Not really the first, but the most ridiculous in quite a while.

Some democrats don’t care about sensible gun laws. Some do want little more than actual background checks for all sales, like me. I don’t want violent felons to have easy access to them, nor people with active charges for kidnapping, murder, stalking, terrorism, etc. I don’t see any need for a public registry, although a closed/non public registry would make tracking firearms found after being used in a crime easier, as well as removing guns from people deemed a threat due to real, diagnosed mental defect or disease. This bill was insanely lax in defining what qualifies there, one of many things that made it not just bad, but horrific....and doa.

It’s odd, my brother, who lives in Austin too, says the same thing. He loves to blame ex-Californians for crazy laws, but most of the laws and regulations he complains about don’t exist here. I guess we got rid of our nuts? Thanks for taking them off our hands!

I’ll watch it later when the wife’s asleep.

It's just the first salvo. The underlaying message is the same. Democrats don't care about sensible gun laws, they just want to make it very hard, very expensive, and very punitive for people to own modern firearms of any type.

Thanks to people moving from liberal states, Texas is purple now. Living in Austin, the ultimate far left stronghold, has made me immune to being surprised when a Texas politician submits crazy bills.

In any case, give it a watch. Brandon is funny even when he is upset.

Not correct.
They used metal barricades to hit police in the face many times. One of the two arrested so far was arrested for repeatedly punching a cop in the face, I think hospitalizing him.
They also sprayed police with pepper spray/mace repeatedly.
I just saw video of a lone officer being chased up a stairway by a group of men and he gets his baton out, not his taser or gun.

Edit: one cop has now died from injuries received from rioters. Over 60 were injured.

Not to mention all the felony destruction of federal property the police made no moves to stop, or that carrying a firearm in the building is a felony that many were committing, or the pipe bombs and molotovs they left behind. Edit: now there’s word that top secret documents and a laptop with more state secrets were stolen.

The only rational explanation for totally insufficient preparations and/or the inhuman restraint is the capitol police were complicit.

Edit: It has now been verified that the Capitol police refused an offer of thousands of extra officers and refused national guard help with the coming Jan 6 riots days earlier, knowing full well that thousands of violent nut jobs were coming to get “wild” as Trump put it, many armed to the teeth and ready to force a “trial by combat”. Even after the armed rioting by the same group the night before, the capitol police still refused any help. They were definitely complicit here. The entire force should be investigated with any that helped prosecuted for dereliction of duty AND sedition....not just the chief, and not just fired. Prosecuted harshly and dumped in gen pop.

Today 6 more right wing terrorists were arrested for plotting to kidnap the Governor of Michigan, one of the state's Trump told them to "liberate". They blamed her for closing gyms, and if they can't shower with other men, life isn't worth living for them.

Edit: UPDATE , that's now 11 right wing extremist terrorists caught so far in this latest act of terrorism, and the plans included bombing state government buildings and attacking state police, training included combat training with firearms and explosives. I'm betting there was a set of monkey bars at their clubhouse too.

Just one more group of Trumpsters caught being terrorists intent on attacking America, and taking steps to realise that goal. Trump is Bin Laden 2.0, inciting dozens of terrorist attacks on America. Where's a drone strike when we need it?

You need to do some more research, there are some terrible bills out there in addition to ones with straightforward good things like background checks. The ghost gun fanatics will end up banning aluminum stock and most 3D printers, they are so ignorant.
https://www.westernjournal.com/dem-reps-attempt-get-rid-ghost-guns-ban-common-tool/
Ghost gun "kits" like you say are blocks of aluminum or polymer partially machined that have to be further machined to be turned into a gun. Cad files for turning a rectangular block of aluminum into a gun are easily available. These are not guns, and treating them as such is simply stupid.

Firearm accessories like magazines are critical parts to a functioning weapon. People have already been successful in getting most people to think 30rnd mags for an AR-15 is "high capacity" when it's actually the standard capacity. They want to ban every removable magazine, with zero data that it will reduce gun crime. There have been bills to define any semi-automatic weapon an "assault weapon". Ludicrous.

I would go hunting for the videos, but Biden has already stated that he fully plans to empower Beto to be his gun control 'czar'. Beto has already said that he absolutely is coming for "our" guns. He plans a forced turn in or buyback of all assault style weapons, presumably those also covered by laws that allow them under federal tax stamps (full auto).

