Beto comes right out and says it.

[shootin the breeze]

Key takeaway here is that people need to start and build an “emergency fund”. If you have a big data plan on your phone and cable TV, skip both for a year. Delay buying a nicer car or a new TV or phone. It adds up quickly.

Respectfully, you need to look at the whole equation. The employees take home pay is only part of it. No one will work if they aren’t getting paid. If they are disciplined and maintain a buffer, this will hurt them harder and faster than I.

Let’s say I make $100 per year. Gov and Sate get $35. Gov can print more, states cannot. I save money long term, they cannot.

Furthermore, to justify that $100, my company has to receive $200 in revenue. That additional $100 is either taxed or spent on other products or people which are taxed.

On a small scale, they can just replace you and the only loser is you. Considering the number of gun owners and my assumption that the lions share of them are money earring tax payers, I’d say this is a much larger problem for them.

As I write this, it occurs to me how many gun owners receive social security? It seems like it would be a nightmare for them to withhold social security payments from large swaths of the population.

Medicare Medicaid ? “Yeah sorry, until you locate that old shotgun and hand it over, no more blood pressure medication for you..”

I agree with your thinking but if they freeze your accounts that emergency fund needs to be in cash. That is not so easy to do anymore. It can be done but it's lots of trips to the ATM or arranging periodic large pulls from the bank.

Also, I wouldn't put it past them to try stopping some SS payments or withholding needed drugs. You would think it would backfire but it might not given who would be on the receiving end of this (conservative gun owners) and who would be cheering it on (librons).

 

[namrelio]

It's a DAMN shame we even have to think about different ways to survive these assholes. It would be nice if they just did their jobs that we pay them to do.

 

[Decoy]

Kamala is now onboard

Kamala Harris says she supports a mandatory buyback on 'assault weapons'

 

[daNattyFatty]

I agree with your thinking but if they freeze your accounts that emergency fund needs to be in cash. That is not so easy to do anymore. It can be done but it's lots of trips to the ATM or arranging periodic large pulls from the bank.



Also, I wouldn't put it past them to try stopping some SS payments or withholding needed drugs. You would think it would backfire but it might not given who would be on the receiving end of this (conservative gun owners) and who would be cheering it on (librons).

Key takeaway here is that people need to start and build an “emergency fund”. If you have a big data plan on your phone and cable TV, skip both for a year. Delay buying a nicer car or a new TV or phone. It adds up quickly.



Respectfully, you need to look at the whole equation. The employees take home pay is only part of it. No one will work if they aren’t getting paid. If they are disciplined and maintain a buffer, this will hurt them harder and faster than I.



Let’s say I make $100 per year. Gov and Sate get $35. Gov can print more, states cannot. I save money long term, they cannot.



Furthermore, to justify that $100, my company has to receive $200 in revenue. That additional $100 is either taxed or spent on other products or people which are taxed.



On a small scale, they can just replace you and the only loser is you. Considering the number of gun owners and my assumption that the lions share of them are money earring tax payers, I’d say this is a much larger problem for them.



As I write this, it occurs to me how many gun owners receive social security? It seems like it would be a nightmare for them to withhold social security payments from large swaths of the population.



Medicare Medicaid ? “Yeah sorry, until you locate that old shotgun and hand it over, no more blood pressure medication for you..”

I’m a long way from social security and Medicare age......but I’m willing to bet there are some skilled and now very disgruntled people that will determine that they have nothing left to lose, should those “benefits” be curtailed or stopped.....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Uncle Duke]

I’m a long way from social security and Medicare age......but I’m willing to bet there are some skilled and now very disgruntled people that will determine that they have nothing left to lose, should those “benefits” be curtailed or stopped.....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Or unfettered access to their own money.

Yeah, I would foresee Misery Lane as not being a one way street.

 

[shootin the breeze]

I’m a long way from social security and Medicare age......but I’m willing to bet there are some skilled and now very disgruntled people that will determine that they have nothing left to lose, should those “benefits” be curtailed or stopped.....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Or unfettered access to their own money.

