Agreed. If the Democrats ran better, saner candidates, they might win more elections.
Another insane person with aa assault weapon.
- Thread starter Jarod
- Start date
Agreed. If the Democrats ran better, saner candidates, they might win more elections.
Nope, Texas is still red, it won’t happen for another two election cycles if then.
Lol, you being a long term Texan knows that is not true.
No, Democrats know we need both, you have an extreme bias against Democrats, so you misrepresent their positions.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
The standard for due process is already there. Trial, conviction, and sentencing. One of the things I've been consistent in saying here is that if a person can't be trusted with a weapon, they can't be trusted in public.
The Government cannot say such things. WE THE PEOPLE make those determinations. IF, a big IF, our representatives in the house/senate decide that jaywalking is a felony offense worthy of removing rights, we the people have a simple resolution to that which is jury nullification.
Now, one of the things that is important to remember.........IF a citizen serves his sentenced and allotted time FULLY, they should have ALL rights restored to them upon release. No permanent removal of rights.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
in a lot of respects, you are correct. MOST Texans don't give a damn about candidates except for the letter after their name denoting party. But Beto deserved to lose as he was way worse than Cruz
Republican redistricting helps keep it red, but the reality is that most Texans aren't Republicans: https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/religious-landscape-study/state/texas/party-affiliation/
39% Republican
21% No Lean
40% Democrat
When a large group of voters feel neither party represents their best interests, what should their strategy be on election day?
But there are situations where it is okay, right?
Ok, so I understand, IF the government makes ANYTHING the Supreme Court allows a felony and a jury convicts, that is one way of limiting gun ownership.
So, for example those who attacked the Capital on 1/6 AND have been convicted of seditions Conspiracy (a felony) can have their gun ownership removed? Right?
That takes care of criminal cases.
What about mental incapacitation? How does that work? If a judge declares someone mentally incompetent, than can restrict gun ownership?
Saint Guinefort
Verified User
It's actually not a bad argument. Sure it can be sort of an argumentum ad absurdum, but if one is debating the "absolute" nature of any right often times this is an effective argument. It forces the side that espouses an unfettered right to accept that limits already exist and limits that we should all be quite happy are there.
Indeed. The NRA's talking point about the need for better mental healthcare is actually just a disingenuous attempt to shift focus away from guns. They aren't actually interested in expanding mental healthcare. If they were they would be willing to accept a surcharge on all ammunition and gun purchases that goes to a fund for expanded mental healthcare.
The suicide number is scary. A lot of gun advocates want to ignore that but guns are a quantum step forward with regards to horrific outcomes. Not all suicide attempts need to be successful, but guns definitely bias that outcome. And studies continually show the presence of guns in a home correlates with higher rates of suicide. Likely it is because of the efficacy.
That should be sufficient to keep suicides as a legitimate measure of the danger of guns.
Democrats are stronger in cities. Republicans in the rural areas. Texas is a microcosm of the nation. As Texas grows and attracts more businesses, it will become more purple.
Abbott won the 2014 election with 59.3% of the vote vs. the Democrat 38.9%
He won the 2018 election 55.8% to 42.5%
He won the 2022 election 54.8% to 43.9%
The trend is downward for Abbott although I don't know if he'll drop below the 50% line unless the Democrats field better candidates. LOL
SmarterthanYou
rebel
no. ONLY incarceration removes a right, once released it is restored.
again, once released, the rights are restored.
ONLY if the person is committed to an institution. Once released, rights are restored.
Monad Portal
Was it me?
democrats are unable to admit they lie constantly.
you should amend your predictions, corn-holer.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
no, it's absolutely a crappy and bullshit argument. The crux of the 2nd Amendment is that ANY weapon that the government would use against the people, the people have the right to own themselves.
this is nothing more than an attempt to make exercising rights people don't like more expensive while punishing those that exercise that right.
How do you come up with the theory that Constitutionally ONLY incarceration or commitment removes a right? I am open minded but what is that based on?
It is currently common practice that rights are removed short of incarceration. What about home detention or halfway houses? People out on Parole?
Monad Portal
Was it me?
The results were 48 to 50 Cruz. Ted only won by a couple of hundred thousand votes. Had it been anyone with a pulse runnign against Cruz we'd have a Democratic senator in TX right now.
Stringfellow Hawk
Member
its clear jarod has no fucking clue what an assault weapon is, the thread topic is moot
LOL good morning to you, too, Sunshine
Fredo gets lonely when even his WSE buddies won't talk to him.