In addition, Biden lists the following on his website as his plans:

1. Hold gun manufacturers accountable. In 2005, then-Senator Biden voted against the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, but gun manufacturers successfully lobbied Congress to secure its passage. This law protects these manufacturers from being held civilly liable for their products – a protection granted to no other industry. Biden will prioritize repealing this protection. (Only this is misleading. Do shoe manufacturers get sued if you kick someone in the face? Do knife manufacturers get sued if you stab someone? Do car manufacturers get sued when you get into an accident? No and neither do most other manufacturers. Putting this in place means that any time a gun is used in a crime, they can try to sue the manufacturer of that gun into non-existence. It doesn't even have to be an 'assault' weapon, any gun manufacturer is at risk. The only thing that wouldn't count is blackpowder guns since they aren't classed as firearms.)

2. Ban the manufacture and sale of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Federal law prevents hunters from hunting migratory game birds with more than three shells in their shotgun. That means our federal law does more to protect ducks than children. It’s wrong. Joe Biden will enact legislation to once again ban assault weapons. This time, the bans will be designed based on lessons learned from the 1994 bans. For example, the ban on assault weapons will be designed to prevent manufacturers from circumventing the law by making minor changes that don’t limit the weapon’s lethality. While working to pass this legislation, Biden will also use his executive authority to ban the importation of assault weapons. (So this would be a perma ban on assault weapons and would also anticipate changes to circumvent the law. This would be the assault ban of 1994 on steroids.)

3. Regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act. Currently, the National Firearms Act requires individuals possessing machine-guns, silencers, and short-barreled rifles to undergo a background check and register those weapons with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). Due to these requirements, such weapons are rarely used in crimes. As president, Biden will pursue legislation to regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act. (So even if he doesn't get Beto to push through a buy back, he can force owners of assault rifles to be subject to the EXTREMELY restrictive NFA. Not only that, but it's expensive and would be a tax on gun owners yearly.)

4. Buy back the assault weapons and high-capacity magazines already in our communities. Biden will also institute a program to buy back weapons of war currently on our streets. This will give individuals who now possess assault weapons or high-capacity magazines two options: sell the weapons to the government, or register them under the National Firearms Act. (Covered this already. But if this does go through, you likely won't be seeing me on here anymore as it will be a cold day in hell before I surrender my guns or pay the government to be allowed to own them.)

5. Reduce stockpiling of weapons. In order to reduce the stockpiling of firearms, Biden supports legislation restricting the number of firearms an individual may purchase per month to one. (Once you get this through, it is far easier to get legislation passed to cap how many guns a person can own total. Fuck that.)

6. Require background checks for all gun sales. Today, an estimated 1 in 5 firearms are sold or transferred without a background check. Biden will enact universal background check legislation, requiring a background check for all gun sales with very limited exceptions, such as gifts between close family members. This will close the so-called “gun show and online sales loophole” that the Obama-Biden Administration narrowed, but which cannot be fully closed by executive action alone. (I can deal with this, just means you need to go through an FFL.)

7. Reinstate the Obama-Biden policy to keep guns out of the hands of certain people unable to manage their affairs for mental reasons, which President Trump reversed. (Not 100% on this one, but it isn't a deal breaker)

8. Enact legislation prohibiting an individual “who has been convicted of a misdemeanor hate crime, or received an enhanced sentence for a misdemeanor because of hate or bias in its commission” from purchasing or possessing a firearm. (Felony yes, but that already exists. Misdemeanor, fuck no.)

9. Close the “Charleston loophole.” (yeah, no problem with this one)

10. End the online sale of firearms and ammunitions. Biden will enact legislation to prohibit all online sales of firearms, ammunition, kits, and gun parts. (So if I want to build another AR15 I can't? Fuck that. You still have to get the primary receiver through or shipped to an FFL. Which means a background check every single time.)

11. Create an effective program to ensure individuals who become prohibited from possessing firearms relinquish their weapons. (I would be for this if it wasn't for the fact that it is one step away from the government outlawing guns. Once this mechanism is in place at a federal level, all that means is you are one vote away from having your guns seized.)

