PDA

View Full Version : Meg Whitman staff @ CA gunshows abusing NRA logos...


bwiese
05-11-2010, 4:13 PM
As I mentioned before, I personally witnessed Whitman staff at the recent Cow Palace gunshow using large-letter-log NRA hat(s) in a cagey way.

I now have multiple other reports of the same thing at other such events.

The staffers would not necessarily wear the hat, but the headwear would be on the table along with campaign literature, and arranged in a 'strategic' readily-viewed fashion.

When the NRA hat was on the table, it was not crushed/collapsed or suffering from any wear (i.e., was fresh/new appearing) and was not casually placed: it was clearly positioned to trigger fraudulent inference the NRA might be endorsing Meg Whitman.

I yelled at the Megholes staffing the booth on this - a guy quickly put the hat on, said he was an NRA life member, blah blah blah, and tried to act like he'd just taken his hat off -- and that Meg really was pro-RKBA.

[If Meg were pro-RKBA, Ben Cannon wouldn't have had to create GunPal!]

If Calgunners see Meg (or, for that matter Poizner) events where NRA hats are used as an artifice like this, please call them out on this - loudly. You don't have to start a riot, but the folks around these booths need to be 'informed'. Please also let contact your local NRA Members Council leadership or the folks at the NRA recruiting booth (typically outside most guhshows) so it's piped thru the right channels ASAP.

jonni
05-11-2010, 5:33 PM
you should let the NRA know

bwiese
05-11-2010, 5:41 PM
you should let the NRA know

I already have ;)

But we need to nip this in the bud for future occurences - that's why I put out the warning.

Shotgun Man
05-11-2010, 5:52 PM
Is this illegal?

"Fraudulent inferences" pretty much sums up the method by which pols try to get elected.

five.five-six
05-11-2010, 5:52 PM
meg, all you need to know


http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/6954/megwhitman.jpg

unusedusername
05-11-2010, 5:53 PM
I'll pass it on to my MC, in the off chance they did not already hear it from you.

otteray
05-11-2010, 6:24 PM
[If Meg were pro-RKBA, Ben Cannon wouldn't have had to create GunPal!]



Dibs on the sig!
Thanks, Bill!

yellowfin
05-11-2010, 6:28 PM
Can that be considered copyright infringement and dealt with accordingly?

Shotgun Man
05-11-2010, 6:44 PM
Can that be considered copyright infringement and dealt with accordingly?

That's what I was wondering. I concluded if I'm running for public office, I'm allowed to wear an NRA hat. Why not? I'm a member. Even if I wasn't a member, I agree with their stated mission purpose.

Neither do I need their endorsement to put an NRA hat on a table at my booth.

bwiese
05-11-2010, 7:01 PM
Neither do I need their endorsement to put an NRA
hat on a table at my booth.

It's "just a hat" - but so much more.

There's nothing legally that can be done, but so much that can be done instead.

Somebody grabbing hold of the PA system "Meg Whitman specifically is NOT endorsed by the NRA, no matter how many cute hat tricks her people use" is a start.

Shotgun Man
05-11-2010, 7:14 PM
It's "just a hat" - but so much more.

There's nothing legally that can be done, but so much that can be done instead.

Somebody grabbing hold of the PA system "Meg Whitman specifically is NOT endorsed by the NRA, no matter how many cute hat tricks her people use" is a start.

If I see her or her minions pulling one of her "hat tricks," I'll do as you suggest.

Funny, I used to play ice hockey in high school. A hat trick was three goals in a game.

Manic Moran
05-11-2010, 7:37 PM
Out of interest, as CEO how much sway did she have to determine E-Bay's firearms policies? Could it have been a decision of the Board of Directors, even if she voted against them?

NTM

advocatusdiaboli
05-11-2010, 7:54 PM
Out of interest, as CEO how much sway did she have to determine E-Bay's firearms policies? Could it have been a decision of the Board of Directors, even if she voted against them?

