• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Biden dropping Gun EOs tomorrow

I saw on Fox news at work where Joe wants a committee to look at rearranging (packing) the Supreme Court.

^This, his EA's, and Dems wanting to stop the filibuster shows they are all in and will pull every trick they can to dismantle the 2nd Amendment along with everything else they want to corrupt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bender
This would explain why Biden has formed a "coalition" to "investigate" packing the supreme court and turning it into a total partisan garbage fest of how many can the ruling party at the time add. What's next a 1000 person supreme court?

You beat me too it while I was typing.
 
This would explain why Biden has formed a "coalition" to "investigate" packing the supreme court and turning it into a total partisan garbage fest of how many can the ruling party at the time add. What's next a 1000 person supreme court?
"That's a nice Supreme Court you have there, it would be a shame if something happened to it because you wouldn't give old Joe what he wants..."
 
"That's a nice Supreme Court you have there, it would be a shame if something happened to it because you wouldn't give old Joe what he wants..."

It ain’t joe, maybe joe of a decade ago, whomever types on the teleprompter is the one running the show.

Joe is more of a narrator, and a poor one at that, than anything resembling what we knew as a president
 
"That's a nice Supreme Court you have there, it would be a shame if something happened to it because you wouldn't give old Joe what he wants..."

That is actually EXACTLY what that evil tyrant FDR did.
He actually tried to follow through but at that time the senate and congress still weren't fully corrupted like they are now.

He did manage to scare them enough to force them to reverse course and find all his unconstitutional orders to somehow be fine.

Including one of the most evil ones, that you may be poor and starving and can't afford food for you and your animals, but tough luck, the government can send the police with guns (Just following orders of course) to force you to not grow food to feed yourself & your own animals, I guess at gunpoint threatening to murder you right then and there. Because maybe if you were starving enough you'd figure out how to go rob somebody to get a couple pennies to buy a bit of bread???
 
That is actually EXACTLY what that evil tyrant FDR did.
He actually tried to follow through but at that time the senate and congress still weren't fully corrupted like they are now.

He did manage to scare them enough to force them to reverse course and find all his unconstitutional orders to somehow be fine.

Including one of the most evil ones, that you may be poor and starving and can't afford food for you and your animals, but tough luck, the government can send the police with guns (Just following orders of course) to force you to not grow food to feed yourself & your own animals, I guess at gunpoint threatening to murder you right then and there. Because maybe if you were starving enough you'd figure out how to go rob somebody to get a couple pennies to buy a bit of bread???
The courts aren't above or immune to politics, they just want the peasants to believe that because it makes us easier to control.
 
many of these agencies operate using street level mafia style thug techniques

you will see blatantly unlawful interpretation and enforcement but it's okay because the "courts will sort it out" and they are doing the "right thing" by hurting the "bad guys" in the pocket book and reputationally

if the case is lost by the defendant at the trial court level and appealed costing ungodly amounts of money in fees to take to trial to defend against the government spending other people's money and then to appeal, just for the agency to rescind their policy before an appeals court makes a decision

thuggery is thuggery whether it's the mafia shaking down business owners for "protection money" or an agency engaging in the above behavior

It’s the same thing as “tax stamps” of course we arnt saying you don’t have that right, you 100% do, however you have to pay a fee we know most can’t afford to exercise that right, be it guns or a competent defense, but ya know, it’s not like you don’t have that right...you just can’t afford it right now
 
Not reading through 6 pages, so it may have already been covered, but just to clarify - there is a big distinction b/w EO and EA. Yesterday was EA
 
It’s the same thing as “tax stamps” of course we arnt saying you don’t have that right, you 100% do, however you have to pay a fee we know most can’t afford to exercise that right, be it guns or a competent defense, but ya know, it’s not like you don’t have that right...you just can’t afford it right now
And why is the left not up in arms (pun intended) about this fee/barrier to a constitutional right? Is this not an outrageous example of inequality and suppression (pun intended) of the masses in favor of the privileged? Imagine if you needed a $200 stamp to vote!
 
And why is the left not up in arms (pun intended) about this fee/barrier to a constitutional right? Is this not an outrageous example of inequality and suppression (pun intended) of the masses in favor of the privileged? Imagine if you needed a $200 stamp to vote!

Because it’s more power for them.

Government is a power struggle between the people and the necessary evil of government. Ideally you have the least government possible to function as a nation.

