ADVERTISEMENT

Dawn being Dawn at ESPYs

Fowl - So this your concern?

There were over 130,000 deaths because of Fentanyl last year. Where do you think that comes from? I've never heard you say a peep about the free-for-all border under the Biden Administration.

There were close to 1,000,000 deaths because of abortion last year. Sure, some of it is pure social-economic, but only a fraction. I've never hear you say a peep about people using it as a form of contraception?

According to VAERs - The Government Website on Vaccine Injuries - There have been at least 37,500 deaths from the COVID vaccine and potentially up to 400,000 just in the US alone. At least 50x more have been injured seriously. I've never hear you say a peep about your concern over this? Many of the deaths have been young people who never needed it in the first place.

I posted earlier about the bi-partisan border bill that Trump squashed.

"Congressional Republicans walked away from it early this year at the urging of GOP presumptive presidential nominee Donald Trump, who was not supportive of the bill because he is centering his reelection campaign on immigration."

According to the DEA most of the fentanyl is produced in China and India and is shipped from there to Mexico, Canada or straight to the US. Some enters the US from Canada. If we closed the border to Mexico it would help a great deal but it wouldn't stop all of it.

I personally know scores of people who took the vaccine and benefitted from it. Can you give us names of people you know who died from the vaccine?

I hate abortions but I'm in no position to make that choice for others.
 
Last edited:
I posted earlier about the bi-partisan border bill that Trump squashed.

"Congressional Republicans walked away from it early this year at the urging of GOP presumptive presidential nominee Donald Trump, who was not supportive of the bill because he is centering his reelection campaign on immigration."

Yes - Trump vetoed the bill stating that it would hinder the executive branch's ability to act swiftly in times of crisis. He didn't have a border crisis. He was building a wall.

What does this have to do with the last 4-years of chaos and the Biden Adminstration literally cutting wire and standing off with Texas authorities at the border?

What does this have to do with over 10x of illegals flooding the border and Biden openly flying them to swing states?

During 4 years of Trump we had under 1 million illegals. Under Biden, it's over 10 million.

Comeon. Don't be a DeeDave.
 
Yes - Trump vetoed the bill stating that it would hinder the executive branch's ability to act swiftly in times of crisis. He didn't have a border crisis. He was building a wall.

What does this have to do with the last 4-years of chaos and the Biden Adminstration literally cutting wire and standing off with Texas authorities at the border?

What does this have to do with over 10x of illegals flooding the border and Biden openly flying them to swing states?

During 4 years of Trump we had under 1 million illegals. Under Biden, it's over 10 million.

Comeon. Don't be a DeeDave.

Trump wasn't in office so he didn't veto anything. He simply called the republican leadership and told them to block the bill even though many had gone on record as supporting it. Another example of Trump putting his personal interests above that of our country.
The border was a problem for Trump as illegal immigration was even greater during much of his administration. Biden's policies did not snatch screaming babies from their mother's arms or separate families but Tump's did.
 
While ammunition certainly affects rifle power there are other contributing factors but you'll have to google those. The AR-15 uses the NATO 5.56 round. I haven't found anything other than "assault" rifles that use that round.

I did, but you'll have e to Google those. (Don't forget to add 223 ammo, unless we would want to argue that ammo is not ban worthy?)

But this brings up a good question, are you for banning guns based on the ammunition they use? If so, there are more than just "assault rifles" that fire that ammunition.

And I would argue that other caliber of bullets are just as deadly, and just as destructive. Many fired from simple handguns.

I suppose the easy way of saying is that you can die from a 223 fired from a pistol or a rifle, it really doesn't matter which. So why ban only one?
 
Trump wasn't in office so he didn't veto anything. He simply called the republican leadership and told them to block the bill even though many had gone on record as supporting it. Another example of Trump putting his personal interests above that of our country.
The border was a problem for Trump as illegal immigration was even greater during much of his administration. Biden's policies did not snatch screaming babies from their mother's arms or separate families but Tump's did.

You're not making any sense. Who cares what Trump didn't want them to vote for?

Look at what happened during his admin vs Biden's.

The Biden Adminstration has openly encouraged immigration.

To try to hang this on Trump is CNN garbage and you know it.

BTW, Obama did the snatching and built cages. That's more CNN garbage you're talking about. Look it up.
 