THeir legal counsel most likely strongly advised against allowing the advertisement of private party transaction in firearms. The way things go in CA, if one person did a PPT without an FFL, eBay would have been sued for multiple millions and the ATF might have threatened to shut them down. They might have gotten clear as the third party, but I am sure the board didn't want to take the risk. If I were a shareholder I wouldn't either unless they added extra overhead to follow up on every single transaction to ensure it was done legally--and that would be cost prohibitive and ruin the free wheeling auction model they have. eBay just avoided a high overhead risky product category. Amazon doesn't sell firearms, neither does Walmart nor Sears and Craig's list won't do it either. You can argue eBay could have set up something like Gun Broker or Guns America but given their huge multi-national model is that really reasonable and how much additional revenue would it provide for the expense, complexity, and risk--would it be worth it? I tend to think not. We gonna boycott them too. I understand the anger, but the problems is our gun laws not eBay.I don't like her for other reasons, but I can see a logical reason why eBay avoided it.

five.five-six
05-11-2010, 8:10 PM
THeir legal counsel most likely strongly advised against allowing the advertisement of private party transaction in firearms. The way things go in CA, if one person did a PPT without an FFL, eBay would have been sued for multiple millions and the ATF might have threatened to shut them down.


exactly like what happened to gunbroker, guns america and shotgun news.... they have all been sued out of business..... oh wait :rolleyes:


as CEO had 100% control over the gun pollicy...and chose to screw the stock holders out of tens of millions in profits because she is anti gun


either that or all those law suits against websites that host "pictures of any firearm in a listing, even if the firearm is just part of the picture" yea, those lawsuits are in the billions


http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/6954/megwhitman.jpg

advocatusdiaboli
05-11-2010, 8:35 PM
exactly like what happened to gunbroker, guns america and shotgun news.... they have all been sued out of business..... oh wait :rolleyes:

I'll say it again, maybe you'll get it this time: eBay, unlike those dedicated firearm businesses which have only firearms as their major source of revenue, has a multi-national, multi-billion dollar business without firearms. It would be imprudent to risk a multi-billion dollar a year business for a niche market selling firearms with all the added costs and risk. If firearms were so lucrative an additional market, why doesn't Amazon do it? Or Walmart? Or Sears? Why not? Because it's piss-ant revenue compared to their mainstream and not worth the additional risk. Think about it again. As a business person with a lot at stake. Think again. <rolls eyes even more than you did, back at you>

dantodd
05-11-2010, 9:32 PM
why doesn't Amazon do it? Or Walmart? Or Sears? Why not? Because it's piss-ant revenue compared to their mainstream and not worth the additional risk. Think about it again. As a business person with a lot at stake. Think again. <rolls eyes even more than you did, back at you>

eBay provides a service which should not discriminate against legal transactions. They permit listing lots of product which some might consider objectionable. Amazon is different in that they provide the products for the most part it is not simply a marketplace, if you search you will find lots and lots of firearms-related items on Amazon that would be prohibited on eBay. They chose to not offer guns as a business decision, they do not want to have to create relationships with thousands of FFLs to do transfers, track individual state laws, etc. For eBay there is no incremental cost of stocking, servicing etc. of a gun listing than a non-gun listing the people placing the listings are taking all the market risk. As for WalMart, they chased out of the gun market by stupid California laws, they still sell firearms in other states, (http://reviews.walmart.com/1336/2685528/reviews.htm.) Sears was one of the nations leading firearms retailers for several decades, stopping sometime in the 80s.

Grumpyoldretiredcop
05-11-2010, 9:36 PM
eBay doesn't have to have anything to do with firearms. And they don't.

We don't have to like Meg. And I don't.

hoffmang
05-11-2010, 9:40 PM
I'll say it again, maybe you'll get it this time: eBay, unlike those dedicated firearm businesses which have only firearms as their major source of revenue, has a multi-national, multi-billion dollar business without firearms.

And that business includes reselling packaged software and selling adult movies - both far more legally fraught than firearms.

To this day eBay (and Paypal) still readily allow the sale of items far more legally risky to both than firearms.

-Gene

thebronze
05-11-2010, 9:49 PM
Whitman loses 50-point lead in CA primary (http://hotair.com/archives/2010/05/11/whitman-loses-50-point-lead-in-ca-primary/)

SIP2000GLO
05-11-2010, 10:04 PM
I'll say it again, maybe you'll get it this time: eBay, unlike those dedicated firearm businesses which have only firearms as their major source of revenue, has a multi-national, multi-billion dollar business without firearms. It would be imprudent to risk a multi-billion dollar a year business for a niche market selling firearms with all the added costs and risk. If firearms were so lucrative an additional market, why doesn't Amazon do it? Or Walmart? Or Sears? Why not? Because it's piss-ant revenue compared to their mainstream and not worth the additional risk. Think about it again. As a business person with a lot at stake. Think again. <rolls eyes even more than you did, back at you>


You are wasting your time. Some people will never get it.

Bottom line is. If Ebay does not want to sell guns, then it's their business and their right to do so.

dantodd
05-11-2010, 10:08 PM
You are wasting your time. Some people will never get it.

Bottom line is. If Ebay does not want to sell guns, then it's their business and their right to do so.

Having the right to do something and that something being the right thing to do are very different things. I have not heard anyone argue that eBay can or should be forced to accept listings for guns. You are putting meaning into people's posts which are not there.

SIP2000GLO
05-11-2010, 10:21 PM
1. Go back and reread your posts.

2. Stop stumping your feet. If Ebay chose not to sell firearms, there are others that do. Grow up!

five.five-six
05-11-2010, 10:32 PM
And that business includes reselling packaged software and selling adult movies - both far more legally fraught than firearms.

To this day eBay (and Paypal) still readily allow the sale of items far more legally risky to both than firearms.

-Gene

don't fore get fake jewelry (sold as real), pirated videos, counterfeit currency, scalped tickets, scam vacations, scam "how to make millions selling on eBay" downloads


but none of that concerns me, what matters is that we have a candidate that won't vote, has no track record, won't debate, won't answer questions publicly and as an AII enthusiast, about all I have to go on is her decision to cost her company tens of millions of dollars banning pictures containing a firearm, which does not sound all that intelligent

thedrickel
05-11-2010, 10:52 PM
OK, so they dont want to be involved in FFL transactions . . . that's fine . . . what about parts? They can't allow the sale of 5 or 10rd mags, small parts, 80% receivers (AKA "paperweights") . . . or even the mere PICTURE of a firearm in a listing?

five.five-six
05-11-2010, 10:57 PM
^ and if you get caught selling anything on the list... the seize any money you have in paypal, then investigate anyone you have had recent transactions with and seize their monies for 60 days as well..... for violating one of these dictates.... seems like more of a religion than just a business decision


starter pistols???? really? starter pistols???


http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/6954/megwhitman.jpg

hoffmang
05-11-2010, 11:16 PM
1. Go back and reread your posts.

2. Stop stumping your feet. If Ebay chose not to sell firearms, there are others that do. Grow up!

Woolworths was well within its rights to exclude black people from lunch counters at the time. That doesn't make it right or something one should support.

-Gene

FatalKitty
05-11-2010, 11:18 PM
OK, so they dont want to be involved in FFL transactions . . . that's fine . . . what about parts? They can't allow the sale of 5 or 10rd mags, small parts, 80% receivers (AKA "paperweights") . . . or even the mere PICTURE of a firearm in a listing?

I don't get it... is there something so wrong with gunbroker that's causing all this wining?
I could really care less that eBay doesn't allow pictures of firearms in their listings, I'm also quite sure they don't allow pornography either - wanna complain about 1a too? Get over it.

I have purchased several gun related items on eBay recently (INCLUDING PARTS like forends, stocks, slings, others) I also haven't had a problem finding the things I wanted at gunbroker either.

five.five-six
05-11-2010, 11:20 PM
Woolworths was well within its rights to exclude black people from lunch counters at the time. That doesn't make it right or something one should support.

-Gene


so long as they are not checking immigration status, it's constitutional... isn't it :shrug:

five.five-six
05-11-2010, 11:23 PM
I don't get it... is there something so wrong with gunbroker that's causing all this wining?
I could really care less that eBay doesn't allow pictures of firearms in their listings, I'm also quite sure they don't allow pornography either - wanna complain about 1a too? Get over it.

I have purchased several gun related items on eBay recently (INCLUDING PARTS like forends, stocks, slings, others) I also haven't had a problem finding the things I wanted at gunbroker either.

ok... this should help...read the thread title


now, do you want someone who is willing to forgo millions of dollars in profit to avoid selling these things RUNNING THE STATE?????????

AlexDD
05-11-2010, 11:24 PM
I haven't heard Woolworths since I was a kid.

Ps Good parallel.

unusedusername
05-11-2010, 11:26 PM
I don't get it... is there something so wrong with gunbroker that's causing all this wining?
I could really care less that eBay doesn't allow pictures of firearms in their listings, I'm also quite sure they don't allow pornography either - wanna complain about 1a too? Get over it.

I have purchased several gun related items on eBay recently (INCLUDING PARTS like forends, stocks, slings, others) I also haven't had a problem finding the things I wanted at gunbroker either.

We are not griping about ebay for the sake of griping.

1) Whitman was CEO of ebay when they decided that they didn't want to touch anything firearm related with a 10-foot pole. Ebay is known to be a company controlled tightly from the office of the CEO.

2) Candidate for Governor Whitman is now saying she is very pro-2nd amendment.

Something between 1 and 2 does not add up.

FatalKitty
05-11-2010, 11:32 PM
ok... this should help...read the thread title


now, do you want someone who is willing to forgo millions of dollars in profit to avoid selling these things RUNNING THE STATE?????????

I'm not voting for meg - I don't want her as gov for many reasons, her choice to run her business how she wanted to run it is NOT one of them.

should the ice cream store down the street sell guns too? there is no 2a infringement by not allowing the sale of guns and related items...

dantodd
05-11-2010, 11:34 PM
1. Go back and reread your posts.

2. Stop stumping your feet. If Ebay chose not to sell firearms, there are others that do. Grow up!

1. As I only made 2 posts before this one it was an easy task. What is your point?

2. Neither of my feet are stumps. This is an arena of open discourse. Voicing a well thought out opinion that differs from yours is in no way stumping, or stomping, or stimping of my feet.

As for growing up, you are the person who chose to make personal attacks, I have not done so. I can assure you I am fully "grown up."

five.five-six
05-11-2010, 11:35 PM
I'm not voting for meg - I don't want her as gov for many reasons, her choice to run her business how she wanted to run it is NOT one of them.


I would be fascinated to find out what those reasons are

five.five-six
05-11-2010, 11:41 PM
2. Stop stumping your feet. If Ebay chose not to sell firearms, there are others that do. Grow up!


OK, let's try a different tact, lets say, hypothetical, that in Malaysia, eBay sold 10 year old boys, it made good business sense, one could make logical conclusions about the CEO


back here on earth, the CEO of eBay bant the sale of all things remotely gunnish, again, one can make logical conclusions about the CEO of eBay


and IBTL

dantodd
05-11-2010, 11:43 PM
I'm not voting for meg - I don't want her as gov for many reasons, her choice to run her business how she wanted to run it is NOT one of them.

should the ice cream store down the street sell guns too? there is no 2a infringement by not allowing the sale of guns and related items...

I am a bit shocked that someone who is on a pro-gun board says that they are not swayed by a candidates stance on RKBA issues.

razorx
05-12-2010, 12:12 AM
[QUOTE=FatalKitty;4274639...should the ice cream store down the street sell guns too? ...[/QUOTE]

I am pausing a moment while I enjoy that imagery :43:

...

FFL on wheels?

five.five-six
05-12-2010, 12:30 AM
I am pausing a moment while I enjoy that imagery :43:

...

FFL on wheels?

while in parker on business, I did buy a box of shells at a gas station, needles to say they get all my business when I am in town

bwiese
05-12-2010, 1:05 AM
...should the ice cream store down the street sell guns too? ...

Well, maybe the ice cream truck can sell hicap magazines ;)

wildhawker
05-12-2010, 1:53 AM
Well, maybe the ice cream truck can sell hicap magazines ;)

Hehehe :43:

artherd
05-12-2010, 2:27 AM
I'll say it again, maybe you'll get it this time: eBay, unlike those dedicated firearm businesses which have only firearms as their major source of revenue, has a multi-national, multi-billion dollar business without firearms. It would be imprudent to risk a multi-billion dollar a year business for a niche market selling firearms with all the added costs and risk.

The perceived versus actual risk in firearms is why GUNPAL is profitable.

Ebay and PayPal both touch higher-voltage rails than Firearms (eg Pornography, Zenga Scamville games, copyrighted works, etc.)

Policy makers tend to follow their lawyers. Their lawyers tend to be members of LCAV.

artherd
05-12-2010, 2:31 AM
should the ice cream store down the street take all your money and impound you're ice cream because you're wearing a shirt with a squirt gun on it?

My edits in italics :)

SIP2000GLO
05-12-2010, 4:14 AM
OK, let's try a different tact, lets say, hypothetical, that in Malaysia, eBay sold 10 year old boys, it made good business sense, one could make logical conclusions about the CEO


back here on earth, the CEO of eBay bant the sale of all things remotely gunnish, again, one can make logical conclusions about the CEO of eBay


and IBTL

Hypothetically that in Malaysia, Ebay sold 10 year old boys and it's fine with the Malaysian custom but it contradict with our customs and beliefs.

U.S.A. sells guns to the general population which is our custom, belief, and 2nd Amendment Right but a lot of people in other countries think it's insane and dangerous to society.

Different countries have different beliefs. Every country have it's good and bad.

I do not care what Ebay sells or not sell and I do not give a crap about politics. What I know is as a head of a company you make decisions for the best interest of the company regardless of what your beliefs are. Meg Whitman might or might not be a gun enthusiast. As CEO, she had to keep the company profitable and shareholders happy. Guns are not the bread and butter of Ebay as the majority of shoppers there are antis. Why piss them off and satisfy the gun owners so your company can piss straight down the toilet? Would that be a good move if you were the CEO?

Heck, next time I go into a mom and pop drive thru convenient store I should demand them to stock the vacuum cleaner that I've been wanting to buy. Since they carry legal products, they should carry everything. Especially the things that I want.

yellowfin
05-12-2010, 4:34 AM
I'll say it again, maybe you'll get it this time: eBay, unlike those dedicated firearm businesses which have only firearms as their major source of revenue, has a multi-national, multi-billion dollar business without firearms. It would be imprudent to risk a multi-billion dollar a year business for a niche market selling firearms with all the added costs and risk. If firearms were so lucrative an additional market, why doesn't Amazon do it? Or Walmart? Or Sears? Why not? Because it's piss-ant revenue compared to their mainstream and not worth the additional risk. Think about it again. As a business person with a lot at stake. Think again. <rolls eyes even more than you did, back at you>
This speaks to the big cultural problem of having the gun culture segregated away from large portions of the population.

Suvorov
05-12-2010, 6:34 AM
I do not care what Ebay sells or not sell and I do not give a crap about politics. What I know is as a head of a company you make decisions for the best interest of the company regardless of what your beliefs are. Meg Whitman might or might not be a gun enthusiast. As CEO, she had to keep the company profitable and shareholders happy. Guns are not the bread and butter of Ebay as the majority of shoppers there are antis. Why piss them off and satisfy the gun owners so your company can piss straight down the toilet? Would that be a good move if you were the CEO?

And so what makes you think she will start making pro-gun decisions once she becomes CEO of Kalifornia? She will believe (and many others will too) that more firearms restrictions are in the "best interest of the State." Second Amendment rights are not the bread and butter of the Kalifornia electorate, so why should she piss them off to satisfy us? Those who apologize for Meg are completely correct in saying that she and eBay can do whatever they want, but the fact is that Meg has a proven track record of sacrificing gun rights at the alter of economic/political expedience. Do you really want such a person deciding whether or not to veto a bill further restricting your right to keep and bear arms?

socal2310
05-12-2010, 7:33 AM
Under normal circumstances, some of us would gripe and complain about e-bay's policies with regard to firearms and nothing more. We know that they are a private corporation and are free to provide or decline to provide any service as they wish. Some of us might prefer that others neglected to purchase other items from e-bay in order to punish them for their anti gun stance, but well do I know what a hardship that would be for some people - my household included. My wife makes quite a few purchases through e-bay because while she could probably realize equal or greater savings by going to physical stores and scrounging sales (indeed, many items we purchase were obtained from clearance racks and resold) it would be at the cost of a tremendous amount of time.

