1 Attachment(s)
Re: Oregon Gov. Kate Brown Signs Confiscation Legislation
Any typical modern "corporate" government wants to make money off the people, plain and simple. Corporations have the ultimate agenda of creating win/win situations for themselves. In this case the win/win status comes from letting people have guns and collecting from their investment in the form of taxes and fees, and also contraposiitively by appeasing the antigun taxpayer with laws that make them feel safe. This is what we call a
Attachment 100308
The states with the highest GDP are either blue or red, not in between (purple). And the reason is because this simplifies the process governments follow to capitalize on the population's activity. And THIS IS WHY THE MEDIA DIVIDES PEOPLE AND PRESSURES THEM TO CHOOSE SIDES. It simplifies the state's business. In blue states or red states only one type of culture dominates and drives the economy. Purple states are in a kind of economic purgatory which is harder to master for governments;This special balance of collecting revenue from two very different if not oppositional social groups living under the same roof, so to speak. Threatening people with gun control makes liberals happy to pay taxes and support government. ..and it makes the right buy more guns and ammo out of fear of being oppressed. More taxes and fees again. This is how win/win is achieved in purple states for the ones who run things. At some point the leaders have to take inventory of who comprises their cash cow herd and implement a way of cashing in on them without ultimately alienating a whole subgroup. In a state which leans red or blue, the goal is to shift the whole population toward that pole to avoid having to cater to a complex mixed population.
Re: Oregon Gov. Kate Brown Signs Confiscation Legislation
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ecclectic Collector
No it isn't. Not to sound testy about the snarky responses but its a serious question and needs to be addressed as such.
The law of the land already has provisions for restricting the right to arms ownership. That is a reality I'm coming from regardless of what I think of politicians and the gun banning elitists.
The question is what is involved in the due process if a person is accused of something that would warrant the removal of arms in his/her possession? Also is there differentiation between a temporary loss of the right vs a permanent one, and what is the threshold for either?
Really? Don't mean to be snarky, but this "Republican" asshole got a lot of money from Democrat organizations known to get money from Bloomberg et al in 2012. I don't have numbers from 2016, and nobody knows what has been promised yet for 2020.
These people are businessmen who pick the softest (cheapest) targets for their agenda.
They will pursue the law as a bargaining chip with moderately moneyed and savvy people and as a sledgehammer with the poorer who don't know better. I'm betting they will never let a well funded challenge get to an appellate court.
Re: Oregon Gov. Kate Brown Signs Confiscation Legislation
The "law of the land" is whatever the government says it is.