While Democrats will celebrate that their candidate, Vice President Kamala Harris “looked presidential” in tonight’s debate and was successful at getting under her opponent’s skin, Republican’s will scowl and correctly note that Harris was long on platitudes and short on actual policy. She was even shorter on explanations for her numerous changes to her positions on important issues between 2019 and now.
Five years ago, she was running to be the nominee among a crowded field of Democratic candidates and had to adjust her messaging to play to the party’s base. But now, with Joe Biden back-doored, Harris finds herself shockingly actually running for president. So, suddenly her, “I will stop fracking,” and “I support confiscating” some firearms, don’t play so well. In response, she verbally changes her stance, with no explanation why or justification for the change, even after being asked numerous times by the moderators of the debate.
To the astute observer of politics in this country, the view is clear—regardless of which candidate you support and which political party you most identify with—we are all kinda screwed. This entire election cycle is a dumpster fire, promising to divide America even more, regardless of who wins.
Inaccuracies Abound
Donald Trump allowed Harris’s condescending sneer and meaningless criticism of his “rallies” knock him off message. He also failed to effectively communicate a number of facts, of which there are many, to attack the current administration’s policies, instead resorting to oversimplified statements on complex issues, broad-stroked declarations of adjective-laden success and at times turning to the mean-spirited name-calling that has spawned a legion of never-Trumpers among the electorate.
Sure, he exaggerated some accomplishments and criticisms, but Harris was just as much as, if not more of, a liar in many of her statements as well. But like much of the Democratic Party of which she is a part, Harris and the Dems have perfected the disingenuous talking point in this Age of Animosity. They are quite simply, better at it than Republicans.
They call Trump a threat to democracy, while they push leftist socialist policies that by their very practice are an actual threat to democracy.
They claim the economy is doing just fine, while the average American, even Democratic ones, continues to struggle to meet the cost of groceries, gas, education, insurance, taxes, entertainment and much more, all robbing us of savings and forcing many to live on credit.
Harris claimed international leaders, specifically those in our NATO countries, laugh at Trump. Maybe some do and maybe some don’t. But they’re damn sure laughing at Biden and Harris. The proof is in history. During Trump’s presidency, the world enjoyed relative peace during his four years, even in Afghanistan, which saw a reduction in hostilities toward American soldiers still in the country. Meanwhile under Biden/Harris, the Russians were emboldened to attack Ukraine; Hamas went on a murderous rampage in Israel killing and, in some cases, raping more than 1,200 citizens, taking hostages and leading to a war that has destabilized the region; China stands at Taiwan’s doorstep rattling its sabers; and Iran is closer than ever to developing nuclear capabilities.
The border? That’s been a true disaster under the current administration of which Harris was supposedly “The Border Czar.” Our nation’s southern border went virtually unchecked until the Democrats realized most American’s didn’t agree with that policy and in the 11th hour decided to start allowing “less” illegal immigration. It’s like a college student who blows off class the entire semester then tries to show up during the final exam and hopes to pass the class.
This Business About Taking Guns Away
And while guns oddly continue to remain absent from debate moderators’ list of questions, Trump forced the issue about the threat to gun rights Kamala Harris and Tim Walz pose, noting they want to confiscate guns.
In reply, Harris said, “This business about taking everybody’s guns away. Tim Walz and I are both gun owners.” She said they are both gun owners as if it legitimizes their push for broad firearm restrictions because after all, “they’re one of us, so of course they’re not against guns. Their proposals are common sense policy.”
But that is among her and Walz’s biggest lies of all.
They both support red flag laws, which in theory are a fair enough idea, but in practice are fraught with constitutional issues. They support outlawing AR-15 style rifles, one of the most popular and widely used firearm platforms in America, and Harris did indeed once say she supported “a mandatory gun buyback program,” for so-called assault weapons, which is politi-speak for “gun confiscation,” though her campaign has walked back those comments. They both support universal background checks, which would create a de facto gun registry in this country, and Walz, at least, is inexplicably against reciprocity between states for those who carry for self-defense purposes.
The Wall Street Journal’s Aaron Zitner noted:
Kamala Harris’s statement that she owns a gun is a reminder of the ways her career as a prosecutor is playing differently — and in some ways more comfortably — in today’s general election than when she was a candidate in the 2020 primary for the Democratic presidential nomination.
In 2019, Harris said that she owned a handgun as a matter of personal safety, noting that she had been a career prosecutor. At the time, some analysts saw it as a problematic statement, given the strong support for gun restrictions among Democratic primary voters. Tonight, Harris mentioned her gun ownership in the course of arguing that Donald Trump was wrong to say she wanted to take Americans’ guns away. Harris wants to tighten some gun restrictions, such as by requiring universal background checks for gun purchases and banning assault weapons.
FOX 5 Atlanta also noted the exchange during the debate as if to help Harris defend the lie:
During tonight’s presidential debate, Vice President Kamala Harris firmly responded to claims that Democrats aim to take away Americans’ guns, emphasizing that both she and her running mate, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, are gun owners.
“This business about taking everyone’s guns away – Tim Walz and I are both gun owners, we’re not taking anyone’s guns away,” Harris said, addressing concerns about gun control legislation.
Harris reiterated that the focus of her administration would be on ensuring responsible gun ownership and safety measures, not confiscating firearms from law-abiding citizens.
Harris first revealed the news In a 2019 CNN interview, she confirmed her ownership of a handgun, purchased for personal safety, citing her years as a prosecutor.
