Co-Sponsor Of Bill Banning Magazines Demonstrates She Doesn't Know What They Are

Status
Not open for further replies.
With rights comes responsibilities, if you're irresponsible why couldn't or shouldn't you have your rights taken away?

That is certainly how they feel about the 2A, isn't it. In fact, we have many laws that enforce just that when it comes to the ownership of firearms in this country. But, oh, yeah, if they applied that logic to voting, then their voting base would suddenly shrink! I get it now...
 
What's wrong with that?
Those who are taxed to pay the bills should be the ones to decide HOW and WHAT that money is spent on - by electing those they see fit. Folks on the welfare dole are going to vote for more of the same (witness these last two elections) even though they do not financially support anything

Lawmakers who have ZERO knowledge of a subject should recuse themselves from that topic

As was once said: " Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak up and remove all doubt"..... Lincoln or Twain

I never said there is anything wrong with that.
I was just mentioning some additional facts.
Actually....I'd be just fine if ghetto dwelling, welfare recipient, non-contributing leeches could NOT vote at all!!!!!

In fact, since I am a property owner myself, I still get to vote anyways....lol
:evil:


5e57ec88.gif
 
I'm all for 1A, but shouldn't we hold our elected officials to a higher standard than this?

In my mind, once a legislator clearly and publicly demonstrates his or her ignorance and determination to remain ignorant on a given topic, he or she should be officially banned from debating and voting on bills related to that topic.

I guess we'd have about a handful of Democrats left to vote on gun control, and that would assure a win for 2A.
 
Degette was involved in a shooting that landed her ex-cop neighbor in some very hot water. It's shocking she could be that mis-informed.
 
Even I put a comment in at the huff for her. Just as I did on here Denver Post article that was the same whine fest.

Man, must be time to go hit up her FB page again. ;)
 
Feinstein should have her vocabulary limited to 2,258 words and not be allowed to use more than 10 at a time.

It's for the children! :evil:
 
Feinstein should have her vocabulary limited to 2,258 words and not be allowed to use more than 10 at a time.
...

One idiot politician at a time; this is a "DeGette bullets = magazines" thread. I just had to say it ... :p

Degette was involved in a shooting that landed her ex-cop neighbor in some very hot water. It's shocking she could be that mis-informed.

I tried to search for the "Degette involved shooting" via multiple search sites and was overwhelmed by stories her latest gaffe. Have more info Dr.Rob?

chuck
 
Shockingly I couldn't find it either after a lengthy search.

As I recall it, she called on a San Diego ex cop neighbor during a break in. The neigbor shot at the fleeing suspect and hit him in the back paralyzing him. The shoot was deemed 'bad' and the ex-cop defaulted to a 'due to brain injury I reacted as if I was still on the force' defense. Which as I recall, actually worked. (The make my day law didn't apply or wasn't yet in use.) The suspect later tried to sue unsucessfully.

She's been a staunch anti for a LONG time.

This is going to be one of those microfiche and archives searches.
 
DR Rob, you memory is good...property crime, running away was not a shoot offence.As I remember it, this kinda went under the carpet after several days! Not sure if X was a Cal or Denver troop?
Dan
:cool:
 
One idiot politician at a time; this is a "DeGette bullets = magazines" thread. I just had to say it ...

DeGette should have her vocabulary limited to 2,258 words and not be allowed to use more than 10 at a time also.

And she really fails at those multi syllable words like 'magazine.'

it might be to large for her brain to understand.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top