Russia invaded Ukraine to expand. They came up with a dozen lame excuses, like protecting Russian speaking people in Crimea from being insulted and to stop the local government (who they called extremists) from taking abandoned Russian military bases, NATO expansion was never a reason they gave for invading.
In Ukraine proper, his stated excuse was that the new Ukrainian government (formed after the Kremlin installed puppet government was ousted) was comprised of NAZIs who were ethnically cleansing Russian speakers in the East, a total fabrication.
https://www.euractiv.com/section/global-europe/news/in-putins-words-why-russia-invaded-ukraine/
Try keeping your revisionist Russia centric anti democratic fantasy history to yourself. I know some random internet blowhard failure broadcasting from mommy’s basement told you this alternative fact nonsense, you have got to stop trusting them.

There’s been more NATO expansion in “buffer” nations since Russia invaded than in the 50+ years beforehand, with more coming because they invaded their neighbor…again.

Ukraine will be a NATO country now, so is our business.
Ukraine was in a treaty with the US, so was already our business. We guaranteed their borders against invasion in exchange for their nuclear arsenal. No nation will ever do a nuclear disarmament treaty with America, we don’t keep our word or we would be fighting there.
Russian expansionism isn’t stopped by ignoring it, it’s encouraged. Trump encouraged the expansionism into Ukraine proper (Crimea was Ukraine) when he recognized Russia’s claim on the seized territory, giving the green light to expand their military operations in Eastern Ukraine (that they denied existed but absolutely were there fighting during Trump’s administration and even before, recall Russians shot down a passenger plane in Ukraine in 2014 and never left).

The EU is supportive enough of Ukraine that they just unanimously agreed to $54 billion in military aid, and the EU is our closest trading partner so again, our business. The MAGA ploy to block any aid to Ukraine to aid Russia (hoping it would look bad for Biden) has failed, the EU miraculously stood up as a unified front and agreed to fund Ukraine.
NATO has agreed to admit Ukraine as soon as possible, something never considered before the invasion.


Ukraine is a lost war, lost by Russia…Russia just won’t admit it yet, but their country will be feeling the loss for decades…loss of their army, loss of an entire generation of young men, loss of their economy, loss of hundreds of trade agreements/partners, loss of trillions of dollars, loss of international standing and cooperation, loss of stability. At this point, even if Russia took Ukraine tomorrow, it would be a loss for Russia. They destroyed their prize, and themselves in the process, and the rest of the world is happy to destroy them through a proxy while Russia engages directly and is crushed daily.
Winning!

https://youtu.be/WhILMFdifhk?si=k-egPJ1oDrqKrd_S

Ukraine has already won this war by destroying Russia. It’s exceedingly likely they will also drive the Russians out and may even take some of Russia a s a buffer zone…Russia is losing badly.

The irony could not be more delicious.
In 2018, in an effort to put Clinton in prison and invalidate her as a candidate in the future, Trump and Republicans signed into law new, much harsher penalties for taking and keeping classified documents inappropriately. These new penalties were a (mandatory ?) 5 year sentence and making it a “hard” felony that cannot be lowered to a misdemeanor by pleading guilty. My read is that’s one charge for every page.
Also, it seems some of the stolen documents are top secret defense documents concerning our nuclear weapons…the most ultra classified information our government has…kept in an unlocked basement in an often empty, unguarded home.
Seems Trump inadvertently just made himself totally ineligible to run for office and likely an inmate for life. D’oh!

So, @bobknight33, Trump’s FBI head and a Trump judge followed a Trump enacted law to investigate Trump for definitely doing exactly what the right was apoplectic at the mere suggestion Clinton might have done but could find no evidence of.

BTW -Trump won’t release the warrant or receipt of what they took because it would include details about the meeting and subpoena he was served with in June after refusing to turn over the documents voluntarily since January when they were first discovered and requested by the DOJ…a subpoena he ignored forcing the raid…and would also list much of the ultra top secret defense documents concerning our nuclear arsenal he was keeping while hosting Russians, Chinese, Saudis, Israelis, maybe even N Koreans at his home where these secrets were being kept unsecured. There are serious questions as to whether he sold any to enemies of the state. There’s no question at all that he would if the price was right.

Edit: ESPIONAGE, OBSTRUCTION, REMOVING GOVERNMENT RECORDS
because they charge espionage, it doesn’t matter if he thinks and claims, like a king, saying the documents were declassified makes them declassified because it doesn’t hinge on the documents being classified, only if it’s harmful to our security if they’re unsecured. Bye Felicia!