“I am a gun owner, and I own a gun for probably the reason a lot of people do — for personal safety,” she said at the time.
The Choice is Clear
One thing is for sure. Harris and Walz can dress up in all the hunting duds and range clothing they want and talk about their love for guns. But intelligent, law-abiding gun owners know when it comes to their rights and concerns for being able to defend themselves, Harris and Walz have zero love or even simple respect for them.
Regardless of who you think won the debate or even whether you are a fan or a critic of our two candidates for president, the choice couldn’t be clearer: if you value your right to own firearms in this country and want to see that right protected above all else, there is only one clear candidate. Admittedly, that candidate hasn’t always been the most ardent supporter of gun rights and has over the course of his political life expressed some willingness to support legislation that could limit those rights. But in a political landscape that often forces voters to choose a candidate that may not always align with every one of their views, the best vote we can cast on Nov. 5 for preserving 2A freedom will be a vote for Donald Trump.
The debate was a HUGE shock to me. I mean, the Left cheated! The whole thing was a slanted-field, goalpost-shifting setup designed to make the daughter of the Marxist “economist” look good. Well, as good as possible. When has THAT ever happened?
Moderator: Trump, why are you so bad?
Moderator: Harris, describe why Orange Man is Bad.
The fix was in when Carville said she will win the debate early in the day
Before the general election people play to their base to solidify, then moderate their tone once they have the nomination. That’s just how the game is played.
This is different. Harris spoke with moderation or even in favor of a number of things she’s always vehemently opposed. Of course she’s retained individual elements, which I guess the campaign calculates will help her more than hurt her with target demographics.
Trump asked the key question: if you believe all that, why haven’t you been doing these things for the last four years? That’s a question the moderators never thought to ask somehow.
“why haven’t you been doing these things for the last four years?”
Because she’s not President of the United States.
She doesn’t sit in the office of the president and it’s not her Cabinet. Her job as VP is to loyally serve the President and his agenda, not have public arguments about policy.
She may offer input, advice or make a suggestion, but the President sets the policy for the nation.
Kamala Harris has 31 years experience as a DA, an elected prosecuting attorney, elected state attorney general, United States senator and VP, she understands what it means to be a member of a team.
One might contrast that with Donald Trump, who stood by as his violent supporters demanded the public execution of his vice president.
And I would point out, Vice President Mike Pence has stated that Donald Trump demanded he violate his oath to the Constitution.
Vote accordingly.
You don’t seem to be too upset each and every time Biden ignored the constitution? Try looking at the number of times he has been beat down by the Courts.
If they wanted to close the border all they have to do is tell them to close it not weld the gates open. Wake up you are being snookered. You can’t be blind to what is going on. How many folks are currently in jail for all the riots that went on? Was that not anarchy supported and encouraged by the Dems in Blue cities/states. You need to get with the program.
“How many folks are currently in jail for all the riots that went on?”
“AP finds most arrested in protests aren’t leftist radicals
BY ALANNA DURKIN RICHER, COLLEEN LONG AND MICHAEL BALSAMO
Published 5:30 AM EDT, October 20, 2020
Federal authorities have arrested more than 300 people amid a crackdown on racial injustice protesters in the U.S. since spring. An AP analysis shows that while many are accused of violent crimes, others are charged with relatively minor violations.
Of more than 300 arrested, there are about 286 defendants, others had charges dropped. Some live in cities like Portland and Seattle where local prosecutors declined to bring some protest-related charges.
Some of those facing charges undoubtedly share far-left and anti-government views. Far-right protesters also have been arrested and charged. Some defendants have driven to protests from out of state. Some have criminal records and were illegally carrying weapons. Others are accused of using the protests as an opportunity to steal or create havoc.
But many have had no previous run-ins with the law and no apparent ties to antifa, the umbrella term for leftist militant groups that Trump has said he wants to declare a terrorist organization.
More than 40% of those facing federal charges are white. At least a third are Black, and about 6% Hispanic. More than two-thirds are under the age of 30 and most are men. More than a quarter have been charged with arson, which if convicted means a five-year minimum prison sentence. More than a dozen are accused of civil disorder, and others are charged with burglary and failing to comply with a federal order. They were arrested in cities across the U.S., from Portland, Oregon, to Minneapolis, Boston and New York.
Attorneys for those facing federal charges either declined to comment or didn’t respond to messages from the AP.
“Was that not anarchy“
No, those were Street protests that in some cases turned violent and destructive. But no one conducted a planned assault on the United States Capitol during a joint session of Congress, certifying our constitutionally mandated presidential election.
And the planned “it will be wild” violence at the United States Capitol was just part of Donald Trump’s pressure campaign on Vice President Mike Pence to violate his oath to the Constitution by failing to certify the electoral ballots.
That my friend, is indeed anarchy.
“AP finds most arrested in protests aren’t leftist radicals”
False. They assumed, not verified.
Miner 49 says ignore what the Kneepad QUEEN SAYS, IGNORE WHAT SHE HAS DONE. Anarchy is ignoring the law. Anarchy is choosing what laws you will enforce and using those laws you do enforce as weapons against your enemies. Wild violence is attacking the police and bailing out Antifa an BLM. Anarchy is praising the animals who raped and maimed various women in Central Park and call them innocent lambs despite their confessions . The Antifa and BLM animals destroyed billions in property and injured more than 2,000 law enforcemnet officials. Only anarchists, communists and perverts fail to understand the difference between Jan 6 show trials and the Antifa and BLM terrorists who were given slaps on the wrists. Only truly deluded animals defend the murder of women on Jan 6 who were killed without warning for non violent crimes, without being armed nor for being violent. But Leftist psychos employed by the usual suspects of the Deep State killed two women without cause. Anywhere else they’d be in prison.