12. Incentivize state “extreme risk” laws. Extreme risk laws, also called “red flag” laws, enable family members or law enforcement officials to temporarily remove an individual’s access to firearms when that individual is in crisis and poses a danger to themselves or others. (Sounds good, but nobody is willing to state the guidelines that the family or LEO will have to follow. That means that it is completely up to family members and LEO's to decide what constitutes a 'crisis'. Bet you a lot of LEO's in protest states would red flag most protesters immediately if this law existed now in all states.)

13. Give states incentives to set up gun licensing programs. (This is above and beyond the federal checks. This would mean any gun owner or potential owner would have to maintain and pay for a separate gun license. Also, it allows states and locales to decide what constitutes the requirements for the gun license. There are already some states doing this and you have to get permission to even own a gun from the sheriff or other official. Fuck that.)

14. Put America on the path to ensuring that 100% of firearms sold in America are smart guns. (Are you fucking kidding me? What if the battery runs out, what if it gets hacked, or what if the government decides to flip a switch and shut them all down? I'll never agree to this.)

15. Require gun owners to safely store their weapons. Biden will pass legislation requiring firearm owners to store weapons safely in their homes. (IE, locked in a safe or partially disassembled, possibly a combination of both. Why bother having a gun for home defense if it can't be used without spending 5-10 minutes to make it available/functional?)

16. Stop “ghost guns.” (This is just stupid. 3d printed guns might be able to fire a few shots before reaching a critical failure. You can't 3d print a lower or upper receiver that matches a stock one. Yes, they made lowers for the original m-16s, but they swapped from those because they were shit. They broke constantly. And those weren't printed, they were molded from a tougher plastic. A 3d printed one is not nearly as strong. Either way, I don't care too much about this because it is a buzzword for non-gun people. Just like bumpstocks. You can still bump-fire a regular ar-15, the bumpstocks were just training wheels for idiots.)

Now he has a shitload more laws he wants to pass, but most of them I don't care too much about. I won't bother covering all of them. In any case, he is going to go after guns on a scale unseen to this point. If the dems get control of both houses, he will get these laws passed. Then the only hope is that SCOTUS votes them down as unconstitutional.

I won't vote for Trump, but I will be doing my part to maintain a split congress. Which means straight republican ticket other than Trump.

Silly, just a ban on selling one style of rifle, not a type. Are they still actually working on that, or are you talking about past attempts? I thought that has gone nowhere since Jan 2019 when it was introduced and shelved. New bill number please.

Supressors/silencers, not a firearm but an accessory, like bump stocks. That's not anti gun.

D I Y, good luck. Who's actually trying any such thing? They would have to ban each design, because they can't ban the method. I've not heard of any actual legislation, just moaning. Bill number please.
Ghost guns, pre manufactured kits but requiring assembly, should be treated like any gun imo. That means serial numbers and background checks, that's not anti gun legislation.

Private sales loophole, exactly what I mentioned, and in no way anti gun. They aren't trying to ban private sales, just require background checks.
I think you're making that up, where did you get the idea most illegal guns are bought by girlfriends?
I bought a new gun from a dealer at a show in Florida with no check myself once, so nope. You're just wrong.

I feel like you are almost certainly just parroting right wing claims without actually seeing if they're true. Give me current bill numbers in the house or Senate please.

Banning modifications is not anti gun, it's anti modification.

You can buy guns online, just not safely or legally. You can buy prostitutes and fentenal online. You can buy kits that require you to make one drill hole to make a functioning unlicensed unregistered unidentifiable gun online legally.

Crazy people can certainly buy guns, in private sales with no background checks. That's why the loopholes should be eradicated, or do you support giving terrorists a method to secretly buy guns legally? That's the outcome of fighting closing loopholes.

Assault weapon bans. Effectively making illegal the most common rifle in the country (ar15) - even though it's statistically tiny in terms of gun killings.
(~450 people killed per year with all forms of rifle. Only some of that is ar15. That's the ~same amount of people as what die yearly from falling out of bed.)

Suppressor bans. Illegalizing an item that has been statistically as good as nonexistent in firearm crimes.

Banning DIY non-commercial firearms. Illegalizing firearms that have been statistically as good as nonexistent in firearm crimes.

