This is correct. I attended the Supreme Court arguments. Trump DOJ argued alongside Bayer/Monsanto that because the EPA had already blessed glyphosate, no state government could require labels disclosing cancer risk. The EPA & DOJ in this instance was only there to protect Bayer.
“Why do you need an AR-15?”
Ask the police.
Because they have them.
They have the rifles.
They have the 30-round magazines.
They have the gear politicians keep saying is too dangerous for you.
And nobody asks them why they need it.
Why?
Because the answer is obvious:
They carry it to confront violent people.
But here’s the part everyone skips…
Who meets that violent person first?
You do.
The cop shows up after the threat starts.
You’re the one already there.
No badge.
No backup.
No radio.
No team.
And the Supreme Court has already said police do not have a constitutional duty to protect you as an individual.
So if the state keeps these tools for the people who arrive second…
Why does it want to take them from the person who has to survive first?
That’s the question.
Drop your answer below — and send this to the person who still asks, “Why do you need that?”
52 weeks and $2 billion later, the Senate has still not voted on the No Tax Dollars For Terrorists Act. It’s time for a vote.
@RepTimBurchett@ShawnRyan762
💯God Bless Raul Rivera.💯
This is Mamdani’s NYPD. NYC is a communist cesspool. Just look at that officers facial expressions when he’s called a communist.🤬👿
@nicksortor, @RepThomasMassie has already been pushing for this. Why does @realDonaldTrump make it sèem likw it was his idea? Dont get me wrong, I whole heartedly support this but for fucks sake, give credit where its due.
JUST IN: President Trump reveals his administration is working on NATIONAL RIGHT TO CARRY
This would be an absolutely HUGE step towards bringing back the true meaning of the Second Amendment
LFG! Keep pushing for this, POTUS!