crbutler wrote:Where did that come from? We already have a bunch of laws against religious bias. We already have task groups about antisemitism. I don't care for an additional federal task force, but there are already laws and policies that actually allow for this kind of thing.
Establishment of a state sponsored religion is forbidden. Look at historical practice by the men who wrote the constitution to show that they were not against the mention of god in the public arena.
I was quoting the GOP platform. They are only interested in protecting christians.
crbutler wrote:Where the heck is the no due process part with red flag laws coming from? As I understand it, all restraining orders are kind of after the fact due process, but the places that have done them and not had due process are all democrat constituencies.
Trump said he wants to take the guns 1st, due process 2nd. Only an idiot would think they could get due process after their guns were taken if they were not entitled to it before. But Trump thinks you and I have foolish enough to believe him. Trump is on C-Span saying this; about five years ago and he has not backed down from this at all. https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4716589/ ... ess-second
crbutler wrote: Which party has done an AWB? I also think that Trump has the sense that an actual ban of AR 15's is impossible in this country. Its possible that Trump learned something after his bump stock ban failed. He's certainly courted the pro 2A crowd politically, unlike the democrats.
Why do you think Trump learned anything after his gun grab was struck down? I think he has not learned a thing. How did he court you on guns? Was it his failure to push for CCW reciprocity or his failure to push for silencer deregulation? Obama pushed for an AWB and failed. But the Obama administration wrote 41F which was the greatest easing of firearm restrictions in the USA since the sunset of the AWB that Bush was willing to extend.
I recall back in 2017 being rather confident that the GOP controlled Congress and white House would make real headway on our 2nd Amendment rights. But they were happy to sit on their hands instead. Well Trump didn't, he had the ATF do a gun grab for him in 2018.
crbutler wrote:As to your prior point, while contraband is never registered, the things were not contraband when they were purchased. That's part of why this rule got overturned. There are a lot of machine guns legally in this country, and his rule did nothing about those. Frankly, the whole rule is one of the things why I don't like Trump. Most of the time he goes off half-assed and doesn't attend to detail. In this case, it worked in our favor, but in other instances it caused good policy attempts to fall apart.
What worked in our favor? The bump stock ban? How? The court made it clear that the reason they overturned the gun grab was because "the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives was wrong to interpret the federal ban on machine guns to extend to bump stocks". https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/06/supr ... stock-ban/
crbutler wrote:Why did Trump go after bump stocks?
I think Trump did it to show how powerful he was.
crbutler wrote:Look at his wall that Mexico was going to pay for... the guy is a shoot from the hip big ideas type who isn't particularly burdened by thinking about consequences.
We need a president that thinks about the consequences. A fool like Trump who does not think is going to get us into a nuclear war.
crbutler wrote:For all your commentary about being anti-Harris, it seems you have just about admitted you are pro Harris... saying a party who is silent on an issue is a greater danger than someone who openly advocates for the issue involved?
I am not pro-Harris. Care to quote the words that make me so in your opinion? Being vague is not going to work.
