Supreme Court rules against Rick Scott
Forums › General Discussion › Supreme Court rules against Rick Scott-
★fnord★ wrote:
Why did you mention your traveling (across state lines?) with your illegal gun on the internet? WTF? Did you like jail so much that you want to go back? You sound like a disaster waiting to happen, man. Need to slow your roll.
What I'm doing isn't illegal in Texas. After 3 years after your sentence is complete you are allowed to have a firearm in your home. Texas has also declared your vehicle an extension of your home.
Addi: the reason I offered all that was to prove my truthfulness about what all I've stated. -
Uh, if you are a convicted felon then you are in violation of federal law by possessing a gun, period. Doesn't matter what your state law says, you are breaking federal law. Lemme guess, you didn't undergo a federal background check when you bought it, right? You broke federal law once right there. If you were to encounter a federal law officer, even a park ranger, and they search your record, you are going back into the system. If you are caught crossing state lines with an illegal gun, we're talking a decade behind bars. Look it up. Better yet, talk to a lawyer. You're risking everything with this behavior, I'm telling you.
-
★fnord★ wrote:
Uh, if you are a convicted felon then you are in violation of federal law by possessing a gun, period. Doesn't matter what your state law says, you are breaking federal law. Lemme guess, you didn't undergo a federal background check when you bought it, right? You broke federal law once right there. If you were to encounter a federal law officer, even a park ranger, and they search your record, you are going back into the system. If you are caught crossing state lines with an illegal gun, we're talking a decade behind bars. Look it up. Better yet, talk to a lawyer. You're risking everything with this behavior, I'm telling you.
Personal sales don't require a background check. How did me wanting to make employees and welfare recieptiants take drug tests evolve to this?????
-
And if I get stopped by a park ranger, I'll ask him to take a drug test :-P
-
ᎷᎪᏟᏦᎷᎬᏟᎻ ᎪᎠᎠ ᏦᎷ wrote:
For most people that's true, but as a felon you knowingly broke federal law when you took possession of that gun. You brought up your personal connections to welfare fraud and unwittingly admitted your complicity in it, then Addi recalled some of your other dubious exploits for context, then you bragged on the internet about flaunting federal firearm law for some damned reason. But really the strangest part is that you are arguing for a law that would get your pot-smoking GF (sister?) in some serious hot water and possibly her kids taken away, yet you claim you are powerless to do anything about it yourself. That has got to be the most passive-aggressive shit I've ever heard. The whole thing is like a Greek tragedy I can't look away from.Personal sales don't require a background check. How did me wanting to make employees and welfare recieptiants take drug tests evolve to this?????
-
If you want some all-encompassing theme I would say first, don't post hypocritical personal details if you don't want them to be scrutinized. Second, practice what you preach if you want to be taken seriously. You can't be living in a den of welfare queens, enabling them, and even being party to their fraud while banging the drum for welfare reform. It just rings hollow. Don't demand that others respect the rule of law regarding misdemeanor drug use while you are flaunting federal felony firearms laws. Finally, don't whine endlessly about your taxes being unfair when your poor choices in life have cost the rest of us more than you could ever possibly repay if you lived to be a hundred. Well, be careful out there and drive safe.
-
Lmao. Not real sure if Texas would defend me for following a law exactly like it's written. As for my gf, not real sure she broke a law either. Smoking weed is illegal, but they wouldn't press that even in Texas.
-
That's actually interesting. If the FBI raids a pot store in Denver, would the Colorado AG come to their defense? If the FBI brought charges against me, would Texas come to my defense?
-
ᎷᎪᏟᏦᎷᎬᏟᎻ ᎪᎠᎠ ᏦᎷ wrote:
You seem awfully confused about Texas law. I'm not just trying to scare you about federal gun laws superseding state law. It's just a fact. The courts have upheld it again and again. You need to consult an attorney about it, I'm not kidding.Lmao. Not real sure if Texas would defend me for following a law exactly like it's written. As for my gf, not real sure she broke a law either. Smoking weed is illegal, but they wouldn't press that even in Texas.
