Donald Trump running for president

Marvel Comics knows what's up. They just made the Prime Minister of Canada a superhero because Canada is so damn awesome.

[video=youtube;ynqIdSZCVO8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynqIdSZCVO8[/video]
 
Socalmk6gti said:
So is it true that this "no-fly list" is automatically including anyone that's a listed member of the NRA????
Click to expand...

I never heard of the NRA being part of it but I can prove how they might be below. There are I believe thousands of innocent people on that list including babies.

The problem is that the no fly list (or proposed no gun list) is a violation of our 5th and 14th Amendments where due process is abandoned and you are guilty until proven innocent rather than innocent until proven guilty.

Its stuff like this I dont support gun control laws, registration, etc......keep in mind returning vets, people that use cash, people who support the constitution and bill of rights, people that dont like the IRS, people that promote small government, pro-2nd amendment, etc...are all labeled as potential terrorists by the Department of Homeland Security, FBI and various other organizations.

But hey, I wear a tin foil hat, what do I really know?



Invalid Link Removed
 
ax1, are you a disgruntled military veteran posting about wanting to take over the US? If not, I believe nobody will come for you or your guns.
 
Gutterpump said:
ax1, are you a disgruntled military veteran posting about wanting to take over the US? If not, I believe nobody will come for you or your guns.
Click to expand...

How do you know Im not the guy on the other side who is going to take them from you and everyone else, lol!
 
Gutterpump said:
Because we are living in the real world, not a dream-make-believe-Republican-fear-mongering world.
Click to expand...

You cant single them out though, Democrats live as much in the dream world and do as much or more fear mongering than Republicans, as do so called "moderates" trapped in the false left/right paradigm.
 
ax1 said:
You cant single them out though, Democrats live as much in the dream world and do as much or more fear mongering than Republicans, as do so called "moderates" trapped in the false left/right paradigm.
Click to expand...

Name me one thing that the Democrats are paranoid about regarding the Republicans
 
muscleupcrohn said:
An irrational fear of a black plastic gun with a pistol grip that is functionally identical to the far less frightening gun with a wooden stock.
Click to expand...

Funny thing is most anyone that knows anything about guns prefer Woodstocks. Now there exceptions to that but still.
 
Gutterpump said:
Name me one thing that the Democrats are paranoid about regarding the Republicans
Click to expand...

Democrats fear monger guns, war on drugs, and war on terror just like Republicans do. Democrats probably fear monger more about guns than Republicans but they are guilty of infringing by fear mongering on the 2nd Amendment as well.
 
ax1 said:
Democrats fear monger guns, war on drugs, and war on terror just like Republicans do. Democrats probably fear monger more about guns than Republicans but they are guilty of infringing by fear mongering on the 2nd Amendment as well.
Click to expand...

I believe the GOP (Bush) began the war on terror. Richard Nixon is responsible for the war on drugs. Come on man, you're better than that. Next?
 
Gutterpump said:
Says who? That's another Republican paranoia. They think Dems hate guns n wanna disarm Murica. Next?
Click to expand...

Well if thats the case then they wouldnt expand gun control laws, they would seek to repeal them and allow American's to practice their 2nd Amendment rights.
 
Gutterpump said:
I believe the GOP (Bush) began the war on terror. Richard Nixon is responsible for the war on drugs. Come on man, you're better than that. Next?
Click to expand...

And democrats only have expanded on that so what difference does it make who started it? Duh.
 
Gutterpump said:
I'm Canadian and I know more about the US than most of you here it seems
Click to expand...

Oh shut the fck up. You have actually proven to be quite ignorant. Thb. You are the person who thinks they know everything but actually knows very little. Yes most Democrats do fear gums. Look up how many gun laws have been tried to be past in the past 5 years, over 85% were proposed by Democrats!
 
Gutterpump said:
Says who? That's another Republican paranoia. They think Dems hate guns n wanna disarm Murica. Next?
Click to expand...

One of the top Democratic polititions in America during a 60 minutes interview....

If I could’ve gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them — Mr. and Mrs. America turn ’em all in — I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren’t here.



So you say we think but thats only because democratic tyrants told us so.
 