If I remember correctly God said something to the effect of "Thou shalt not kill".

What other weapons do you have left in your arsenal that your God gave you?

Not in my experience. I've known many people who tried in Texas and Nevada, all failed. They said it was about 3 pages in triplicate (4 with cover page, totalling 12), fingerprints, photos, a pristine criminal record, chests of cash (the guns cost thousands or tens of thousands), a Class 3 FFL dealer willing to sell to you, 9 months to a year waiting for approval, and no local ordinance against it (local police will be notified).

I said the background check is similarly difficult to pass, not the entire process.

No one asked you that. We balked at your claim-
"The 2A specifically says "arms". There is plenty of debate and case law regarding what arms they meant. Suffice to say there isn't a shadow of a doubt that it means firearms (long and short) of all varieties commonly available."
...and I then gave you the federal definition of "firearms" which you begrudgingly admitted trumps yours, but still cling to the concept that firearms can't be regulated (even though they clearly are). I'm surprised you recall it so differently, especially when you can verify by just scrolling up.

This is a paranoid delusion. Because that's a possibility in a future where the 2a is repealed, they think that's enough reason to ignore any positive uses, like knowing if the person just diagnosed with schizophrenia has an arsenal, or the person who's stalking your 15 year old daughter, or the man who beats his wife. Also, taken to conclusion, that argument is basically "It might make it harder for me to break the law. That's unacceptable." Hardly a reasonable argument imo.

? Your argument was there are better issues to throw money at, bucketloads you said, now you admit it takes no money and declare yourself correct?!

Then don't be dumb and fuck little kids.
Don't be dumb and rape random women.
Don't be dumb by getting caught in the Jr high locker room filming.
Don't be a snarky tool who hides from what he said by doing mental gymnastics to pretend their warnings aren't implications.
See how giving these warnings imply you needed warning? That's how warnings work.

Because I post here doesn't make me the big dog...I'm not even top 20. Everyone is welcome, welcome to post as much or little as they choose, but if I see lies, misstatements, abuse, or insults when none are called for, I'm going to say something, just like I do in person. That's called being an upright citizen. I guess you prefer those who shrink away from that obligation....so hit ignore. That's what I'm doing.

Admit it Bob. To you, being a democrat very simply means being weak, a pussy, and dare I say, a fag.

You on the other hand are the opposite. Strong, brave, moral. A man's man. You have a line drawn in the sand and dare anyone to cross it. You have your troops and your weapons and booby traps all ready to protect yourself.

The only reason you hold onto your arsenal is because there is still this little nagging fear in you. You're not quite sure what it is but it's got something to do with what's wrong with the world.

You might have, at one time or another, caught a fleeting glimpse of what that fear is and had to deny it, look away or suffer the consequences. The consequence being that you would become what you fear. Weak, a pussy and dare I say, a fag?

You only have one fear Bob. Just one. You fear a broken heart. And you will do EVERYTHING to protect it.

Cowboy up.

Perfect! Give him something to believe in. What do you have in your arsenal?

Your video, The new supercomputer behind the US nuclear arsenal, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Not possible here in California. I've tried.
They insist you put it through the full registration process with all associated fees, waiting period during which you turn it in to a gun store, and your id attached in case it's stolen or has been used in crimes. It's surprising that that's not the norm everywhere, but I'm pretty sure Florida doesn't do any of that.
If you could get that info and found out your new gun is stolen during a murder, what then? Ditch it (destroying evidence in a murder and becoming a co conspirator), turn it in (losing your money and becoming a murder suspect), sell it (selling stolen property and hiding evidence in a murder), or what? There's no good option if you bought a gun with a body on it, especially when you can't say where you got it.

If you see nothing wrong with repeatedly crossing state lines to avoid your own state laws, you can't ever complain that it's too easy for criminals to get guns, especially where it's difficult for law abiding citizens, because this is how most of them get illegal unregistered guns.
There's nothing stopping convicted murderers, rapists, and kidnappers from easily building an unregistered arsenal when this is allowed, so absolutely zero possibility of keeping guns away from the clearly criminally insane....that's what you want? It's what you advocate.

Only if it's Arsenal fans.

We have a treaty with the Ukraine.
In exchange for them giving up their nuclear arsenal left over from being part of the USSR, we, and Russia, agreed to guarantee their borders.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances

It's because Russia was secure in thinking we would not honor our promises to defend them that they invaded Crimea, a Ukrainian territory at the time, and later the Ukraine itself.

