- Messages
- 2,149
- Reactions
- 4,157
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The Democans and Republicrats are interchangable...
The only difference between the two is ie: If the Democrats voted to burn down the Library of Congress tomorrow, the Republicans would propose phasing it in over a three day period.
C&P
"One thing to remember here -- the vote on the amendment actually passed, by a sizable majority.
The only reason that it "failed" is that slime-ball Schumer promised a filibuster.
The way the Senate works is that you don't actually have to carry out your filibuster, just claim that you will do one - the, since it needs 60 votes to override a filibuster, they assume that the filibuster will succeed, and just say that the vote fails.
This, of course, is stupidity. Anyone who wants to play that particular ace should be forced to carry through with it."
I'm guessing that even if there was a republican majority, the senators representing the West Coast and Northeast states would vote nearly the same way. I've seen some of the numbers of concealed permits issued by states, and the northeast/west coast states have a _dinky_ amount by comparison. The majority of citizens in those states have very little interest in having more of us among their ranks. The senators, as always, will pander to the majority. Kinda their job, really.
Originally Posted by Trlsmn
"One thing to remember here -- the vote on the amendment actually passed, by a sizable majority.
The only reason that it "failed" is that slime-ball Schumer promised a filibuster.
The way the Senate works is that you don't actually have to carry out your filibuster, just claim that you will do one - the, since it needs 60 votes to override a filibuster, they assume that the filibuster will succeed, and just say that the vote fails.
This, of course, is stupidity. Anyone who wants to play that particular ace should be forced to carry through with it.
"Oh yeah, our old friend sucky Chucky.
The guy someone here thinks has no influence,...
Strike 3 PP!
I'm going to call you on this Cam, please show me the data to back this up. Not saying you are wrong just I always feel it's good to show proof.
Oh yeah, our old friend sucky Chucky.
The guy someone here thinks has no influence,...
Strike 3 PP!
I'm guessing that even if there was a republican majority, the senators representing the West Coast and Northeast states would vote nearly the same way. I've seen some of the numbers of concealed permits issued by states, and the northeast/west coast states have a _dinky_ amount by comparison. The majority of citizens in those states have very little interest in having more of us among their ranks. The senators, as always, will pander to the majority. Kinda their job, really.
OK so now that you have seen the reality of your own proof, care to stick by this statement? Before I tear it apart piece by piece?
Whose/Which statement are you referring to?
The majority of citizens in those states have very little interest in having more of us among their ranks.
The senators, as always, will pander to the majority. Kinda their job, really.
The illogical assumption that the citizens of non shall issue states have no interest in exercising their right to carry concealed as you stated here:
"The majority of citizens in those states have very little interest in having more of us among their ranks."
And so making this statement a laughable catch 22:
"The senators, as always, will pander to the majority. Kinda their job, really."
The illogical assumption that the citizens of non shall issue states have no interest in exercising their right to carry concealed as you stated here:...
The NE states and California are May Issue States, not Non shall issue states.
The percentage of the population that have concealed carry licenses in those states are the lowest in the nation.
It seems reasonable to me that that citizens in mostly urban states with high population densities appear to favor politicians that are anti-gun.
Or stated another way, politicians who want to get elected in these areas vote anti-gun to appease their constituents; regardless of political party.
I don't think that's an unreasonable assumption.
You appeared to support this statement Originally Posted by xstayfrostyx:
The Democans and Republicrats are interchangable...
I'm simply agreeing with you.
I would also argue that in many people's minds, fear of having someone else carry concealed around them outweighs their personal desire to exercise
a right they have little to no interest in.
Your "arguement" is based on your assumption, but your assumptions are based on?
This is just plain erroneous thinking, the ever increasing demand for CHLs in shall issue states, shows that there is big interest in "carry concealed".
Check your data for confirmation.
Does it matter if it's the federal government or state that's in charge?
Either way, someone else is making your decisions for you. I don't see a plus or minus to either scenario; States having control, or Feds having control. If all the states have control, you're still just in another little country..