Gutterpump said:
I'm Canadian and I know more about the US than most of you here it seems
Click to expand...
You THINK you know more about the US than everyone else... but you do know more than the average American, not that's saying much.

In reality, I see a lot of sweeping generalizations on your part. In reality, both parties (politicians, not voters) behave largely in the same manner; the same end results with different justifications.
 
Socalmk6gti said:
Did you see the new gun laws passed today in California. Wow! Bye bye 2nd amendment California. I'm glad I left that state
Click to expand...

Didnt see that. Thats Senator Feinstein's state which I posted just a post ago showing back in 95 she wanted to take them ALL across the US.

Everything is stripped incrementally and people dont realize how this adds up.
 
Gutterpump said:
I saw that today, they're allowing transvestites in the military. First of all, has a transvestite ever shown interest in the military? I don't understand the demand, why it's even become law... Secondly, wtf are they thinking? It's not going to be very safe for boys who dress like girls to be around a bunch of macho men. Gay men / women sure, but this is just asking for trouble with transvestites... I mean, I honestly don't ever see it becoming an issue cos I don't see transvestites ever applying for the military though.
Click to expand...

YOU ARE NOT SEEING THE BIG PICTURE...a pregnant woman cannot join the military...a person with cancer cannot join the military...a person who's had a stroke and needs bypass surgery cannot join the military---it is called pre-existing illness.

but a transgender can join the military and get a very expensive surgery and follow up care for free. once recovery is over 1st time someone says something he/she claims discrimination, sues the military, gets a load of cash and free medical for the rest of their life...
 
Are we really against transgender people serving the country? You don't want them to defend your freedom because you don't agree with their choices?

Fwiw, there's a reported 2500 transgender people in US military service
 
rtmilburn said:
Yes. No issue with anyone serving but I want the standards the same
Click to expand...

I had a buddy who became a firefighter about 10-15yrs ago. He said there were 2 women in his class and neither one of them could carry a 150lb body to safety out of a burning house. They needed help just getting a 150lb body out of a car! That's one of the criteria to become a firefighter apparently, but the Sarg still passed them anyway because it was an affirmative action mandate kinda thing.

I like to see everybody get a fair shake, but is it really fair to the people they serve when they don't even have what it takes to get the job done? It may not be PC to say it that way but it's unethical not to say it. It has nothing to do with equality, that's just how it's spun to pass if off socially. Anybody who can't do the job, or is so mixed up and preoccupied about who they are, doesn't seem like the ideal candidate for serving others ya know?
 
NutraChem said:
I had a buddy who became a firefighter about 10-15yrs ago. He said there were 2 women in his class and neither one of them could carry a 150lb body to safety out of a burning house. They needed help just getting a 150lb body out of a car! That's one of the criteria to become a firefighter apparently, but the Sarg still passed them anyway because it was an affirmative action mandate kinda thing.

I like to see everybody get a fair shake, but is it really fair to the people they serve when they don't even have what it takes to get the job done? It may not be PC to say it that way but it's unethical not to say it. It has nothing to do with equality, that's just how it's spun to pass if off socially. Anybody who can't do the job, or is so mixed up and preoccupied about who they are, doesn't seem like the ideal candidate for serving others ya know?
Click to expand...

Exactly!!
 
rtmilburn said:
If gun laws ever change, other than background checks and registering guns(where I live you don't need to register guns), I will move to a different country. Dont fck with my gun rights.
Click to expand...

...but no other country you would want to live in has such lax laws in firearm ownership, lol.
 
rtmilburn said:
When will people realize that more guns equal less crime. Places like dallas, denver, salt lake, that all have very high amount of gun carrying citizens and very low crime rate, low murders, for big cities.

Whereas places like Detroit that have almost non existent legal gun carrying citizens have extremely high murder and crime rates.
Click to expand...

Wordwide data fails to agree with thia statement lol. More guns, more gun crime.
 
NutraChem said:
I had a buddy who became a firefighter about 10-15yrs ago. He said there were 2 women in his class and neither one of them could carry a 150lb body to safety out of a burning house. They needed help just getting a 150lb body out of a car! That's one of the criteria to become a firefighter apparently, but the Sarg still passed them anyway because it was an affirmative action mandate kinda thing.

