doesn t register, she has to figure out if she has money to keep going. she already pulled out of new hampshire. biden, follow that thread, if he finishes deep in the back of the field in iowa, goes into new hampshire, elizabeth warren and bernie sanders represent massachusetts and vermont next door to new hampshire. they re likely to do well there. biden won t have a win in either of first two states. first, i don t think kamala harris doesn t make it in iowa. i would tell her to cut bait and go home before it gets any worse. the grim reap hears visited her campaign and he is the accountant. she doesn t have money to keep the lights on. she is done. if biden doesn t perform in either of those first two states he is walking into south carolina he think it is his firewall because he does well today with african-americans. but don t forget, bloomberg and others could be crushing biden with their ads and at the same time, biden as of last reporting period only had $7 million cash
going to know that law-abiding citizens trained to handle firearms don t have them. and that s when it really is a bad guy with a gun is only stopped by a good guy with a gun. ed: we reached out to the mayor s office for a statement the, we haven t gotten a response yet. last question for you, sheriff, it seems to me you re looking at the idea that, look, if you restrict the rights of law-abiding gun owners, it s the criminals who end up having the guns. it s been proven time and time again. there have been no anyone who has a premises permit, which is what they call these things in new york and, frankly, i wish the supreme court would look at the constitutionality of that, there has not been a documented incident with a premises holder in new york. show you that lawful, trained gun owners don t commit crimes. ed: sheriff, we appreciate your insights. go, lsu, as you said. we wish you well in the days ahead. we ll be watching the case very closely. thank you, sheriff. thank you v
focused on people who are just not this guy and the law that would be focused on stopping him. actually, we had a law that could have caught this guy and it wasn t enforced. that s not a rational for not having a law for doing what he did to get the gun. we are looking at red flag laws, looking at it has nothing to do with a red flag law. i think it would. the man had some mental health issues. lots of other issues that could have been dealt with more effectively than keeping hassle law-abiding people it s not a hassle. gun owners don t think it s a hassle. every time we ask them, they say they re into reasonable things. i don t know who you re arguing for on this one. i appreciate the argument. it helps the audience to hear. man made catastrophe, don t want to fix it, natural disaster, can t stop it, but we can come together to deal with
like this, what we now call an ar-15 type weapon. a lot of people refer to them as assault weapons. a lot of gun owners don t like the term. the fact is that type of weapon was actually disallowed by federal law from 1994 for about ten years. so we have been there. we have already decided as a country that we think these weapons are not really for use by civilians, but that went away. and the resistance to changing that is strong. right. it went away. it had flaws with the gun manufacturers got around it because what they did the way the gun was described, they took those off and basically made the same rifle. the rifle looked pretty vanilla, but it fired the same cartridge at the same velocity and can take the same detachable
remarkable impact in getting people signed up to vote, in raising money, by some measures, they outspent the nra in the 2018 midterms. could that be the beginning of the end of the nra s stranglehold on politics? well, we ll see. i mean, what you have to see is an election that s the converse of what a.b. described earlier in 1994. you have to see an election in which they actually demonstrate their muscle and punish people who don t vote the way they want them to vote. and that s when lawmakers will sit up and take notice. if there s no consequence to voting against them, then they re going to ignore them, right? if there s an election in which voting with the nra is perceived to be politically damaging and a risk to your seat, that might change the dynamics. so far, we haven t seen that. that s not the perception, anyway. as long as that s not the perception, you know, the cost of voting against these gun laws is not sufficient to change the voting patterns in the congress. we ll s