Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

The Trump Administration

24567100

Posts

  • GundiGundi Serious Bismuth Registered User regular
    Gundi wrote: »
    Also I ain't super happy about Megyn Kelly leaving Fox because while she's not someone I consider a nice person, she was practically the only popular voice on FOX who ever willing to criticize the GOP.

    The easy answer is to treat Fox like the faux journalism that it is and just not watch them at all.

    No see the problem is people who only watch Fox. This won't help that.

    SleepPLA
  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    Gundi wrote: »
    Also I ain't super happy about Megyn Kelly leaving Fox because while she's not someone I consider a nice person, she was practically the only popular voice on FOX who ever willing to criticize the GOP.

    The easy answer is to treat Fox like the faux journalism that it is and just not watch them at all.

    That's great, except for all the people who only watch Fox.

    wpyz0Y5.png
    Gamertag: PrimusD | Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
    SleepEmerlmaster999N1tSt4lker
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    Gundi wrote: »
    Gundi wrote: »
    Also I ain't super happy about Megyn Kelly leaving Fox because while she's not someone I consider a nice person, she was practically the only popular voice on FOX who ever willing to criticize the GOP.

    The easy answer is to treat Fox like the faux journalism that it is and just not watch them at all.

    No see the problem is people who only watch Fox. This won't help that.

    They're beyond help

    SurfpossumGaddezCantidoGoodKingJayIIIEmerlmaster999SpoitPanda4Youdispatch.oMagellMan in the MistsGennenalyse RuebenCptKemzikHarry DresdenTheDrifterMrVyngaardshrykeGiggles_FunsworthHonkNobeardHacksawbrynhrtmn
  • GundiGundi Serious Bismuth Registered User regular
    Cool, cool. They can still utterly ruin your, my, and their own lives. I ain't saying it should be a priority of folks but the stakes are too high to not try all avenues possible for change.

    Giggles_FunsworthdiscriderLeon2309
  • Jealous DevaJealous Deva Registered User regular
    Gaddez wrote: »
    Aioua wrote: »
    Mr Khan wrote: »
    Gundi wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    I think California is just looking for every available way to flip the bird to the incoming adminstration.

    They really want to be the city on the hill, beset by the Trumpian hordes.

    What's sad is that Calexit means that the state inmediatly gets a visit from the Chinese Navy looking to annex a new colony.

    States can't leave the union. Period.

    The notion of that always bothered me from a legal perspective, despite being a fierce anti-Confederate myself. You'd figure if a majority of state delegations voted to allow a state to leave, then that would constitute mutual consent or something. I could easily see conservatives being behind that in theory, on the mistaken assumption that the blue states are the takers, so if a blue state wanted out a majority of state delegations could be pushed to approve.

    I get that the legal standard doesn't exist for that, but it should. No union should be binding in perpetuity since all government comes from consent, even if a small-l liberal view of secessionism goes to dangerous places (whether for the ulterior motives of secessionists or just to prevent large, functional states from becoming a nest of small, weak countries that have less of an ability to provide for their citizens).

    "states can't leave the union" is misleading

    States can't leave the union without the consent of 3/4ths of the states.
    Dude: can you imagine if new york seceded, and then refused to grant trump entry?

    If New York could secede in the next 3 weeks, Trump would not be a natural born US citizen and would be ineligible for the Presidency. Everyone wins!.

    GaddezPolaritiekimeSleepminirhyderEmerlmaster999Shadowhopeoverride367Rhesus PositiveDedwrekkaelectricitylikesmedispatch.oPLADark Raven XRingoGennenalyse RuebenBlameless ClericEtiowsaForarVoodooVTheDrifterMrVyngaardshrykeNightDragonGiggles_FunsworthJazzHonkTransporterN1tSt4lkerNobeardjdarksunLeon2309Squigie
  • GaddezGaddez Registered User regular
    Gundi wrote: »
    Cool, cool. They can still utterly ruin your, my, and their own lives. I ain't saying it should be a priority of folks but the stakes are too high to not try all avenues possible for change.

    A fifth column approach to fox news isn't going to get anywhere since the people watching it aren't watching it for news so much as they are to have their beliefs reinforced.

    Richy wrote: »
    But I think the resistance I’m getting more has to do with “rawr! Loklar said it! Rage!” than anything else.

