Avatar feed
Responses: 13
CPT Jack Durish
14
14
0
We already have laws that address this issue, Child Endangerment. Now, let's be honest. Hillary doesn't give a damn about your children (nor my grandchildren). She has an agenda, to erode our right and ability to defend ourselves from her and her type of tyranny. That's what this is all about. Now, people will "remind" us that Hillary (nor any President) can rescind the 2nd Amendment. Well, they don't have to rescind it. They just have to keep doing what they've been doing: Eroding it with court decisions that interpret it into irrelevancy. If elected, she will appoint a number of new justices to the Supreme Court who will accomplish this mission for her. So go right ahead and complain about Donald. He is most deserving of your derision. But keep in mind what you will be losing if Hillary wins.
(14)
Comment
(0)
SPC James Harsh
SPC James Harsh
>1 y
We know what Democrats on the trail think of Clinton and Executive orders, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HrUUXOHgzg
(1)
Reply
(0)
SGM Steve Wettstein
SGM Steve Wettstein
>1 y
SPC James Harsh - If elected, she can try. If SCOTUS says that it is against the Constitution, it won't last.
(2)
Reply
(0)
MCPO Roger Collins
MCPO Roger Collins
>1 y
SGM Steve Wettstein - If you don't have ammunition or some types of firearms (like the scary one Feinstein wanted banned) you have limited your ability to using firearms to an expensive club. These can be done and bought into by a liberal Supreme Court. Progressive don't necessarily move quickly but inexorably. And, as we have found winning on all fronts.
(2)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
LTC Owner
7
7
0
WHAT A CROCK!
Sweeping legislation for parental failure. Hold the parents responsible!
(7)
Comment
(0)
SPC James Harsh
SPC James Harsh
>1 y
Some articles showed statistics and one had abortions as the number cause and I'll refrain but I almost made a post asking if that would be accurate to abortion advocates since they don't consider abortions to be a loss of life, should there be an asterisk* but that is another topic for another day
(0)
Reply
(0)
Alan K.
Alan K.
>1 y
That way they can take your children away from you....
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SPC Nathan Freeman
5
5
0
D.C. Vs Heller had nothing to do with toddlers. Toddlers were not mentioned in any argument or by judges in the decision. It was about a retired cop who felt like the city's anti gun laws violated his Constitutional rights. Sen Ted Cruz argued the case and won (as he always does)
(5)
Comment
(0)
SPC James Harsh
SPC James Harsh
>1 y
I'll post a separate response to this claim
(0)
Reply
(0)
SPC Nathan Freeman
SPC Nathan Freeman
>1 y
Make sure you read the actual case and argument first.
(2)
Reply
(0)
SPC James Harsh
SPC James Harsh
>1 y
SPC Nathan Freeman - I have that is how I speak from memory and upon review of the debate Clinton should be called out for her misleading of Dc v Heller since it was about the handgun ban
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close