I needed a good laugh today. Thanks.

While I will make no secret that Trump is not my favorite President, this obsession with disarming the American public may well give Trump a 2nd term. It will lose Democrats a lot of e*******l v**es in the west and midwest. Here in Vermont, we have few restrictions on the ownership or use of firearms, except one, passed a couple of years ago, in which an out-of-state billionaire literally bought the v**es of Democratic legislators to ban the sale (but not the ownership) of 30 round magazines. Yet, we have one of the lowest crime rates in the US. The reason is simple. If arms are banned by law, law abiding folks tend to obey the law. Criminals do not. The result is that government has disarmed the criminals victims for them.

It seems that a lot of what we do is based on precedent. Is it a good idea to establish a precedent of passing laws that violate the Constitution? The next guy in power may not like the part of the Constitution that you like.

While Biden is at it, why not hold car manufacturers responsible for car accidents, and kitchen implement manufacturers responsible for accidents in kitchens, and laboratory equipment manufacturers responsible for accidents in research and school labs?

What illegal c**p? Congress, the way the Founders wrote the Constitution, is the primary part of government. That's why the organization and duties of congress are in article one. The presidentcy is described in article two. He is supposed to be an executive who carries out and enforces the laws passed by congress. He is not above the law like King George III was. He cannot "do anything I want" as President Trump has stated. If a president is accused of doing high crimes or misdemeanors the House of Representatives MUST investigate, and if they find evidence they MUST bring charges against the president or any other official so charged. That is called "Impeaching" him. Then the Senate acts as a big jury in a trial. Andrew Johnson was impeached in the late 1860's. The senate failed to convict him by one v**e. Richard Nixon was impeached, but resigned when senators from his own party told him he would get convicted in the senate. Bill Clinton was impeached but the senate felt it was not important enough to remove him from office. Where these c**ps?

Thank you. I'll look them up. I had a knee replacement last fall and haven't been able to get to the range since (and for quite a while before. The knee, though original issue, was no longer in original condition after 88 years.) Two years ago, I volunteered for the VT State Guard (not National Guard) pistol team, as they needed four people to compete at the AG matches, and I have an M9. I did OK until the second day, when there was a match where we had to load 3 rounds in one mag, two in the other, lay them and the pistol on a table, 15 meters from the target, then go back 35 meters and on a signal run to the table, load, fire, change mags, load and fire, all in 20 seconds! I was virtually hopping on one foot with my left leg d**gging behind! I only got four of the five shots off and thought I'd missed everything but the team leader says he's sure I got two of the targets. Stay safe and healthy. And thanks again for the tip about cheap ammo.

I guess you ain't read that silly, quaint old 18th century document called the Constitution of the United States. Even IF they had set Trump up on bogus allegations, they were not aiding enemies of the United States or waging war on the United States, and that is the only thing that anybody can be charged with treason for doing. I'm unsure of what they were trying to do, since if they wanted to convict him (which only the senate can do) they might have impeached him for obstructing justice, which would have been a clearer case. But McConnel wouldn't have let that fly anyway.

Though Trump accuses folks of treason for merely disagreeing with him or for investigating his behavior. He has accused Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff of treason. Yet treason is clearly defined in that silly, quaint old 18th century document called the Constitution of the United States as giving aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States or waging war against the United States. Pelosi and Schiff did not do either of those things but did investigate some of his actions which led to his impeachment. So maybe what we need is to stop letting the news media keep dividing us and stop calling folks names.

Quite correct. Kings do not respond to subpoenas from parliament

It was a lot cheaper than the local gun shops were selling 30-06 ammo for. What do you need thousands of rounds for? Are you expecting an invasion by extra terrestrial insects?

Have you ever noticed that some folks always blame other people for what they themselves are doing?

There is precedent for this in America. Some years ago I ran across an account of some poor guy in Boston in the 1650's who was called up to stand in front of the pulpit one Sunday morning, while the minister preached a sermon against him! He had charged more than a 5% profit on goods imported from England. Very effective.

It isn't even clear if Trump was the lesser of two evils. Those two parties, ( neither of which is authorized in the Constitution) gave us two unelectable candidates and one of 'em got elected. As a leader, Donald Trump falls short in four of the five jobs of leadership that they taught in ROTC in the 1950's. He doesn't seem to Plan, Organize, Delegate, or Coordinate, but he does seem to Control.

I would probably qualify, in your mind, as a "libtard." But try "Cheaper than dirt." I got 400 rounds for my M1 from them a couple of weeks ago. They have lots of ammo. And if you think I should not own a gun, you are welcome to, as Leonidas put it at Thermopalae many centuries ago, "Molun Labe."

Some politicians figure that with their policies, if everybody could v**e they couldn't win.

I sometimes wonder if perhaps Democratic politicians may understand the 2nd amendment better than Republican politicians. Perhaps Republicans think it so we can go hunting and Democrats know that it so we can resist tyranny. A certain NY billionaire has been trying to pay Vermont legislators to pass anti gun laws. The governor vetoed them last year. I wouldn't want to mention any names, but his initials are Mike Bloomberg.

We are up to about 700,000 or so. However, what tells the tale is that in New England states, for reasons dating back to the 17th century, the township is the unit of government. It is small and harder (tho' not impossible) to corrupt. Jefferson once wrote that the New England township was the surest way to maintain democracy. And most of the states do have townships, but outside of New England they don't seem to have much power. When I was still active politically, I represented my town on the Federally mandated Local Emergency Planning Commision.(LEPC) One company rep gave us a sales pitch on a great management system one night. I was talking to her after the meeting and she complained that her district covered NY and Pennsylvania where there is a legislative body at the county level and most members of the LEPC were members of it. In Vermont, she told the LEPC about this system, and then had to convince 16 or so Town select boards to contribute money to the LEPC so they could buy it because there is no legislative body at the county level. There is no county board, or county director. While this is a weakness of a town based system,(which the Feds haven't figured out yet) the strength is that the polling places are numerous and local. What you need in some of these big states is smaller v****g districts and more numerous polling places.