    No, it has to do with the fact that you're done nothing but throw lies, blatant flasehoods, and downright dumb statements at us so far.
    Panda4YouelectricitylikesmeGnome-InterruptusMan in the MistsGennenalyse RuebenshrykeJazzNobeardHacksaw
  • SeñorAmorSeñorAmor !!! Registered User regular
    Taramoor wrote: »
    Will Trump finally mint the Platinum coin?

    Which is more likely: "In Trump we Trust" or "In God we Trump"?

    E Pluribus Trump

    "Trump Trump Trump Trump"

    or just "Trump"

    And on the back: "The best currency. Really, just the greatest currency. Believe me."

    override367
  • MuddBuddMuddBudd Registered User regular
    SeñorAmor wrote: »
    Taramoor wrote: »
    Will Trump finally mint the Platinum coin?

    Which is more likely: "In Trump we Trust" or "In God we Trump"?

    E Pluribus Trump

    "Trump Trump Trump Trump"

    or just "Trump"

    And on the back: "The best currency. Really, just the greatest currency. Believe me."

    The back will be in Russian.

    steam_sig.png
    TicaldfjamHeatwaveGennenalyse RuebenMrVyngaardSmrtnikGiggles_FunsworthHonkTransporterN1tSt4lkerNobeardMild ConfusionHacksawSquigie
  • GoodKingJayIIIGoodKingJayIII Registered User regular
    Gundi wrote: »
    Gundi wrote: »
    Also I ain't super happy about Megyn Kelly leaving Fox because while she's not someone I consider a nice person, she was practically the only popular voice on FOX who ever willing to criticize the GOP.

    The easy answer is to treat Fox like the faux journalism that it is and just not watch them at all.

    No see the problem is people who only watch Fox. This won't help that.

    And you think those people listened to Megan Kelly?

    Battletag: Threeve#1501
    PSN: Threeve703
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    I think California is just looking for every available way to flip the bird to the incoming adminstration.

    They really want to be the city on the hill, beset by the Trumpian hordes.

    As a Californian, I am okay with this.

    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
    MaximumQuidHavelock2.0IncenjucarDoodmannNijaelectricitylikesmedispatch.oDacOatsKarozForarGiggles_Funsworthwandering14357GoodKingJayIIIHacksaw
  • MuddBuddMuddBudd Registered User regular
    So a thread popped up on my FB yesterday about the fact that the Clintons are attending the inauguration. The consensus was that it was 'disgusting' and 'traitorous' that she was attending.

    I made an attempt to convince them that despite the awful circumstances, a peaceful and gracious transition was important. They weren't having it. I am not sure what they think it would accomplish for her to refuse attendance.

    steam_sig.png
    ShadowhopeminirhyderGennenalyse RuebenwanderingNobeard
  • SeñorAmorSeñorAmor !!! Registered User regular
    MuddBudd wrote: »
    So a thread popped up on my FB yesterday about the fact that the Clintons are attending the inauguration. The consensus was that it was 'disgusting' and 'traitorous' that she was attending.

    I made an attempt to convince them that despite the awful circumstances, a peaceful and gracious transition was important. They weren't having it. I am not sure what they think it would accomplish for her to refuse attendance.

    And yet if they didn't attend, they'd be sore losers.

    It's a lose-lose situation for those of us capable of rational thought.

    kimeQanamilEmerlmaster999emp123PantsBShadowhopeAistanNo-QuarterCommander ZoomminirhyderdavidsdurionsPanda4Youoverride367SleepLovelyDarkPrimusMillHakkekageMagellGnome-InterruptusiTunesIsEvilSo It GoesOrcaGennenalyse RuebenVegemyteCptKemzikHarry DresdenTheDriftershrykelonelyahavaNightDragonMegaMekGiggles_FunsworthVeagleMartini_PhilosopherwanderingTransporterNobeard14357HacksawDarth WaiterDisruptedCapitalistLeon2309Squigie
  • Mr KhanMr Khan Not Everyone WAHHHRegistered User regular
    MuddBudd wrote: »
    So a thread popped up on my FB yesterday about the fact that the Clintons are attending the inauguration. The consensus was that it was 'disgusting' and 'traitorous' that she was attending.