The founding fathers got this, over the centuries it seems the people have forgotten and view the government as a parent or religious like figure. The blue ties and the red ties have more in common than they do different, just mute the sales pitch and look at the product.

Per voting wow, they’d be VERY against that, it would question the integrity of the voting system, you can’t oppress people like that and not get major pushback, you need the illusion of choice, that it’s not them doing this to you, it your votes doing this to you, it’s that damn neighbor with the Prius and Bernie sticker, it’s his vote that did this. You remove that illusion and the in fighting and division, well now everyone’s cross hairs and anger for this shit situation only has one place to fall on, and that shit is just bad for business.
 
Last edited:
Not reading through 6 pages, so it may have already been covered, but just to clarify - there is a big distinction b/w EO and EA. Yesterday was EA
Just curious, if you mean Executive Action by EA, you should know that an EO is an EA. EAs encompass many things including EOs but if he did something other than an EO (which I would not be arguing since I don’t know) could you clarify exactly what?
 
It ain’t joe, maybe joe of a decade ago, whomever types on the teleprompter is the one running the show.

Joe is more of a narrator, and a poor one at that, than anything resembling what we knew as a president
Maybe Bruce Almighty is already working the teleprompter for joe?



I wish I knew how to crop Joe’s head onto a video... 😂
 
  • Like
Reactions: TurboTrout
Because it’s more power for them.

Government is a power struggle between the people and the necessary evil of government. Ideally you have the least government possible to function as a nation.

The founding fathers got this, over the centuries it seems the people have forgotten and view the government as a parent or religious like figure. The blue ties and the red ties have more in common than they do different, just mute the sales pitch and look at the product.

Per voting wow, they’d be VERY against that, it would question the integrity of the voting system, you can’t oppress people like that and not get major pushback, you need the illusion of choice, that it’s not them doing this to you, it your votes doing this to you, it’s that damn neighbor with the Prius and Bernie sticker, it’s his vote that did this. You remove that illusion and the in fighting and division, well now everyone’s cross hairs and anger for this shit situation only has one place to fall on, and that shit is just bad for business.
Thanks. I don't disagree with you, but my post was meant to be rhetorical and just pointing out the hypocrisy of it all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TurboTrout
And why is the left not up in arms (pun intended) about this fee/barrier to a constitutional right? Is this not an outrageous example of inequality and suppression (pun intended) of the masses in favor of the privileged? Imagine if you needed a $200 stamp to vote!

Because the 16th Amendment gave them the ability to tax everything including the right to live. It was only limited by the passage of the 24th Amendment which prevents poll taxes.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: TurboTrout
SVJo73bV.jpeg
 
Just curious, if you mean Executive Action by EA, you should know that an EO is an EA. EAs encompass many things including EOs but if he did something other than an EO (which I would not be arguing since I don’t know) could you clarify exactly what?
True statements. Essentially im saying what happened yesterday were not orders. They were directives that will be open to public comment.
 
Just curious, if you mean Executive Action by EA, you should know that an EO is an EA. EAs encompass many things including EOs but if he did something other than an EO (which I would not be arguing since I don’t know) could you clarify exactly what?
That's what they want you to believe.
The notion that EO's and EA's are the same thing or that an EO falls under the general heading of an EA was started during the Obama era.
Not once did PJ used the term Executive Order in the presser yesterday, that I heard.
He did use the terms Executive Actions and recommendations when outlining his proposals.
EO's are legally binding and If he really did issue any yesterday, they will be asigned a reference number and get published in the Federal Registry within a few days.
EA's are not legally binding, and in reality they are nothing more than a wish list of policies a president would like to see enacted. Since they carry none of the legal weight of an EO they are not published in the FR.
Then there are Executive Memorandums......but I didnt hear him use that term either.
Go to www.federalregister.com and see if an EO's were signed on 4-8-21.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ravenworks
That's what they want you to believe.
The notion that EO's and EA's are the same thing or that an EO falls under the general heading of an EA was started during the Obama era.
Not once did PJ used the term Executive Order in the presser yesterday, that I heard.
He did use the terms Executive Actions and recommendations when outlining his proposals.
EO's are legally binding and If he really did issue any yesterday, they will be asigned a reference number and get published in the Federal Registry within a few days.
EA's are not legally binding, and in reality they are nothing more than a wish list of policies a president would like to see enacted. Since they carry none of the legal weight of an EO they are not published in the FR.
Then there are Executive Memorandums......but I didnt hear him use that term either.
Go to www.federalregister.com and see if an EO's were signed on 4-8-21.