I like to see everybody get a fair shake, but is it really fair to the people they serve when they don't even have what it takes to get the job done? It may not be PC to say it that way but it's unethical not to say it. It has nothing to do with equality, that's just how it's spun to pass if off socially. Anybody who can't do the job, or is so mixed up and preoccupied about who they are, doesn't seem like the ideal candidate for serving others ya know?
Click to expand...

Females are not built physically like a male, can you really expect the same criteria applies? In situations where a person is obviously trapped, they will just send someone else in. It's really not that difficult
 
Jiigzz said:
...but no other country you would want to live in has such lax laws in firearm ownership, lol.
Click to expand...

I would move more on principle. Other countries have always had control. Whereas as in the USA we pride are second amendedment but try to take it away, all the time.


Jiigzz said:
Females are not built physically like a male, can you really expect the same criteria applies? In situations where a person is obviously trapped, they will just send someone else in. It's really not that difficult
Click to expand...

Don't care. If you aren't qualified you shouldn't be in it. There are lots of women that can/have met the same requirements the men have. Women want equality, so give it to them; just dont make it easier to achieve it.

Side note: women talk gender equality, but in divorce it's never equal. Men whom are sometime a much better fitting parent, will only get kids on maybe 2 days a week. Where are men's rights in such situations.
 
Jiigzz said:
Wordwide data fails to agree with thia statement lol. More guns, more gun crime.
Click to expand...

Issue with those, is for the most part, those studies aren't taking in account for legal gun owning citizens.
They are just an anonymous tally of every one with guns. Most people who commit gun crimes obtain there guns illegally. Not to mention the fact that most countries make it harder for people to get guns. Legal guns aren't an issue.
 
rtmilburn said:
I would move more on principle. Other countries have always had control. Whereas as in the USA we pride are second amendedment but try to take it away, all the time.




Don't care. If you aren't qualified you shouldn't be in it. There are lots of women that can/have met the same requirements the men have. Women want equality, so give it to them; just dont make it easier to achieve it.

Side note: women talk gender equality, but in divorce it's never equal. Men whom are sometime a much better fitting parent, will only get kids on maybe 2 days a week. Where are men's rights in such situations.
Click to expand...

Invalid Link Removed

Did you know most mothers will spend more time with their child on average before the divorce or separation?

If they don't meet the female standard. sure. If they do, then they should. People always assume equal rights means we should treat them as males. False. All people should be treated the same regardless of race, gender or otherwise. There is a difference. You want them to be treated like men when they clearly aren't; that isn't equality. You are saying they should be held to the same standards as a male, which means you are placing your status as a male and saying "here, be like me before joining up with us".

That's not how it works.

I'm a male in training for law enforcement, and I meet the standards pretty easily for physical prowess. I trained long and hard to do so. But I am far outsized by much of the Polynesian community where I would be initially based. I stand at 5'10" and weigh 90kg, and some of these guys are 6'2+ easily and weigh well over 100kg. Am I therefore not fit to police because some people, especially in the community I will be based, are larger than I am? Or will the police use their commonsense and place me in situations within my control or with others who may be needed to subdue someone larger than I am?
 
Jiigzz said:
Invalid Link Removed

Did you know most mothers will spend more time with their child on average before the divorce or separation?

If they don't meet the female standard. sure. If they do, then they should. People always assume equal rights means we should treat them as males. False. All people should be treated the same regardless of race, gender or otherwise. There is a difference. You want them to be treated like men when they clearly aren't; that isn't equality. You are saying they should be held to the same standards as a male, which means you are placing your status as a male and saying "here meet this before joining up with us".

That's not how it works.
Click to expand...

No I agree. Although there are plenty of cases where that isn't the case. The dad was and is a better parent but because the system is so biased towards mother those guys get screwed most of the time. I get that's not the way it is most of the time but the majority shouldnt matter to the individual, when a child's life is at stake.

If the standards for military aren't set at men's then set them at women and make it easier? ??? No one would do that.
 
rtmilburn said:
No I agree. Although there are plenty of cases where that isn't the case. The dad was and is a better parent but because the system is so biased towards mother those guys get screwed most of the time. I get that's not the way it is most of the time but the majority shouldnt matter to the individual, when a child's life is at stake.