    I made an attempt to convince them that despite the awful circumstances, a peaceful and gracious transition was important. They weren't having it. I am not sure what they think it would accomplish for her to refuse attendance.

    I think its normalizing him for any president to show up. I get that the Republicans might want to, but Carter and the Clintons should stay the hell away.

    It's part of operating by the old rules where we think trust and respect go both ways.

    SpoitPanda4YouMan in the MistsGiggles_FunsworthYamiB.Martini_Philosopher14357jdarksun
  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    KetBra wrote: »
    Enc wrote: »
    Mr Khan wrote: »
    Gundi wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    I think California is just looking for every available way to flip the bird to the incoming adminstration.

    They really want to be the city on the hill, beset by the Trumpian hordes.

    What's sad is that Calexit means that the state inmediatly gets a visit from the Chinese Navy looking to annex a new colony.

    States can't leave the union. Period.

    The notion of that always bothered me from a legal perspective, despite being a fierce anti-Confederate myself. You'd figure if a majority of state delegations voted to allow a state to leave, then that would constitute mutual consent or something. I could easily see conservatives being behind that in theory, on the mistaken assumption that the blue states are the takers, so if a blue state wanted out a majority of state delegations could be pushed to approve.

    I get that the legal standard doesn't exist for that, but it should. No union should be binding in perpetuity since all government comes from consent, even if a small-l liberal view of secessionism goes to dangerous places (whether for the ulterior motives of secessionists or just to prevent large, functional states from becoming a nest of small, weak countries that have less of an ability to provide for their citizens).

    One state leaving damages all the states with the repercussion. It's to prevent some tiny state like Vermont from destabilizing a nation of hundreds of millions because of the short sighted extremism at the state capital.

    States can 100% leave, you would "just" need a constitutional amendment to do it

    Or at least consent of the federal government.

    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
  • CelestialBadgerCelestialBadger Registered User regular
    MuddBudd wrote: »
    I made an attempt to convince them that despite the awful circumstances, a peaceful and gracious transition was important. They weren't having it. I am not sure what they think it would accomplish for her to refuse attendance.

    In child-rearing, you must model the behavior you want the toddler to imitate. Since Trump doesn't have much book-learning, this is how he learns to be president, and more importantly, how to lose an election (I hope.)

    SmrtnikNobeardRedTide
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    Mr Khan wrote: »
    MuddBudd wrote: »
    So a thread popped up on my FB yesterday about the fact that the Clintons are attending the inauguration. The consensus was that it was 'disgusting' and 'traitorous' that she was attending.

    I made an attempt to convince them that despite the awful circumstances, a peaceful and gracious transition was important. They weren't having it. I am not sure what they think it would accomplish for her to refuse attendance.

    I think its normalizing him for any president to show up. I get that the Republicans might want to, but Carter and the Clintons should stay the hell away.

    It's part of operating by the old rules where we think trust and respect go both ways.

    So, what do you achieve by them staying away? And does that counterbalance the negatives?

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • TryCatcherTryCatcher Registered User regular
    The world still rotates, and the NC GOP still moves:
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Representative Richard Hudson (NC-08) released the following statement after introducing the bipartisan Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 (H.R. 38) with 58 original cosponsors:

    “Our Second Amendment right doesn’t disappear when we cross state lines, and this legislation guarantees that. The Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 is a common sense solution to a problem too many Americans face. It will provide law-abiding citizens the right to conceal carry and travel freely between states without worrying about conflicting state codes or onerous civil suits. As a member of President-elect Trump’s Second Amendment Coalition, I look forward to working with my colleagues and the administration to get this legislation across the finish line.”
    Team Trump getting started up with their own legislation priorities.

  • MuddBuddMuddBudd Registered User regular
    MuddBudd wrote: »
    I made an attempt to convince them that despite the awful circumstances, a peaceful and gracious transition was important. They weren't having it. I am not sure what they think it would accomplish for her to refuse attendance.

    In child-rearing, you must model the behavior you want the toddler to imitate. Since Trump doesn't have much book-learning, this is how he learns to be president, and more importantly, how to lose an election (I hope.)

    I'm in this camp I think. Also, might as well let her end her career with some dignity.

    steam_sig.png
    Shadowhope
  • PantsBPantsB Registered User regular
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_inauguration_of_Barack_Obama
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_inauguration_of_Barack_Obama

    So crowds in 08 and 12 were estimated around 1.8 million and roughly 1 million. How many show for Trump's and how many of them are openly white nationalists?