It should be noted that, in effect, Israel declared war against Russia days ago by attacking Syria, a Russian ally, and likely killing Russian troops in the process. Be prepared for that to get messy fast.

This business will get out of control, and we'll be lucky to live through it.

Really? You have a complete inventory of his arsenal, because I haven't seen one. He had many bump stocks.
Full auto what is 20 Hz? Different guns have different rates of fire, and he had many. Different bump stocks also deliver different rates, as do different fingers on different triggers.

When your target is a 15 degree arc, it's fine. For aiming, I agree.

Not in my experience at gun shows is all I'll say about that.

My point, these are legal. The traceability comes in if he had escaped.

You don't have to be squeaky clean, just not banned if you buy legally. There's no check at all for the bump stock or other rapid fire mechanism (there are many).

Ban of the rapid fire mechanisms would have at least forced him to buy them on the black market for far more money...if he could find them at all. That's a step, not a solution.

He didn't have full auto, he used a bump fire stock.
Full auto fires around 20hz. Well practiced bump firing is around 10hz. Well practiced semi auto pull is around 6hz.

Bump firing also sprays so bad it's not aimable beyond a few feet distance. The gun community is even more surprised than other people, most considered the bump stock as a joke doo dad for making noise and wasting money.





All vendors, even at a gun show, must do background checks.

All private sellers, regardless of where (at home, gun show, on the street, wherever), are not required to do checks - but are in practice held liable for subsequent gun crimes if they can't prove they had no idea the buyer was shady.

There is absolutely nothing special about gun shows. The gun show loophole is an entirely imaginary issue (I explained this earlier).




A traceable gun is just as capable of shooting a person as an untraceable gun.



Yes, anyone can put together that arsenal.
Especially anyone with a squeaky clean record who qualifies to be a gun owner no matter what the restriction - like the Vegas shooter.

Hence why *nothing proposed* would have had *any impact* on the Vegas events, short of confiscation raids nation wide and capital punishment for possession.





The reply was to : "You are more likely to be killed by a criminal if you have a gun than if you don't."

I have two interpretations of that chart

1) (my initial thought)
Assault understood as the legal meaning (brandishing, threatening, not necessarily killing).
Discharge understood as firing.
This is what the original math was based on.
But yes, it seems senseless because how can you die to brandishing?

You are correct regarding the "per year".
The original math does include the mistake of thinking it was cause of death, not per year chance of death.
That alters the result from 350'000 lifetimes for a 50/50 chance, down to 350'000 years for a 50/50 chance. AKA 4600 lifetimes worth of years for a 50/50 chance in the next year.

2) (your [likely correct] thought)
Assault understood as being fired upon.
Discharge understood as accidental (what else could it mean?)
This variant is computed below.
However, this challenges conventional assertion, because the common assertion is that accidents kill more than intentional. Maybe that assertion is crap.

1/24974 as caused by assault
That's a 99.995995835669095859694081845119% chance of dying by a cause OTHER than firearms.
Which requires around 17'000 trials for the chance of the next death to be 50% by firearm.
I.E. 99.995995835669095859694081845119% ^ 17'000 = 50.625%, or about 50/50.
AKA 226 lifetimes worth of years to have a 50/50 chance of death by firearm in the next year.

Referring to the study I linked earlier :
http://service.prerender.io/http://polstats.com/?_escaped_fragment_=/life#!/life
#2 version has a similar death chance to the polstats link, so the #2 variant is likely the appropriate understanding (not my initial understanding).

-schehearzade

Common sense is not anti gun.
There clearly aren't laws enough. Anyone could put together the arsenal of full auto weapons he had, untraceable if from a gun show, legally, and repeat this. Felons, psychotics, terrorists, libtards, anyone. This is definitely a case of intentional neglect, make no mistake. Congress knows about these devices, they've fought to keep them legal. This hole in the law was by design.

You totally misread or intentionally misrepresent your own dumb, misleading blaze.com chart which separates all different firearm deaths into "firearm discharge, firearm assault, intentional self harm (by firearm) , and accident" Even using their highly suspect numbers and singling out only death by firearm assault, it's 24974/1 , not the 350000/1 that you claim ....and that's total odds of dying by firearm assault per year, not odds that, if you die, it will be by firearms. Math...it's a thing.

And Trump wants this guy to have a rocket launcher without need for further training.

Because... you know, the police don't have enough of an arsenal at their disposal already.

What does a society do when the police are the criminals and they refuse to enforce the law on each other?