Bloomberg for VP? Not so fast - New coke story breaking on msnbc

[Soul Crusher]

Bloomberg is done after this.

[240 is Back]

this is what happens when you support a dipshit who signs anti-gun legislation.

The leader says "Wow, I was able to get away with that anti-gun shit.  Now it'll be anti-calorie next".

People who sign assault weapons bans suck.  They hate freedom, hate the 2nd amendment.

[The True Adonis]

Piece of steaming shit. 

[avxo]

Disagree. Her initiative for getting kids/teens/whoever to get outside and exercise, be healthy, eat right isn't what got her bashed and mocked. It was the "Bake Sale Regulations", what food you are allowed to pack for your kids lunch and the like. That's what got people upset.

I have no problem with advocating and promoting exercise and a healthy lifestyle, provided it's not forced at the point of the government's proverbial gun. But did she really advocate "bake sale regulations"? I don't pay much attention to the personal agenda of the unelected spouse of the President; all I heard was that she was hoping to address childhood obesity - a lofty, if not weighty, goal.

And for the record, I really don't have a problem with government regulations on lunches that schools serve to their students as long as parents are informed and such. But schools/govt. shouldn't regulate what parents pack for their kids or what is sold at school bake sales, that's where I draw the line.

I more or less agree with that; I don't think that any level of government should be able to tell parents what they can and cannot feed their child, provided that you are actually feeding him and that the food isn't dog food.

[avxo]

this is what happens when you support a dipshit who signs anti-gun legislation.

The leader says "Wow, I was able to get away with that anti-gun shit.  Now it'll be anti-calorie next".

People who sign assault weapons bans suck.  They hate freedom, hate the 2nd amendment.

I like the Second Amendment just as much as I like the First and think that assault weapons bans are idiotic. Background checks I can understand; I could even be convinced about a requirement that the owner attend a short and inexpensive one-time course on gun safety as a prerequisite for a semi- or fully-automatic weapon. But an outright ban on sales is just stupid.

But I do have one question. Do you actually draw a line at some point? That is, would you support say, a ban on the purchase of, say anti-tank weapons like the M20A1, or an M252 mortar? If so what changes the calculus for you to cause you to say "I think this should not be available for purchase by civilians"?

[tu_holmes]

I like the Second Amendment just as much as I like the First and think that assault weapons bans are idiotic. Background checks I can understand; I could even be convinced about a requirement that the owner attend a short and inexpensive one-time course on gun safety as a prerequisite for a semi- or fully-automatic weapon. But an outright ban on sales is just stupid.

But I do have one question. Do you actually draw a line at some point? That is, would you support say, a ban on the purchase of, say anti-tank weapons like the M20A1, or an M252 mortar? If so what changes the calculus for you to cause you to say "I think this should not be available for purchase by civilians"?

I don't... I think if it's good enough for a military or police force to buy, then we should be able to buy it.

If not, there's no way that the people can take up arms and revolt against oppression if need be.

[avxo]

I don't... I think if it's good enough for a military or police force to buy, then we should be able to buy it.

If not, there's no way that the people can take up arms and revolt against oppression if need be.

So you would be ok with the sale of anti-tank weaponry to the general public? What about nuclear or biological weapons? I could understand if you said "good enough for a police force" but "good enough for a military" is kind of extreme for me.

[tu_holmes]

So you would be ok with the sale of anti-tank weaponry to the general public? What about nuclear or biological weapons? I could understand if you said "good enough for a police force" but "good enough for a military" is kind of extreme for me.

I see where you're going... and maybe just "maybe" I can be onboard with nuclear and biological weapons... only because the general public wouldn't handle them even remotely safely, but Anti-Tank weapons are fine by me.

[GigantorX]

I don't... I think if it's good enough for a military or police force to buy, then we should be able to buy it.

If not, there's no way that the people can take up arms and revolt against oppression if need be.

I'm with you on this.

If the Government has access to it than the citizens should have access as well.

In the end it is a great check and balance system.

Of course, let us not go to extremes but owning a 12 gauge, body armor, hunting rifle and an assault rifle with add-ons should be legal.