    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
  • Psychotic OnePsychotic One The Lord of No Pants Parts UnknownRegistered User regular
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    The world still rotates, and the NC GOP still moves:
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Representative Richard Hudson (NC-08) released the following statement after introducing the bipartisan Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 (H.R. 38) with 58 original cosponsors:

    “Our Second Amendment right doesn’t disappear when we cross state lines, and this legislation guarantees that. The Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 is a common sense solution to a problem too many Americans face. It will provide law-abiding citizens the right to conceal carry and travel freely between states without worrying about conflicting state codes or onerous civil suits. As a member of President-elect Trump’s Second Amendment Coalition, I look forward to working with my colleagues and the administration to get this legislation across the finish line.”
    Team Trump getting started up with their own legislation priorities.

    As someone who lives in Arizona...if I am understanding this right it would mean anyone who lives in a concealed carry state (Alaska, Vermont, Arizona) would be able to conceal carry in any state as long as they have their driver's license.

    I foresee bad things coming from this.

    ExtreaminatusPolaritieminirhyderSleepLovelyDoodmannDedwrekkaMan in the MistsGnome-InterruptusKarozGennenalyse RuebenlonelyahavaGiggles_FunsworthVeagleKayne Red RobeMartini_PhilosopherNobeard14357David WalgasjdarksunHacksawLeon2309Squigie
  • CoinageCoinage I think I look handsome Registered User regular
    edited January 2017
    I mean sure oppose it because if you give an inch they'll take a mile, but concealed carry is really not a big deal.

    Coinage on
    YrkxdGc.gif
    Shadowhope
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    Coinage wrote: »
    I mean sure oppose it because if you give an inch they'll take a mile, but concealed carry is really not a big deal.

    The issue isn't concealed carry. The issue is that they're doing the same thing they did to credit cards - kneecapping local regulations by forcing states to have to accept the lowest common denominator.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
    rockrngerExtreaminatusQanamilPhoenix-DPolaritiedurandal4532kimeTicaldfjamDoctorArchSleepDedwrekkaelectricitylikesmeZomroDarkPrimusMagellMan in the MistsDacGnome-InterruptusOrcaArdolGennenalyse RuebenshrykeGiggles_FunsworthVeagleMartini_PhilosopherN1tSt4lkerjdarksunHacksawLeon2309Squigie
  • BlindPsychicBlindPsychic Registered User regular
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    The world still rotates, and the NC GOP still moves:
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Representative Richard Hudson (NC-08) released the following statement after introducing the bipartisan Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 (H.R. 38) with 58 original cosponsors:

    “Our Second Amendment right doesn’t disappear when we cross state lines, and this legislation guarantees that. The Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 is a common sense solution to a problem too many Americans face. It will provide law-abiding citizens the right to conceal carry and travel freely between states without worrying about conflicting state codes or onerous civil suits. As a member of President-elect Trump’s Second Amendment Coalition, I look forward to working with my colleagues and the administration to get this legislation across the finish line.”
    Team Trump getting started up with their own legislation priorities.

    Didn't this same shit happen with slavery? C'mon now.

  • QanamilQanamil Registered User regular
    Or 'fuck your state rights, got mine' if you will.

    Steam/PSN ID: FauxRomano | JBYC Podcast, recorded live and messy Mondays at 9EST
    Panda4YouShadowhopeMan in the MistsGnome-InterruptusGennenalyse RuebenMegaMekGiggles_FunsworthVeagleMartini_PhilosopherjdarksunLeon2309
  • DarkewolfeDarkewolfe Registered User regular
    PantsB wrote: »
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_inauguration_of_Barack_Obama
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_inauguration_of_Barack_Obama

    So crowds in 08 and 12 were estimated around 1.8 million and roughly 1 million. How many show for Trump's and how many of them are openly white nationalists?

    I hope so badly, even though I know it won't happen, that we see at least 1 million at the march the day after.