So basically nothing happened but Biden is having a screaming tantrum like a toddler.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TurboTrout
Don't give them clicks/views. Fuck that network.

You might want to think that one through a little more

You punish bad behavior, but reward good behavior, them seeing massive clicks on something like that shows them this is the story that sell$


Fact-checking Biden's speech announcing new executive actions on gun control​

Holmes Lybrand, Tara Subramaniam and Daniel Dale, CNN
(CNN)In the wake of another series of mass shootings around the US, President Joe Biden announced several gun-control focused executive actions on Thursday.
The actions include expanding background checks for certain types of guns, regulating stabilizing braces built for pistols, making new investments in intervention programs for violence-prone communities, and creating model "red flag" legislation for states to pass.
Here's a look at some of the claims Biden made during his Rose Garden announcement and the facts around them:

Gun manufacturers and liability​


Biden claimed that "the only industry in America -- a billion-dollar industry -- that can't be sued -- has exempt from being sued -- are gun manufacturers."
Facts First: This is false. Gun manufacturers are not entirely exempt from being sued, nor are they only industry with some liability protections.
Under the 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, gun manufacturers cannot be held liable for the use of their products in a crime. However, gun manufacturers can still be held liable for (and thus sued for) a range of things, including negligence, breach of contract regarding the purchase of a gun, or certain damages from defects in the design of a gun.
In 2019, the Supreme Court allowed a lawsuit against gun manufacturer Remington Arms Company to continue. The plaintiffs, a survivor and families of nine other victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School mass shooting, are attempting to hold the company, which manufactured the semi-automatic rifle that was used in the killing, partly responsible by targeting the company's marketing practices, another area where gun manufacturers can be held liable.
Other industries also have some exemptions in liability. For example, vaccine manufacturers cannot be held liable in a civil suit for damages from a vaccine-related injury or death. And for the next four years, pharmaceutical companies developing the Covid-19 vaccines will have immunity from liability under the 2005 Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act. Those who claim to have been harmed by vaccines may receive money from the government, not the pharmaceutical company, via the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.

Background checks and gun shows​


Biden claimed that "If you walk into a store and you buy a gun, you have a background check. But you go to a gun show, you can buy whatever you want and no background check."
Facts First: This framing from Biden is misleading, since it leaves the false impression that gun shows are exempt from background check laws. Purchases at gun shows are not exempt from background checks, which are required on purchases from licensed gun dealers whether you are in a gun store, a gun show or anywhere else. Only purchases from private sellers, whether at a gun show or elsewhere, do not require a background check in most states.
Under federal law, anyone who is purchasing a gun from a federal firearms licensed (FFL) dealer must go through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). These licensed dealers include anyone trying to make money by selling guns, or who sell guns regularly. They must be an FFL dealer and regardless of where they sell guns (online, at a store or gun show) they have to put buyers through the NICS.
Under federal law, private sellers not looking to turn a profit and who "only make occasional sales of firearms from (a) personal collection" do not have to run buyers through a background check system, according to the ATF. The private seller exemption is often referred to as the "gun-show loophole," which is an overly vague term that fails to capture the complexity of the law.
State laws around background checks vary widely. In 14 states and District of Columbia, for instance, private sellers must subject each buyer to a background check.
It is illegal for a private seller to sell a gun to someone who is not legally permitted to own a firearm. Private sellers cannot sell a gun to a resident of another state without first shipping the gun to an FFL dealer who will run the buyer through the NICS before handing over the weapon.

Red flag laws and suicides​


Biden touted so-called red flag laws, also known as Extreme Risk Protection Order laws, which allow people to ask a court to temporarily remove guns from people believed to be a danger to themselves or others. He said that states with red flag laws have "seen a reduction in the number of suicides in their states."
Facts First: This needs context. Research on this subject is limited, some of the available research data is mixed, and suicide rates have increased around the US in the 21st century.
The national US suicide rate has increasedsignificantly since 1999, though there was a slight decline in 2019. Suicide numbers have worsened in both states with red flag laws and states without red flag laws. (The Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence says 19 states and the District of Columbia have such laws.)
So why isn't Biden's claim false? Because someacademic research has found that Indiana and Connecticut had fewer firearm suicides than would have been expected without their red flag laws. According to this research, in other words, the laws may have had a reduction effect even if the overall number of suicides in one year remained higher than the number in the previous year.
However, there is additional nuance to consider. One study on Indiana and Connecticut found that while Indiana's red flag law was associated with an overall reduction in suicides of all kinds compared to the expected number, the overall picture was mixed in Connecticut. In Connecticut, this study found, a state move to increase enforcement of its red flag law, beginning in 2007, coincided with an increase in non-firearm suicides that was actually bigger than the reduction in firearm suicides.
In a 2020 review of the data on the effects of various gun policies, researchers at the RAND Corporation took note of the positive findings out of Indiana but said the overall evidence on the effect of red flag laws on both total suicides and firearm suicides is "inconclusive." The RAND report called for additional study on the subject.”
 