Banning Private Sales (aka gunshow loophole). Effectively banning transfers between family and friends. Even though nearly all illegal arms are acquired by straw purchase at conventional stores by girlfriends.
And commercial sellers at gun shows have to do background checks anyways - this is much ado about old geezers trading collectible wild west / ww2 / antique shit.

Nearly all people are killed by pistols. Nobody is calling for a pistol ban. It makes things like an AWB look like a disingenuous effort - because you can pass all sorts of non-pistol-banning gun control laws and there will be no effect on gun death stats. Meaning you can just make more and more stuff illegal forever so long as you save what really matters (pistols) for last.

Between city, county, state, federal, existing gun laws are fat like an encyclopedia. Most people, unless they are 'gun folk', don't even realize the ways you can go to jail. Put a vertical grip in a pistol and posted it to instagram? Enjoy your time with the ATF. 10 years and $100k, assuming you're lax enough to not hire a lawyer to knock it down a bit. Literally volumes of ways to go to jail for shit you wouldn't even imagine would matter.

Many things people complain about aren't even a thing. Like complaining about buying guns online (you can't, not without an FFL involved), or crazy people buying guns (they can't, unless they've yet to be caught doing crazy shit).

Too many laws as it is. Erase a bunch first.

-scheherazade

Likely not.

Wait.
You're saying there's video of him being chased from his gun toting friends by one guy with a pistol? For blocks? And none of his friends helped him at all? That might change my mind completely....but only if they essentially dragged him away, not if he followed along arguing, and if they physically forced him away from his friends, why didn't his friends try to help?

Again, I'll need some evidence of the pepper spray to believe it, because the videos of him running he wasn't acting like a person who had been pepper sprayed, not that it would excuse killing someone else, and I'm assuming the spray came after the first homicide.

(Edit: if the pepper spraying happened, and happened before he shot, then he has zero excuses for any of them. He couldn't see, so had no idea what was happening around him, who threw what, what was thrown, or who he was shooting. You can't see after being pepper sprayed. That makes every shot fired attempted murder of any random person in the area, not self defense. To be self defense, you must know who and what you're defending yourself from. If he was sprayed, he couldn't possibly know, nor could he properly aim.)

A plastic bag mistaken for a Molotov? Not by any American kid, all boys over 7 know what a Molotov looks like from movies and video games, they don't resemble empty plastic bags.

I think you're being biased. I may be too. I'm not excusing any threatening acts by protesters before he killed one, but do excuse any acts committed trying to apprehend him afterwards. (Edit: anything they did at that point would be real self defense, not just in their own minds.)

I can't find any way to excuse him, from going armed looking for trouble to leaving his group where he felt safe to mistaking a harmless object for a deadly one and killing someone out of fear to running away armed to shooting at his pursuers to not reporting it, every act indicates intentional murder and an attempt to escape. He might have had a reason, he may have even feared for his life, but he had no real reason, put himself in the situation that scared him, and opened fire for no GOOD reason.
Children often do things for bad reasons, that's one reason they shouldn't be let loose with firearms unaccompanied, especially not in high stress events like this.
It's not that he had no reason, it's that his reasoning was flawed on all points. He had no legitimate reason, and no legitimate excuse.

Btw, in case you don't recall, I'm not anti gun at all. I am anti armed groups traveling the country intent on killing unarmed people they disagree with, even if those people are being mean and scary, even if they're stealing. If they're committing arson, well maybe, that can be mass murder.

If you find a still live version of him being chased by armed protesters away from his friends, or threatened, I would be interested in seeing them. I find it impossible to envision. It's not that I'm not open to new info, it's only that I've seen none that excuse his killings.

(Edit: I'm looking at it like this....If a 17 year old kid wants to do extreme mountain climbing with little to no training, gets on the mountain and gets panicked and, thinking it will make him safer to have two ropes disconnects his partner's harness and they die, he had a reason, but not a legitimate reason, and not an excuse. This kid wanted to do extreme policing totally untrained, he panicked, people died because of his panicked actions. It's really that simple to me.)

Sorry,but someone who's identity is supporting gun carriers isn't likely to give an unbiased report, but I'll read the Newsweek.

It makes zero sense that he's somehow blocks away from the parking lot he went to protect when he shot the man that threw a plastic bag in the head. How on earth did he get chased from his well armed group? I read reports that he was loudly arguing with the man he shot first, among others.

Shot fired in the air....so he didn't know who shot, from where, at what. Nothing. Might have been his fellow militia trying to chase away the crowd, right?

I've seen the video of him running, pointing his gun randomly, falling, shooting, and people risking their lives trying to take an active shooters weapon. Stomping someone running and gunning from a murder is acceptable imo. Shooting him with a handgun is ok if he doesn't submit to citizens arrest.

I have to agree with Bosuie. You do not have a right to murder people who are trying to stop you from fleeing a murder you just committed.

If he hadn't continued to try to flee, armed and aiming randomly, they wouldn't have had the need to use physical force to detain him. He did, they were all being good citizens trying to stop a murderer, imo. Restrained and totally within their legal rights.

So, the illegal firearm was on militia boys side, and militia boy used his.

Militia kid went looking for trouble, found it, panicked, murdered a few people and tried to kill a third, and fled the state without telling the police. He was not trying to do the right thing running towards police, he was trying to escape the crowd he had just shot at.

I don't think I said the mass looting and rioting were all fake antifa, I'm saying many of those starting it are. The ones who wander into peaceful protests and start smashing glass or starting fires, swinging at protesters that try to stop them, and running. The ones doing drive bys on police and crowds of protesters. The multiple cases of groups caught with bombs planning to blame blm for bombing police or schools or government buildings. Those are fake antifa boogaloo boys, right wing terrorists. They are nation wide, and they are trying hard to instigate rioting and looting, usually successfully.

In Kenosha, the violent killers were right wing. The looters, not so much. In that instance, no boogaloos needed to spark rioting, just more unarmed black men shot 7 times in the back feet from their children served nicely, the unarmed black man murdered by police near there 10 years ago didn't even get investigated, just ignored.

Again, chasing an active shooter and trying to disarm him is bravery and honorable. Shooting a baggie tosser isn't

The glok, not sure why you think it being loaded gets you excited, they don't work unloaded, wasn't used, and obviously should have been in self defense.

He was defending himself, against being caught. He wasn't defending himself when he left his defensive position to go blocks away and shoot an unarmed man with a plastic bag.
He put himself in a dangerous position, made it far more dangerous by murdering someone because he got scared over a baggie, then murdered his way out. I say he was 100% wrong from the moment he left home looking for trouble he could solve with his rifle, and made every bad decision he could from there, resulting in two dead men and a third injured.

Yes, I never expect you to make things up, but you took a position that seems deluded, based on facts I have not heard mentioned one bit, and that were mostly irrelevant, just throwing dirt at the victims. I see that some of what you said is corroborated by reports, but not that any of it excuses one bit of his behavior or makes the protesters in the wrong one whit. Thanks for the links.

If he was looking for help from police, why didn't he ask for any when he reached them? Why didn't he report the shooting? No, he went home and hid, hoping no one could identify him.

Again, doing whatever is necessary to apprehend a violent felon by citizens arrest is legal and proper, which is why I say emptying the glok would have been the right move until he was disarmed and subdued. Hitting him with a skateboard, 100% proper and legal.

I didn't buy anything. There are multiple videos that aren't being shown on most news sites.

Youtube is banning them as fast as they get posted.

Here is one: https://youtu.be/NSU9ZvnudFE

This is from Newsweek(https://www.newsweek.com/kyle-rittenhouse-sef-defense-murder-protests-1528301) who had access to the videos:

How the Kenosha shootings unfolded
In the wake of the shootings, several videos appeared on social media showing the moments before, during and after the first shooting took place.

In one video, Rittenhouse is seen being chased into a parking lot by several people while still armed with his gun.

One man then fires a gun into the air from several feet away from the 17-year-old before several others shots are fired.

In another clip from a different angle, one man seen chasing Rittenhouse appears to lunge at the 17-year-old before the suspect fires at least four times.

A body, later identified as Rosenbaum, is then seen on the ground and is assisted by another male. Rittenhouse appears to make a call on a cellphone before fleeing.

It is unclear why the 17-year-old was being chased in the first place. The parking lot is reportedly around several blocks away from the area he previously claimed to be protecting with the other armed men.

Later on, Rittenhouse is filmed being chased by more people down a residential street. He is seen stumbling and falling to the ground.

