Biden vs Gun Owners

[Ben Lamb]

Look harder. There are homes every year that sell for back taxes in the property for the price I quoted..

I just moved across the country. Cost me around $16K or a bit more, depending on what we're counting. I had to pay cash for it. I was lucky that we had it. I still had to give away thousands of dollars in furniture, work benches, etc. That means I have to spend more money to replace what I had.

I cannot fathom how anyone thinks picking up & moving across the country is an easy thing, especially when you dangle houses that would need to be torn down in a city without a lot of employment opportunities as an incentive to poor people who can't afford both medicine & rent.

 

[Gulf of America]

Look harder. There are homes every year that sell for back taxes in the property for the price I quoted..

I don't see anyone arguing against additional gun regulation going to the inner city and helping poor families relocate to Detroit, but please let me know if that's happening. Even if there really are $1800 houses (in actual livable condition) all over, I still think it's alot to expect someone working multiple jobs trying to survive to also find a home and go through the process of purchasing it. Buying a house sight unseen is a rich person's game.

 

[Fullquiver]

I just moved across the country. Cost me around $16K or a bit more, depending on what we're counting. I had to pay cash for it. I was lucky that we had it. I still had to give away thousands of dollars in furniture, work benches, etc. That means I have to spend more money to replace what I had.

I cannot fathom how anyone thinks picking up & moving across the country is an easy thing, especially when you dangle houses that would need to be torn down in a city without a lot of employment opportunities as an incentive to poor people who can't afford both medicine & rent.

Doesn't sound like you have spent much time in Detroit lately..

 

[rwc101]

Right, the solution to poverty is moving into a condemned house in Detroit filled with mold. Many of those properties require proof of funds to either demolish or remodel the property.

 

[Ben Lamb]

Doesn't sound like you have spent much time in Detroit lately..

I've been watching that real estate market for a while now. Anything for $1800 isn't going to be habitable.

 

[jryoung]

 

[stevejfarms]

Just a quick google on this, so take the figures with a grain of salt, but average rent in Chicago is $1,800 per month. At the federal minimum wage, a person would have to work 58 hours a week to afford only rent. Now I recognize that this is missing a lot of factors - housing assistance, IL minimum wage is higher than federal, etc - but it's clear that supporting a family on a low wage job isn't possible in a big city. And the people working food and service jobs have to live in the same communities as the people paying for their services.

Everyone argues that the breakdown of the family is the problem here, but how is a family unit supposed to function when the parent(s) have to work 80 hours a week at multiple jobs to keep a roof over their heads and food on the table?

Just did a quick google, the median rent in Chicago is $958. That’s almost 1/2 what you said. I understand poverty in inner cities is real, but let’s keep it honest.

 

[406dn]

Just did a quick google, the median rent in Chicago is $958. That’s almost 1/2 what you said. I understand poverty in inner cities is real, but let’s keep it honest.

Average and median are two different things. Both might be totally correct in this instance. I would say median rent is more accurate in describing the rental market.

 

[Gulf of America]

Just did a quick google, the median rent in Chicago is $958. That’s almost 1/2 what you said. I understand poverty in inner cities is real, but let’s keep it honest.

That's fair, median rent would be a better representation. I still stand by my assertion that even a two-parent household has little chance of being engaged parents if both are undereducated and working minimum-wage jobs.

 

[3darcher2]

Wow - if you will place no faith in any SCOTUS ruling ("To place any amount of faith in a Supreme Court ruling, that it is indeed, objective and unbiased is erroneous"), then you do not respect our constitution, and there is no point in group discussion because only you alone apparently can interpret the document. But then again, on what basis can we be assured you are 100% objective and 100% unbiased? So, if even you can not be trusted to interrupt the law/constitution then I guess the anarchists are right. Every man, woman and child for themselves, because no one can be trusted and every person is their own tyrant. Good luck running a society with this belief system

As the thread has reached this level (even worse than going nazi in the mid #300s) I am out. Take care all.

If 5 justices tomorrow determine that up is down or green is red, then so be it, because in the court's opinion, that's how it is.

I cheated after the first two pages and came to the end. I'm sorry if this has been hashed over. The COTUS, and especially the Bill of Rights have a lot of contemporaneous writings so that we don't need to guess what the intentions of the words were - the writers told us. They also provided a mechanism to change them if they were so overwhelmingly unpopular that the need arose. We are led to believe that for gun control, there is overwhelming evidence of such. If there really was, then there would be an amendment to that effect.

The notion that for the public good somehow can trump literally every one of the Bill of Rights is right that the SCOTUS anointed unto itself at some point. Lockdowns, muzzling of opposition, gun control - all on the table as part of the greater good - despite the fact the document being used to provide these anointed powers specifically prohibits them. At one point a precedent was set by those seeking to expand their power, and for some reason, that precedent now carries more weight than the document it came from.

Since there isn't an amendment, and it's not popular enough to actually pass, the courts were long ago seen as the last option. IMHO, we often hear about Obama and others described as Constitutional scholars. I believe that's clearly because they studied not to embrace it, but in an effort to defeat it, whether it's to implement gun control, limit speech, expand rights that don't exist, etc. The mental gymnastics, when looked at from start to finish, seem staggering, but it's been incremental. This is one point that I don't think the Founders recognized, or else they did but didn't seem any way to combat it - other than watering the tree of freedom with the blood of tyrants and patriots from time to time.

