Tuesday, July 5, 2016

Gun control bill a defining issue in 21st Congressional District race | Local | poststar.com

   Gee, the Green has the most anti-gun control stance ?  I can never figure out that Funiciello guy.
Gun control bill a defining issue in 21st Congressional District race | Local | poststar.com

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

Maybe he thinks the guns are empty. Just like the airplanes on 9/11.

Go home pinko.

Anonymous said...

Go Green.

Danny M. Francis (Eyepublius) said...

Ms. Stefanik: Our own Annie Oakley: The more guns the merrier.

Mr. Derrick: party line...

Thus, no surprise there. No common sense, no common ground - that ain't happening in DC folks: The NRA is just too damn strong.

So, renew your NRA pledge and order more ammo and prop up Wayne and a bigger salary...

Anonymous said...

10:01

I have to disagree with all your points.

Stefanik is no Annie Oakley and is more likely the one following the party line.

The democrat party line is to keep the issue alive thru the November election. Mr. Derrick stated that he would vote for the republican bill. This would take the issue off the table and defeat the democrat purpose.

Both bills are only feel good legislation attacking a straw man. When was the last time someone on the no fly list used a gun to comment a terrorist act in this country? The NRA stance on this is a sign of weakness not strength.

Only the Baker is taking a rational position on this issue.

Anonymous said...

Here's a thought: Put it on the Ballot on the November election...

Danny M. Francis (Eyepublius) said...

Actually this is a defining issue for the country - we/us as a whole. In short: I totally support the 2nd Amendment and always have and will - but I do not support the NRA and their lackies - the GOP - not solving this problem "with simple fixes and that does NOT mean "they're coming to take away our guns" - that is fear run amok thanks to mostly GOP raw unreasonable politics and not much else...!!".

Anonymous said...

These fixes, that the gun control advocates espouse, usually would have done nothing to have prevented the incident that prompted the outcry, but they do infringe on the rights of millions of people who have done nothing wrong.