Did anyone watch the Democratic Debate?

BigSteve57 said:

I didn't watch. I already know what they want and I'm voting for Trump. I haven't yet met a Democrat I'd vote for. IBTL.

Click to expand...

Agreed, Trump may be a questionable ALLY to gun owners, but the Democratic candidates are all most certainly our ENEMIES.

Chuck Todd and Rachel Maddow were the losers big time. Geeze could they be anymore biased?

Kaybee said:

I don’t want to turn this into a crazy political thread, but I think it’s very important to hear what these candidates have to say about guns right from their mouths and I think people should tune in to hear it for themselves.

So much for “sensible”, they floated some CRAZY ideas! Like Forced federal government buybacks, and mandatory biometric sensors built into guns.

Nuts!

Also every candidate talked about “defeating the NRA”, but funny... the BILL OF RIGHTS never came up.

Click to expand...

I watched about 1/2 of both and was amazed that it is the N.R.A. that is responsible for all the "gun violence" in this country.

Here all along I thought it was the gangs and drugs that we already outlawed ?.

The old and logical argument / discussion is that if it actually the tool that does the damage.

We REALLY,REALLY need to outlaw all automobiles as they kill so many more than all the guns in the hands of free Americans [ MILLIONS of guns ].

And the fact is,MEDICAL treatment is the biggest killer of Americans,but that fact is ignored by those running = no accident I am positive.

WHAT? You mean Al Sharpton is not running? What a bummer. When I was a kid growing up, while everyone else was reading Marvel comic books, Batman, Superman etc, I was reading and in love with Mad Magazine. So it is no surprise that I love to watch the Democrat debates. Man, I laughed until I hurt. Close your eyes for a moment and picture all of them in Mad mag. One of my favorites is Kamala Harris and her Gun Control BS. You know, you have heard it before, Her (FIRST 100 DAYS IN OFFICE WILL BE HELL FOR GUNS ). You know, the nonsense of how she is going to start the "BAN" by using Executive Power. Lol, I thought that by now her Constituents would have already told her that the law she is going to enact are already on the books by the ATF.
Now ya have to ask yourself, is she that stupid, or is her followers just stupid and love to just watch her throw some weight around. You know the big ole I AM GOING A BAN routine.
One thing for certain, I watched the Most far Left group of people that have ever been put together in History. Not just US history, but the history of the entire time of human population. Watch Kamaly tear into Biden, and Bernie giving away the house etc. was more than even Mad magazine could ever hope for. The only thing missing was Al Sharpton. He would have sealed the cake. The good "REV" sat this one out. I bet even he was laughing his butt off watching these characters try out for Mad Magazines top zany character. Who will take his title? I'm betting on Kamala. Love to watch her "GUN CONTROL" speech, just hilarious.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/heres-2020-Democrats-differ-gun-control/story?id=62970498

All their anti-gun ideas lead one direction, ultimate disarmament of We the People.

I am surprise Harris did not hold up a AR to the crowd and then start to break it into little pieces.

Jeb Stuart said:

I am surprise Harris did not hold up a AR to the crowd and then start to break it into little pieces and then eat them.

Click to expand...

I thought she was a gun owner for "Personal safety"?



Kamala Harris Admits She Would Be a Tyrant if Elected President - "If congress fails to act, I will take executive action ..."

It's not amusing that they all tout that assault weapons are the biggest threat, which is absolutely not true. I'm not an AR fan, but truth is truth, and the truth is that assault type weapons account for less than 2% of criminal gun fatalities according to gov't stats.

Even the NY Times when they did an article on crime fatalities mentioned that figure. So either the candidates are totally clueless, or, more likely, they're unrepentant liars.

The goal of the Democrats is not disarmament of the law-abiding.
The actual goal is to criminalize all gun owners, then treat all that would support the Second Amendment as the supporters of criminals - like they treat the NRA now.

theotherwaldo said:

The goal of the Democrats is not disarmament of the law-abiding.
The actual goal is to criminalize all gun owners, then treat all that would support the Second Amendment as the supporters of criminals - like they treat the NRA now.