Sooo...Cliff Notes. I have been knocked out busy this week. How many Executive Orders came down the pipe and what do they say?

What's my new normal Monday morning? Thanks in Advance!

VooDoo
 
Sooo...Cliff Notes. I have been knocked out busy this week. How many Executive Orders came down the pipe and what do they say?

What's my new normal Monday morning? Thanks in Advance!

VooDoo

None

This so basically what Biden did...or read off this teleprompter



And even CNN fact checked his BS

He put out a bunch of advisories, but no actions, so just gum flapping and drum beating
 
I don't have any desire to argue against any point you made here, but I do want to say one thing about the tinfoil hat thing.

Epstein.
Scalia suffocated under a fucking pillow?

Autopsy over the phone?

I do not see any tinfoil around, but I do smell bullshit after watching that shitshow go down.

Roberts sure did get on board didn't he?

And yes Epstein...
 
Last edited:
Nothing came down the pipe? 6 pages of hysterical screaming and *nothing* happened yet? Wake me up when he bans stuff or sends the NG to come get my shit. I'm too tired and old now to GAS about stupid politicians.

Did anything happen this week or are we all just got our panties in a bunch and sand in our vaginas?

VooDoo
 
Nothing came down the pipe? 6 pages of hysterical screaming and *nothing* happened yet? Wake me up when he bans stuff or sends the NG to come get my shit. I'm too tired and old now to GAS about stupid politicians.

Did anything happen this week or are we all just got our panties in a bunch and sand in our vaginas?

VooDoo
Well, there was this:
20210409_194523.jpg
20210409_194626.jpg
20210409_194830.jpg
 
Nothing came down the pipe? 6 pages of hysterical screaming and *nothing* happened yet? Wake me up when he bans stuff or sends the NG to come get my shit. I'm too tired and old now to GAS about stupid politicians.

Did anything happen this week or are we all just got our panties in a bunch and sand in our vaginas?

VooDoo

Well they did install one of the Waco/ruby ridge guys as head of atf, dude thought it was cool to get a dating pic taken in front of dead women and children and has a record of making false official statements.
 
You might want to think that one through a little more

You punish bad behavior, but reward good behavior, them seeing massive clicks on something like that shows them this is the story that sell$


Fact-checking Biden's speech announcing new executive actions on gun control​

Holmes Lybrand, Tara Subramaniam and Daniel Dale, CNN
(CNN)In the wake of another series of mass shootings around the US, President Joe Biden announced several gun-control focused executive actions on Thursday.
The actions include expanding background checks for certain types of guns, regulating stabilizing braces built for pistols, making new investments in intervention programs for violence-prone communities, and creating model "red flag" legislation for states to pass.
Here's a look at some of the claims Biden made during his Rose Garden announcement and the facts around them:

Gun manufacturers and liability​


Biden claimed that "the only industry in America -- a billion-dollar industry -- that can't be sued -- has exempt from being sued -- are gun manufacturers."
Facts First: This is false. Gun manufacturers are not entirely exempt from being sued, nor are they only industry with some liability protections.
Under the 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, gun manufacturers cannot be held liable for the use of their products in a crime. However, gun manufacturers can still be held liable for (and thus sued for) a range of things, including negligence, breach of contract regarding the purchase of a gun, or certain damages from defects in the design of a gun.
In 2019, the Supreme Court allowed a lawsuit against gun manufacturer Remington Arms Company to continue. The plaintiffs, a survivor and families of nine other victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School mass shooting, are attempting to hold the company, which manufactured the semi-automatic rifle that was used in the killing, partly responsible by targeting the company's marketing practices, another area where gun manufacturers can be held liable.
Other industries also have some exemptions in liability. For example, vaccine manufacturers cannot be held liable in a civil suit for damages from a vaccine-related injury or death. And for the next four years, pharmaceutical companies developing the Covid-19 vaccines will have immunity from liability under the 2005 Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act. Those who claim to have been harmed by vaccines may receive money from the government, not the pharmaceutical company, via the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.