Trump wasn't in office so he didn't veto anything. He simply called the republican leadership and told them to block the bill even though many had gone on record as supporting it. Another example of Trump putting his personal interests above that of our country.
The border was a problem for Trump as illegal immigration was even greater during much of his administration. Biden's policies did not snatch screaming babies from their mother's arms or separate families but Tump's did.
You mean Obama’s did. BTW, the Dems Border proposal was garbage. Look closely at the 2,500 daily section of the proposal. It sound good but there is absolutely no way it could actually be operationalized. We have a daily number already : zero! Any number the Dems put into law will just be ignored by them as evidenced by the current ignoring of current law.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ward Jr
Trump wasn't in office so he didn't veto anything. He simply called the republican leadership and told them to block the bill even though many had gone on record as supporting it. Another example of Trump putting his personal interests above that of our country.
The border was a problem for Trump as illegal immigration was even greater during much of his administration. Biden's policies did not snatch screaming babies from their mother's arms or separate families but Tump's did.

Seems like open borders were a high-priority:

"Immediately upon taking office, the Biden administration began reversing several of Trump's immigration policies. This included the termination of the "Remain in Mexico" policy (Migrant Protection Protocols) and the lifting of Title 42, which allowed for the rapid expulsion of migrants."
 
I did, but you'll have e to Google those. (Don't forget to add 223 ammo, unless we would want to argue that ammo is not ban worthy?)

But this brings up a good question, are you for banning guns based on the ammunition they use? If so, there are more than just "assault rifles" that fire that ammunition.

And I would argue that other caliber of bullets are just as deadly, and just as destructive. Many fired from simple handguns.

I suppose the easy way of saying is that you can die from a 223 fired from a pistol or a rifle, it really doesn't matter which. So why ban only one?
In 2017 60 people were killed and 500 wounded by bump stop AR-15 in less than 10 minutes all by a single gunman in Las Vegas. That

was the worst mass shooting in our country's history. According to my search, rifles which use NATO 5.56x45mm ammo ( AR-15 and M-16)

are classified as assault rifles. You indicate there are others but I haven't found any. Another major factor is the ease in which AR-15s are

converted to full automatic. The parts are sold online. You might also consider how a 5.56 round tumbles and fragments when it hits a

human body. Hunting rifles OTOH which may be just as powerful make a clean entry and exit so as not to destroy the flesh of an animal

you might want to eat.
 
In 2017 60 people were killed and 500 wounded by bump stop AR-15 in less than 10 minutes all by a single gunman in Las Vegas. That

was the worst mass shooting in our country's history. According to my search, rifles which use NATO 5.56x45mm ammo ( AR-15 and M-16)

are classified as assault rifles. You indicate there are others but I haven't found any. Another major factor is the ease in which AR-15s are

converted to full automatic. The parts are sold online. You might also consider how a 5.56 round tumbles and fragments when it hits a

human body. Hunting rifles OTOH which may be just as powerful make a clean entry and exit so as not to destroy the flesh of an animal

you might want to eat.

I understand the impact of the mass shooting. My question boils down to the total numbers though.

If you can stop on mass shooting that kills 40, or 100 shootings that kill 1 each, which do we choose? One makes a bigger optic, the other actually saves more lives. Pistols take way more lives, but fewer at a time.

The ar15 can be chambered for 223 or 556. (The m16 is an automatic rifle) The mini 14 can be chambered for both and is not considered an "assault rifle".

I have to ask again, as I didn't see a clear answer. Is it the 556 ammo that makes it an "assault rifle" in your opinion? If I change ammo to the 223, do you still consider it an "assault rifle"?

As for modifying the ar15? I don't do that myself, so I'm not as familiar with that. If you proposed banning modifications that made it full auto, I can't argue too much.

(I am aware of the technicality that allows bump stocks. Whether we agree or disagree on if they should be legal, they are an external mod, not internal)
 
You mean Obama’s did. BTW, the Dems Border proposal was garbage. Look closely at the 2,500 daily section of the proposal. It sound good but there is absolutely no way it could actually be operationalized. We have a daily number already : zero! Any number the Dems put into law will just be ignored by them as evidenced by the current ignoring of current law.
Obama? Why not Nancy Pelosi? Due to Trump's diminished mental state he uses those names interchangeable. So it's kosher for his lemmings to do the same. FYI the bill under discussion is from 2024. Yes the repubs won't let anything pass. Perhaps someone could use their campaign funds to secure a truck load of ex-lax.
 
I understand the impact of the mass shooting. My question boils down to the total numbers though.

If you can stop on mass shooting that kills 40, or 100 shootings that kill 1 each, which do we choose? One makes a bigger optic, the other actually saves more lives. Pistols take way more lives, but fewer at a time.

The ar15 can be chambered for 223 or 556. (The m16 is an automatic rifle) The mini 14 can be chambered for both and is not considered an "assault rifle".