These people are truly sick and they will reap what they sow.
MINOR49er, so KamelToe had no influence in the Sleepy Joe administration? Oh please. Sleepy was so incompetent that they both compliment each other. She accomplished NOTHING in her “reign” as Border Czar. Can you tell me ONE THING she accomplished as a politician in her entire career? Your story by the AP was a WHITEWASH of the Seattle and Portland takeovers in 2016. A propaganda piece about incidents that occured four years prior? AP use to be a decent news outlet. It has become a puppet of the Left.
Fudds aren’t gun owners are politicians aren’t humans.
During the three on one debate cackles had many faces and only one accent which was white as rice when compared to her plantation accent used n Atlanta. TRUMP offering cackles a MEGA hat was fitting. TRUMP telling cackles to go wake up joe and close the border right now was priceless and damaging to the trinket promising cackles.
After the 3 on 1 debate team harris called TRUMP and asked for another debate, and unless the mods are along the lines of Hannity/Levin Bongino/Gabbard it’s a no deal cackles.
Good Short Venison Vid…To view copy and paste to a reply box, connect the h, highlight and click view or copy and paste into your browser search…
h ttps://youtu.be/0cZjrx3nwvk?feature=shared
Attention david muir you cackles lint licker!! Two Honduran Men Kill American Bald Eagle to Eat…To view simply copy and paste to a reply box, connect the h, highlight and click view or copy and paste into your browser search…
h ttps://youtu.be/KFwxeWUJPSU?feature=shared
“Hello fellow gun owners” posters incoming.
“and Harris did indeed once say she supported “a mandatory gun buyback program,”
No she didn’t “once say”. She said it repeatedly over a five year period both directly and indirectly, up until she dropped out of her past run for president where during that debate before she dropped out of the race even Joe Biden told her it was unconstitutional, then as vice president she alluded to it on occasion. If its so obviously unconstitutional that even a marxist socialist like Joe Biden is telling you ya can’t do it because its unconstitutional there’s a reason. And it doesn’t take a case going to SCOTUS either as even SCOTUS would be forced, even if 100% left wing justices, to say its ‘unconstitutional’. The reason is because there is no government entity, not congress not the president not a state or local government entity nor any government agency, that the constitution gives authority to in any manner … (and to keep this shorter and in plain English) to actually take or posses by any means or coercion or compensation, including by enacting a ‘law’, anything that is part of the exercise of a constitutional right for an individual … by use of a government imposed ‘mandatory’ requirement participation in such, which is why its actually a ‘forced confiscation’ which is also unconstitutional. Such authority is not in the constitution, period, in any manner shape or form no matter how the anti-gun forces want to spin it and talk it up, or how the various legal scholars want to spin it, no matter how much BS Miner49er wants to copy-n-paste, the authority for such is just not there, period and that absence is intentional by our founders because its part of the foundation of the anti-tyranny nature they intended for the Constitution.
The cackling whore is a lying piece of shit.
Howlett needs to audit a Journalism class at his local Community College. TTAG has truly fallen on hard times if they consider Howlett to be a Journalist.
Otherwise no talk about gun control because they know it’s a loosing issue and ABC would never put Kamala on record on TV, that wouldn’t be good for the Rodina comrades.
She acknowledged October 7th but didn’t acknowledge the AMERICAN HOSTAGES! Hamas started with 12 Americans, they’ve killed 8 so far, THEY STILL HAVE 4 AMERICANS HOSTAGE. Democrats don’t care. She also skipped right over acknowledging the 13 dead at Abby Gate, and the moderators let her. If I’m Trump I don’t move on until she says their names, or rather proves she doesn’t know them. How despicable, and she does represent the democrats writ large.
She just vaguely plays to both sides on the Israel-Hamas issue. It’s the safe thing to do. “Hamas did terrorist things. We need to end this.” Blah, blah, blah. I wonder how many people know that Israel has agreed to end this multiple times, but Hamas refuses.
Remember back when American hostages abroad was a big deal? One was just executed after being held for 11 months. The headlines read that he died, not executed or murdered, but found dead. No one’s talking about it. Kamala said Israel shouldn’t go into that area because she looked at the maps, and Hamas wasn’t there. Well, that’s exactly where they were. Kamala works for Hamas.
Hamas is perfectly willing to end the current hostilities and release the hostages. Hamas just has conditions that the evil Israelis refuse to agree to. Hamas prefers to return the hostages dead rather than alive. Hamas wants unfettered control of the Gaza strip with no restrictions on importing weapons and terrorists. Hamas wants a two state solution that reduces Israel to the 1948 borders that trisects Israel. Hamas demands the right of return for alleged Palestinians whose allegedly ancestors allegedly once lived in Israel so that the remnant Israeli state would become majority Palestinian. Hamas is eager to end the hostilities provided that they are enabled to exterminate the Israelis.
@Elmer Fudd – Your Nazi is showing.
“skipped right over acknowledging the 13 dead at Abby Gate“
She did not acknowledge that 13 service members were killed in Afghanistan during Joe Biden’s term.
And Donald Trump did not acknowledge that 45 American soldiers were killed in Afghanistan during his term.
Interesting…
“She did not acknowledge that 13 service members were killed in Afghanistan during Joe Biden’s term.”
