Rye Miles #13621 Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 If she's changed her position on gun control I have not heard about it. She claims to be against the democrat party but she is for gun control including an Assault Weapon ban. https://www.ontheissues.org/2020/Tulsi_Gabbard_Gun_Control.htm Link to comment
Blackwater 53393 Posted January 2 Share Posted January 2 The leopard may change where it hunts or feeds or even sleeps, but it doesn’t change its spots!! Link to comment
Blackwater 53393 Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 She SOUNDS convincing, but I am a lot more skeptical! It will take a while and a lot of positive action on her part to gain my trust, (what little trust I would have in ANY politician) or get my vote! Link to comment
Dilli GaHoot Galoot Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 It's almost as if her "positions" are available to the highest bidder But you know, that's just like my opinion . . . Link to comment
Rye Miles #13621 Posted January 4 Author Share Posted January 4 1 hour ago, Blackwater 53393 said: She SOUNDS convincing, but I am a lot more skeptical! It will take a while and a lot of positive action on her part to gain my trust, (what little trust I would have in ANY politician) or get my vote! Amen! I want to like her and believe her, she's articulate for sure and she seems sincere but you're right it's gonna take some of her doing some things to really convince me. She is pretty hot though! and she is a veteran. Link to comment
Sedalia Dave Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 I want to hear her stance on specific issues like, constitutional carry, making concealed carry licenses SHALL issue instead of maybe, magazine restrictions, so called "assault" rifle bans, banning "weapons of war", Red flag laws without due process. so called "Common sense" gun laws. and so on down the list. Lots of politicians when asked if they support the second amendment will say yes. But when asked for their stance on the specific issues I listed above you soon find out that they really don't. Link to comment
Gungadin Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 Is she for 'common sense' Budget Spending Immigration Policing Punishment insider Information laws for politicians ??? Common Sense Limitations of a right? Yea, you can't yell fire in a crowded theater, nor can you open fire..... But you can take your mouth into a crowded theater.... Link to comment
The Original Lumpy Gritz Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 Another used car sales person Link to comment
Rye Miles #13621 Posted January 4 Author Share Posted January 4 3 hours ago, Sedalia Dave said: I want to hear her stance on specific issues like, constitutional carry, making concealed carry licenses SHALL issue instead of maybe, magazine restrictions, so called "assault" rifle bans, banning "weapons of war", Red flag laws without due process. so called "Common sense" gun laws. and so on down the list. Lots of politicians when asked if they support the second amendment will say yes. But when asked for their stance on the specific issues I listed above you soon find out that they really don't. Right. Joe Biden said he supports the Second Amendment Link to comment
Eyesa Horg Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 55 minutes ago, Rye Miles #13621 said: Right. Joe Biden said he supports the Second Amendment He can barely support himself. Link to comment
John Kloehr Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 I made a mental note somewhere around the 4 minute mark... I'm not sure she at all has my view of the 2nd Amendment. I do think she does not have the far left Hawaii view of it. So that is a plus. I guess. Some years back, I lived in Portland Oregon for a year. Some far right organization, religious identity, anti gay, anti abortion, can not remember all the details like the pastor name, but it was on the local evening news they planned a protest. They complied with all the requirements of: Quote Do I need a permit? If you’re planning an event on a sidewalk, street, park, or plaza you will likely need a permit from Portland Parks and Recreation (Parks) or Portland Bureau of Transportation (PBOT). If you’re planning to make a lot of noise, like with amplified music or a marching band, then you’ll probably need to apply for a noise code variance permit from the Noise Office in the Bureau of Development Services (BDS). Portland Fire & Rescue (Fire) also issues permits for events that may pose a fire or life safety hazard. When applying for a permit with Parks or PBOT, they may require additional permits and approvals (e.g., Fire or Noise permits, and Public Safety approval) and will help guide you through those additional requirements, including insurance. A note about permit costs: When applying for a permit there is typically a small application fee. This fee pays for the staff time to thoroughly review the permit and have a conversation with the event producer to answer any outstanding questions. The actual cost of the permit, if issued, depends on the level of city coordination needed across bureaus, and the size and type of event. Portland Events and Film is here to help with coordination, communication, and facilitation of City partners. To cut it short, they did need permits per city government for the political event.. And then there was a group that wanted to counter-protest. Well, due to the short time available to apply and get approval, all permit requirements and fees were waived for the counter-protest. Because suddenly the 1st Amendment was important and should not be restricted in any way. This is to me is clear political speech on the part of a city government. And it is an anti-2A government. Yet I still remember a sign driving by one of the few local gun stores letting everyone know more pink Glocks were in! The events taken together reminded me of the ancient phrase "Amicus meus, inimicus inimici mei." or as we know it today: "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." Without declaring either the original protesting preacher or the counter-protestors as my friend, I found the actions of the city to be absolutely counter to the 1st amendment on several levels. The protest ended up not happening (the primary protestor cited city actions), and from what I understand only a few counter-protestors showed up and had a bit of a party. But the city clearly took a side. And I contrast this to pink Glocks... I do think the counter-protesters were in all likelihood the target market for them. And for this, I do say it is fine. Considering the actions of the city, I do they think the enemy of my (their) enemy is my (their) friend. In terms of the 2nd Amendment. And I do think Gabbard has made progress. And I think it is better to continue to draw her along the righteous path than to hate her for not coming far enough. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.