Yeah, I would foresee Misery Lane as not being a one way street.

Yeah, I was thinking on the front end. Of course, I'd completely except it to backfire on the idiots on the back end as this would most certainly happen.

 

[Doctor_M]

Key takeaway here is that people need to start and build an “emergency fund”. If you have a big data plan on your phone and cable TV, skip both for a year. Delay buying a nicer car or a new TV or phone. It adds up quickly.

Respectfully, you need to look at the whole equation. The employees take home pay is only part of it. No one will work if they aren’t getting paid. If they are disciplined and maintain a buffer, this will hurt them harder and faster than I.

Let’s say I make $100 per year. Gov and Sate get $35. Gov can print more, states cannot. I save money long term, they cannot.

Furthermore, to justify that $100, my company has to receive $200 in revenue. That additional $100 is either taxed or spent on other products or people which are taxed.

On a small scale, they can just replace you and the only loser is you. Considering the number of gun owners and my assumption that the lions share of them are money earring tax payers, I’d say this is a much larger problem for them.

As I write this, it occurs to me how many gun owners receive social security? It seems like it would be a nightmare for them to withhold social security payments from large swaths of the population.

Medicare Medicaid ? “Yeah sorry, until you locate that old shotgun and hand it over, no more blood pressure medication for you..”

Honestly, holding social security checks, VA benefits, medicare/medicaid hostage would be a huge tactical mistake on the part of the government. There is nothing more dangerous than an armed citizen who feels like they are out of all other options. "The government is going to cut off my social security and insulin... well, might as well go to my God like a solider". Think about what 100,000 optionless Walt Kowalski types (Grand Torino) might do to up-end the apple cart. It would be.... messy.

 

[Muleskinner]

So what will the IRS Do if your employer pays you in cash??? and they put down office expenses ????

you think your employer is going to jeopardize his own livelihood by doing this??

 

[Muleskinner]

Key takeaway here is that people need to start and build an “emergency fund”. If you have a big data plan on your phone and cable TV, skip both for a year. Delay buying a nicer car or a new TV or phone. It adds up quickly.

Respectfully, you need to look at the whole equation. The employees take home pay is only part of it. No one will work if they aren’t getting paid. If they are disciplined and maintain a buffer, this will hurt them harder and faster than I.

Let’s say I make $100 per year. Gov and Sate get $35. Gov can print more, states cannot. I save money long term, they cannot.

Furthermore, to justify that $100, my company has to receive $200 in revenue. That additional $100 is either taxed or spent on other products or people which are taxed.

On a small scale, they can just replace you and the only loser is you. Considering the number of gun owners and my assumption that the lions share of them are money earring tax payers, I’d say this is a much larger problem for them.

As I write this, it occurs to me how many gun owners receive social security? It seems like it would be a nightmare for them to withhold social security payments from large swaths of the population.

Medicare Medicaid ? “Yeah sorry, until you locate that old shotgun and hand it over, no more blood pressure medication for you..”

LOL nope....no even close to the correct answer..You can't save enough money because the IRS won't give in...ever....they will wait...decades if need be...the correct answer is if the government is trying to starve you and your family you respond with force....you won't be the only one..

 

[Muleskinner]

Honestly, holding social security checks, VA benefits, medicare/medicaid hostage would be a huge tactical mistake on the part of the government. There is nothing more dangerous than an armed citizen who feels like they are out of all other options. "The government is going to cut off my social security and insulin... well, might as well go to my God like a solider". Think about what 100,000 optionless Walt Kowalski types (Grand Torino) might do to up-end the apple cart. It would be.... messy.

100,000 is just the tip of the iceberg...it is estimated that only 3% of gun owners would fight back...but 3% of 120 million is still an army of 3.6 million...