Hey! Its a miracle! Miner49er told the truth for once. Unfortunately, his TDS is his main driving force because there is this …
“And Donald Trump did not acknowledge that 45 American soldiers were killed in Afghanistan during his term.”
Which is 100% lie.
There are news stories and witnesses that tell us such acknowledgement by President Trump did indeed happen. From the various fallen family’s reported in the news about the time he spent with them, to Trumps statements while actually visiting the combat zone, to the witnesses for the phone calls he made to the families of each and every one of the fallen and cried in grieving for each and every one. That is acknowledgement.
Whats not so interesting is Miner49er once again lied, and its not so interesting because its a routine thing with him and expected.
“There are news stories… “
But you don’t reference or cite any…
And the article above (and this discussion) are about the presidential debate, context…
You are correct, I did not spoon feed you. But, it still happened anyway despite you not being spoon fed to satisfy your infantile crying for ‘cite’ and its in search engines. For example, one of many examples > https://x.com/SarahHuckabee/status/1301702348071460864
Those phone calls, that’s acknowledgement that you said never happened. You lied and you continue to lie.
Are you not an adult? You need someone to spoon feed you as you run around the internet crying for cites because your confirmation bias and lack of knowing what context and means.
You believe anything the left wing media says and then run around the internet trying to spread it as if its gospel. And you believe it because it feeds your confirmation bias, which is exactly what they want to do. You are a duped moron.
Learn what context and research is and do it without confirmation bias. Sometimes ya gotta do a little work to dig it out, but you wont do that… you click on the first headline that proclaims ‘Orange Man Bad’ and it becomes the TDS religion to you and you start spreading it around the internet.
Once again you have lost your way regarding ‘context’.
The article above, and the discussion at hand is about the candidates’ recent debate.
All you offer is Donald Trump‘s former press secretary claiming she overheard a conversation years ago.
That is what lawyers call ‘hearsay’.
Yes, during the debate Donald Trump did mention the 13 soldiers killed in Afghanistan during Biden’s term.
But he failed to mention the 45 American soldiers killed in Afghanistan during his term.
It’s easy to see why, he lost over three times as many American soldiers in Afghanistan during his term compared to Biden’s presidency.
Not to mention, Donald Trump freed 5000 Taliban terrorists to destabilize Afghanistan before the withdrawal.
you are so very delusional. learn what context means.
“But he failed to mention the 45 American soldiers killed in Afghanistan during his term.”
100% false
“It’s easy to see why, he lost over three times as many American soldiers in Afghanistan during his term compared to Biden’s presidency.”
what a deceptive piece of crap. Biden’s term didn’t include much of the war at all so of course there would not be as many you moron.
But what Biden did do was essentially murder those 13 by his incompetence in the withdrawal to become the only president in American history to withdraw from an undeclared war that actually intentionally armed the enemy – and that’s why even today he doesn’t acknowledge those 13.
Oh yeah, and the ‘period without lives lost’ in Bidens term was due to the truce deal that Trump made to end American involvement in the conflict, it covered about an 18 month period and extended into Bidens term.
“All you offer is Donald Trump‘s former press secretary claiming she overheard a conversation years ago.”
Oh, ok, well yeah…. ok … a first hand account from the person that was there for each and every one of those phone calls…phone calls which by the way is backed up in other news articles by the family members them selves as actually happening … but instead you believe the numerous lies comrade Kamala told during the debate, and Kamala by the way has also not acknowledged those 13.
You are delusional.
During the Trump Administration, yet 45 American soldiers were killed in Afghanistan. How many were killed during Obuma The Phony’s administration in Afghanistan? The deaths that occured on Sleepy Joe’s and KamelToe’s watch were during a BOTCHED “withdrawal”. Or did you forget that point?
“… about taking everyone’s guns away – Tim Walz and I are both gun owners, we’re not taking anyone’s guns away” – Classic motte-and-bailey fallacy that gun control activists frequently use, shifting fron not taking EVERYONE’S guns to not taking ANYONE’S.
Of course, the “not taking anyone’s” clam is a straight out lie. They support “red flag” laws, and the ONLY thing such laws do is take away someone’s guns.
“They support “red flag” laws, and the ONLY thing such laws do is take away someone’s guns“
Tell me, do you think it was reasonable for the deputy sheriffs to take no action when they learned of Colt Gray’s school shooting threats and the fact that he had access to firearms when they visited his home?
Avoiding the point. She and Walz believe in taking guns from people deemed as too risky to have them (whether the criteria used in that determination are sound or not). Endorsing such laws while claiming they aren’t going to take away anyone’s guns is either a lie, or an admission that they don’t consider “those people” to count as “anyone”.
“Tell me, do you think it was reasonable for the deputy sheriffs to take no action when they learned of Colt Gray’s school shooting threats and the fact that he had access to firearms when they visited his home?”
Miner49er, just what action would you have them take when no law had been violated at the time?
Simply saying something on line is not a crime. Did ya want them to come busting into the house and drag the kid off to be confined for evaluation and take all the guns – invoking some kid of ‘red flag law’ response?
There seems to misunderstanding about laws that you want to understand Miner49er. You seem to think the concept gives police the right to take the property of people who have done nothing wrong simply because ‘gun’. An important part here you miss intentionally – the kid didn’t actually own the guns, not even the one dad bought as a present for him. He was underage, hes 14, he can’t legally own such property even though he may have been able legally to possess it.
Dad owned the guns, dad was not the subject of the police inquiry, dad did not make the post nor did he do the heinous act. And sure, dad was irresponsible and that maybe created the ‘environment’ that allowed the kids mental illness to finally go over the edge to do what he did.
