TexasCHLforum.com

Your thoughts on his position?

http://gunsinthenews.com/jeb-bush-there ... ownership/

He should get C from NRA.
1) Waiting period is a joke. Does not effect the violent crime or suicides.
2) Sharing info about mentally defective people and deny them through NICS should be the law and it is the law.
3) He should have stated that he is pro-gun, pro 2ndA at both Federal and State level.
4) He should have stated clamp on the criminals, reduce gun theft by toughing out the penalties, and share info about mentally defective people.

Finally, he does not own guns and he is not a gun guy.

Beiruty wrote:He should get C from NRA.
1) Waiting period is a joke. Does not effect the violent crime or suicides.
2) Sharing info about mentally defective people and deny them through NICS should be the law and it is the law.
3) He should have stated that he is pro-gun, pro 2ndA at both Federal and State level.
4) He should have stated clamp on the criminals, reduce gun theft by toughing out the penalties, and share info about mentally defective people.

Finally, he does not own guns and he is not a gun guy.

here's something I've wondered about before.....
the whole "sharing info about mentally defective people" wouldn't that be against HIPPA?HIPAA, whatever it's initials are. I mean, for example, I can't legally call and get information about my MIL who has Alz and may have forgotten to write something down, but some bureaucrat can decide that a diagnosis means that someone is "mentally defective", tell a gun store salesman that and now everyone in the store knows the man can't buy the gun.

NYC is not a state and like Chicago, should not have so much control over state law.

SewTexas wrote:

Beiruty wrote:He should get C from NRA.
1) Waiting period is a joke. Does not effect the violent crime or suicides.
2) Sharing info about mentally defective people and deny them through NICS should be the law and it is the law.
3) He should have stated that he is pro-gun, pro 2ndA at both Federal and State level.
4) He should have stated clamp on the criminals, reduce gun theft by toughing out the penalties, and share info about mentally defective people.

Finally, he does not own guns and he is not a gun guy.

here's something I've wondered about before.....
the whole "sharing info about mentally defective people" wouldn't that be against HIPPA?HIPAA, whatever it's initials are. I mean, for example, I can't legally call and get information about my MIL who has Alz and may have forgotten to write something down, but some bureaucrat can decide that a diagnosis means that someone is "mentally defective", tell a gun store salesman that and now everyone in the store knows the man can't buy the gun.

Actually no it is not a violation of the HIPAA to release medical information to the us govt for certain purposes or even the state govt for that matter MD's are required by law to report epilepsy or seizure disorders to DPS for the purpose of drivers licenses. Also the federal and state governments are exempt from the HIPAA provisions

There is massive confusion about gun rights/ownership by both leftists and radcons. Leftists would rewrite the second amendment through their own "interpretation" and basically deny us the right to own any firearm. On the other extreme are some radcons who believe there should be no regulation of any firearms whatsoever.

Remember, Bush is running for President so expect him like most politicians to speak out of both sides of his mouth. He wants to be both pro-states rights and pro-gun ownership at the same time. Occasionally his statements will seem to contradict one another so he must engage in further nuancing and parsing to repair the mess he made with previous statements.

Glad I am not a politician.

dlh

Or he could speak openly, plainly and directly without playing both sides of the fence using nuance and flat out doubletalk. It seems to be working well for others. I think many American voters are sick of politicians trying to play all sides for the sake of votes.

he could speak openly, plainly and directly without playing both sides of the fence using nuance and flat out doubletalk. It seems to be working well for others. I think many American voters are sick of politicians trying to play all sides for the sake of votes.

It doesn't matter since I'm not voting for him regardless.

mojo84 wrote:Or he could speak openly, plainly and directly without playing both sides of the fence using nuance and flat out doubletalk. It seems to be working well for others. I think many American voters are sick of politicians trying to play all sides for the sake of votes.

Thus giving rise to the animal known as Trump.

The Wall wrote:It doesn't matter since I'm not voting for him regardless.

Maybe you aren't but others on here have voiced their support for Jeb and I thought it a good idea to make sure they see this.

I detest Stephen Colbert's lefty unctuousness, thus I couldn't bring myself to watch...

For J.B. to go on his show doesn't make sense as Colbert isn't credible. He's a court jester at best.

No more than Jon Stewart is a pundit - neither is to be taken seriously, but it seems some think they're both heavy weight thinkers.

Whoever suggested J.B. go on Colbert's show ought to be shown the door.

Bad decision.

I was more interested in what Jeb Bush had to say than what Colbert's political opinions are.

I don't watch him but some say he has a conservative political bent. I wouldn't know though.

mojo84 wrote:Or he could speak openly, plainly and directly without playing both sides of the fence using nuance and flat out doubletalk. It seems to be working well for others. I think many American voters are sick of politicians trying to play all sides for the sake of votes.

No he can't, because he's a corrupt, sleazy, lying, America hating politician, like Obama, except not as smart, personable, or dare I say, as masculine. He's just too pathetic to be taken seriously. He was born with a sliver spoon in his mouth and he acts as if he's entitled to be president because of his name and because his daddy and his brother were president. He's not as brazenly corrupt as Hillary, but they're both part of the same club of which the rest of us are not members.

mojo84 wrote:

The Wall wrote:It doesn't matter since I'm not voting for him regardless.

Maybe you aren't but others on here have voiced their support for Jeb and I thought it a good idea to make sure they see this.

And I'm glad you did! So I guess it does matter if you can get folks not to vote for him.