• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Kaine is no fan of the 2nd.

blaxshep

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
16,875
Reaction score
7,666
Location
St. Petersburg
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
On July 22 Hillary Clinton announced Tim Kaine as her running mate. Kaine is a Democrat Senator from Virginia who supports a ban on 15-round “clips” and “assault weapons,” and who wants to enact a law to hold gun dealers liable for the misuse of firearms.

During the June 26 airing of Meet the Press, Kaine told Chuck Todd that he voted for an “assault weapons” ban before and “would likely vote for it again.” But he stressed that he believes “limitations on the size of magazines and ammunition clips” is the first step to take.

Todd asked Kaine if he believes the sale of AR-15 rifles ought to be illegal, and Kaine offered no direct answer, Instead, he suggested the problem with banning certain rifles is that the ban can be circumvented. Kaine said:

Here’s the thing, I have voted for [the assault weapons ban], and I would likely vote for it again, but here’s the practical problem I think you’re aware of. As soon as you define what an assault weapon is–that you can’t sell a weapon and here’s how to describe it–gun manufacturers just make one adjustment or two and they say, “See, this isn’t subject to the limitation.”

Tim Kaine: Ban 15-Round 'Clips,' Hold Gun Dealers Liable for Misuse of Firearms - Breitbart
 

Gimmesometruth

Liberal Snowflake
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 21, 2012
Messages
33,792
Reaction score
8,505
Location
US Southwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
281,619
Reaction score
100,383
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
On July 22 Hillary Clinton announced Tim Kaine as her running mate. Kaine is a Democrat Senator from Virginia who supports a ban on 15-round “clips” and “assault weapons,” and who wants to enact a law to hold gun dealers liable for the misuse of firearms.

During the June 26 airing of Meet the Press, Kaine told Chuck Todd that he voted for an “assault weapons” ban before and “would likely vote for it again.” But he stressed that he believes “limitations on the size of magazines and ammunition clips” is the first step to take.

Todd asked Kaine if he believes the sale of AR-15 rifles ought to be illegal, and Kaine offered no direct answer, Instead, he suggested the problem with banning certain rifles is that the ban can be circumvented. Kaine said:

Here’s the thing, I have voted for [the assault weapons ban], and I would likely vote for it again, but here’s the practical problem I think you’re aware of. As soon as you define what an assault weapon is–that you can’t sell a weapon and here’s how to describe it–gun manufacturers just make one adjustment or two and they say, “See, this isn’t subject to the limitation.”

Tim Kaine: Ban 15-Round 'Clips,' Hold Gun Dealers Liable for Misuse of Firearms - Breitbart


he's a hard core Bannerrhoid. anyone who believes that the way to prevent people who already commit a federal felony merely by touching a firearm, is to deny honest people the ability to own such weapons, is a hard core gun banner. There is no way around that fact.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
281,619
Reaction score
100,383
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday left in place gun control laws in New York and Connecticut that ban military-style assault weapons like the one used in last week's massacre at an Orlando nightclub, rejecting a legal challenge by gun rights advocates.

Supreme Court rejects challenge to state assault weapon bans | Reuters


you seem unable to understand the difference between the idiocy of some Democrat run STATES vs a FEDERAL GUN BAN that clearly violates the second amendment. Kaine is seeking FEDERAL OFFICE so your silly rant is worthless
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
36,160
Reaction score
17,559
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
On July 22 Hillary Clinton announced Tim Kaine as her running mate. Kaine is a Democrat Senator from Virginia who supports a ban on 15-round “clips” and “assault weapons,” and who wants to enact a law to hold gun dealers liable for the misuse of firearms.

During the June 26 airing of Meet the Press, Kaine told Chuck Todd that he voted for an “assault weapons” ban before and “would likely vote for it again.” But he stressed that he believes “limitations on the size of magazines and ammunition clips” is the first step to take.

Todd asked Kaine if he believes the sale of AR-15 rifles ought to be illegal, and Kaine offered no direct answer, Instead, he suggested the problem with banning certain rifles is that the ban can be circumvented. Kaine said:

Here’s the thing, I have voted for [the assault weapons ban], and I would likely vote for it again, but here’s the practical problem I think you’re aware of. As soon as you define what an assault weapon is–that you can’t sell a weapon and here’s how to describe it–gun manufacturers just make one adjustment or two and they say, “See, this isn’t subject to the limitation.”