The police can’t simply show up in an inquiry for one person yet take the owned property of another without probable cause belief of involvement of that others owned property in an actual crime.
Yet, that’s exactly what the left wing red flag laws want to do – take guns with no warrant or probable cause belief (thinking it might happen is not probable cause belief) with no crime actually having been committed and not allow due process for the subject of the red flag.
Yes, it was reasonable for the deputy sheriffs to “take no action” beyond what they did at that point of going to the home. Their actions were investigative and proper. No crime had been committed at that point, all they had was a post on line with nothing to show it was anything more than basically an agnsty or attention seeking teen at that point. And sure, the nature of the post in words caused some concern and should have been looked into, and the sheriff deputy did exactly that but there was no crime at the time.
We don’t use the marx — ist soci — alist communist pre-crime concept in our legal system in the United States. Yet that it exactly what the left wing seeks to do with their red flag laws where its “we think therefore it is because we say so”
“Dad owned the guns, dad was not the subject of the police inquiry, dad did not make the post nor did he do the heinous act“
So you believe dad was charged unjustly?
And as no law was broken, the sheriffs deputies could do nothing?
So like JP Mandel, you believe that this sort of thing is ‘just a fact of life’, fascinating.
But you know, I concur regarding the fact the LE had no justification to act, the Georgia state government apparently considers these incidents unworthy of attention.
MINOR49er, The Key words here are “when he visited his home”? Did you also forget that it was your beloved FBI who was the lead investigators in the “investigation”?
I don’t know the laws of Georgia. I do believe that he was charged due to what is called a lack of due diligence to safeguard the weapons. Of course I am sure you don’t understand the term “due diligence”.
“I do believe that he was charged due to what is called a lack of due diligence to safeguard the weapons“
So you’re saying Georgia state law assigns a duty of care to people regarding their firearms?
Dad didn’t know his son had taken the gun, but you think he is responsible. So if someone steals one of your firearms without your knowledge, you are responsible for their actions? Interesting.
The statement from the OP was: “I do believe that he was charged due to what is called a lack of due diligence to safeguard the weapons“
The Miner49er reply was” “So you’re saying Georgia state law assigns a duty of care to people regarding their firearms?
Dad didn’t know his son had taken the gun, but you think he is responsible. So if someone steals one of your firearms without your knowledge, you are responsible for their actions? Interesting.”
Whats interesting is the Op never said any of that or even implied it yet Miner49er makes it up anyway. Ya see the thought pattern of the radical extreamist left wing’er in Miner49ers reply, its like:
Person: “The sky is blue.”
Miner49er: “So you believe purple grapes are yellow. Interesting.”
It is regrettable that your reading comprehension and understanding of the law is so shallow.
The original statement was:
“he was charged due to what is called a lack of due diligence“
In order to prove any liability, it must first be established that dad had a ‘duty of care’ and then that he failed to discharge that duty.
“In tort law, a duty of care is a legal obligation that is imposed on an individual, requiring adherence to a standard of reasonable care to avoid careless acts that could foreseeably harm others“
To put a finer point on it, did the deputy sheriffs informing dad that his son had made a school shooting threat create a duty?
Did dad knowing his son was mentally troubled create a duty on his part to restrict his son’s access to lethal weapons?
Did dad already have a duty just by being a parent, even though he was unaware his son had taken his firearm?
I have an honest question for any of the ban the “Weapons of War” crowd.
What exactly makes the AR or AK platforms more dangerous than another model of firearm? Say something like an actual military surplus rifle like the M-1 Garand.
Something else to consider.
When the Constitution was written the common military arm was the smoothbore musket. Basically because it was marginally faster to reload, cheaper to manufacture, and for the most part, soldier proof. While long rifles with greater range and accuracy were fairly common in civilian hands. Meaning many civilians had both superior weapons and skills compared to the common infantry private. And don’t forget cannon and even full on warships were privately owned. Many merchant ships carried weapons as well.
The authors of the Constitution feared the government being too well armed with a large standing army. Most wanted the real power of government closer to home with the state governments. And most would have expected those who committed acts of violence held accountable rather than see the populace in any way disarmed outside of very limited circumstances and locations.
Unfortunately, too many of our current citizenry want big daddy government to care for them instead of being responsible adults with responsibilities.
Safe, orderly slavery instead of uncertain, messy liberty and freedom.
“What exactly makes the AR or AK platforms more dangerous than another model of firearm?“
Light weight, low recoil, magazine capacity from 30–90 rounds, very cheap.
As we’ve seen, even a 14 year old has no difficulty killing/wounding a dozen people in just a couple minutes with an AR 15.
“Say something like an actual military surplus rifle like the M-1 Garand“
Too heavy, too hard to load (‘Garand thumb’), too much recoil and very expensive (3 to 4 times the typical AR15).
Yes, easy to use, including by smaller individuals, and very effective with minimal training. Makes it an ideal home defense weapon for the average American.
The question from the OP was: “What exactly makes the AR or AK platforms more dangerous than another model of firearm?“
The Miner49er reply was: “Light weight, low recoil, magazine capacity from 30–90 rounds, very cheap.”
Which has zero to do with ‘dangerous” either more or less than any other firearm. I can lay my AR and AK platforms on a table and leave them and despite the anti-gun claims they don’t do anything.