 

[Gulf of America]

If 5 justices tomorrow determine that up is down or green is red, then so be it, because in the court's opinion, that's how it is.

I cheated after the first two pages and came to the end. I'm sorry if this has been hashed over. The COTUS, and especially the Bill of Rights have a lot of contemporaneous writings so that we don't need to guess what the intentions of the words were - the writers told us. They also provided a mechanism to change them if they were so overwhelmingly unpopular that the need arose. We are led to believe that for gun control, there is overwhelming evidence of such. If there really was, then there would be an amendment to that effect.

The notion that for the public good somehow can trump literally every one of the Bill of Rights is right that the SCOTUS anointed unto itself at some point. Lockdowns, muzzling of opposition, gun control - all on the table as part of the greater good - despite the fact the document being used to provide these anointed powers specifically prohibits them. At one point a precedent was set by those seeking to expand their power, and for some reason, that precedent now carries more weight than the document it came from.

Since there isn't an amendment, and it's not popular enough to actually pass, the courts were long ago seen as the last option. IMHO, we often hear about Obama and others described as Constitutional scholars. I believe that's clearly because they studied not to embrace it, but in an effort to defeat it, whether it's to implement gun control, limit speech, expand rights that don't exist, etc. The mental gymnastics, when looked at from start to finish, seem staggering, but it's been incremental. This is one point that I don't think the Founders recognized, or else they did but didn't seem any way to combat it - other than watering the tree of freedom with the blood of tyrants and patriots from time to time.

Couldn't find the time to read the entire discussion, but had to make sure it was mentioned that a President who willingly committed to and oversaw a peaceful transfer of power was planning the breakdown of democracy from his college days. Thank you for your contribution.

 

[Irrelevant]

"Hey Constitutional Scholars. Remember that part of middle school where you learned that the Legislature makes laws, the Executive branch enforces laws, and the Judicial branch interprets laws?"
...
"No? Oh, you must have been sick that day."
...
"Well to make a long story short, it means there's no need for YOU to try to interpret what the founding fathers thought when they wrote the Constitution, that's not your job, and is kind of irrelevant"

 

[Irrelevant]

I can also assure those still standing in this thread, this isn't the civil war, you're not going to win through attrition. The horse is still dead, you can quit beating it.

 

[3darcher2]

Couldn't find the time to read the entire discussion, but had to make sure it was mentioned that a President who willingly committed to and oversaw a peaceful transfer of power was planning the breakdown of democracy from his college days. Thank you for your contribution.

I'm assuming your referring to Obama? They guy who said he wanted to "fundamentally transform" America and learned in his college days from Bill Ayers? Yeah, that's who I am talking about. He literally told you we was going to try to do it, so I take the guy at his word. He did move the ball down the field. He certainly isn't alone, he's simply the most visible. There dozens, hundreds, maybe thousands of leftists in various positions whether politicians, judges or bureaucrats, who seek to subvert the COTUS. They write about it, talk about it, and act on it; more subdued in the past, much more openly now.

Whether you choose to acknowledge it or not, it's been happening since before I was born. You can somehow feign ignorance, but that doesn't mean it isn't happening.

 

[Trial153]

I'm assuming your referring to Obama? They guy who said he wanted to "fundamentally transform" America and learned in his college days from Bill Ayers? Yeah, that's who I am talking about. He literally told you we was going to try to do it, so I take the guy at his word. He did move the ball down the field. He certainly isn't alone, he's simply the most visible. There dozens, hundreds, maybe thousands of leftists in various positions whether politicians, judges or bureaucrats, who seek to subvert the COTUS. They write about it, talk about it, and act on it; more subdued in the past, much more openly now.

Whether you choose to acknowledge it or not, it's been happening since before I was born. You can somehow feign ignorance, but that doesn't mean it isn't happening.

Like there are no "rightist" seeking to subvert the COTUS. You can feign ignorance but that doesn't mean it isnt happening.
Or you can just be a partisan hack and tow the line with your head happly planted where the sun doesn't shine.

 

[Pmacc60]

A voluminous compilation of semantic nits, pejorative anecdotes, compelling anecdotes, and opinion shaming....juxtaposed.

Three lines to describe 500+ post perfectly!

 

[Hammsolo]

Mrs45 says their students pissed off the SRO last time because they weren't taking it seriously. Too much laughing and giggling behind the classroom doors.
More fun than a spirit rally.

Like everything in life it’s how you teach it. If teachers don’t take it serious than students won’t. School shootings are a problem whether it’s convenient or not. I live in Spokane. We had a shooting in Freeman just a few years ago. Our school counselor had to work it. I have friends that work there. It’s a sad complicated situation.

 

[Gulf of America]

I can also assure those still standing in this thread, this isn't the civil war, you're not going to win through attrition. The horse is still dead, you can quit beating it.

You can pry my keyboard from my cold, dead hands!

With that, I can let this thread cross the rainbow bridge.

 

[Tradewind]

Meme time

 

[EKYHunter]

Meme time

View attachment 175019

Yep! And apparently lots of folks are ready to help sharpen the pencil.