 

[Muleskinner]

The bottom line is that because the left thinks there will be no repercussions for their action (they really don't think we will fight back) they will do whatever they wish and give a rat's ass who gets hurt, especially if it's a conservative gun owner.

again, gun control is about control. Their end game is to control the masses like every other socialist/communist regime in history. They can't do it with 120 million people pointing weapons at them and telling them no. If any one of them win next year and the senate flips it will be game on and the only good democrat will be a dead one...Beto said what he said because he knows he has a snowball's chance in hell of winning..I guarantee you every single one of them feel the same way.

 

[teratos]

Don't forget the millions of unserialized, untraceable, unregistered (just like the guns used in the battle of Lexington and Concord) AR clones that people have made at home......

Yep, and this is huge. Not that I have any, but if I did I would only give them what they have on file. I will be fully compliant on paper.

 

[Adolph Oliver Bush]

The context that these people are lacking is that the Amendments were ratified less than 3 years after......

The context missing is that they are not true "amendments" to COTUS. The first ten amendments were all added at once as the Bill of Rights, compliments of the Massachusetts Compromise, in order to get all the states to ratify the COTUS.

I remind anyone who pulls the "it's an amendment, thus not a true part if the COTUS" crap that their right to free speech is an amendment too.

 

[fidelity]

Kamala is now onboard

Kamala Harris says she supports a mandatory buyback on 'assault weapons'

More of a dumbass than I thought. This pretty much guarantees that she won't be national candidate for many years. I thought she had Clinton handlers, and Clinton handlers don't take risks like this. Beto is running for VP, and I think has a shot, particularly because no one takes him (or his positions) seriously, and he doesn't have high negatives with Democrats and Independent voters.

On the other hand, Harris is unlikeable to not only Republicans, but some Democrats. Maybe she's desperate to shore up this support in the party. However, combine her on a ticket with another socialist like Warren, and you've got someone who wants to grab guns (and has threatened to use the executive to enact gun control) and another that's going to take away your private insurance and tax you to hell.

 

[fidelity]

I would add to the above that Democratic strategists were hoping to write off Beto's comments as his own and not reflective of the party. Harris saying that she's on board doesn't allow Democrats to weasel out and say that gun grabbing isn't a long term (or short term) objective. Chris Coons must be thrilled.

 

[rockstarr]

Yep, and this is huge. Not that I have any, but if I did I would only give them what they have on file. I will be fully compliant on paper.

But wait doc, they shouldn’t have any on paper, at least long gun wise since we are forced to voluntarily register pistols in the state!!!

At least that’s what they tell us, that there paper trail is tossed after wards...

 

[Doctor_M]

But wait doc, they shouldn’t have any on paper, at least long gun wise since we are forced to voluntarily register pistols in the state!!!

At least that’s what they tell us, that there paper trail is tossed after wards...

.

 

[randomuser]

But wait doc, they shouldn’t have any on paper, at least long gun wise since we are forced to voluntarily register pistols in the state!!!

At least that’s what they tell us, that there paper trail is tossed after wards...

If Facebook gathers information on non Facebook users known as shadow accounts) by accessing the contact list on the cell phone of a user with an account then you can be sure that gov gathers the information on guns.you ate speaking on.

 

[MichaelZWilliamson]

And tomorrow, Trump will announce support for a federal "red flag" law and universal background checks "to start," and his cucks will bleat, "But Hillary would have been worse!" and pledge to re-elect him. "At least he's better than Beto!"

 

[skipidar]

What's the Source?

Just now in the Democratic debate.
YES, his plan is to CONFISCATE EVERY AR and AK in the public's hands. They asked him straight up, and he said it.
Not just 'buy back', confiscate.
So there ya go.

What is the source for this statement? Understand, I am not saying Beto didn't say this, I am simply curious to know what the source of this quote is. What is its provenance? Where and when was it said? Was this the entire quote or just the heart of the matter? If Beto said this, I definitely oppose it, and in order to argue against it I need to know where and when it was printed or quoted. Otherwise it's just another he said/she said situation.

Thanks.