I have to ask again, as I didn't see a clear answer. Is it the 556 ammo that makes it an "assault rifle" in your opinion? If I change ammo to the 223, do you still consider it an "assault rifle"?

As for modifying the ar15? I don't do that myself, so I'm not as familiar with that. If you proposed banning modifications that made it full auto, I can't argue too much.

(I am aware of the technicality that allows bump stocks. Whether we agree or disagree on if they should be legal, they are an external mod, not internal)

I have no interest in beating this dead horse any longer.
 
You mean Obama’s did. BTW, the Dems Border proposal was garbage. Look closely at the 2,500 daily section of the proposal. It sound good but there is absolutely no way it could actually be operationalized. We have a daily number already : zero! Any number the Dems put into law will just be ignored by them as evidenced by the current ignoring of current law.

Just a reminder

  • The Senate’s immigration bill would have given the executive branch emergency authority to bar most migrants from seeking asylum if unauthorized immigration at the border reaches an average of 5,000 encounters a day during seven consecutive days.

  • That does not mean that 5,000 people are allowed to illegally enter the U.S.

  • Encounters track the number of times immigration officials stop people trying to enter the U.S., not the number of people who are released into the country.
 
Just a reminder

  • The Senate’s immigration bill would have given the executive branch emergency authority to bar most migrants from seeking asylum if unauthorized immigration at the border reaches an average of 5,000 encounters a day during seven consecutive days.

  • That does not mean that 5,000 people are allowed to illegally enter the U.S.

  • Encounters track the number of times immigration officials stop people trying to enter the U.S., not the number of people who are released into the country.

Look at this ridiculous crap to try to justify what has happened at our border under Biden.

He immediately took measures to open up the border the day he was elected.

He was in a standoff with Texas officials who didn't want their wire cut.

He is literally flying immigrants into this country.

Over 10 million illegals on his watch.

None is this is disputable.
 
You've literally become unhinged since Trump started losing.

Interesting how you project your feelings.

Similar to how you complain about other posters not having "substance".

Do you think this stems from crying yourself to sleep night after night hoping daddy would come home?
 
It's literally is not valid.

That's why your "substance" isn't actually substantial .

Watson - Cognitive Behavioral Therapy can help with internet and trolling addictions.

You can also have a neurotransmitter panel run.

Often times it's nutritional and genetic deficiencies at play.

We all wish you well.
 
Watson - Cognitive Behavioral Therapy can help with internet and trolling addictions.

You can also have a neurotransmitter panel run.

Often times it's nutritional and genetic deficiencies at play.

We all wish you well.

I like how this has become the de facto "i'm wrong and I have nothing else to say"
 
Trump wasn't in office so he didn't veto anything. He simply called the republican leadership and told them to block the bill even though many had gone on record as supporting it. Another example of Trump putting his personal interests above that of our country.
The border was a problem for Trump as illegal immigration was even greater during much of his administration. Biden's policies did not snatch screaming babies from their mother's arms or separate families but Tump's did.

Trump opposed it because it was a bad bill. The Dems would take all that money and fly in more illegals and still treat border patrol like they are the klan.

And Biden lied. He said there was nothing he could do. But then, knowing he HAD to at least temporarily get the numbers down before the election because it was the #1 election issue, he used executive action to slow down the slow. Just like he could have the entire time. Just like Trump did.

But it didn't matter. Dems couldn't even get all the Dems to vote for it, and it was dead on arrival in the House. Senate had an immigration bill for almost a year sitting around (HR2) that passed the House. They refused to even look at it.


Dems want open borders. Period. They are lying when they say they don't. Kamala will flood even more illegal in. People better wake up, because we are about to lose this country to central and south american immigrants. And we see what they turned their countries into.
 
Kennedy just laid down a masterpiece in his resignation speech.

It starts at the 41:25 minute mark and lays out exactly how bad the DNC is acting against its core values and how it was captured.

 
Harris - 48.4%
Trump - 46.9%

Harris +1.5%

Harris 46.4%
Trump 44.4%
Kennedy 5.0%
Stein 0.8%
West 0.6%

Harris +2.0%

Source: Real Clear Politics (averaging of polls)

Not making a statement; just relaying information.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Forever Fowl
Harris - 48.4%
Trump - 46.9%

Harris +1.5%

Harris 46.4%
Trump 44.4%
Kennedy 5.0%
Stein 0.8%
West 0.6%

Harris +2.0%

Source: Real Clear Politics (averaging of polls)

Not making a statement; just relaying information.

Do you personally anticipate any shift with today's news?
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT