User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:29:37 AM EDT
[#1]
Vote for Hillary then
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:31:31 AM EDT
[#2]
95% of the EPA is bullshit anyways.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:31:56 AM EDT
[#3]
Quoted:
is that a good idea? 70-80% seems kinda extreme. I'm not a TreeHugger, but I also don't want to go duck hunting in sewage. I support Trump 100% but I agree with you. Inb4 you get called a treehugger. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:32:15 AM EDT
[#4]
The EPA has little to do with environmental protection and everything to do with people/company/financial control. 80% would be a good start.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:33:12 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Vote for Hillary then this is the 2nd time in 2 days that you've encouraged someone to vote for Clinton. why do you keep doing that???? apologies... that was actually Cobalty2004 that did that yesterday. regardless, why would you - one of Trump's OG pumpers - suggest (even jokingly) that someone vote for Clinton? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:33:18 AM EDT
[#6]
He is a maniac and hates peasants, clean air, and children.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:33:23 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I support Trump 100% but I agree with you. Inb4 you get called a treehugger. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
is that a good idea? 70-80% seems kinda extreme. I'm not a TreeHugger, but I also don't want to go duck hunting in sewage. I support Trump 100% but I agree with you. Inb4 you get called a treehugger. As with most Government programs and regulations, I'd say that 70-80% is BS waste anyways so I think he's on to something. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:33:39 AM EDT
[#8]
How about retarded CAFE standards for vehicles? Those need to go.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:34:10 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
this is the 2nd time in 2 days that you've encouraged someone to vote for Clinton. why do you keep doing that???? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Vote for Hillary then this is the 2nd time in 2 days that you've encouraged someone to vote for Clinton. why do you keep doing that???? He is a nevertrumper. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:34:33 AM EDT
[#10]
Don't worry OP hilliary will make sure the EPA determines lead and gunpowder are unsafe to the environment. No congress vote needed.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:35:02 AM EDT
[#11]
Are any EPA regulations, rules, or policies stricter than those specified by law? If so, those should be on the chopping block. We should not have government red tape in excess of that minimally required by law.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:35:10 AM EDT
[#12]
As an owner of 3 vehicles with v8 engines, fuck the EPA and CAFE standards, eat a bag of dicks.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:35:50 AM EDT
[#13]
Quoted:
is that a good idea? 70-80% seems kinda extreme. I'm not a TreeHugger, but I also don't want to go duck hunting in sewage. Who the fuck duck hunts on Capitol Hill? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:36:17 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
95% of the EPA is bullshit anyways. I would push that number up to the 98% range. There's very little the EPA does that actually protects the environment. They are on par with the BATFE with their effectiveness. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:36:47 AM EDT
[#15]
well if he cuts some regs, maybe we can get a lead smelter back in the US so we dont have to buy our lead from china. Then ammo prices can drop.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:37:28 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Who the fuck duck hunts on Capitol Hill? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
is that a good idea? 70-80% seems kinda extreme. I'm not a TreeHugger, but I also don't want to go duck hunting in sewage. Who the fuck duck hunts on Capitol Hill? Isn't that where all of the sitting ducks are? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:37:41 AM EDT
[#17]
He won't cut anything.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:37:42 AM EDT
[#18]
Quoted:
is that a good idea? 70-80% seems kinda extreme. I'm not a TreeHugger, but I also don't want to go duck hunting in sewage. Environmental regulation should be simple; don't pollute the environment if you don't want to get your shit pushed in by lawsuits. There is no need to have a bunch of regulatory hoops for businesses to jump through. It is all bullshit written by the lawyers of big corporations who use the .gov to stomp on their competition. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:38:18 AM EDT
[#19]
Yes it is a great idea!
I have worked in the environmental business since 1987. Most of the laws are way overkill. Liberals who want to control everything you do are running the EPA now. Vote less government !!!!! Vote Freedom!!!!!!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:38:24 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Isn't that where all of the sitting ducks are? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
is that a good idea? 70-80% seems kinda extreme. I'm not a TreeHugger, but I also don't want to go duck hunting in sewage. Who the fuck duck hunts on Capitol Hill? Isn't that where all of the sitting ducks are? He does not want to hunt in sewage......
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:38:36 AM EDT
[#21]
EPA regulations are a major reason so many companies outsource manufacturing or move out of the country altogether.
The regs also stifle competition because smaller companies can't afford to stay compliant. EPA: "You can't rinse off this lettuce and just have the water drain out into the field behind your building, you must run it through a waste water filtration system and store it for a year." Small business owner: "How much is a system like that?" EPA: "Oh, about $50,000." |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:39:12 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Environmental regulation should be simple; don't pollute the environment if you don't want to get your shit pushed in by lawsuits. There is no need to have a bunch of regulatory hoops for businesses the jump through. It is all bullshit written by the lawyers of big corporations who use the .gov to stomp on their competition. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
is that a good idea? 70-80% seems kinda extreme. I'm not a TreeHugger, but I also don't want to go duck hunting in sewage. Environmental regulation should be simple; don't pollute the environment if you don't want to get your shit pushed in by lawsuits. There is no need to have a bunch of regulatory hoops for businesses the jump through. It is all bullshit written by the lawyers of big corporations who use the .gov to stomp on their competition. You make it sound so simple, but what is the definition of "pollute the environment"? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:39:44 AM EDT
[#23]
I wouldn't be too concerned about him following through with anything he said he was going to do, anyway.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:39:54 AM EDT
[#24]
Quoted:
is that a good idea? 70-80% seems kinda extreme. I'm not a TreeHugger, but I also don't want to go duck hunting in sewage. Remember he said just a few days ago for every reg you bring bring two you'll get rid of. Makes sense. There is a lot of needless overlapping and often conflicting regs. Many are out dated and and need to be replaced with updated regs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:40:13 AM EDT
[#25]
every time I go get in my vehicle and see the clear coat peeling off, I get more pissed
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:40:37 AM EDT
[#26]
Quoted:
is that a good idea? 70-80% seems kinda extreme. I'm not a TreeHugger, but I also don't want to go duck hunting in sewage. Maybe you can start a group that advocates everyone pays higher taxes to subsidize your duck hunting. Oh, wait- |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:40:57 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He won't cut anything. oh look another pathetic arfcom defeatist. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:41:22 AM EDT
[#28]
You could get rid of 90% of them, rewrite the rest and have a cleaner environment with easier to understand and enforce rules.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:41:54 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You make it sound so simple, but what is the definition of "pollute the environment"? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
is that a good idea? 70-80% seems kinda extreme. I'm not a TreeHugger, but I also don't want to go duck hunting in sewage. Environmental regulation should be simple; don't pollute the environment if you don't want to get your shit pushed in by lawsuits. There is no need to have a bunch of regulatory hoops for businesses the jump through. It is all bullshit written by the lawyers of big corporations who use the .gov to stomp on their competition. You make it sound so simple, but what is the definition of "pollute the environment"? Ideally, it would be whatever pollution a plaintiff can prove is harmful to the jury in a reformed loser pays legal system. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:42:19 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
oh look another pathetic arfcom defeatist. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
He won't cut anything. oh look another pathetic arfcom defeatist. So, you think he will cut the EPA? If he doesn't, what is your excuse? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:42:57 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 95% of the EPA is bullshit anyways. Slacker isn't going far enough.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:43:05 AM EDT
[#32]
100%
Just because something is necessary does not mean the government has to do it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:43:34 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ideally, it would be whatever pollution a plaintiff can prove is harmful to the jury in a reformed loser pays legal system. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
is that a good idea? 70-80% seems kinda extreme. I'm not a TreeHugger, but I also don't want to go duck hunting in sewage. Environmental regulation should be simple; don't pollute the environment if you don't want to get your shit pushed in by lawsuits. There is no need to have a bunch of regulatory hoops for businesses the jump through. It is all bullshit written by the lawyers of big corporations who use the .gov to stomp on their competition. You make it sound so simple, but what is the definition of "pollute the environment"? Ideally, it would be whatever pollution a plaintiff can prove is harmful to the jury in a reformed loser pays legal system. So, fracking...because anyone can get a jury of idiots and show them bullshit on fracking. Also, why is the loser paying something? How does that money solve the problem? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:44:05 AM EDT
[#34]
Do you think the government owns the rainwater as the EPA insists? Or that they should be in charge of cleaning up gold mines?
Yeah, the EPA is mostly BS, and should be cut drastically, and their duties more tightly defined. And no rulemaking powers. Make their shit go through congress or presidential orders or something. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:44:47 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
this is the 2nd time in 2 days that you've encouraged someone to vote for Clinton. why do you keep doing that???? apologies... that was actually Cobalty2004 that did that yesterday. regardless, why would you - one of Trump's OG pumpers - suggest (even jokingly) that someone vote for Clinton? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Vote for Hillary then this is the 2nd time in 2 days that you've encouraged someone to vote for Clinton. why do you keep doing that???? apologies... that was actually Cobalty2004 that did that yesterday. regardless, why would you - one of Trump's OG pumpers - suggest (even jokingly) that someone vote for Clinton? NVM  
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:46:40 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Don't worry OP hilliary will make sure the EPA determines lead and gunpowder are unsafe to the environment. No congress vote needed. Why legislate when you can regulate..85% of regulations are bullshit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:48:16 AM EDT
[#37]
If he could stop them from making up shit as they go it would be a huge step in the right direction
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:48:57 AM EDT
[#38]
Does this mean I get my awesome, non-EPA gas cans back.
On this issue alone, he'd get my vote. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:49:04 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
this is the 2nd time in 2 days that you've encouraged someone to vote for Clinton. why do you keep doing that???? apologies... that was actually Cobalty2004 that did that yesterday. regardless, why would you - one of Trump's OG pumpers - suggest (even jokingly) that someone vote for Clinton? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Vote for Hillary then this is the 2nd time in 2 days that you've encouraged someone to vote for Clinton. why do you keep doing that???? apologies... that was actually Cobalty2004 that did that yesterday. regardless, why would you - one of Trump's OG pumpers - suggest (even jokingly) that someone vote for Clinton? Because in his world if you're not going full Madonna for Trump then you're a DU member in good standing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:49:19 AM EDT
[#40]
Who the fuck cares at this point?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:49:34 AM EDT
[#41]
Where the fuck was this a month ago?
Go, Donald go!!! 
I'd be willing to bet that at least 90% of EPA regs do about as much to ensure clean air and water as the Arfcom CoC does. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:50:13 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The EPA has little to do with environmental protection and everything to do with people/company/financial control. 80% would be a good start. This |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:50:18 AM EDT
[#43]
You don't need the EPA. Courts can handle cases where people's rights are being infringed.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:51:35 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Are any EPA regulations, rules, or policies stricter than those specified by law? If so, those should be on the chopping block. We should not have government red tape in excess of that minimally required by law. Thanks to the Title V program most air permits are significantly more restrictive than the law. I know nothing about water but can't imagine it's any different. Most regulatory permitting is done by fiat. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:51:57 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So, fracking...because anyone can get a jury of idiots and show them bullshit on fracking. Also, why is the loser paying something? How does that money solve the problem? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
is that a good idea? 70-80% seems kinda extreme. I'm not a TreeHugger, but I also don't want to go duck hunting in sewage. Environmental regulation should be simple; don't pollute the environment if you don't want to get your shit pushed in by lawsuits. There is no need to have a bunch of regulatory hoops for businesses the jump through. It is all bullshit written by the lawyers of big corporations who use the .gov to stomp on their competition. You make it sound so simple, but what is the definition of "pollute the environment"? Ideally, it would be whatever pollution a plaintiff can prove is harmful to the jury in a reformed loser pays legal system. So, fracking...because anyone can get a jury of idiots and show them bullshit on fracking. Also, why is the loser paying something? How does that money solve the problem? Does the EPA prevent fracking companies from getting sued? Loser pays might help prevent those fracking companies from getting sued by people who aren't sure they will win. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:52:26 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I would push that number up to the 98% range. There's very little the EPA does that actually protects the environment. They are on par with the BATFE with their effectiveness. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: 95% of the EPA is bullshit anyways. I would push that number up to the 98% range. There's very little the EPA does that actually protects the environment. They are on par with the BATFE with their effectiveness. I am a tree hugger by education and professional experience anyway. The EPA fuckin blows but to say 98% of what they do isn't protecting the environment is just making you look silly. It's more accurate to say that most of what they do is good, but some is utter and complete bullshit political hackery. Clean air and clean water are good things, cleaning up old waste sites that threaten public health is good. We are, up until recently, far better off with some form of the EPA than without. If you really knew the history of the environment prior to 1970 things were kinda fucked up. All that being said they are completely out of control and need to get the ever loving bitch slapped out of them by congress and the courts. The environment has become the favorite excuse of the left to implement economy destroying wealth redistribution and massive bureaucratic overreach. My vision for the EPA and DEC in my state is for it to be more of NASA type organization. You want to reduce XYZ? Ok take your budget and go engineer a solution, then share it with business...solve the problems don't just mandate something and let the economy decide it's cheaper to make it overseas. If they actually gave a shit about the planet the would want to keep things being made in the western world where the regulation do protect the environment. Again, I'd rather have an EPA than not...but much like the rest of washington is needs to be burned to the ground and rebuilt with the benefit of hindsight. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:52:36 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
95% of the EPA is bullshit anyways. This. Removing the vast majority of the innumerable lines of regulations will have no noticeable impact on the environment. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:52:46 AM EDT
[#48]
I need to educate myself on EPA laws. I enjoy spending time outdoors so my immediate reaction, albeit an uneducated one, is that cutting 80% of laws protecting the places I enjoy may be extreme.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:52:51 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: He won't cut anything. Quote HistoryQuoted: He won't cut anything. Quoted: I wouldn't be too concerned about him following through with anything he said he was going to do, anyway. I remember when arfcom wasn't full of whiney old women. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 11:53:52 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The EPA has little to do with environmental protection and everything to do with people/company/financial control. 80% would be a good start. This, for fuck sake. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