As noted by others, e-bay went far beyond reasonable due diligence in separating themselves from any legal liability associated with firearms. That alone is suspicious in the extreme though I disagree that that fact alone is adequate to categorically condemn Whitman as anti gun. Thankfully, she has made enough other statements to ensure she would be viewed with extreme suspicion by any reasonable firearm owner even without the e-bay connection.

Ryan

Robidouxs
05-12-2010, 7:35 AM
The perceived versus actual risk in firearms is why GUNPAL is profitable.

Ebay and PayPal both touch higher-voltage rails than Firearms (eg Pornography, Zenga Scamville games, copyrighted works, etc.)

Policy makers tend to follow their lawyers. Their lawyers tend to be members of LCAV.

Was there any a time in the past when firearms were originally allowed to be sold on Ebay? I know Ebay has been around since 1995, well before the California 2000 features based ban for firearms.

IGOTDIRT4U
05-12-2010, 7:52 AM
It's "just a hat" - but so much more.

There's nothing legally that can be done, but so much that can be done instead.

Somebody grabbing hold of the PA system "Meg Whitman specifically is NOT endorsed by the NRA, no matter how many cute hat tricks her people use" is a start.

20007. No candidate or committee in his or her behalf shall
represent in connection with an election campaign, either orally or
in campaign material, that the candidate has the support of a
committee or organization that includes as part of its name the name
or any variation upon the name of a qualified political party with
which the candidate is not affiliated, together with the words
"county committee," "central committee," "county," or any other term
that might tend to mislead the voters into believing that the
candidate has the support of that party's county central committee or
state central committee, when that is not the case.
This section shall not be construed to prevent a candidate or
committee from representing that the candidate has the support of a
committee or group of voters affiliated with another political party,
which committee or group is identified by the name of that party,
where the name of the committee or group also includes the name of
the candidate.
Any member of a county central committee or state central
committee may commence an action in the superior court to enjoin
misrepresentation by a candidate or committee in his or her behalf,
in the manner prohibited by this section, to the effect that the
candidate has the support of the state or county central committee
involved.


Maybe there is a violation, here. Might explain the hasty donning of the hat.

chuckles48
05-12-2010, 9:24 AM
And that business includes reselling packaged software and selling adult movies - both far more legally fraught than firearms.

To this day eBay (and Paypal) still readily allow the sale of items far more legally risky to both than firearms.

-Gene

Actually, less so than you might realize. Back when eBay was just getting going, MS tried to use some rather heavy-handed methods to shut down that particular channel. The CA AG's office weighed in, MS backed off... in short, they've got good cover on the legal level, and have had for over a decade.

And yes, I speak from first-hand knowledge.

FatalKitty
05-12-2010, 9:27 AM
I would be fascinated to find out what those reasons are

I hate people named Meg

Luieburger
05-12-2010, 9:46 AM
I just can't find any reasons to vote for Meg. It's almost like voting for Hitler.

advocatusdiaboli
05-12-2010, 9:49 AM
Well, I am trying to give her the benefit of a doubt and I am stretching because I generally suspect people who make a fortune while inactive in politics (she rarely even voted) and suddenly become interested after they get enough money to have their own way. I am afraid of bored rich people who might not have any core values beyond avarice. The Governator, a bored rich film star, cut and run on us when it got tough. I am worried about the same with both Carly and Meg frankly. Rich egomaniacs looking for their next self-aggrandizing ego rush--and then they'll get bored and restless when it gets tough.

That said, I am going to try and contact her campaign, explain the issue a lot of 2A people have with eBay policy during her tenure, and ask them if they would like to issue a policy statement that addresses the reasons of eBay policy and Whitman's stand on 2A and state firearms laws.

Here is my thinking in more detail for any who care. I think the risk to eBay, who is headquartered in the PRK which will surely bring many lawsuits over firearms, is substantial given they are national and international in scope. They have very deep pockets and I am sure many lawyers out there salivate at the prospect. Imagine the extra costs and potential liabilities they'd face--ensuring FFLs are on both sides of transactions, ensuring cross-state transfers are legal, ensuring all firearms are legal, accounting for returns, ammunition laws, etc. There have been big suits over selling violent video games--and gun manufacturers have been sued multiple times. Remember the huge hassles eBay got into over Nazi gear in Germany and France? A general auction house, unlike a specialty and small outfit like Gun Broker, is not staffed for such monitoring and legal tightrope walking--it would likely come at a large cost to their operations. The first time someone is hurt or killed with an eBay bought gun, suits would be filed in Campbell like falling rain. My guess is the business model just didn't add up--but I want to hear that, straight out. I'll post in this forum if I get a reply.

FatalKitty
05-12-2010, 10:57 AM
+1 to all that.

Other than that I don't care what she has to say about 2a cause there is no way she's getting my vote

ChibiPaw
05-12-2010, 11:55 AM
They gave me a meg whitman lawn sign after I spent a good hour making a mockery of her campaign. It's hilariously easy to debunk her entire book that promises golden ponies for everyone.

Now, I want to know. Which range will allow me to use this as my target?

Anyone got a bit of tannerite that they would like to donate to use with this target ?

PEBKAC
05-12-2010, 12:12 PM
OK, let's try a different tact, lets say, hypothetical, that in Malaysia, eBay sold 10 year old boys, it made good business sense, one could make logical conclusions about the CEO


back here on earth, the CEO of eBay bant the sale of all things remotely gunnish, again, one can make logical conclusions about the CEO of eBay
We could conclude that their CEO knows how to research markets and knows where not to try and compete, because in the USA Target appears to have cornered the "small children" market. ;)

http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/6002/targetsellingsmallchild.png

But I digress...:D

On topic, I don't think ebay is staffed to take care of any issues of legality of items on their site...there is so much obviously illegitimate (read: bootlegged or somehow copyright infringe-a-licious) stuff on there it is hilarious and just a little sad. And the thing is, that especially with guns, there is already laws dealing with transfer and the like...it is up to the involved parties, not ebay, to ensure this goes down legally. All they really would need is a disclaimer to that effect, as well as some friendly reminder about export restrictions. This isn't exactly rocket science.

Probably the issue of their lawyers being over cautious and/or openly hostile towards guns is the more probable reason ebay has this idiotic policy. However as to Meg's responsibility in the matter, make no mistake, whether or not she could have been overruled in lodging an objection is irrelevant...until it is patently clear she was fighting the policies being implemented she is at best implicated by omission of action, at worst a proponent of said policies. I'll neglect to Godwins Law for the time being but "just following suggestions" has never been an excuse for wrong action if you get my drift.

Saym14
05-12-2010, 12:19 PM
I still dont understand how the hats were being molested?

GuyW
05-12-2010, 12:22 PM
Why are gunshow promoters renting space to this anti-gun slime?

Certainly they have the right to run their business the way they want....

.

bwiese
05-12-2010, 12:33 PM
Why are gunshow promoters renting space to this anti-gun slime?

Certainly they have the right to run their business the way they want....


Both Poizner and Whitman are claiming to be pro-gun, and both apparently pay cash.

The gunshow I was at also continues to have the guy selling MagMagnets that override Bullet Button maglocks, so I guess there's not a high threshold of scrutiny.

bwiese
05-12-2010, 12:34 PM
They gave me a meg whitman lawn sign after I spent a good hour making a mockery of her campaign. It's hilariously easy to debunk her entire book that promises golden ponies for everyone.


Golden ponies still generate horses**t.