    What is this I don't even.
    Panda4YouGnome-InterruptusGiggles_Funsworth
  • QuidQuid I don't... what... hnnng Registered User regular
    edited January 2017
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    The world still rotates, and the NC GOP still moves:
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Representative Richard Hudson (NC-08) released the following statement after introducing the bipartisan Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 (H.R. 38) with 58 original cosponsors:

    “Our Second Amendment right doesn’t disappear when we cross state lines, and this legislation guarantees that. The Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 is a common sense solution to a problem too many Americans face. It will provide law-abiding citizens the right to conceal carry and travel freely between states without worrying about conflicting state codes or onerous civil suits. As a member of President-elect Trump’s Second Amendment Coalition, I look forward to working with my colleagues and the administration to get this legislation across the finish line.”
    Team Trump getting started up with their own legislation priorities.

    As someone who lives in Arizona...if I am understanding this right it would mean anyone who lives in a concealed carry state (Alaska, Vermont, Arizona) would be able to conceal carry in any state as long as they have their driver's license.

    I foresee bad things coming from this.

    I'm positive the people proposing the bill have no intention of requiring people to prove they're from certain states.

    I swear Dems better filibuster nonsense like this.

    Quid on
    mrondeauTicaldfjamSleepMagellMan in the MistsGennenalyse RuebenshrykeHacksawSquigie
  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    I've defended the Times a lot, but I woke up to a headline alert saying congressional Republicans backed down after "intense criticism from Trump and others."

    I'm cancelling that shit today. The fuck.

    ...You probably should have stopped supporting them after they misrepresented NIST's findings about Iraqi centrifuges - a story that changed many people's opinions about the impending war in Iraq.

    Times has always been a shitty rag.

    With Love and Courage
  • KhavallKhavall British ColumbiaRegistered User regular
    Quid wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    The world still rotates, and the NC GOP still moves:
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Representative Richard Hudson (NC-08) released the following statement after introducing the bipartisan Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 (H.R. 38) with 58 original cosponsors:

    “Our Second Amendment right doesn’t disappear when we cross state lines, and this legislation guarantees that. The Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 is a common sense solution to a problem too many Americans face. It will provide law-abiding citizens the right to conceal carry and travel freely between states without worrying about conflicting state codes or onerous civil suits. As a member of President-elect Trump’s Second Amendment Coalition, I look forward to working with my colleagues and the administration to get this legislation across the finish line.”
    Team Trump getting started up with their own legislation priorities.

    As someone who lives in Arizona...if I am understanding this right it would mean anyone who lives in a concealed carry state (Alaska, Vermont, Arizona) would be able to conceal carry in any state as long as they have their driver's license.

    I foresee bad things coming from this.

    I'm positive the people proposing the bill have no intention of requiring prove they're from certain states.

    I swear Dems better filibuster nonsense like this.

    Of course they intend on requiring* proof** of residence in certain states!

    *requirement only to be met if suspect's skin is suspiciously brown-ish or darker.
    **"proof" in this context refers to "shooting them and then claiming that they didn't have proof".

    TicaldfjamGnome-InterruptusPLAMrVyngaardGiggles_FunsworthJazzNobeard
  • No-QuarterNo-Quarter Nothing to Fear But Fear ItselfRegistered User regular
    The Ender wrote: »
    I've defended the Times a lot, but I woke up to a headline alert saying congressional Republicans backed down after "intense criticism from Trump and others."

    I'm cancelling that shit today. The fuck.

    ...You probably should have stopped supporting them after they misrepresented NIST's findings about Iraqi centrifuges - a story that changed many people's opinions about the impending war in Iraq.

    Times has always been a shitty rag.

    I would preface that by saying they've more so coasted on reputation rather than by maintaining it.

    Walter Cronkite said:
    I regret that, in our attempt to establish some standards, we didn't make them stick. We couldn't find a way to pass them on to another generation, really.

    The EnderHarry DresdenGiggles_Funsworth
  • DoctorArchDoctorArch Curmudgeon Registered User regular
    PantsB wrote: »
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_inauguration_of_Barack_Obama
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_inauguration_of_Barack_Obama

    So crowds in 08 and 12 were estimated around 1.8 million and roughly 1 million. How many show for Trump's and how many of them are openly white nationalists?

    What's the over/under on someone or multiple people sneaking in Nazi flags and unfurling them during the inauguration?

