Chelsea Clinton: Now that Scalia’s Gone We Can Enact Gun Control

[chances R]

You guys are only trying to convince yourselves if you think Trump is a pro gun conservative. I can't even stomach the election anymore.

Have you got proof? From what I have heard from him and from his kids, they are very much pro gun, including class 3 stuff. Also Trump has done avery good job at raising successful kids. Don't hear of them getting into any trouble. Look at his campaign funds.....more bang for the buck with the political machine spending millions more against him. Milloms have voted for him, he has bested 16 other smart, successful canidates. If nothing else it has to be Trump...anyone but Hillary because it can get much worse. Edited April 23, 2016 by JohnC
Fixed broken quote tag.

[btq96r]

Its fascinating to me that liberals will refuse to accept scotus rulings they do not like (ie McDonald vs City of Chicago) but ones they like are sacrosanct and forever unchangeble (ie Roe v Wade)

 

Just like conservatives if you flip those examples.

[btq96r]

And then he dies unexpectedly and no autopsy is performed.

 

The Scalia family was against having one performed, and I can agree with deferring to their wishes.

 

After that, Guevara said, she reached out to Scalia’s attorney, who said “that the family requested that there be no autopsy, that they believed Justice Scalia had died of natural causes, and they preferred there be no delay in the return of Justice Scalia’s remains to Virginia.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/02/16/texas-judge-defends-decision-not-to-order-autopsy-for-justice-scalia/

[Hershmeister]

Just like conservatives if you flip those examples.

Exceting the major fact that mcdonald Incorporated the second amendmeny - that a major deal - that truly is an over and done with ruling

Roe - however you stand on that issue - only found that the right to an abortion fell under the penumbra of right to privacy and ALSO dictated the time periods in which abortion was go/no go based on the scienxe of the time - not any particular judicial principle.

[btq96r]

Exceting the major fact that mcdonald Incorporated the second amendmeny - that a major deal - that truly is an over and done with ruling

Roe - however you stand on that issue - only found that the right to an abortion fell under the penumbra of right to privacy and ALSO dictated the time periods in which abortion was go/no go based on the scienxe of the time - not any particular judicial principle.

 

I'm the odd man out in thinking that both cases were the right call, but it doesn't make a difference in the end results...both were SCOTUS decisions that a large part of the country disagrees with based on their personal politics.   Also, both could be changed if the court takes a case that opens either back up, much as Heller took on established law at the time.

 

I'm just saying that conservatives have their own hypocrisy in liking/hating SCOTUS verdicts same as liberals.   

[Pete123]

Is it possible any sane gun owner and 2nd Amendment supporter could actually vote for Hillary?

 

I've said on this forum that I would vote for Hillary if Trump is the Republican nominee.  I have come to realize that the president of the US doesn't have enough power to really move us toward becoming a Facist country.   I also suspect that Trump doesn't buy in to the hate speech he has used - that he's said it to get elected.

 

In light of that, along with being pretty close to a single issue voter with the Second Amendment, I have changed my thinking.  

 

Between Trump, Cruz and Hillary, I now like Trump best, Cruz next and then Hillary.

 

It's too bad that we don't have better folks to choose from.  I believe that Hillary is dishonest to the very core of her essence.

[Mike.357]

the Illuminati was not allowing any to examine Scalia.  Everyone knows that.

 

As for the Chelsea,  I wish her mother would die in a fire.

[Chief07]

The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

Another brain washed libtard.

[300winmag]

This is just another person who is protected by people with guns but does not want you or me to have guns.  I wish people like this would follow their beliefs and give up their armed protection if guns are so bad.

[bersaguy]

And then he dies unexpectedly and no autopsy is performed.

I find it strange that anyone that might go against something Clintons want or do people die. Witness in White Water case all at once comits suicide in a park 2 days before he is scheduled to testify about White Water. Then while Secretary Of State the people in Bengahzi keep requesting more security and the requests by Steves get ignored and it comes out that Hillary and Stevens hada few views they didn't agree on and Now Justice Scalia stood in the way of many things they wanted to get pushed through the Supreme Court and the only one actually standing in their way was Scalia and dies suddenly and no autopsy is performed to find out cause of death. Just to many unexplained issues to trust the Clintons at any level.......jmho  

[ReeferMac]

There is a long, large trail of bodies behind the Clinton family bersaguy....

