A man in woman face =/= a girl or a woman. Clown. Hope your family sees your mental illness for what it is. You need professional help. Now. Not later. Now.

It is a mental disorder. Just because an agenda makes people money and they unscientifically alter hundreds upon thousands of years of scientific research, obsevation and facts doesn't = fact when it is so clearly fiction. A male will never magically become a female no more than the inverse. This isn't a Disney world, it is a world of reality.

A male in a women's restroom is a male in woman face. They (the men) most certainly do choose (not "chose") to be a member of the alphabet soup mafia. Sexuality is a choice. Sexual fetishes are a choice. That's a fact of psychology and social-psychology. No such thing as god, so your ad hominem is an epic fail.

No, I am 110% factually accurate. There is NO such thing as 'transgender rights,' they do want "special rights" that supersede the human rights of the opposite sex that they claim to be. They are not entitled to any measure of rights that violate the rights of the opposite sex. Period. And the mental basket cases are trying to force tolerance through cancel culture and the force of law. It's an already established fact and common knowledge, but apparently you've been keeping your head buried in the sand, or up someone's.... (BLEEP)!

"In conclusion, imposing restrictions on assault weapons is a common-sense measure that can help to reduce gun violence in the United States. By limiting access to these deadly weapons, we can make our communities safer and prevent tragedies like mass shootings from occurring." You do know that more people die every single year by hands, fists and feet than by rifles of any kind? You do know that more people die every singe year by stabbing and blunt objects than by rifles of any kind? You do know that more people die every single year by shotguns than by rifles of any kind? AND You do know that a lot more people die every singel year by HANDGUNS than by all of the above combined than by rifles of any kind, don't you? The left's anti-rifle position is pure unsubstantiated emotively driven subjective nonsense!!!! And the focus of Heller was on handguns for concealment, it had nothing to do with rifles because you cannot walk around concealing it...it's too big. DUH!

"The one who just makes up definitions to make himself always be (sic) right all the time." I've made up no definitions, ever. This is just a strawman fallacy, and a rather pathetic one at that. "The fact that you probably couldn't come (sic) with a single fault that trump has makes you look like a delusionabl fanatic." Yet another pathetic strawman fallacy. "No one is perfect." Thank you Captain Obvious!!! Got amymore gems like that one!?!

Making an observation of another's psychological projection =/= my projection. Linguistics matters. You did more personal attacking in that comment than actually addressing greg's point. You seem to have a knee-jerk reaction with those personal attacks (ad hominem fallacy) than actually addressing the arguments/positions proferred by others.

No, I am using the commonly understood and accepted defintion what is central to the "debate" involving assault weapons. You were the one who went off on a tangent with a different definition to come up with a poor example that has no relevance in reality. "If you are going by your definition that anything that can be used for assault is an assault weapon." Thank you. You just admitted you cannot prove me wrong. The rest of your retort comes off as a whiny scorned little girl. Superfluous nonsensical sophomoric banality. Don't let the proverbial door hit you one your way out.

"You should get some help." How cute, psychological projection. 🙄

Trump did no such thing. He made a phone call, an inquiry. That's it. He didn't leverage 💩! And to date it is becoming clearer and clearer that the ONLY corrupt lying treasonous criminal between the two is Joe "child sniffing pedo" Biden and his entire family who has sold out America to the Chinese, Iran and Ukraine.

"I cant (sic) seem to be (sic) understanding your question." Sounds like a personal problem to me.

An AR-15 is not designed for combat. It is designed for civilian use. It is functionally no different than dozens of rifles made for the same purpose over the decades. The only difference between the older/other versions is, the AR-15 looks more menacing to those who do not understand it. Everyone fears the unknown. Your "extreme" example is a bad one, at best. Ever see the movie "Runaway" with Tom Selleck and Gene Simmons? Robots were made as caretakers in the homes, but they were easily reprogramed for nefarious reasons. One such robot was and killed the adults, but not the child in the home. And we don't quite live in the age of Terminator, so, no go on your example. Well, except maybe in China where there has been a news story floating around where they have been tinkering with that very idea, but the robot turned on them and killed several scientists. Either way, in your example, the robot is the killer wielding the gun just like a human being. It's programming, just like human behavior, is the problem and not the tool being wielded. A kitchen knife, while made for reasons other than killing, can still kill. And historically stabbing weapons have been used just like guns to kill people by the person wielding them. Just last week a kid in Van Nuys High School (CA) did just that. He chose a stabbing object to cut and hurt 4 students in a mass stabbing. Even a pencil can be used as a stabbing weapon, which it has by a student stabbing a staff member at their school (Student stabs staff member with pencil at Memminger Elementary School: CPD | WCIV). Bottom line, anything used to "assault" another person with the intent to do them either minor, major, serious bodily harm, even death, becomes an "assault weapon" of that person's choice at the time of their heinous criminal act.

Hell yes. The same for any other divisive day. It's bull!!! We are all human beings.

Nah, intellectual cowards such as yourself demean yourself with your psychological projection actually believing you are attirbuting something factual upon another, when that could not be any further from the truth. Mr. Dunning-Kruger.

"Those were Southern Democratic Conservatives. Also party switch, which is something that actually occured. Conservatives love to deny history huh." ~Didn't deny anything. They were Democrats. Jacksonian Democrats to be precise. What was then is not what is today. Citing historical eras as if they have any relvance today just demonstrates your ignorance of said history to present day realities.

You did not link to the video, or post html text to it, but I will respond based on the text above. Yes, there is only one race...the human race, but that does not mean there are not variations within that race the same as there are variations in the flowers, trees, amphibians, mammals, reptiles, etc. There are inherent differences that set us apart by those variations. Perhaps as David (below) suggested, breed would be a better term to use, but a rose by any other name is still a rose. So demarcating the human race by separate categorical races is scientifically appropriate. So no, there is no one "race" per se, but the entirety of races being called the 'human race,' yes, there is one "human" race. AA wasn't about color of skin so much as it was about "racism," the false belief that one race of human beings is more superior to another race of human beings. The differing classifications between the races has nothing to do with the "shameful, antiquated and segregative philisophy" human beings have created and propagated. Again, that goes back to "racism" and "stereotyping." Your theory and argument for debate here is way off point. You need some education by Thomas Sowell and Heather Mac Donald.

"Do you even know that something called the Confederacy existed?" ~ AKA Democrats

"I love it when Conservatives always think you're a Liberal when you contest them." ~ Liberal in mindset, not political party. Big difference. "...even though I know about 30x more about the political landscape then you do..." ~ ROTFLMAO!!! Easy to claim, much harder to prove. And so far all you've proven to be is a sanctimonious obnoxious narcissist. "...keep crying on the internet." ~ You're the only doing the crying, like a scorned little girl that even the dogs won't play with, even with porkchops tied around her neck.

That's right, tuck tail and run you yellow intellectual coward poster child for the Dunning-Kruger Effect. Can't prove me wrong, so you cry wolf. What a loser. You should be expelled from this site. you are no debater, you couldn't argue your way out of a wet paper bag.

That's right, I am a conservative. So what!?! What is your point? And how does that make me a "L" when conservatives are far more successful than liberal progressives?????