    Switch Friend Code: SW-6732-9515-9697
  • TaramoorTaramoor Registered User regular
    DoctorArch wrote: »
    PantsB wrote: »
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_inauguration_of_Barack_Obama
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_inauguration_of_Barack_Obama

    So crowds in 08 and 12 were estimated around 1.8 million and roughly 1 million. How many show for Trump's and how many of them are openly white nationalists?

    What's the over/under on someone or multiple people sneaking in Nazi flags and unfurling them during the inauguration?

    Sneaking?

    Emerlmaster999Mr KhanrockrngerQuidLovelySleepDoctorArchDedwrekkaEncDarkewolfeZomroShadowhopeMagellMan in the MistsHeatwaveArdolGennenalyse RuebenEtiowsaKharnorMrVyngaardshrykeBrutal JlonelyahavaMegaMekGiggles_FunsworthJazzExtreaminatusTransporterNobeardjdarksunMild ConfusionHacksawRedTidePantsBSquigie
  • AlexandierAlexandier Registered User regular
    DoctorArch wrote: »
    PantsB wrote: »
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_inauguration_of_Barack_Obama
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_inauguration_of_Barack_Obama

    So crowds in 08 and 12 were estimated around 1.8 million and roughly 1 million. How many show for Trump's and how many of them are openly white nationalists?

    What's the over/under on someone or multiple people sneaking in Nazi flags and unfurling them during the inauguration?



    Only if the innauguration is in a DPW garage

    HeatwaveHacksawSquigie
  • override367override367 ALL minions Registered User regular
    edited January 2017
    I don't understand how that works though, I thought states could always exceed federal regulations, unless they violate the constitution

    override367 on
  • tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    The world still rotates, and the NC GOP still moves:
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Representative Richard Hudson (NC-08) released the following statement after introducing the bipartisan Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 (H.R. 38) with 58 original cosponsors:

    “Our Second Amendment right doesn’t disappear when we cross state lines, and this legislation guarantees that. The Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 is a common sense solution to a problem too many Americans face. It will provide law-abiding citizens the right to conceal carry and travel freely between states without worrying about conflicting state codes or onerous civil suits. As a member of President-elect Trump’s Second Amendment Coalition, I look forward to working with my colleagues and the administration to get this legislation across the finish line.”
    Team Trump getting started up with their own legislation priorities.

    This confuses me. How can the federal government force a state to obey another states laws? I can see how they could pass a federal concealed carry law, and say "This now applies", but even that is challenging since the state governments aren't saying that something illegal is legal, but that something legal elsewhere is illegal here. Going beyond federal regulations is fully within the purview of state governments.

    And again, I just do not think California and other blue states (where everyone who cares about gun control actually lives) will accept this. If it went through, I could see California banning holsters. Or coats. Or any gun with rifling.

    "That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
    Spoit
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    tbloxham wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    The world still rotates, and the NC GOP still moves:
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Representative Richard Hudson (NC-08) released the following statement after introducing the bipartisan Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 (H.R. 38) with 58 original cosponsors:

    “Our Second Amendment right doesn’t disappear when we cross state lines, and this legislation guarantees that. The Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 is a common sense solution to a problem too many Americans face. It will provide law-abiding citizens the right to conceal carry and travel freely between states without worrying about conflicting state codes or onerous civil suits. As a member of President-elect Trump’s Second Amendment Coalition, I look forward to working with my colleagues and the administration to get this legislation across the finish line.”
    Team Trump getting started up with their own legislation priorities.

    This confuses me. How can the federal government force a state to obey another states laws? I can see how they could pass a federal concealed carry law, and say "This now applies", but even that is challenging since the state governments aren't saying that something illegal is legal, but that something legal elsewhere is illegal here. Going beyond federal regulations is fully within the purview of state governments.

    And again, I just do not think California and other blue states (where everyone who cares about gun control actually lives) will accept this. If it went through, I could see California banning holsters. Or coats. Or any gun with rifling.

    Read up on what happened with credit cards - the feds said that the card issuer's home state laws would apply.