One person appears to stomp on him on the ground, before the 17-year-old fires twice, hitting Huber in the stomach and another man, Gaige Grosskreutz, who was carrying a handgun, in the arm.

According to the criminal complaint, an eyewitness video shows Rosenbaum chasing Rittenhouse and throwing what was ultimately determined to be a plastic bag at the suspect, not an incendiary device.

"Rosenbaum appears to be unarmed for the duration of this video," the document adds.

In response to Parkinson's tweet, New York Times columnist Jamelle Bosuie noted: "I have been seeing this everywhere on here. It is an explicit argument that if someone is trying to stop you after you killed someone, you can continue shooting and killing in 'self-defense.'

Parkinson added: "Why leave out during the 2nd shooting, after Rittenhouse trips, he was jumped by several men, including another armed protester, attacked by a skateboard—prior to firing more shots?"

The man holding the skateboard was Rittenberg's alleged second victim Huber, who died after being shot in the chest.

***You'll notice that even some of their videos were removed/banned***

I'm not saying the kid was in the right 100%. He definitely committed the crime of being under aged with a firearm. He shouldn't have listened to right wing calls to go defend property in a different state.

What we have is a kid who heard people shooting, got scared, a 'protester' threw what he thought was an incendiary device at him and he shot that person. He then tried to flee to the police line and you can read what else happened.

Here is the tweet that shows the survivor wishes he had just mag dumped his glock into the teen: https://twitter.com/mrandyngo/status/1299086141329563648

Gaige Grosskreutz, 26. Hes a member of the People’s Revolution Movement. He has numerous encounters with the police but I couldn't find a felony. This was his biggest charge: Go Armed with Firearm While Intoxicated, a class A misdemeanor, Wisconsin Statutes 941.20(1)(b).

Anthony Huber. https://wcca.wicourts.gov/caseSearchResults.html (for some reason it wont link, you can type his name in to see all, but here is one specific one https://wcca.wicourts.gov/caseDetail.html?caseNo=2014CF000057&countyNo=39&index=0)
Online arrest records show Huber was arrested several times on battery, drugs and other charges. He also had a case from 2012 where he was convicted of domestic abuse strangulation and suffocation and false imprisonment with a dangerous weapon, both felonies. Other charges – for second-degree recklessly endangering safety, battery, and disorderly conduct – were dismissed but read in.

Joseph Rosenbaum. https://twitter.com/musicandwhiskey/status/1298861484752035840/photo/1
https://www.rt.com/usa/499205-kenosha-shooting-victim-id/
https://www.bailbondshq.com/arizona/azdoc-inmate-JOSEPH/172556
https://inmatedatasearch.azcorrections.gov/PrintInmate.aspx?ID=172556
Rosenbaum had an open criminal case on battery, disorderly conduct and domestic abuse charges, according to the Wisconsin Circuit Court website. (https://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/ny-kenosha-victims-identified-as-anthony-huber-joseph-rosenbaum-20200827-zvrsv7fpqfftlmjyrtjrmg5wwa-story.html
)

As far as right wing people showing up and pretending to be Antifa, I suppose anything is possible. But most of all these looting and rioting things have been going on since all this shit broke loose months ago. I doubt very much that all of these 'peaceful protestors' are RW loonies. Clearly the 3 that were shot in Kenosha weren't and they were all part of the groups rioting...I mean 'protesting.

There are more videos if you want to find them. Shoot me, N Rosenbaum is seen attacking and throwing something at Kyle. You can see a gun fired as well by someone else. Videos show them chasing a fleeing person, who at that point is being attacked by them. Skater boi was beating him prone with a skateboard. 'Medic' Grosskreutz was carrying a fully fucking loaded Glock 17 and grabbing Kyle's rifle.

You know I don't make up shit like Bob does. But I do look in multiple places to find out what I can before I say something. Like I said, the kid fucked up, but I 100% believe in his mind he was defending himself and trying to reach the police for help.

So am I. Well armed. I'm not a bad shot either.

My forefathers actually founded this nation, fought and died to create it. I owe them no less than to defend it against the dark creeping madness with my life if necessary, not that it's what I want. What else am I doing that's more important? Where else do I have to go? (Edit: thanks to our lack of functional Covid response and continued epidemic, no where right now, or for the foreseeable future.)