Background checks and gun shows​


Biden claimed that "If you walk into a store and you buy a gun, you have a background check. But you go to a gun show, you can buy whatever you want and no background check."
Facts First: This framing from Biden is misleading, since it leaves the false impression that gun shows are exempt from background check laws. Purchases at gun shows are not exempt from background checks, which are required on purchases from licensed gun dealers whether you are in a gun store, a gun show or anywhere else. Only purchases from private sellers, whether at a gun show or elsewhere, do not require a background check in most states.
Under federal law, anyone who is purchasing a gun from a federal firearms licensed (FFL) dealer must go through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). These licensed dealers include anyone trying to make money by selling guns, or who sell guns regularly. They must be an FFL dealer and regardless of where they sell guns (online, at a store or gun show) they have to put buyers through the NICS.
Under federal law, private sellers not looking to turn a profit and who "only make occasional sales of firearms from (a) personal collection" do not have to run buyers through a background check system, according to the ATF. The private seller exemption is often referred to as the "gun-show loophole," which is an overly vague term that fails to capture the complexity of the law.
State laws around background checks vary widely. In 14 states and District of Columbia, for instance, private sellers must subject each buyer to a background check.
It is illegal for a private seller to sell a gun to someone who is not legally permitted to own a firearm. Private sellers cannot sell a gun to a resident of another state without first shipping the gun to an FFL dealer who will run the buyer through the NICS before handing over the weapon.

Red flag laws and suicides​


Biden touted so-called red flag laws, also known as Extreme Risk Protection Order laws, which allow people to ask a court to temporarily remove guns from people believed to be a danger to themselves or others. He said that states with red flag laws have "seen a reduction in the number of suicides in their states."
Facts First: This needs context. Research on this subject is limited, some of the available research data is mixed, and suicide rates have increased around the US in the 21st century.
The national US suicide rate has increasedsignificantly since 1999, though there was a slight decline in 2019. Suicide numbers have worsened in both states with red flag laws and states without red flag laws. (The Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence says 19 states and the District of Columbia have such laws.)
So why isn't Biden's claim false? Because someacademic research has found that Indiana and Connecticut had fewer firearm suicides than would have been expected without their red flag laws. According to this research, in other words, the laws may have had a reduction effect even if the overall number of suicides in one year remained higher than the number in the previous year.
However, there is additional nuance to consider. One study on Indiana and Connecticut found that while Indiana's red flag law was associated with an overall reduction in suicides of all kinds compared to the expected number, the overall picture was mixed in Connecticut. In Connecticut, this study found, a state move to increase enforcement of its red flag law, beginning in 2007, coincided with an increase in non-firearm suicides that was actually bigger than the reduction in firearm suicides.
In a 2020 review of the data on the effects of various gun policies, researchers at the RAND Corporation took note of the positive findings out of Indiana but said the overall evidence on the effect of red flag laws on both total suicides and firearm suicides is "inconclusive." The RAND report called for additional study on the subject.”

Nope, I want them gone along with the other Networks. When all those pieces of shit are in the unemployment office....then I'll be happy.
 
Weird how Stairmaster Fail announced this as SCOTUS is considering taking up Corlett, et al ain't it? The black robe cowards only need a sentence or two from Democrats to make them run from their duty like small children in a haunted house.
 
The greatest trick the anti-2ers ever pulled, was convincing gun owners “nothing happened”.......🙄
 
The greatest trick the anti-2ers ever pulled, was convincing gun owners “nothing happened”.......🙄

I thought it was “just comply” and be a good citizen.

Heck during Waco it was a farmer who called in hearing gunshots, I’m sure if you would have asked him he was a “I’m pro 2a but....” type
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Holliday
There are literally childrens bodies still smoldering in this picture..This guy is a monster.

It's amazing how brave and tough a little worm tries to look when he's murdered children.
 
How much would anyone care to bet that he has a sizeable arsenal of FA weapons, SBRs and more suppressors than Starbuck's has coffee cups?
I wouldn't be surprised if he collected a few skulls from Waco for trophies , kinda like the predator !