    Hence why every credit card comes out of either Delaware or South Dakota.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
    Giggles_Funsworth
  • tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular
    tbloxham wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    The world still rotates, and the NC GOP still moves:
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Representative Richard Hudson (NC-08) released the following statement after introducing the bipartisan Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 (H.R. 38) with 58 original cosponsors:

    “Our Second Amendment right doesn’t disappear when we cross state lines, and this legislation guarantees that. The Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 is a common sense solution to a problem too many Americans face. It will provide law-abiding citizens the right to conceal carry and travel freely between states without worrying about conflicting state codes or onerous civil suits. As a member of President-elect Trump’s Second Amendment Coalition, I look forward to working with my colleagues and the administration to get this legislation across the finish line.”
    Team Trump getting started up with their own legislation priorities.

    This confuses me. How can the federal government force a state to obey another states laws? I can see how they could pass a federal concealed carry law, and say "This now applies", but even that is challenging since the state governments aren't saying that something illegal is legal, but that something legal elsewhere is illegal here. Going beyond federal regulations is fully within the purview of state governments.

    And again, I just do not think California and other blue states (where everyone who cares about gun control actually lives) will accept this. If it went through, I could see California banning holsters. Or coats. Or any gun with rifling.

    Read up on what happened with credit cards - the feds said that the card issuer's home state laws would apply.

    Hence why every credit card comes out of either Delaware or South Dakota.

    So they would try and make the gun manufacturers home state laws apply? Because if they try and say, "Oh, the home state laws on your drivers license apply" and then try and let everyone pretend to be from Louisiana then that's totally something that California could crack down on since it has tax implications. And voting implications.

    It just doesn't seem to work as well with guns, which are owned by people, than with Credit cards which are owned by banks.

    "That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
  • Mr KhanMr Khan Not Everyone WAHHHRegistered User regular
    If the credit card solution is their aim, then the current system people get out-of-state CCW licenses (because many, like Utah's, are accepted in many states), but you would still have to prove that you hold a CCW in some state, unless there's a state that has no licensing whatsoever, then you would have to prove that you're a resident of that state to have that rule apply.

  • CelestialBadgerCelestialBadger Registered User regular
    It's not really a fair fight if Texans are allowed to tote their arsenal into NYC which doesn't really like citizens carrying guns.

  • PolaritiePolaritie Sleepy Registered User regular
    tbloxham wrote: »
    TryCatcher wrote: »
    The world still rotates, and the NC GOP still moves:
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Representative Richard Hudson (NC-08) released the following statement after introducing the bipartisan Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 (H.R. 38) with 58 original cosponsors:

    “Our Second Amendment right doesn’t disappear when we cross state lines, and this legislation guarantees that. The Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 is a common sense solution to a problem too many Americans face. It will provide law-abiding citizens the right to conceal carry and travel freely between states without worrying about conflicting state codes or onerous civil suits. As a member of President-elect Trump’s Second Amendment Coalition, I look forward to working with my colleagues and the administration to get this legislation across the finish line.”
    Team Trump getting started up with their own legislation priorities.

    This confuses me. How can the federal government force a state to obey another states laws? I can see how they could pass a federal concealed carry law, and say "This now applies", but even that is challenging since the state governments aren't saying that something illegal is legal, but that something legal elsewhere is illegal here. Going beyond federal regulations is fully within the purview of state governments.

    And again, I just do not think California and other blue states (where everyone who cares about gun control actually lives) will accept this. If it went through, I could see California banning holsters. Or coats. Or any gun with rifling.

    Read up on what happened with credit cards - the feds said that the card issuer's home state laws would apply.

    Hence why every credit card comes out of either Delaware or South Dakota.

    The authority for that seems cleaner as interstate commerce. Concealed carry is not.

    Steam: Polaritie
    3DS: 0473-8507-2652
    Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
    PSN: AbEntropy
  • The EnderThe Ender Registered User regular
    DoctorArch wrote: »
    PantsB wrote: »
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_inauguration_of_Barack_Obama
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_inauguration_of_Barack_Obama

    So crowds in 08 and 12 were estimated around 1.8 million and roughly 1 million. How many show for Trump's and how many of them are openly white nationalists?

    What's the over/under on someone or multiple people sneaking in Nazi flags and unfurling them during the inauguration?

    Spencer's crowd will be there. I'm skeptical that they would attempt to raise Nazi iconography; that ship sailed from the American fascist movement quite a long time ago. They'll probably try to generate a noteworthy Seig Heil! salute throughout the crowd, though.


    With Love and Courage
    SleepPanda4YouMrVyngaardSquigie
This discussion has been closed.