Click to expand...

Yep...
Sad but true.

The more that I hear about these debates, the happier I am that I quit watching TV in 1998.
-That's when I set up my first reloading bench. Much more interesting.

Jeb Stuart said:

It is interesting to see that all the Democrat candidates have one common goal. To take away all guns.

Click to expand...

None of the Democrats have said that. Even Swalwell said explicitly on Thursday night that he's not interested in taking handguns, ordinary rifles, and shotguns. And Swalwell is the most extreme antigunner among the Democrats.

AlexanderA said:

he's not interested in taking handguns, ordinary rifles, and shotguns

Click to expand...

For now. Look at Australia, the continent they get their best ideas from...

Here was the lineup for the first night's debate:

Enemy, domestic
Enemy, domestic
Enemy, domestic
Enemy, domestic
Enemy, domestic
Enemy, domestic
Enemy, domestic
Enemy, domestic
Enemy, domestic
Enemy, domestic

Here was the lineup for the second night:

Enemy, domestic
Enemy, domestic
Enemy, domestic
Enemy, domestic
Enemy, domestic
Enemy, domestic
Enemy, domestic
Enemy, domestic
Enemy, domestic
Enemy, domestic

AlexanderA said:

None of the Democrats have said that. Even Swalwell said explicitly on Thursday night that he's not interested in taking handguns, ordinary rifles, and shotguns. And Swalwell is the most extreme antigunner among the Democrats.

Click to expand...

Lol, and you believe him?

Deanimator said:

The ONLY reason to vote for ANY of them is because you WANT confiscation, because that's what EVERY one of them wants.

Click to expand...

No. That's factually incorrect. Besides that, I vote strategically. A Democratic president would galvanize Republicans to oppose any form of gun control, something that cannot be said with a Republican in the White House. Rhetoric aside,Trump has had a worse record on guns than did Obama. What did Obama actually do on guns? Legalize carry in National Parks. What did Trump do? Outlaw bump stocks, encourage "red flag" confiscation orders without due process, and suggest the outlawing of silencers. And a second term for Trump would be even worse for gun rights.

AlexanderA said:

What did Obama actually do on guns? Legalize carry in National Parks.

Click to expand...

-That would be fine if Obama were running - and if the Senate and House were in Republican hands.
Problem is, if a Democrat wins the presidency then Democrats are much more likely to take a majority in Congress.
So much for the Second Amendment.

Elkins45 said:

What bothered me was how Chuck Todd phrased the question about "what are you going to do to get the hundreds of millions other guns off the street?" as if every gun in private hands is a problem that needs taken care of immediately. "Other" in this case being the guns besides the already universally-reviled 'assault weapons' that any clear-thinking person would already have banned.

Click to expand...

No. You have misinterpreted this completely. Chuck Todd's question was specifically about grandfathering of "assault weapons." The starting point was that all the Democratic candidates were more or less agreed on an assault weapon "ban." Grandfathering, then, becomes a crucial point of differentiation. If there are 150 million assault weapons extant, a "ban" with grandfathering becomes essentially meaningless. In fact that was exactly the point that Swalwell was trying to make in pushing for his mandatory buyback. None of the other candidates was willing to go that far. For example, Kamala Harris' "ban" is just a ban on importation. That's totally toothless since hardly any AR-15's are imported.

AlexanderA said:

None of the Democrats have said that. Even Swalwell said explicitly on Thursday night that he's not interested in taking handguns, ordinary rifles, and shotguns. And Swalwell is the most extreme antigunner among the Democrats.

Click to expand...

"Divide and conquer." In the 1930s they went after full auto and short rifles. They tried for handguns and failed.

They want ALL guns eventually. If you cannot see the pattern, at this point in history, there's nothing that can be done to help you see it.

I wouldn’t say Trump “ Take guns now, due process later “ is standing in the way of gun grabbers. Anyways, the only part I cared about the debate is when Beto starred speaking Spanish and then that guy is just starting at him looking completely dumbfounded.