I watched the Democratic Debate last night.
It went pretty much as I expected. The Democrats have continued to shift toward the Far Left. Since the last debate, the Democratic Party has embraced impeaching Blompf over the Mueller Report and the Ukraine conspiracy and the debate opened with that subject.
The highlight of last night’s debate was that all the Democratic candidates except for Mommy Tulsi want to stay in Syria forever to protect Muh Kurdish Allies because Blompf pulled out. Beto O’Rourke also wants to send law enforcement to your house to confiscate your guns.
Beto defended his plan to confiscate firearms on Morning Joe this morning.
Many of them don’t they just oppose trumps exit stategy to his own esculation which can be used as a future entrance strategy.
Beto needs to just go ahead and move to Highland Park or Turtle Creek in Dallas, and get himself another hobby, like all of the other spoiled Texas rich boys do.
Zero O’Dork is like a Saturday Night Live parody of himself. His fellow Irishman Jimmy Fallon would’ve done a good job portraying him.
Beto has never gotten over his skate board being confiscated by the El Paso police department back in 1994.
Is there an official definition of what is considered an assault weapon? And I wonder how much compensation would be given to the gun owners. Perhaps that information was in the videos and I missed it. Is a World War 2 Garand an assault weapon? An older brother of one of my girl friends in the USA has a SKS. I wonder if that is an assault weapon. As little as I know of firearms I think I know as much as Beto.
My understanding is that some of those weapons cost many hundreds of dollars or more. Without reasonable compensation why would anyone turn their weapon in?
You have plucked a thorny Rose here, Christina. The term “Assault Weapon” used to be purely technical. Nowadays, it’s purely political. Technically, an “Assault Weapon” is capable of semi-automatic or fully-automatic fire. The American M-1 Garand and the Soviet SKS are capable of semi-automatic fire only. Politically speaking, an “Assault Weapon” is any firearm that liberal-leftist politicians and their adherents dislike. If you’re curious about the technical details, there’s a wealth of information online including videos…
Brian,
Thank you for the information. I did smell a rat in that Beto only keeps mentioning AR 15’s and AK 47’s.
From what I can gather a true assault rifle is a machine gun and those have been heavily regulated since 1934 and further production banned for civilians since 1986.
Some of my relatives have been in the Army and are in the police. Some in the Mexican Army and one in the US Army. So, I asked a couple of them on the effectiveness of the AR and AK. They said the AR is accurate but not as reliable as the AK. They also said in combat semi automatic fire is better and more accurate than automatic unless fighting inside a house or something.
For people to comply with a ban there would have to be either/or stiff punishment for not complying along with a lot of money for turning over valuable and efficient weapons.
This is some strange Deep State 4-D rugby they’re playing.
It’s not entertaining and it’s thoroughly confusing why anyone would financially back any of these candidates.
Where does the DNC dredge up these freaks ?
Have none of you heard what I said? The Demon-crap party isn’t serious about defeating Blormp in the 2020 election! They are going to allow him to win by default. That’s why their line-up of presidential candidates is so laughably bad. Their strategy involves continuous harassment of him through his second term using baseless accusations and threats of impeachment. So when Blormp finally leaves office in early 2025 he will be so bruised and battered that voters will be ready to embrace a virulently anti-White Social Democrat to replace him, you see.
Bernie getting endorsements from the squad will boost him in the short term online Bernie world but will probably do more damage than good in the long run.
The squad
The private ownership of arms – specifically weapons suitable for war – is our patrimony as members of an Anglo-Saxon society going back to the Assize of Arms in the 1100s, and that was more of an acknowledgment or codification of the reality that the European yeomanry going back to the Greek poleis have always possessed and borne their own weapons in defense of their homes and states.
Now, like most other white folks in America, I’m not of pure Anglo ancestry, but that’s why the framers and founders said “free white persons of good character” can get the benefit of the doubt and become Americans too. Everyone else who is a citizen gets the benefit of the doubt too – like it or not that’s how it is under our post- Licoln imperial rulership.
The question shouldn’t be “who can have weapons legally?” It should be instead “who can become a citizen?”
hhh