If the standards for military aren't set at men's then set them at women and make it easier? ??? No one would do that.
Click to expand...

The point was that equality is about treating people fairly and equally, regardless of race or gender. Not that females should meet the standards of a male, because they want equality with us. That isn't equality because you're wanting them to be like you.

They want the same opportunities, but obviously scaled to match the physical differences. That, IMO, is fair.
 
Jiigzz said:
The point was that equality is about treating people fairly and equally, regardless of race or gender. Not that females should meet the standards of a male, because they want equality with us. That isn't equality because you're wanting them to be like you.

They want the same opportunities, but obviously scaled to match the physical differences. That, IMO, is fair.
Click to expand...

I see what your saying. But I respectfully disagree.
 
rtmilburn said:
I see what your saying. But I respectfully disagree.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, I can appreciate that. What is a world without it's differences ;)
 
Jiigzz said:
Females are not built physically like a male, can you really expect the same criteria applies? In situations where a person is obviously trapped, they will just send someone else in. It's really not that difficult
Click to expand...

It's really not that difficult? Are you serious?? So, i'm working on an Ambulance with my female partner and we came to help your mom, who is in cardiac arrest, but weighs 350 lbs.....you're gonna be ok waiting for another unit to show up to help get her in the truck while she coding?? I don't think so!

There is a minimum requirement for lifting in some jobs, and it doesn't matter if you're male or female, that's the requirement. I've worked with plenty of women who could out lift some of the men. Sometimes it's not about equality but what's best for the people you are serving.
 
Thiefcatcher said:
It's really not that difficult? Are you serious?? So, i'm working on an Ambulance with my female partner and we came to help your mom, who is in cardiac arrest, but weighs 350 lbs.....you're gonna be ok waiting for another unit to show up to help get her in the truck while she coding?? I don't think so!

There is a minimum requirement for lifting in some jobs, and it doesn't matter if you're male or female, that's the requirement. I've worked with plenty of women who could out lift some of the men. Sometimes it's not about equality but what's best for the people you are serving.
Click to expand...

How many jobs require you to lift a 350lb person in an ambulance? Yup, let's stop people from having a job in paramedicine because of a golden nugget scenario.

How's this: you're in the army, the guy next to you wears glasses. A blast throws them off his face and now he can't see far away. Bullets fly, another man gets hit. The guy in the glasses was meant to be watching your right flank and now a buddy is down. You now demand that anybody who wears glasses cannot enter the army.

Or

You're an 80kg male , decent build and are fit and you are a police officer, You approach a man, he has a decent 30kg on you, all of it muscle and can fight. He hits you. You go down. The police enforce a rule you must be a 150kg+ bodybuilder to become a cop because one guy is 120kg of muscle. You are fired immediately for not meeting this requirement.

Cmon.
 
Jiigzz said:
Females are not built physically like a male, can you really expect the same criteria applies? In situations where a person is obviously trapped, they will just send someone else in. It's really not that difficult
Click to expand...

That's not exactly how it works.
 
Jiigzz said:
Invalid Link Removed

Did you know most mothers will spend more time with their child on average before the divorce or separation?

If they don't meet the female standard. sure. If they do, then they should. People always assume equal rights means we should treat them as males. False. All people should be treated the same regardless of race, gender or otherwise. There is a difference. You want them to be treated like men when they clearly aren't; that isn't equality. You are saying they should be held to the same standards as a male, which means you are placing your status as a male and saying "here, be like me before joining up with us".

That's not how it works.

I'm a male in training for law enforcement, and I meet the standards pretty easily for physical prowess. I trained long and hard to do so. But I am far outsized by much of the Polynesian community where I would be initially based. I stand at 5'10" and weigh 90kg, and some of these guys are 6'2+ easily and weigh well over 100kg. Am I therefore not fit to police because some people, especially in the community I will be based, are larger than I am? Or will the police use their commonsense and place me in situations within my control or with others who may be needed to subdue someone larger than I am?
Click to expand...

There's no way to strategize that out when a call comes in. So you better learn how to handle larger people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top