Connect with us


Ted Cruz Calls Out Dems: They’re Playing ‘Ridiculous Theater’ with 2nd Amendment Rights



On Tuesday, Republican Sen. Ted Cruz criticized a number of proposals connected to the gun control push by Democratic members of Congress. Cruz said these proposals punish law-abiding gun owners even while it does little to prevent mass shootings.

Cruz spoke at a hearing about gun violence held by the Senate Judiciary Committee. There, the GOP senator said Democrats are playing “ridiculous theater” with regards to the people’s Second Amendment rights.

He noted that in committee hearings following a mass shooting, Democrats start proposing measures that will take firearms away from law-abiding gun owners. Cruz said this is because it’s the Democrats’ political objective. The Texas lawmaker then added that such measures are not effective in reducing crime; instead, they make the problem worse.

Cruz said that when the law disarms law-abiding citizens, the possibility of them becoming victims increases. According to the senator, to stop the murders, they need to go after those perpetrating the crime.

Democrats Continue to Push for Gun Control

The committee hearing took place less than 24 hours after the recent shooting in Boulder, Colorado. The incident left 10 people dead, including a Boulder Police officer. It also came less than a week after the Atlanta-area shooting, which led to the deaths of eight individuals.
With this, Senate Democrats are trying to urge their fellow lawmakers to support gun control proposals that the House of Representatives passed in February.

The proposed measure would require stricter background checks on all commercial gun purchases and transfers. It would also provide the FBI with more time to conduct the said background checks. The measure also closes several loopholes that would let a person acquire a gun prior to the completion of background checks.

Click here to read the full article on

What do you think will happen next? Let us know in the comments below!

Continue Reading


  1. Jonas

    March 26, 2021 at 10:46 AM


  2. Dr Richard J Rini

    March 24, 2021 at 10:56 PM

    Bill – the Armalite Rifle model 15 was designed by Armalite years ago as a more modern, lighter, easy to sight and shoot for HUNTING. With subsonic ammo it is also a great home defense gun for the same reasons. Women can learn to fire this gun quite accurately because of the light weight. One can also mount it with a blinding light and laser to quickly target an intruder. It is a gun that fights the 2nd Amendment perfectly. Pistols are harder to shoot. Shotguns with defense ammo will blow an intruder and everything within a 4 foot circle to pieces. The AR15 fires one shot at a time. An Assault rifle fires automatically (like a machine gun). The M4 was an Army take off on the AR but fires automatically. The bigger magazines were made for the military and for practicing shooters and for competition. If however your home is stormed by BLM, a stack of 30 round mags taped together will allow fast changes to easily fend of those thugs. Man up. Go to a range and try out shooting. It’s fun. AND it beats trying to plead for your life when BLM overruns your defense by throwing cutlery at them.

  3. Anonymous

    March 24, 2021 at 4:59 PM

    Bill – why are you shouting? I was in the service – for 31+ years. So does that make me ‘entitled’ to own an AR – which is a civilian weapon.
    I don’t have to ‘need’ one, I can own one as a Law Abiding Citizen if I so choose. Period

  4. Pat

    March 24, 2021 at 4:44 PM


  5. Pat

    March 24, 2021 at 4:41 PM

    An AR-15 stands for Armalite Rifle model 15, the M16 and M4 that American Armed Forces use are BASED ON a CIVILIAN firearm; not the other way around. Personally I find it to be a very overpriced ‘varmint fun’.

  6. bill

    March 24, 2021 at 3:41 PM

    WHAT THE HELL DO YOU NEED A AR-15 FOR YOU re not in the service are you

  7. Rick Danzey

    March 24, 2021 at 3:00 PM

    A very accurate assessment, Sen Cruz. The gun used was mearly a tool use to achieve the shooter’s objective. It realy could have been far worse had he decided to blow up the store. Or have driven his car into the front door. There are numerous means to his end and to blame a rifle and other associated guns (not weapons) is senseless abuse of “Shall not be infringed”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *