Reply to Thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="JM44-40" data-source="post: 2147450" data-attributes="member: 14273">Bloomberg and others need to be challenged on their assertions that 40% of guns are private purchases, thereby avoiding any kind of background check. This is hogwash.In addition E. J. Dionne&#039;s point was without merit when he stated that La Pierre was inconsistent by saying the assault weapons ban was unconstitutional yet he supported enforcement of current background checks.Although not thread related, I was amused when I watched the debate between Feinstein and Senator Ted Cruz and the fact that she got so frustrated that Schumer and Dick Durban had to attempt to rescure her.What&#039;s significant was Durbin&#039;s assertion when alluding to the Bill of Rights that &quot;none of these rights are absolute.&quot;Excuse me Senator --- the right to a trial by a jury of your peers, and the prohibition against &quot;cruel and unusual punishment&quot; among others are not absolute? What a joke. This is a real insight into these peoples&#039; thought process and complete lack of logic in reasoning.It&#039;s amusing when you question these people on the constitution they always wet their pants.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="JM44-40, post: 2147450, member: 14273"] Bloomberg and others need to be challenged on their assertions that 40% of guns are private purchases, thereby avoiding any kind of background check. This is hogwash. In addition E. J. Dionne's point was without merit when he stated that La Pierre was inconsistent by saying the assault weapons ban was unconstitutional yet he supported enforcement of current background checks. Although not thread related, I was amused when I watched the debate between Feinstein and Senator Ted Cruz and the fact that she got so frustrated that Schumer and Dick Durban had to attempt to rescure her. What's significant was Durbin's assertion when alluding to the Bill of Rights that "none of these rights are absolute." Excuse me Senator --- the right to a trial by a jury of your peers, and the prohibition against "cruel and unusual punishment" among others are not absolute? What a joke. This is a real insight into these peoples' thought process and complete lack of logic in reasoning. It's amusing when you question these people on the constitution they always wet their pants. [/QUOTE]

Verification