Comments by "" (@JohnDoe-ew3xt) on "Peter Navarro Indicted On Contempt of Congress Charges" video.
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@davidmccain7662 thanks dave, I appreciate the conversation.
I agree with a couple of your suggestions, but most of this is unconstitutional, and none of this will prevent shootings.
1- raising the age to 21 to purchase any firearm, I'm ok with that, so long as the voting age goes with it. if I'm not mature enough to purchase a firearm, or even purchase a can of beer, I have no business voting.
2- we already have background checks, and waiting periods in most places, and that's fine... and yes, even at gun shows. I assume you have never purchased a gun at a gun show, or you wouldn't think it is somehow drastically different than any other purchase.
3- banning on line purchases of magazine? why? maybe you could expand on that one, and explain how it would prevent shootings..? other than being an inconvenience, I don't get the point...
4- all new gun purchases being licensed? registered? and insured? absolutely not.... this is where you go off the rails.... I do not need a license to exercise my constitutional rights. the bill of rights is my license to keep and bear arms. gun registries have also been found to be unconstitutional. and again, I am not required to purchase anything, like insurance, to exercise my constitutional rights. again, this has already been ruled on. much the same way the poll taxes were found unconstitutional, you cannot provide constitutional rights to those who can afford them, and deny rights to those who cannot afford them. your licensing, registration, and insurance requirement is no different than a poll tax, or forcing citizens to purchase their ability to speak freely. poor folks get to speak too ya know... nobody has to pay for their right to exercise their constitutional rights.
and since you mentioned cars, yes, that is completely different as driving an automobile on public streets is a privilege, and not a right. ( and why do you refer to people as "gun nuts"? care to expand on that...?)
5- psych exams being a prerequisite to exercising my constitutional rights is not constitutional either, nor feasible as it is a subjective determination. who gets to make this determination as to weather or not I'm fit to own a firearm? eric holder? ted nugent? if you know anything about these two men, you should understand why this wouldn't work... my constitutional rights do not depend on a subjective opinion of a un-elected liberal bureaucrat. sorry...
and finally, you tell me that I'm more worried about guns than children, when liberals are the ones that are stuck on the hardware. look at all of these shootings... there is one thing that continues to function properly... the hardware... the guns... yet that's all you want to talk about! you don't want to talk about securing our schools or protecting children! all you want to talk about is "guns"!
take the psycho that drove an suv into a chirstmas parade last year... how do you prevent things like that? you can't.... you can try to take measures to protect innocent people, like placing barricades around large gatherings of people, but you cant solve that problem talking about automobiles, or forcing law abiding owners and operators to jump through a bunch of hoops!
and if you want to talk about mental health, how about we stop teaching hatred and division in our school systems with this crt crap, and confusing our kids with this gender crap... how about we get back to some form of unity? how about our children stand side by side and recite the pledge? maybe pray together if they so choose? christ, we have a sitting president who calls half of americans domestic terrorists, and tries to convince the other half of americans that they are the biggest threat our democracy faces... no wonder there is so much violence in our country...
and wtf is this defund the police, and paint them as the bad guy bs??? ya think maybe we should stop that?
1
-
1