Yeah, I don't need to be devoured by the mouth of madness. Reading the words infects you, and once you're under Q's influence you'll believe anything. That's how cults work. I only needed to read chapter one of Dianetics to know the destructive self inflicted insanity it contained. Same goes for Q.

If I had the means to move to New Zealand, and if they would have me, I might have a difficult choice to make. Fortunately for them, I don't. Maybe time to add to my firearm collection instead.

I'll probably vote for Biden, but the rest of my votes have to go Republican for one reason only.

Guns. I am OK with some gun control. But it is clear that no matter what, Democrats will make every attempt they can if they sweep the election to re-do the assault weapon ban, apply punitive taxes to ammo (and possibly guns), and remove the right to private sale.

Bedo was the only one to fully admit it, but Biden has been harsh on guns as well going by comments alone. I don't want Trump back, but I want the Senate to stay Republican to counter gun measures.

I know it's unpopular, but I am one of those people that will never give up my rifles, my pistols, my shotguns, my large capacity clips, and my right to buy as much ammo as I wish without paying another government tax. I also feel I should be able to give or sell my firearms to someone I trust, be it a family member or close friend.

Nice editing there. Tons of audio missing and multiple skips....what did they edit out? Discussions of how to frame them? Bribes?

We've seen multiple instances of stops exactly like this that ended in police gunfire....just as cordial and friendly until the citizen tells police they have a gun, or a camera, then the police lose their shit and start shooting.
The Press at protest marches were all 100% friendly, cordial, had open dialog asking politely where police wanted them to move to, totally legal, and complied with every request FROM officers, and still got shot point blank in the eyes with rubber bullets, tear gas canisters fired so close they can kill, pepper sprayed, were beaten, and arrested. Multiple times, on camera, over and over and over and over and over and over.
You claim 'look, it worked once, that means it will work every time, just put your life and freedom on the line and check, and don't consider the hundreds of times it ended in prison or death.'

He didn't actually comply legally, legally if you have a concealed firearm in your glove compartment, you MUST inform officers IMMEDIATELY....They didn't, and tried to hide it by bringing up his registration on his phone instead of retrieving the paper copy from his glove compartment. Many MANY cases just like this end in tragedy. This one just ended in a full vehicle search without a warrant.

Comply with officers requests, eh? So let them violate your rights and you'll be fine....except when you aren't. So American, comrade. Perhaps, since you likely live where you have no rights, you don't understand them. If you don't exercise your rights, you don't have any.

This isn't the narrative because it's not the norm, and even if it was, that's besides the point. The daily violations and murders of unarmed, mostly black men, is the point you wish to ignore. Pablo Escobar was a nice guy if you did what he said, were polite and compliant, and never hinted at crossing him. He's not a good guy or good apple, he was a violent criminal thug...just like police.

When Trump called for the death penalty for the innocent Central Park 5, were all those times they didn't rape women (including the time they were falsely accused) the point, or was the singular, false accusation about the one time they did rape someone his only point? Hint-it's the second one.
*facepalm

Edit : Now, are you ever going to produce these "known instances" of massive democratic voter fraud, or can you admit that was just one more thing you made up? It's not going away, I plan on asking until you have the testicular fortitude to answer.

Dude. Tell me you aren't really surprised. ;-)
You know full well this is straight from the Trump chump playbook. Whenever challenged on the truthfulness of their claims they offer random "proof"...which is NEVER a truthful defense and usually actually proves exactly what they're arguing against, like this time....then they invariably actively ignore any further discussion on the subject to avoid having their nose rubbed in their mess.

That's the problem with blind faith in a convicted con man paired with well below average intelligence and a complete inability to reason or comprehend, it leads to (sometimes deadly) dishonest obstinate obstructionism based on obvious lies at it's best, and it's rarely that good.

Recent polls show that 41% of "Republicans" (Trump voters) actually believe Bill Gates is funding Covid vaccine research in order to secretly inject billions of people with microchips (they have no idea towards what ends, but they know it's true), and another 34% aren't sure but think it's likely true, only 25% are rational enough to say they don't believe it (but in private I bet they're less certain). Do you honestly believe one of these people has the capacity for rationality, truth, or reasoned discussion?

It does explain why republicans don't want to restrict firearms from the mentally defective, 3/4 of them would lose their rights on day 1.