 

https://www.truthorfiction.com/clintonfriends/

 

- K

[polecat]

 

 

You guys are only trying to convince yourselves if you think Trump is a pro gun conservative. I can't even stomach the election anymore.

I don't think he is a conservative. He may be pro gun 0 or not. But I don't believe he will pursue an anti gun agenda like Hillary has vowed to do.

An abstention is a yes vote for Hillary and we know what she will do. I will vote for the republican nominee regardless of who it is. I don't like Trump or Cruz.

Actually, I didn't like any of this year's candidates on either side. However, I choose not to be one of those who didn't vote and then complains about what happens later.

[Roche]

As of today there are 5 candidates running for POTUS; this is how I trust their support of the Second Amendment: 

 

1) Cruz

2) Trump 

3) Kasich

4) Sanders 

5) Clinton

 

I doubt anyone's first and fifth selection will be different than mine; second, third and fourth will be debatable.  

 

But Hillary makes Bernie look like the late Charleton Heston concerning the Second Amendment.

[jphillips63]

I've seen a few on here that said before they vote Cruz or Trump, they'll vote Hillary. Just read the politics threads and you'll see.

Those that makes these bold statements should be banned from ever Using this site. And now that it looks as if Trumps one that vote for anyone otherwise is the same as voting for Hillary.

[Mindless-Focus]

My thing is, if Killary wins, she'll put one or more SCOTUS judges in. That will change the face of our rights. Sure, the House and Senate is in the Right's hands, but what if that changes? She'll be unstoppable. We've lost control of both before, and it can and will happen again.

The way I see it is this: abstaining from a vote is a vote for Killary. Voting for Killary is a vote against our rights and remember, she is running on a gun control platform for presidency. A vote for Killary is a vote against the 2A and means you are an enemy of the 2A.

[crossfire]

Those that makes these bold statements should be banned from ever Using this site. And now that it looks as if Trumps one that vote for anyone otherwise is the same as voting for Hillary.

And to make a statement about banning anyone that has a different opinion then yours should put you in the same camp as Hillary. So what should be done with you? :confused:

Edited May 11, 2016 by crossfire

[Oh Shoot]

And to make a statement about banning anyone that has a different opinion then yours should put you in the same camp as Hillary. So what should be done with you? :confused:

 

Yep, that's very much a lib point of view -- free speech, as long as it agrees with mine.

 

- OS

[KKing]

Yep, that's very much a lib point of view -- free speech, as long as it agrees with mine.

- OS

You ought to be tossed for suggesting his views align with that of a liberal ;) Edited May 11, 2016 by KKing

[jphillips63]

And to make a statement about banning anyone that has a different opinion then yours should put you in the same camp as Hillary. So what should be done with you? :confused:

Ban me I don't care.... My point is this is a gun site and if anyone wishes to support someone that's anti gun on here shouldn't be here in the first place. Whether it's direct or indirect on a vote. I stand by any vote made outside the conservative group on keeping in tact our second amendment is a vote that goes towards the anti gun movement. It's not a view it's just fact.

[Trekbike]

Decided to subscribe to this thread since it's likely to turn lively.    :popcorn:

[KKing]

Ban me I don't care.... My point is this is a gun site and if anyone wishes to support someone that's anti gun on here shouldn't be here in the first place. Whether it's direct or indirect on a vote. I stand by any vote made outside the conservative group on keeping in tact our second amendment is a vote that goes towards the anti gun movement. It's not a view it's just fact.

You do realize that you can't stifle someone's view just because it's different from yours, right? That's liberal logic, exactly as OS said. You can call them a no good stupid pinko commie, but you don't get to decide who stays and goes based on opinion.

[crossfire]

Ban me I don't care.... My point is this is a gun site and if anyone wishes to support someone that's anti gun on here shouldn't be here in the first place. Whether it's direct or indirect on a vote. I stand by any vote made outside the conservative group on keeping in tact our second amendment is a vote that goes towards the anti gun movement. It's not a view it's just fact.

The only one talking about banning someone is you. I just pointed out the fact Hillary would be proud of you. 

[Garufa]

Those that makes these bold statements should be banned from ever Using this site. And now that it looks as if Trumps one that vote for anyone otherwise is the same as voting for Hillary.

 

^ part of the problem.  Furthermore that makes absolutely no sense.