Trump's Secret Agenda...Kill The Electoral College

[Audie]

Trump is well aware that when he becomes a private citizen there are criminal and civil court cases awaiting him. So, yes, he is deperate.

Another telepsychiatrist and legal x-purt?

 

[Revoltingest]

The second is a real thorn in the side for gun control folks

That's the 2nd best thing about it.

 

[Audie]

Do you want to talk about the amendments or not?

Otherwise, you can save your one liners for other folks.

If you're going to suggest to me, to not touch the amendments, I would expect a reasonable why behind that.

Then don't write weird things which invite nothing but dismissal.

" Can of Worms " comes to mind when anything about changing the constitution comes up.
It may not stop just where you wanted it to.

What in your constitution is so bad that it needs to be excised?

 

[Audie]

That's the 2nd best thing about it.

When I felt I needed a little pistol to protect myself I was glad it was possible for me to have one.

 

[suncowiam]

Then don't write weird things which invite nothing but dismissal.

" Can of Worms " comes to mind when anything about changing the constitution comes up.
It may not stop just where you wanted it to.

What in your constitution is so bad that it needs to be excised?

You've touched it. The second amendment needs to be updated to better define many ambiguities and antiquated definitions of the past.

What do you believe is the essence of the second amendment? Is it about gun control or liberties?

And, sure if you want a pistol, I wouldn't argue that you can't necessarily have one. I would argue if you are ready and trained enough for one.

 

[Audie]

You've touched it. The second amendment needs to be updated to better define many ambiguities and antiquated definitions of the past.

What do you believe is the essence of the second amendment? Is it about gun control or liberties?

And, sure if you want a pistol, I wouldn't argue that you can't necessarily have one. I would argue if you are ready and trained enough for one.

Why would you choose to question my competence?

 

[suncowiam]

Why would you choose to question my competence?

I'm flabbergasted by that comment.

Why shouldn't I? I'm supposed to assume you know what you're doing with a gun? A weapon that can literally kill people with a squeeze of a trigger?

Are you suggesting that anyone is already defined as competent to own and operate guns?

 

[Audie]

You've touched it. The second amendment needs to be updated to better define many ambiguities and antiquated definitions of the past.

What do you believe is the essence of the second amendment? Is it about gun control or liberties?

And, sure if you want a pistol, I wouldn't argue that you can't necessarily have one. I would argue if you are ready and trained enough for one.

I'd say neither. It is about limiting the power of the government.

 

[Revoltingest]

Why shouldn't I?

It's insulting.

 

[suncowiam]

It's insulting.

It's insulting to have a base position that people generally do not know how to safely operate guns?

Explain that further, plz

 

[suncowiam]

I'd say neither. It is about limiting the power of the government.

Good, it's about limiting the power of the government.

The second amendment doesn't talk about guns, cannons, muskets or other weapons.

It talks about checks and balances of the government. And some of us chose to define it as enabling armament to the citizens. But even then, it doesn't define even the specifics of the armament.

So, I fall back to ambiguities and definitions that should be cleaned up.

 

[Revoltingest]

It's insulting to have a base position that people generally do not know how to safely operate guns?

Explain that further, plz

When having a discussion with someone, questioning
their ability to have it is indeed insulting. At times a poster
might suggest a claim of expertise, whereupon it's
appropriate to ask about it. That wasn't one of those times.

 

[suncowiam]

When having a discussion with someone, questioning
their ability to have it is indeed insulting. At times a poster
might suggest a claim of expertise, whereupon it's
appropriate to ask about it. That wasn't one of those times.

Oh, that...

Ok, again, I meant that as a general you.

I'm sorry Audie, if that was taken personally or to be defined as you. I mean it as "you", the general "you" for everyone.

So I will be careful with how I phrase these comments.

Generally, it is the safe position to assume people, generally speaking of individuals, that own guns, most likely do not know how to safely operate them.

IMO, the issue is not of people generally simply owning guns but of people being ready and trained to own, operate and store the guns.

[edited]

But this is a diverging topic away from the original topic. The base topic is: Does the second amendment correctly define enough to address the limiting of government. That is the essence of the second amendment.

 

[Audie]

I'm flabbergasted by that comment.

Why shouldn't I? I'm supposed to assume you know what you're doing with a gun? A weapon that can literally kill people with a squeeze of a trigger?

Are you suggesting that anyone is already defined as competent to own and operate guns?

You assumed that I am not so don't try to turn it around on me with invidious rhetorical questions.

I might assume its because you figure a lil
CHINESE girl won't know a thing and as such is a meance not to be trusted.

But let's give you the benefit if the doubt you
were not willing to extend to me, and figure yo wuz just wondering. So-

I took a concealed carry class.
The weapon was a Smith and Wesson Lady Smith caliber 38 special, three inches barrel
and brushed stainless steel finish with rosewood handle.

It hurt my hand to shoot it so I was able to get
less powerful cartridges to put in it.

At a shooting range the men there were very friendly and helpful. They let me try aR 15 and AK47 rifles. I was intimidated by such things at first but soon got the idea,

I made sure I am thoroughly familiar with my
revolver and all relevant laws.