In terms of the context word ‘dangerous’ the AR and AK platforms are safer than a lot of other things, for example: Annually, ~90,000 kids age 12 and younger are injured to some degree, some die, and some are permanently disabled to some degree, due to car accident. Annually, ~130,000 people enact suicide by drug overdose, some are successful and some are not. Annually, use of tobacco products results in over 480,000 deaths. Annually, over 32,000 people are seriously injured due to defective glass table tops, ~14,000 die as a direct result of the injuries and another ~9,000 die later as a result of complications from the injuries. Annually, over 300,000 (closer to 400,000) people are injured, some die, as a result of medical mal-practice. And the list goes on an on for the many things that are more “dangerous” then the AR or AK platforms.
MINOR49er, You are forgetting that is the responsibility of the gun owner to safeguard his firearms. You see we already have enough laws on the books without your feel good nonsense proposals which make it look like you are doing something. The problem is not guns. The problem is PEOPLE who break the law which you Lefties refuse to deal with along with the mental illness problem.
“MINOR49er, You are forgetting that is the responsibility of the gun owner to safeguard his firearms“
“Safeguard” he says.
So if the gun owner has his firearm stolen from his car and used in a murder, the gun owner is responsible because he failed to “safeguard his firearms”?
“We’re both gun owners”… except neither of us would consider owning or even allowing anyone else to own a (non) assault rifle, like the onesTim Walz (never) carried while he was(n’t) in the many (imaginary) combat zones where he saw it’s devastating effects.(or was it the spicy chili he had in mess hall, the most dangerous place he’d ever been.)
It all boils down to the UNsaid.
“the many (imaginary) combat zones“
He never said he was in a combat zone, he made it clear that his unit pulled security duty overseas during the GWOT.
Do you remember when Republican President George W. Bush declared the “Global War on Terror”?
Yeah, that War:
“After the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, President George W. Bush announced a comprehensive plan to seek out and stop terrorists around the world. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were part of the Global War on Terror, or “GWOT,” but the term was also used to describe diplomatic, financial, and other actions taken to deny financing or safe harbor to terrorists. Coalition partners from around the world also participated in the GWOT.“
Aren’t the actual facts of history just so fascinating!
It certainly is fascinating – how Walz’s statement in 2018 that “We can make sure that those weapons of war that I carried in war is the only place where those weapons are at.” End quote. Which is now conveniently explained away as ” he misspoke” … do you have a TV in your ass Miner?
I’m sorry you’re having trouble with reading comprehension, let me make it a bit more plain for you:
“ …those weapons of war that I carried in ‘President Bush’s declared Global War On Terror’ is the only place where those weapons are at.”
For his wartime service, Governor Walz was awarded the following commendation:
“The Global War on Terrorism Service Medal (GWOT-SM) is a military award of the United States Armed Forces which was created through Executive Order 13289 on 12 March 2003, by President George W. Bush. The medal recognizes those military service members who have supported operations to counter terrorism in the War on Terror from 11 September 2001, to a date yet to be determined“.
The actual facts of history remain just so entertaining.
“He never said he was in a combat zone, he made it clear that his unit pulled security duty overseas during the GWOT.”
100% lie.
Over a period of 12 – 17 years before he started again lying when he teamed up with fellow marx==ist comrade Kamala, Walz claimed to have been in combat in war zones. He tried that lie again when he teamed up with fellow marx==ist comrade Kamala and got caught where his excuse becomes “I misspoke”. BS.
Another of your empty claims:
“Walz claimed to have been in combat in war zones”
When did “Walz claim to have been in combat”?
‘insert cricket sound sample here’
Actual historical facts are the antidote to right wing disinformation.
MINOR49er. Walz MOST CERTAINLY did say he had been in a combat zone “carrying weapons of war.” In fact he never set foot in a combat zone. His only deployment was a short term in Italy. We have not been at war with Italy since WWII.
“Walz MOST CERTAINLY did say he had been in a combat zone“
So when did Sergeant Walz “say he had been in a combat zone”?
‘insert cricket sound sample here’
Actual historical facts are the antidote to right wing disinformation.
I don’t think I would go so far as to call Trump a friend to the 2nd amendment, but Harris is a clear threat to it.
That’s probably an accurate distinction.
Time to start finding better candidates that support 2A. Trump is stale. The house can’t move anything forward by design. No silencers, no interstate permits. Just drama about drag queens and dog tacos.
camo…On your way out don’t let the door hit you in your politically inept worthless slacker behind.
so youthink thats a lying? maybe your the one that should find thedoor out.
FIX THIS MODERATION BS.
I had a post in this article comment section go to moderation hours ago. I have posts I made over the last four days that went to moderation and still have not appeared. Each and every one of those it said “Your comment is awaiting moderation”.
PLUS! FIX THIS ‘DELAYED COMMMENTS’ THING THAT’S GOING ON.
Ya hit the button to post, and it goes back to the top of the page and the comment doesn’t appear. Sometimes if you close the browser and come back to the thread your comments are there but sometimes not. I have comments I made four days ago and over the last four days this has happened to and most of those have still not appeared. Plus, now its happening more frequently almost every post.
Plus now you can’t post a link to a video at youtube to have the video show up here where it can be watched through and from TTAG. Now you have to actually click the link (if the post happens to eventually show up) go to youtube and subject yourself to 100% of their privacy invasion tracking that didn’t happen if you watched the video through a post here at TTAG.
Plus, links to other places, or to TTAG, causes a post to go to moderation but sometimes they never come out of moderation. I have posts I made two days ago with links that went to moderation and they still have not appeared.
