I know people that hunt deer and other animals and use the meat to help feed their family. That you equate hunting and kicking dogs makes it difficult to take your other opinions seriously.
And there are plenty of people that just like to kill stuff. Point remains that it's a hobby. People love their hobbies, and I get why they would defend them, but being a single-issue voter for your hobby remains ridiculous.
Hi. Poor country person here. We definitely relied on wild game to supplement our table. And yes. You’re right. To a point. But people who hunt larger game to provide for their families are doing it mostly by choice. Deer season is short, states often have limits, and unless a hunter is spending time cultivating knowledge of deer behavior and patterns the likelihood of hitting their limit in rifle or bow season annually (enough to provide for their family) is pretty dicey. That means going to the deer lease, spending time there, and having the time to spend. Aside from that - deer stands, licensing, safety equipment, tags, processing, ammunition, etc. - isn’t cheap. This isn’t a poverty population undertaking. People who hunt deer and other large game like hunting and use the meat. People who hunt to feed their families are eating squirrel, possum, quail/dove/duck sometimes, rabbit, and fish. Because those animals are plentiful and more easily accessed. So while I don’t agree with Aetius’s point equating hunting to kicking dogs, his point re: it’s a hobby isn’t off base at all, in my experience on both sides of that fence. (Hobby vs necessity, not dog kicking.)
I believe that all hunting should be done with nothing more than a bowie knife to keep it sporting. It's just what my religion teaches.
Given that cops have no duty to actually protect citizens and that it takes them nearly 20 minutes to get to my house in an emergency, Ill take my chances with a boom stick. Plus yeah they're pretty fun. Gun control advocates are pussies.
I'm pretty ambivalent on them in general, I just find most of the arguments in favor of them disingenuous. Safety outcomes for yourself and your family are much more greatly improved by taking an advanced driving class than by any sort of gun ownership, but almost no one does it. People own guns because guns are fun as shit to shoot at things, and that's about it. I just wish people wouldn't be willing to vote for objectively horrible candidates just because of the gun issue, and I wish the Democrats would stop spending so much electoral capital on the gun issue when they can do far more good actually getting elected on other issues.
Yeah. I’m all for gun control. I’m also owner of several rifles and absolutely advocate an AR for some of the varmints mom and dad deal with messing with their stock. It’s entirely possible to recognize and advocate for both, without mental gymnastics.
Yeah that advanced driving class will certainly be helpful during a home invasion, good tip. I know it certainly helped when we had one when I was a kid.
And that gun will certainly stop that drunk driver from plowing straight into your driver's side door.
Is this how you have conversations in real life? Should we steer it back to just bitching about Trump so you'll be more comfortable?
My point is that the huge number of people who buy guns for "personal protection" do not take steps that are objectively better at increasing their personal safety, such as learning how to drive defensively or control their car in the event of an unexpected loss of control. Most of them do 20 over the speed limit while texting, but would feel "unsafe" without a gun in the house.
This. I own 4 pistols, 3 rifles, and 2 shotguns. All different calibers/gauges, different uses. In my opinion an AR-style rifle is the ideal hunting platform, which is why one of my more recent purchases -- and my favorite firearm I own, after the pistol I carry on me -- is an AR10 in .308/7.62X55. I also think it's absurd that I was able to purchase one of my pistols at a gun show in cash in less than 15 minutes without a background check. Requiring a background check would deter some people, but criminals are criminals and they're gonna get their guns regardless. Still, it might help prevent that depressed kid from killing himself. I wish that the purchase of a firearm required proof of training hours, similar to how you are required to maintain at least 36 hours of annual training in order to be a teacher. Can people get around this illegally? Sure. But it still helps, and it certainly doesn't hurt. If you are a proponent of something (in this case: gun ownership), you should also be a proponent of making that thing better (in this case: safer). At least, in my opinion.
That sound you just heard was the contents of trump's stomach emptying into his pants. Cohen has just agreed to testify before Congress. It will be public (and televised).
Cool! When does it all go down? Related question: now that Cohen has turned on him, who is Trump's lawyer now? Or is he representing himself, because he's such a smart guy?
Cohen is gonna tattle on trump Feb 7th. At least from what's been made public thus far, I think those hush money payments (campaign finance violations) are gonna be the biggest issue. Cohen has the opportunity to potentially reduce his jail sentence here, so I fully expect him to lay everything bare so long as it isn't confidential and/or endangers America or our interests. Trump had an issue with all of his attorneys resigning because he wouldn't listen to them, so he hired Rudy Giuliani as his propaganda minister/attorney.
What exactly qualifies as confidential then? I thought that everything Cohen and Trump did was protected by attorney /client privilege UNTIL Cohen agreed to testify.
Attorney client privilege isn't applicable if the attorney knowingly and willingly aided and abetted crime(s) at the direction of his client.
I would imagine that there are some things Cohen knows about which might be labeled as confidential, or he would otherwise be asked not to discuss, as those details could hint at or be correlated to other parts of the ongoing investigation(s) which have not yet been made public. On a related note, there's also discussion of trump wanting to use Executive Privilege in order to keep the Mueller Report from the public.... Not sure why he'd do that. If he does assert EP, then it goes to court where he's gonna lose. But before it even goes to court, he's gonna be assumed guilty in the court of public opinion first simply by the fact he tried to silence it via EP.