Welcome to American Politics

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more!

This message will be removed once you have signed in.

FallsLake

Members
  • Content count

    46
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

6 Neutral

About FallsLake

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  1. Starship Troopers?
  2. I don't think we can get rid of all the guns. This country has such a history of gun ownership it would take a 100 years of police state enforcement to collect and destroy all of them. Plus our criminals are really smart. If guns are not available, they would probably make them (think really good zip guns). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Improvised_firearm
  3. What do we do then? We could take the assault rifles away. But there's still hunting rifles and hand guns. Most of the killings across our nation are smaller events; whereas a hand gun is all the criminal really needs. Even though the mass killings are horrible (and more in the spotlight), they still pale by the numbers of the inner city deaths. Ultimately do we ban all guns? Can we even do that...logistically. Would the bad guys end up being the ones who have the guns?
  4. I'm not sure there's much we can do. Even if we passed certain gun restrictions, crazies, racist, terrorist will still find a way to kill (in mass). If we attempt to look for mentally unstable people, it will eventually be questioned as profiling (...should we take a gun away from a depressed person??). Then even if you get gun control measures passed and metal health "checks", you'll have the folks that will still get guns; explosives, buses/trucks, knives, and be able to pass any mental exam. (so)You guys can argue all you want but I think this is a new norm. Maybe we can decrease it some but we'll see more events whatever we do...
  5. Yeah, I'm not sure how GB will respond. And not sure the US will assist. At this point you would have to think some kind of counter actions will occur. Technically this could be an act of war by Iran (at least in the old days).
  6. I think the Democrats will continue to move left. Basically becoming the official socialist party for the country. The Republicans are doing the opposite by going farther right. Becoming more heavily capitalist and possible more focused Christian (in which I think Trump is a temporary oddity in the party). With each side continuing to slide farther from the center, a third party could allow a bridge for laws/bills to be passed. Otherwise we're looking at a future of gridlock..
  7. I think the Republican and Democratic parties of 12 years back were closer in ideology then each of the parties are today within their own ranks. I would love to see a third party immerge that focuses more to the center. You might laugh, but get folks like Biden/Obama and Bush/McCain to create the new party and then let the two others push more left and right. I would be the first to join the new party.
  8. Biden needs to prevail or Trump will be president for a second term. I think Harris is actually the second best choice (but still not enough to win); whereas she may be pushing very left ideas right now but would lean more center if she ran against Trump. The other two listed are truly too far left on their agendas and will scare the hell out of most in the middle (including me).
  9. Don't blame him, blame Nike (and all of Nike's supporters). We're now in a world where American flags on shoes are disrespectful. Truly sad...
  10. So you're saying he's a "Sleepy Joe"?
  11. We would have the right. If the gangs are the (claimed) reason that thousands of people are crossing our borders. then they are our problem. Of course we want to work with the governments; but if they can't do it, we may have to.
  12. At the very least, they support policies that do not deport people back to their country of origins.
  13. To be fair. there were also very few children crossing the border back then.
  14. A lot of the migrants are actually conservative. They (or their voting aged kids) vote for Democrats because they're more supportive of open borders (..did I spell that correct?), or policies that do not deport them. You could almost argue the point that the Democrats do not want a comprehensive immigration agreement. Keep the Latinos needing them.... Funny to say, but a lot of next generation Latinos could be future Republicans.
  15. That is the key to immigration for the entire world. As populations continue to grow in parts of Asia, Africa, and to a lesser extent the Americas; migration (because of many factors) will only increase.