Top Menu

Home Forums Politics and Second Ammendment Sept 26th 2016 Political Debate

This topic contains 2 replies, has 3 voices, and was last updated by  Mitch 3 weeks, 4 days ago.

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • Author
  • #83565

    Jacob Paulsen

    I would love to hear everyone’s comments and thoughts about the Debate tonight… comment below.


    Riley Bowman

    My take away from the debate tonight was that Hillary is a stiff, cold, calculating shell of a person that thinks she deserves to the president either because she’s a woman, or because she was Secretary of State, or because she was once upon a time First Lady, or more probably because of ALL of those reasons. Worst of all, she is a liar, a cheat, and more probably a criminal that thinks she is above the law.

    Donald Trump is rough around the edges, he is unrefined, he is bold, and he is quite often wrong in his positions. HOWEVER, he is not entirely dumb, and he has indicated that he will surround himself with good, qualified advisors and assistants, most importantly people like Sen. Mike Lee (a staunch 2nd Amendment supporter) or similar as a potential pick for Supreme Court.

    If we are truly supporters of the 2nd Amendment, although the two major choices of candidates may not be ideal–they may not even be close to ideal–there really is only ONE CHOICE where it comes to having a chance to defend our rights. And that choice is through Donald Trump, although it is somewhat painful to admit it. The alternative is a cold, heartless person (at least partially responsible for the deaths of American citizens and heroes, and probably more) that we already know where she stands on guns, and it is not the side of supporting gun rights.



    Street thugs don’t use military style weapons. They are un-concealable and too expensive for petty criminals. Whenever military style firearms are mentioned by socialist democrats, it’s because they want to place that false notion in the minds of low-information democrat voters. A solution for a non-existent problem. In reality, taking the very weapons we would need in order to resist tyrannical government is the final socialist agenda item. The democrats cannot say this in public, like so many of their other agenda items.

    Something else they cannot say, much like how the Benghazi incident was really a terror attack and had nothing to do with a youtube video, is that any attempt to disarm law abiding Americans would start an armed civil uprising. They know this but are in denial about how viscous and widespread it would be. They are also in denial that many, and I mean MANY American socialists would be hunted down and eliminated.

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.