Random thoughts on varied points, people
- Given the make-up of the Congress, handily Republican, with a slimmer Republican majority in the Senate, now seems a good time for gun owners to get in touch with their elected representatives and senators, regarding supporting pro-gun/pro gun rights legislative proposals, and dumping anti-gun/anti-gun rights laws, too. If gunnies don’t do it now, when will they?
- Re: Citizens across Europe applying for gun licenses; can you imagine that.
- Re: Eric Holder’s new position; is he being paid with taxpayer monies or private funds?
- Lest I forget, not likely, the goon squad of ATF management responsible for the cabal that was Operation Fast and Furious remains unpunished, or might the Statute of Limitations have come into play?
- We await president-elect Trump’s upcoming actions regarding judicial appointments and the dumping of Obama’s executive orders; in particular those that trample on Second Amendment Rights.
Senator Sessions has been nominated for the position of US Attorney General and respecting his pro-Second Amendment position, the man appears to be a good nominee. That said there are other things that need to be considered, in my opinion that is. One of those being his stated support for Asset Forfeiture, aka Civil Asset Forfeiture, or as I describe it, Theft Under Color of Law, a description that I see absolutely no reason to change. How much trust, if any, do you have for a strong supporter of Asset Forfeiture, as the highest law enforcement officer in the United States? For myself, not much, and I find the prospect of Sessions in that position troubling.
Finally, it has been noted that perfect is the enemy of good, perfect being likely not attainable anyway. The question in my mind could perhaps be put as follows: How do you spell “good.” I have question regarding it be spelled Sessions. Of course, I have been wrong before, as memory serves.
Additional comment on the February 2017 issue
Re: “Nevada background check initiative hits a speed bump,” and other articles on same subject. Might it be that the movers and shakers behind the almost not approved by the electorate proposal realized that this might be the case, losing was also a possibility, and that they were willing to accept being able to cause a ruckus, which they seem to have accomplished, if their advertised goals proved not possible of accomplishment?