If this nut job is stupid enough to take a shot at the White House, he's not bright enough to know whether Obama's there or not.
We can expect all the usual suspects to jump in front of a TV camera to shout about more gun control.
There's a bill, in the House, now that would allow those with concealed carry permits to carry in 49 states. Not in IL or DC though. Both jurisdictions are too liberal to allow citizens to protect themselves. I mean, if states like CA, NY, and MA allow CCW, how bad could a national CCW law be? It'll never get past the Senate, though. The Dem. Libs. are against personal protection. For everyone except themselves, that is.
We can expect all the usual suspects to jump in front of a TV camera to shout about more gun control.
There's a bill, in the House, now that would allow those with concealed carry permits to carry in 49 states. Not in IL or DC though. Both jurisdictions are too liberal to allow citizens to protect themselves. I mean, if states like CA, NY, and MA allow CCW, how bad could a national CCW law be? It'll never get past the Senate, though. The Dem. Libs. are against personal protection. For everyone except themselves, that is.
I disagree with federal CCW legislation, and hope the Senate does deep six it.
Leave it to the states.
I'm astonished at how some on the far right want the fed gov't out of state business.........unless it's for something they feel strongly about.
Mudge wrote:
If this nut job is stupid enough to take a shot at the White House, he's not bright enough to know whether Obama's there or not.
We can expect all the usual suspects to jump in front of a TV camera to shout about more gun control.
There's a bill, in the House, now that would allow those with concealed carry permits to carry in 49 states. Not in IL or DC though. Both jurisdictions are too liberal to allow citizens to protect themselves. I mean, if states like CA, NY, and MA allow CCW, how bad could a national CCW law be? It'll never get past the Senate, though. The Dem. Libs. are against personal protection. For everyone except themselves, that is.
Shooting at the White House for a political statement is like pissing in the air to cool down the sun, moronic
Shooting at the White House to injure anybody inside, with a typical hand held firearm is futile the White House is "bullet proof" up to
and including .50 BMG rounds.
Shooting at the White House in hope of hitting the POTUS when he is out of the country is....well it speaks volumes about the
shooter.
I have no love for Barrack Hussein Obama (peace be upon him) however he is the legally elected President of the United States, as
such I would still feel the need to protect his life if I were present.
I hope someone catches this idiot .
Shooting at the White House to injure anybody inside, with a typical hand held firearm is futile the White House is "bullet proof" up to
and including .50 BMG rounds.
Shooting at the White House in hope of hitting the POTUS when he is out of the country is....well it speaks volumes about the
shooter.
I have no love for Barrack Hussein Obama (peace be upon him) however he is the legally elected President of the United States, as
such I would still feel the need to protect his life if I were present.
I hope someone catches this idiot .
How about that...........we agree.
Aces-Full wrote:
So, let the states decide on CCW legislation, but don't let them decide on immigration legislation. Too many people want to pick-and-choose too much on issues like this.
RetiredVet wrote:
I disagree with federal CCW legislation, and hope the Senate does deep six it.
Leave it to the states.
I'm astonished at how some on the far right want the fed gov't out of state business.........unless it's for something they feel strongly about.
Aces-Full wrote:
So, let the states decide on CCW legislation, but don't let them decide on immigration legislation. Too many people want to pick-and-choose too much on issues like this.
RetiredVet wrote:
I disagree with federal CCW legislation, and hope the Senate does deep six it.
Leave it to the states.
I'm astonished at how some on the far right want the fed gov't out of state business.........unless it's for something they feel strongly about.
The problem RV is that this IS a federal issue under the 2cd ammendment. I agree, most of the time the state should reserve the right to decide who can do what in their state, except Federal Constutionally guaranteed rights. I see this as not alot different from Driver's Licenses being accepted across state boundaries ( although driving on public ways is not a right, but a priivelege). This, I think, is why it was introduced in to the US Senate.....and if I am not mistaken, not by someone normally considered a Right Wing extremist.....In all actuality though......seems like there are a whole lot more important things to be considered than something like this, but it is under the realm of Federal purview.
RetiredVet wrote:I disagree with federal CCW legislation, and hope the Senate does deep six it.
Leave it to the states.
I'm astonished at how some on the far right want the fed gov't out of state business.........unless it's for something they feel strongly about.
Mudge wrote:
If this nut job is stupid enough to take a shot at the White House, he's not bright enough to know whether Obama's there or not.
We can expect all the usual suspects to jump in front of a TV camera to shout about more gun control.
There's a bill, in the House, now that would allow those with concealed carry permits to carry in 49 states. Not in IL or DC though. Both jurisdictions are too liberal to allow citizens to protect themselves. I mean, if states like CA, NY, and MA allow CCW, how bad could a national CCW law be? It'll never get past the Senate, though. The Dem. Libs. are against personal protection. For everyone except themselves, that is.
Yes, and if the states do something that counters the constitution, it's the role of the SC to make the final decision......not for Congress to legislate it.
frodo-lives wrote:
The problem RV is that this IS a federal issue under the 2cd ammendment. I agree, most of the time the state should reserve the right to decide who can do what in their state, except Federal Constutionally guaranteed rights. I see this as not alot different from Driver's Licenses being accepted across state boundaries ( although driving on public ways is not a right, but a priivelege). This, I think, is why it was introduced in to the US Senate.....and if I am not mistaken, not by someone normally considered a Right Wing extremist.....In all actuality though......seems like there are a whole lot more important things to be considered than something like this, but it is under the realm of Federal purview.
RetiredVet wrote:I disagree with federal CCW legislation, and hope the Senate does deep six it.
Leave it to the states.
I'm astonished at how some on the far right want the fed gov't out of state business.........unless it's for something they feel strongly about.
Mudge wrote:
If this nut job is stupid enough to take a shot at the White House, he's not bright enough to know whether Obama's there or not.
We can expect all the usual suspects to jump in front of a TV camera to shout about more gun control.
There's a bill, in the House, now that would allow those with concealed carry permits to carry in 49 states. Not in IL or DC though. Both jurisdictions are too liberal to allow citizens to protect themselves. I mean, if states like CA, NY, and MA allow CCW, how bad could a national CCW law be? It'll never get past the Senate, though. The Dem. Libs. are against personal protection. For everyone except themselves, that is.
No comments:
Post a Comment