Plus, the ‘forbidden words’ issue is becoming a major pain in the butt. Yes, the term ‘forbidden words’ may not be the exact term one wants to call it but its really not about ‘forbidden words’ … for example ‘mar — xist socia — list (written that way to avoid moderation …remove the ‘-‘s and regroup the letters to get the actual formed words) if written correctly sends a post to moderation even though there is nothing wrong or forbidden about the words.
I know these issues are affecting others here as well. (and this post will probably be affected by these issues as well and maybe or maybe not appear so lets find out)
Please address and fix and remove this combination of censorship and, for lack of a better term avodign curse words ‘&$G^/ng comment section stupid functionality’.
“FIX THIS MODERATION BS.“
Karen wants to talk to the manager…
MINOR49er , speaking of Karens…
AND Kamaltoe cheated wearing audio earrings. And got the questions in advance. And had an ally in that ABC gal. Trump failed to notice & realize Dims want all “57” states to have unfettered Baal worship er butchered baby’s. How he agreed to “debate” an illegitimate candidate who get zero votes is beyond my understanding. Oh yeah gunz>from your cold deceased hand’s! We forgot about 9/11😧
“an illegitimate candidate who get zero votes“
So you missed floor session at the DNC where the state delegates nominated her for the office of President of the United States?
Did you know that Kamala Harris has more time serving the public in government then both Ronald Reagan and JFK combined? Isn’t that just fascinating…
Too bad, it was really quite exciting
“Did you know that Kamala Harris has more time serving the public in government then both Ronald Reagan and JFK combined?”
That is not exactly a plus, you know.
And I’d say that is the primary reason Trump won the first time around.
“Did you know that Kamala Harris has more time serving the public in government then both Ronald Reagan and JFK combined?”
Just the fact that you consider it “fascinating” is an interesting “tell” on your thought process. Or any understanding of why Trump won the first time around…
Dang posting delay…. Thought my first post got eaten along the way..
“So you missed floor session at the DNC where the state delegates nominated her for the office of President of the United States?”
Those are not votes in a primary election, where she literally got zero votes because she did not primary. Bypassing the primaries, the DNC nomination was literally the very definition of the ‘communism’ method where the ‘party’ gets to select the leader. Crazies in a big room nominating another crazy to lead the crazy ’cause good vibes and joy joy joy and lots of hand waving and multiple documented, and proven to be, lies told in speeches.
and also, there’s your marxi – st social-ism communism peeking through.
A nomination from a party does not a legitimate candidate make. Only the ‘people speaking’ their agreement can legitimize a candidate. A primary election is the means used today to give the ‘people’ that ability to ‘speak’ (though voting), and that is what makes a legitimate candidate because its the ‘people’ speaking through the voting process and under our Constitution and election process only the ‘people’ can legitimize a candidate. By her not in the primary and thus ‘the people’ legitimizing her by voting, Kamala Harris is an illegitimate candidate.
“A nomination from a party does not a legitimate candidate make“
Well now, there’s a novel thought that does not comport with the last 200 years of American political life.
So Abraham Lincoln was an illegitimate candidate, fascinating!
Abraham Lincoln was nominated by the delegates at the Republican national convention:
“Lincoln’s combination of a moderate stance on slavery, long support for economic issues, his western origins, and strong oratory proved to be exactly what the delegates wanted in a president. On the third ballot on May 18, Lincoln secured the presidential nomination overwhelmingly.“
“Proceedings of the Republican national convention held at Chicago, May 16, 17 and 18, 1860 by Republican National Convention (2nd : 1860 : Chicago, Ill.)”
And once again, the actual facts of recorded history provide endless amusement, or rather should I say, the ignorance of most people to the actual facts of history are the real entertainment.
‘insert cricket sound sample here’
Actual historical facts are the best antidote to right wing disinformation.
MINOR49er, No we did not miss that mishap. It seem thought that during the Primaries, she received absolutely ZERO votes. Or did you just forget that salient point.
Her primary performance four years ago has nothing to do with the 2024 election.
The vast majority of the state delegates to the Democratic national convention voted overwhelmingly to make Vice President Kamala Harris their nomination for President of the United States, it was a public vote that was televised.
And they did it on the first round of voting, Abraham Lincoln didn’t make it till the third round, astounding!
I’m sorry you missed that, it was quite exciting.
A wolf in sheep’s clothes is still a WOLF!
“if you value your right to own firearms in this country and want to see that right protected, there is only one clear choice deserving of your vote, and that choice is Donald Trump.”
… I wouldn’t actually say he’s “deserving” of our vote – more like the Lesser of the Two Evils to chose from, which is still an evil. Don’t forget his past performance shows a lack of desire to actually FURTHER our protections.
A wolf in sheep’s clothes is still a WOLF!
“if you value your right to own firearms in this country and want to see that right protected, there is only one clear choice deserving of your vote, and that choice is Donald Trump.”
Tren de Whatchamacallems, El Paso.
New look – Tren moves in, the city orders the *owners* to vacate.
I don’t believe her and even if she is telling the truth (that would be the truly shocking part) she will still try to ban/confiscate/buyback everything she can.
Look, its not really all about the 2A. Its about the Constitution and ALL constitutional rights.
The democrat party and politicians and Biden and Kamala, since Biden came into office, have gone out of their way to attack most of the constitutional rights in some manner attempting to gain a foothold in having control over them and the exercise of them. They’ve done it to the 1’st, 2’nd, 4’th, 5’th, 10’th, 14’th, and still continue that today in various forms.