Now, what is your legal competence to determine that the constitution is defective?

 

[Audie]

Oh, that...

Ok, again, I meant that as a general you.

I'm sorry Audie, if that was taken personally or to be defined as you. I mean it as "you", the general "you" for everyone.

So I will be careful with how I phrase these comments.

Generally, it is the safe position to assume people, generally speaking of individuals, that own guns, most likely do not know how to safely operate them.

IMO, the issue is not of people generally simply owning guns but of people being ready and trained to own, operate and store the guns.

[edited]

But this is a diverging topic away from the original topic. The base topic is: Does the second amendment correctly define enough to address the limiting of government. That is the essence of the second amendment.

Accepted

 

[Quetzal]

Always activate your BS alarm when you see 2 cartoon characters conversing.

As long as someone doesn't have the audacity to suggest that we aren't funny.

 

[Quetzal]

You were having a "bro" conversation and I took it out of context. I got it now.

I mean, as much as a brotherly bond can be formed between a tiger and a groundskeeper.

 

[suncowiam]

You assumed that I am not so don't try to turn it around on me with invidious rhetorical questions.

I might assume its because you figure a lil
CHINESE girl won't know a thing and as such is a meance not to be trusted.

But let's give you the benefit if the doubt you
were not willing to extend to me, and figure yo wuz just wondering. So-

I took a concealed carry class.
The weapon was a Smith and Wesson Lady Smith caliber 38 special, three inches barrel
and brushed stainless steel finish with rosewood handle.

It hurt my hand to shoot it so I was able to get
less powerful cartridges to put in it.

At a shooting range the men there were very friendly and helpful. They let me try aR 15 and AK47 rifles. I was intimidated by such things at first but soon got the idea,

I made sure I am thoroughly familiar with my
revolver and all relevant laws.


Now, what is your legal competence to determine that the constitution is defective?

Please read my most recent posts and I apologized for the misleading comments.

No, I do not assume anything of you being a Chinese or a girl...

Like I said before, I assume a base position that gun owners do not generally know how to safely operate and store guns. This is for America.

Both of us do not have legal competence to either justify that the constitution is either defective or perfect, so that is a mute point if we are to continue.

The statistics on guns will suggest that my base position is either correct or highly plausible, especially in America.

FYI, it's good to hear that you are trained. That is actually what I hope will be the norm.

 

[Audie]

Please read my most recent posts and I apologized for the misleading comments.

No, I do not assume anything of you being a Chinese or a girl...

Like I said before, I assume a base position that gun owners do not generally know how to safely operate and store guns. This is for America.

Both of us do not have legal competence to either justify that the constitution is either defective or perfect, so that is a mute point if we are to continue.

The statistics on guns will suggest that my base position is either correct or highly plausible, especially in America.

FYI, it's good to hear that you are trained. That is actually what I hope will be the norm.

Note that I said, "accepted". And tnx.

The Chinese woman thing was uncalled for on my part
for however much its lead to assumptions about me other times!
You are not "other people". And I am not ex mil or a rancher who would not
be questioned.

I got looks at the range that had a dubious tinge till I proved myself.

You are saying the constitution is obsolete which presupposes some sort
of legal competence? In the event, individual failings to behave responsibly
under the terms of the constitution is common as dirt, but not customarily seen as a reason to rewrite the amendments! See 1st in this regard.

 

[Riders]

In the news....
Trump to meet Michigan lawmakers in bid to overturn electoral defeat
Excerpted....
Nov 20 (Reuters) - President Donald Trump will meet with Republican leaders from Michigan at the White House on Friday as his campaign pursues an increasingly desperate bid to overturn the Nov. 3 election following a series of courtroom defeats.

The Trump campaign's latest strategy, as described by three people familiar with the plan, is to convince Republican-controlled legislatures in battleground states won by President-elect Joe Biden, such as Michigan, to set aside the results and determine Trump the winner.

"The entire election frankly in all the swing states should be overturned and the legislatures should make sure that the electors are selected for Trump," Sidney Powell, one of Trump's lawyers, told Fox Business Network on Thursday.


Back to me....
Some think that these antics are Trump's death rattle.
(I once naively posted that. But I've come to my senses.)
Clearly, The Donald is showing both his genius & his put
Ameristan first agenda.
How so, you ask?
Playing by the rules, & exploiting them in brilliant novel ways,
he's now showing us inherent flaws in the Electoral College.
The new one is more interesting & dangerous than the
occasional "faithless elector". We now see the faithless party
risk, ie, that if one party held enuf power in crucial states, they
could conspire to install an unelected President.

He must've realized this when he beat Hillary with a lower
popular vote count. This is how he's fixing that flaw, ie,
inspiring the country to switch to the popular vote.
He knows he won't win, but he's doing it for us.

For sooth, Donald Trump is God's gift to democracy,
although it took me awhile to realize this.

I also read he wanted hem to throw out Bidens votes and declare Donald the winner.What has gotten into him,he's going crazy CRAZY. No court in the world would allow him to do that and its insane.I think who ever throws him out 1-20 should take the men in white from the psych ward and get him into the psychiatric ward. Its interesting watching al
of this taking place anyone want some pop corn?l