HeloDude

With private sales still being legal at the federal level, the Feds might know who originally bought the firearm from the manufacturer/dealer, but have no way of knowing if you sold you it to someone else (and so on and so forth), as no records are required to be made/maintained. This is what is preventing a national registry of firearms not on the NFA list…and it’s why progressives want “100% background checks” (to essentially make a registry). ETA: Basically what M2 had already said lol

So it was legal for all these years (it’s already gone and forth in the past) and it’s suddenly not legal, according to a 3-letter bureaucracy, even though there hasn’t been a new law passed to make it not legal. This will also be overturned, eventually. In the meantime, just don’t be stupid (ie tell people online that you have it, share pics/videos, etc).

So should anything negative happen to Biden?

Yeah…CNN is reporting it and is definitely not trying to spin this as Biden is good and Trump is bad.

You’re missing my point bud—if the massive increases in spending doesn’t matter, then there’s no need to prioritize. Whatever wants to get funded, gets funded. So why not do much more across the globe? As for the debt getting “resolved”…not sure what that means, exactly? I guess we could just default on some of our payments, tax ourselves considerably more, and/or just print off more money, but this is not the kind of the “resolve” I think will be healthy for the country. And as I’ve said before, it’s not just Ukraine (though Ukraine is a massive new symptom of the spending problem)—it’s all of it.

So why aren’t we spending hundreds of billions (or even trillions) more to help countries in need? If the national debt is irrelevant when it comes to spending to help out countries, shouldn’t we be doing quite a bit more?

Should there ever be any limitations/concerns on federal spending, wrt to the national debt, to help a country in need?

I totally agree man…so what exactly happens to Biden?

If they’re only arguing about Ukraine spending, then you’re right, they’re full of shit. If they’re arguing that spending is a problem across the board then they’re not full of shit, and Ukraine spending is only adding to the problem. As for politicians not caring about future problems due to what they’re doing today—call me shocked. Funny, people worry more about “climate change” than an increasing massive debt…I’m sure one will cause us more problems in the next 10-20 years than the other.

You can call it BS…but we didn’t end up here by accident. It all adds up. And I’m for tackling all of it—everything should be heavily scrutinized. Take a look at this from 2013…this way of thinking is why nothing will get dealt with until it’s way too late. And the GOP is just as at fault. "The cupboard is bare. There's no more cuts to make. It's really important that people understand that," Pelosi said in an interview on CNN. "We cannot have cuts just for the sake of cuts." https://reason.com/2014/05/25/nothing-left-to-cut/

It would literally not add that much more to the debt. And I’m all about cutting the defense budget as well. The same thought that “these cuts wouldn’t amount to much” is the same thought that brings “let’s fund X…it’s not that much in grand scheme of things”. This is how you get $31 Trillion in debt…and much worse when you look at what SS and Medicare will add over the years.

This is the debt clock…not sure what your questions are?

I’m not a Republican, but if you’re asking why some people would “whine” about spending (defense or otherwise)…oh I don’t know… https://www.usdebtclock.org

Isn’t in the US where the left gets really upset for police shooting unarmed people?

Nah not triggered, just initially disappointed, and it wasn't a threat—wonder why you would suggest that it was? As for “just quoting the Constitution”…if you say so. Funny, it’s the same partial quote that those who want to erode gun rights use. I guess I assumed you were doing the same, my honest apology. As far as the high standard people should have when owning, carrying, using firearms…totally agree. I expect that everyone should have a high standard in everything they do in life. But if Karen wants to have a loaded pistol in her purse with “one in chamber” (I don’t know why anyone would carry a firearm for self defense without one in the chamber?), then that’s her right. If she uses her firearm inappropriately/to cause problems, then she can answer for it. But until then, carrying a firearm is still her right and it shouldn’t never be reduced or taken away. But back to Kinzinger…he’s a politician. He said what he had to say to get elected and now he’ll say what he has to say to stay relevant. Justin Amash can’t stand Trump either (he voted to impeach him the first time), but I believe he’s more so of an honest type politician (compared to most) as he still stands for what he has stood for in the past.

I’ll give you a chance to fix/edit your post…what exactly do you think “well regulated” meant in the late 1700s? I’ll give you a hint: A clock that was in good working order was seen as “well regulated”.

A Sandy Hook could have could have happened before 2012…and there were plenty of shootings before then as well, but yet you didn’t change your mind until after 2012? Also how did the availability of guns change in the recent years before Sandy Hook? Just curious how that all made you change your mind unless it was your emotions that caused you to form a different opinion.

That’s not what I would call then “extreme conviction”. It’s not like the Second Amendment has changed in the last 10 years. But since you’ve mentioned it personally. How has your view on the 2A changed and why did you change?

This is a good thing, even if it temporarily sucks for those living in IL (though they can always move, which would be smart). I imagine this will be immediately challenged, especially with the Bruen SCOTUS ruling, and should be eventually overturned.

The same guy who once said he was a staunch supporter of the 2A suddenly now says he supports more gun control laws? So much extreme conviction…

Once again, the ATF gets called out on their unconstitutional bans. Hopefully the FRT is soon to follow. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-appeals-court-strikes-down-ban-bump-stocks-2023-01-07/

Well if your business (CNN) model is mostly based on how Trump is a bad guy and 6 Jan 21 was a violent attempt to overthrow the government, then this is the guy you hire. Oh and then there’s this: https://www.forbes.com/sites/markjoyella/2022/12/15/the-five-leads-fox-news-to-big-win-in-2022-cable-news-ratings-as-cnn-msnbc-have-worst-years-ever/?sh=57c51fec42c0

Who gets to determine if it’s a “waste”? Clearly enough people don’t see it the same way as you since they’re more than willing to pay the fare.

I thought you were talking about how bad it was for a man to abandon his child…well, it’s the same thing a woman does when she leaves an infant on the door step of a fire station.