-
ᎷᎪᏟᏦᎷᎬᏟᎻ ᎪᎠᎠ ᏦᎷ wrote:
Wow really!!!!Now, out of the people I just listed, there isn't a SINGLE one of them that can't work. They choose not to. There's not a thing in the world wrong with any of them. 2 of them actually work for cash under the table from a friend of mine. If u look at my GF, she owns her own home, has a 45k SUV in the driveway, coach purse and all name brand clothes. Yet she still gets SNAP and Medicare for the kids. And, smokes about half an ounce of weed a week. Now, that really seem fair to you?
-
"All the people" is a few out of the thousands that are on welfare. If you gave me legit research, I might change my mind.
-
No doubt there needs to be massive reforms to welfare, not just federal, maybe more so state, I am guessing; but wouldn't be surprised if 25% of state and federal $ spent on welfare is fraudulent. There also needs to be an easy way to report fraud.
-
The welfare system was massively reformed in 1998. At the time, conservatives said they got everything they wanted, but now here we are, calling for massive reforms again. Lifetime caps were put on most programs. More strict means testing and asset testing was added. Work requirements were put in place. Almost every program requires a pregnancy or minor child in the house to qualify. Seriously, go read your state's requirements on their social services webpage. It's a lot more strict than you think. There will also be a link there where you can anonymously report fraud and hotlines you can call. Multiple independent audits of all of these programs over the years have shown a 1%-3% rate of fraud and abuse. Ask yourself how much of what you think you know about welfare is anecdotal, like Mack's insane story, or a guy who knew a guy, or like Cliven Bundy you see someone hanging out on a porch stoop and just assume the worst. Educate yourself and stop speculating if you want to have an honest debate.
-
You can tell people are not interested in real solutions when they say the solution to fraud is to completely overhaul the programs that they claim are rife with fraud. You know the simplest way to reduce welfare fraud? Increase the legal penalties for committing welfare fraud. Shit, call it grand larceny and make it a minimum 10 years in prison. Same for voter fraud, make it life in prison for all I care. These are simple, easy ways to reduce fraud but no one even mentions them. They say better to spend a bunch of time and money completely overhauling these programs every 10-15 years. Something tells me that there is an ulterior motive in there somewhere and they are not looking for honest solutions. Hmm
-
★fnord★ wrote:
Yes putting people in prison is way better than having them on welfare! Brilliant idea! That'll save taxpayers!You can tell people are not interested in real solutions when they say the solution to fraud is to completely overhaul the programs that they claim are rife with fraud. You know the simplest way to reduce welfare fraud? Increase the legal penalties for committing welfare fraud. Shit, call it grand larceny and make it a minimum 10 years in prison. Same for voter fraud, make it life in prison for all I care. These are simple, easy ways to reduce fraud but no one even mentions them. They say better to spend a bunch of time and money completely overhauling these programs every 10-15 years. Something tells me that there is an ulterior motive in there somewhere and they are not looking for honest solutions. Hmm
-
The main point is that government run welfare, has not reduced the number of poor people we have in America
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/PovertyinAmerica.html
-
★fnord★ for president. How are you guys trying to tangle with him? I'd be afraid he can melt your brain through your iphone or something! Duck for cover!
-
Fnord- so let me get you on record. You are saying that there is nothing wrong with the current welfare programs and you believe the American people are getting the best bang for the buck with them?
-
Cazzo wrote:
It's not designed to take you out of poverty. It gets you by.The main point is that government run welfare, has not reduced the number of poor people we have in America
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/PovertyinAmerica.html
-
We need a comfortable medium between socialism and capitalism. Eliminating the welfare program would just push us further into oligarchy.
-
We had no welfare system for 150 years. How did we ever survive?
-
Cazzo wrote:
You should read the article you posted, it disagrees with you.The main point is that government run welfare, has not reduced the number of poor people we have in America
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/PovertyinAmerica.html
-
Look... Im just a conservative, I don't have credit card debt, my only debt is my house. Is it too much to ask that our government be financially responsible? Not spend more than you bring in, have a balanced budget (which by the way, the constitution mandates). Is that unreasonable? Welfare, is but one of many programs that need to be asked, can we really afford this? That's all I'm genuinely concerned with.
-
Cazzo wrote:
I think individual fraud rates of 1-3% don't warrant massive reforms as you suggest, that's for sure. The truth is that welfare runs way more efficiently than most private charities when it comes to getting assistance to those who need it. Since the dawn of civilization, there has always been a certain sliver of society that cannot or won't do for themselves. That is just a fact of life. I think we've come up with a pretty good balance between giving a hand up to those who want it while not incentivizing dependency, all things considered. Is it perfect? Of course not, nothing is when you are dealing with human beings. Government is about pragmatic solutions, not perfect ones. In answer to your earlier comment, I do think people who commit welfare fraud should go to jail. It is blatant theft from the most vulnerable among us and should be punished accordingly.Fnord- so let me get you on record.
-
Cazzo wrote:
Read your history. Former president George Washington petitioned Congress for and was granted ongoing funds to establish a welfare home for retired merchant mariners, after he saw that retired seamen were living in the streets. Thomas Jefferson founded federal land grant colleges all over the country that provided free higher education to those who otherwise couldn't afford it. Every great civilization before us, from the Egyptians to the Romans, had state funded welfare programs of some sort. This is nothing new. Taking care of the least among us has been a fact of life ever since humans formed the first tribes.We had no welfare system for 150 years. How did we ever survive?
-
Fnord, I have GOT to move into your town. What day is the unicorn petting zoo open? In all seriousness, I'm willing to admit that the real world lies somewhere in between what you see and what I see. You only know 1 person on welfare, I know hundreds. I can only think of 1-2 that aren't on welfare. I don't know where the answer is, but I'm willing to bet it's between us somewhere.
-
YOU wrote:
So your okay with it the way it is and see no need to change anything (other than incarceration for fraud). We are just gonna have to agree to disagreeFnord- so let me get you on record. You are saying that there is nothing wrong with the current welfare programs and you believe the American people are getting the best bang for the buck with them?
-
ᎷᎪᏟᏦᎷᎬᏟᎻ ᎪᎠᎠ ᏦᎷ wrote:
I don't think so. I never said it was somewhere in between our two experiences. Our personal experiences are anecdotal and thus irrelevant. It is impossible for you or I to get an accurate picture of such a complex system simply from our own personal observations. It's why we do studies. I trust independent studies way more than my gut feeling and certainly more than your's. Do some reading, you'll find everything I said is true. Even the right wing think tanks admit that fraud is 2-3%. I still think you should report anyone you think is committing fraud, if you truly want to make a difference. I can send you the Texas info for doing so. It is confidential, of course. If you want to directly improve the system this is your chance. Just curious, how do you feel about minimum mandatory prison time for welfare fraud?I don't know where the answer is, but I'm willing to bet it's between us somewhere.
-
YOU wrote:
Let me rephrase. We had no national welfare system for 150 years. How did we ever survive?We had no welfare system for 150 years. How did we ever survive?
-
Well since since its on the forum why not. The problem with welfare in my home state is there is no limitation to it. There are family's raised by yours and my hard earned tax dollars. And what pisses me off most about the whole dam thing is when i have to work my ass off so they can sit around draining society of what its worth. How do you feel that you have a 1998 maxima that you worked your ass off for that breaks down once a month causing you to be late on paying a bill while people on welfare walk into a dealership and drive off in a brand new Altima full warranty?👈example. I frankly think welfare should be abolished and only the strong survive.
![[][]](https://turfwarsapp.com/img/app/ajax-forbutton.gif)
Purchase Respect Points NEW! · Support · Turf Map · Terms · Privacy
©2021 MeanFreePath LLC