• Friendly reminder: The politics section is a place where a lot of differing opinions are raised. You may not like what you read here but it is someone's opinion. As long as the debate is respectful you are free to debate freely. Also, the views and opinions expressed by forum members may not necessarily reflect those of GBAtemp. Messages that the staff consider offensive or inflammatory may be removed in line with existing forum terms and conditions.

Texas trying to break away from the USA

Smoker1

Well-Known Member
OP
Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2015
Messages
5,027
Trophies
1
Location
California
XP
6,023
Country
United States
Sure, prove your first claim and get that list together.
Removal of your 2nd Amendment Rights.
Removal of your Right to choose what you want to Eat, Drink, or even Smoke (Ban Flavored Cigarettes, but keep Alcohol)
The Preamble of the Declaration of Independence gives The People reasons for why The People should take back their Government. The 2nd Amendment gives the People the Means to do so.
----Theory: You are a Gun Control Advocate. You want People to willingly surrender their Rights. You want to scrap the 2nd Amendment, so The People wont be able to take back their Government, and also so you can then control them. How do you do that????? Firearms have been around for so long, and it is only in recent Decades have there been horrific Incidents. Plus you got Biden telling People they do not need Firearms, or wanting to Limit what you can have. Basically so you can not demand your Government back. Also saying The People can not go against the Government, so basically why do you need the 2nd Amendment??? Why doesn't he just come out and say, "We are in charge, you do what WE tell you. It is no longer "We the People", but "We the Elite, Rich and Powerful", and you cannot do anything about it." So it is very likely, that Gun Haters, Grabbers, Gun Control Advocates, are creating Intendents, each one more horrific than the last to make People want you to surrender your Rights.
Also, the CDC did their Study, and found 2.3 Million Firearm Related Intendents were in Self-Defense. But some Gun-Control Advocate pressured them to remove the Self-Defense bit in E-Mails, to try and make People think those 2.3 Million Incidents were Crime Related, Illegal Activity, you name it. All to make the People want to willingly surrender their Rights.
 

Smoker1

Well-Known Member
OP
Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2015
Messages
5,027
Trophies
1
Location
California
XP
6,023
Country
United States
I knew it'd be second amendment nonsense. We just want common sense regulations which the ammosexuals melt down over.

Which by the way, that wasn't a source but an unhinged MAGA Meltdown
Sorry to burst your bubble, but I could care less about Trump, his Trumpetts, or Biden
 

KingVamp

Haaah-hahahaha!
Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
13,481
Trophies
2
Location
Netherworld
XP
7,910
Country
United States
They don't even have the infrastructure to handle snowstorms and hurricanes without the federal government. Texas would be a 3rd world country at the get go.
I can't believe people that seen this or actually lived through this, and think this should be a model for a state, let alone a whole country.
 

Deleted member 194275

Edson Arantes do Nascimento
Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2009
Messages
2,685
Trophies
2
XP
4,351
so, agreeing or not with this bill, anyone can tell me how those things work on USA/Texas?

I mean, here a politician may purpose a bill, any absurd bill will be registered, then the rulers of the congress (there were previous elected by the congress persons) send this bill to internal commissions, and then it gets voted. There are exceptions, but usually the ruler party or group may hold bills forever in this path to voting if they will.

So my question is, is this Texas independence bill has even a chance to be voted on congress? Because if it do not, then it's pointless to even lose time with this.
 

Foxi4

Endless Trash
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,824
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,817
Country
Poland
Whatever you say, ammosexual.
This is always the (weak sauce) argument I hear in response to a gun rights proponent - the (thinly veiled) suggestion that it’s some kind of sexual attraction to guns/a coping mechanism for erotic inadequacy. I’m not even American and I don’t understand that - there’s no reason why the state should regulate what weapons I can or can’t own or for what purpose, the government is not my dad. Any infringement in that regard is no different than treating the citizen as pre-emptively guilty of some kind of imaginary gun crime.

We could (should actually) grant DC and Puerto Rico statehood.
DC is ineligible for statehood because it’s the seat of government. If anything, DC should cede excess land back to the states it came from, whether they want it back or not. It’s already too big as it is - it’s not supposed to exceed 10 square miles. Puerto Rico is far closer to becoming a state than DC ever should be. Unfortunately, every proposal I’ve seen to date is nothing more than an attempt to generate electors out of thin air.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Smoker1

supermist

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2009
Messages
1,083
Trophies
2
Location
Wisconsin
XP
3,890
Country
United States
The response was to mock the dead horse "they gon take muh gunz" argument which has long been debunked.

The events of 1/6 are why DC actually needs statehood. They were powerless to call on any military for defense when those losers sacked the capitol.
 

Foxi4

Endless Trash
Global Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Messages
30,824
Trophies
3
Location
Gaming Grotto
XP
29,817
Country
Poland
The response was to mock the dead horse "they gon take muh gunz" argument which has long been debunked.

The events of 1/6 are why DC actually needs statehood. They were powerless to call on any military for defense when those losers sacked the capitol.
Oh please, that is the weakest of sauce. Besides, I don’t necessarily see that as a drawback. The constitution exists to protect citizens from government tyranny, both the second amendment and the non-statehood of DC are an integral part of that purpose.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Smoker1

supermist

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2009
Messages
1,083
Trophies
2
Location
Wisconsin
XP
3,890
Country
United States
So why can't I own nukes or a tank? Would you say that the government is infringing on my rights?

But really, your dismissal of 1/6 really tells me all I need to know as far as what discourse will be like with you on this as well
Post automatically merged:

question is does Texas have any of OUR nuclear stockpile? US: sure you can secede but give us back our nukes
They'd have to return any and all federal property, so all military bases would have to be combed through and US property confiscated because Texas wouldn't be entitled to it. I'd imagine any military bases would also be demolished in this hypothetical.

Texas would lose federal funding for disasters they're already incapable of dealing with, and they'd have no military.
 

Site & Scene News

Popular threads in this forum

General chit-chat
Help Users
    AncientBoi @ AncientBoi: :rofl2: +1