As an example; The recent confessions disclosure to congress by FaceBook (e.g. Meta) Mark Zukerberg that facebook was forced (collectively) by the democrat party and Joe Biden AND Kamala Harris, and through and by democrat members of congress and by the FBI … forced to acquiesce, both before and after the election, to censor the speech of thousands of American citizens on those platforms. Not only for and after the election but ANY speech they called ‘dis/mis information’
(just a note here – there is not such thing as a ‘dis/mis information’ exception to the first amendment like there is for hate speech. But that didn’t stop Kamala Harris and Walz during this election season campaign from claiming that ‘dis/mis information’ is not protected first amendment speech. What they want is to be able to say is ‘its mis/dis infortmation so censor it because we say so’).
These government censorship activities (collectively) by democrats led, for example, to the false claim there was a russia-trump collision being pushed as the truth by democrats, hid pertinent information to bias opinion towards the democrats, Hunter laptop story being censored and called a hoax of russian disinformation and we know today those FBI people who signed that letter saying it was russian disinformation were lying at request of the democrats and the laptop was real and was not russian disinformation. The same thing happened at twitter except the democrats didn’t need to work as hard because they had so many allies inside twitter that willingly did it, wanted to do, without any pressure being applied simply because the (collectively) democrats asked – and we found that out after Musk purchased ‘twitter’ (now X) and exposed the email and communications and other information (e.g. ‘the twitter files’) showing this government censorship effort was indeed happening.
And now today we know that Kamala lied about the border security issue, lied about Bidens mental and physical health, we know today that Biden-nomics was a lie and the inflation is not really the numbers Biden and Kamala claimed it was, we know now today that Walz didn’t hesitate to use police and national guard force against innocent men, women, and children not even involved with or near the riots, we know now today that Walz lied about his military service when he stole the valor of those who did go to combat zones … we know today so many more evil and vile things the democrats have done and want to continue doing to American citizens and the list goes on and on and over 1,763 documented lies they have told since they started their campaign.
Trump may not be the best in some peoples opinions, but its a fact (in their own words and deeds and now ‘policy’ they want to implement if they get elected) that if Kamala and Walz get into office your constitutional rights, all of them, will be in serious jeopardy as they continue the Biden plan to bring about a marx – ist socia– list overthrow of the Constitution.
“the Biden plan to bring about a marx – ist socia– list overthrow of the Constitution“
But it actually was Donald Trump who publicly called for the termination of the United States Constitution:
“Trump called for ‘termination’ of parts of Constitution in December
BY TARA SUTER 08/23/23 11:19 PM ET
“A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post in December 2022”.
Need I say, the actual facts of history continuously entertain.
MINOR49er, Seems you have taken one sentence out of context, But then that is what propagandists do?
Kameleon hair on my lips should author a book on how to lie! Not just down or on her knees!
All he really had to do when she said what she was going to do is say back to her then how come you aren’t doing it. He waited until the end to remind everyone that if this is what she intended why hadn’t it been done. This would have forced her to dodge and show she was not sincere. It was a missed opportunity held off too long without the impact it would have had if he had done it earlier and more often instead of letting her put him on the defensive.
After watching the “debate” last night, I am supporting the only real choice/no choice…NONE OF THE ABOVE. They BOTH talked out of their a$$e$, and said little to nothing relevant to the carefully chosen(sarc) questions. I give up on Trump’s blowhard demeanor and Harris’ inability to directly answer any question. From now on, it’s none of the above.
There has never been more of a contrast between presidential candidates in our lifetime. Typically, low information independents are the only ones that make voting decisions based on the debates. This time is different because we’ve lived under each administration. We already know what it’s like. Do you love inflation? Do you understand what would happen if first time home buyers were given $25k toward the price of a home? Is half of the country really that stupid?
That debate was designed to be an emotional performance. It wasn’t designed to inform people. You will still exist in a society whether or not you have checked out.
Awwww, somebody watched their first debate. Cute.
I’m less than happy with Trump as a nominee. That said, the idea of Harris as President is unacceptable.
There are gun owners, and then there are gun owners that understand what the second amendment is really all about and she is not in that category no matter what imaginary universe you live in.
Undecided voters SLAM Kamala in Debate with Trump – multiple Kamala lies (including her capital hill lie for Jan 6) – ABC moderators fact check Trump but not Kamala, Trump triumphs in fact checks – usually left wing voters switching to vote for Trump, CNN poll shows Kamala losing points and Trump gaining points from debate and Kamala lost the debate.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bvtp5tJLLME
“CNN Flash Poll: Majority of debate watchers say Harris outperformed Trump onstage
By Ariel Edwards-Levy, CNN
4 minute read
Published 2:37 AM EDT, Wed September 11, 2024”
“Election 2024
How resounding was Kamala Harris’s debate win? Let’s look at the polls.
Early results show Harris won by a historically large margin. And Trump voters acknowledged that and said it could impact their votes.
Analysis by Aaron Blake
September 11, 2024 at 11:43 a.m. EDT
Vice President Kamala Harris turned in one of the more resounding debate performances in recent decades on Tuesday night — to the point where Donald Trump’s allies have struggled to locate a silver lining“
MINOR49er, If you consider that that “moderators” were slanting the entire “debate” against Trump, your article is correct. Since when do “moderators” fact check for either side?
I knew you would bite the cnn bait.
shes already lost the election, its just a matter of by how much.
“shes already lost the election, its just a matter of by how much”
Wager?
and again, a post hung up in moderation due to, this time, a youtube link. I wonder if it will appear or not.
Comments are closed.