Tim Kaine: Ban 15-Round 'Clips,' Hold Gun Dealers Liable for Misuse of Firearms - Breitbart

I am not surprised. Many democrats in office seem to have no respect for the 2nd amendment.
 

Henrin

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 3, 2010
Messages
60,458
Reaction score
12,357
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
you seem unable to understand the difference between the idiocy of some Democrat run STATES vs a FEDERAL GUN BAN that clearly violates the second amendment. Kaine is seeking FEDERAL OFFICE so your silly rant is worthless

There is no real difference since it was ruled the first ten amendments apply to the states.
 

blaxshep

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
16,875
Reaction score
7,666
Location
St. Petersburg
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
There is no real difference since it was ruled the first ten amendments apply to the states.

Big difference based on your own post, if a liberal state is able to circumvent the 2nd it effects the state not the Fed or any other state, but if the Fed is able to circumvent the 2nd it could apply to all the states.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
281,619
Reaction score
100,383
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
There is no real difference since it was ruled the first ten amendments apply to the states.

that is true but the USSC has a dilemma. Since the federal government was never given any powers to regulate privately owned firearms, its much easier for them to strike down such actions than it is for them to strike down powers that the states HAD before incorporation. Now we both know that the intent of the founders and those who created state constitutions is such that gun bans-especially of firearms civilian police and national guardsmen use-would never have been tolerated. Sadly, lots of judges and politicians see the NRA and gun owners as opposing their agenda so they piss on their constitutional oaths in favor of political expediency
 

Henrin

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 3, 2010
Messages
60,458
Reaction score
12,357
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Big difference based on your own post, if a liberal state is able to circumvent the 2nd it effects the state not the Fed or any other state, but if the Fed is able to circumvent the 2nd it could apply to all the states.

In both cases they are in violation of the second amendment for the same exact reason. Yes, the effect of individual states violating the second is less than the federal government doing it, but it's still unlawful and for the exact same reason.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
281,619
Reaction score
100,383
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I am not surprised. Many democrats in office seem to have no respect for the 2nd amendment.

it first started during the great era of pandering in the 1930s but it really became a permanent part of the Democrat scheme in 1960s when the Democrat party adopted gun control as a means of pretending that the Democrats were actually trying to do something about violent crime. Well Gun control was a facade that allowed them to pretend they were while not upsetting one of their major constituencies. Once the NRA and pro gun advocates started calling the Democrat scheme for the BS that it was, the Democrat party has launched a jihad against gun owners and the NRA
 

blaxshep

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
16,875
Reaction score
7,666
Location
St. Petersburg
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
In both cases they are in violation of the second amendment for the same exact reason. Yes, the effect of individual states violating the second is less than the federal government doing it, but it's still unlawful and for the exact same reason.

That ship sailed a long time ago when the commerce clause was interpreted to grant the Federal government a power that was purposely never enumerated to it. .... but yes you're right.
 

blaxshep

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
16,875
Reaction score
7,666
Location
St. Petersburg
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
it first started during the great era of pandering in the 1930s but it really became a permanent part of the Democrat scheme in 1960s when the Democrat party adopted gun control as a means of pretending that the Democrats were actually trying to do something about violent crime. Well Gun control was a facade that allowed them to pretend they were while not upsetting one of their major constituencies. Once the NRA and pro gun advocates started calling the Democrat scheme for the BS that it was, the Democrat party has launched a jihad against gun owners and the NRA

It's absurd how the Democrats want to disarm the people for our safety at the same time they want to bring in millions of refugees from Islamic states that hate the West.
 

Manc Skipper

Wrinkly member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2008
Messages
38,821
Reaction score
27,923
Location
Southern England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
"THEY'RE COMING FOR OUR GUNS, MA!!!" Is such a cliche these days.
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
281,619
Reaction score
100,383
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right

Crimefree

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 24, 2009
Messages
10,476
Reaction score
2,623
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
"THEY'RE COMING FOR OUR GUNS, MA!!!" Is such a cliche these days.

I believe that is exactly what the NRA and other British organisations said. I mean if they had had any sense at all they would have prepared their members to get off their bums and fight.

I'm reliably assured the only response from UK firearm organisations after the ban was announced was to beg parliament for more restrictions rather than a ban. What a bunch of abject cowards and suck ups.

Even now those self same cowards will tear down any organisation that tries to raise objection.
 
Top Bottom