Full Clip
05-12-2010, 12:40 PM
Was it not the Ebay-Virginia Tech Shooter connection in 2007 that put a final nail in the coffin for their gun parts sales? (Story was that the shooter had bought a couple magazines on Ebay.)
I too have no issue with a given company deciding to not sell guns/parts, which is, of course, their right, but the fact is that Ebay DID allow such items for several years and only later caved to PC BS and prohibited them.
That I have a problem with. And I'm sure the decision was made at a tippy-top corporate level.

bwiese
05-12-2010, 12:45 PM
Was it not the Ebay-Virginia Tech Shooter connection in 2007 that put a final nail in the coffin for their gun parts sales? (Story was that the shooter had bought a couple magazines on Ebay.)
I too have no issue with a given company deciding to not sell guns/parts, which is, of course, their right, but the fact is that Ebay DID allow such items for several years and only later caved to PC BS and prohibited them.
That I have a problem with. And I'm sure the decision was made at a tippy-top corporate level.

It's not issues about guns & mags even - hell, people's auctions for scope mounts and friggin' holsters and grips/stocks have been cancelled by EBay.

A pox on 'em.

calixt0
05-12-2010, 2:11 PM
And so what makes you think she will start making pro-gun decisions once she becomes CEO of Kalifornia? She will believe (and many others will too) that more firearms restrictions are in the "best interest of the State." Second Amendment rights are not the bread and butter of the Kalifornia electorate, so why should she piss them off to satisfy us? Those who apologize for Meg are completely correct in saying that she and eBay can do whatever they want, but the fact is that Meg has a proven track record of sacrificing gun rights at the alter of economic/political expedience. Do you really want such a person deciding whether or not to veto a bill further restricting your right to keep and bear arms?

says it all for me

advocatusdiaboli
05-12-2010, 2:49 PM
I am a bit shocked that someone who is on a pro-gun board says that they are not swayed by a candidates stance on RKBA issues.

Well, eBay is a private auction organization and what they sell has nothing to do with RKBA. Amazon doesn't sell firearms or ammunition on-line either. Neither does Sears, Barnes & Noble, CVS Pharmacy, Victoria's Secret (though the wife likes that nice paddle holster and black leather teddy combo she got on-line), and many other mainstream retailers. It their business decision and doesn't violate RKBA either way. It's our government that is infringing more and more.

Whitman is running for office but I'll support her or oppose her on what she'll do, not a private company's policies that are legitimate business decisions. Why is the firm's policy an issue only with Whitman. Look I won't likely support her as it now stands, but for more substantive reasons than this.

I bet she shows up in her Burberry coat with one of these next time:
Pink Digital Camo Cap (http://www.nrastore.com/nra/Product.aspx?productid=HT%2024174)

five.five-six
05-12-2010, 3:30 PM
Amazon doesn't sell firearms or ammunition on-line either. Neither does Sears, Barnes & Noble, CVS Pharmacy, Victoria's Secret (though the wife likes that nice paddle holster and black leather teddy combo she got on-line), and many other mainstream retailers.


tell me again, which of their CEOs are running for govenator of kalifornia?

SAN compnerd
05-12-2010, 4:01 PM
should the ice cream store down the street sell guns too?

I have this crazy image in my head of a bunch of adults chasing a truck down the street yelling 'stop stop' while some crazy music blares from speakers on the truck...

I am really quite supprised how many people on the forum are defending MW and the way she ran Ebay. If she would simply make a public statement about her position on 2a then this would not need to be covered here but she has not and much to our chagrin (or pleasure) has resorted to misleading the public.

If it walks like a duck, it must be MW.

Bizcuits
05-12-2010, 4:06 PM
I'll write in Charles Manson, before I voted for Meg...

Mute
05-12-2010, 4:11 PM
Regardless of her level of involvement with ebay's firearms policies, her statements about her "support" of the 2nd Amendment tells me everything I need to know as to how much she truly supports us. Nothing but weasle words. I've seen enough politician to know a two-faced liar who'll say and promise anything to get elected and she certainly seem to fit the mold perfectly.

hoffmang
05-12-2010, 9:06 PM
Well, eBay is a private auction organization and what they sell has nothing to do with RKBA. Amazon doesn't sell firearms or ammunition on-line either. Neither does Sears, Barnes & Noble, CVS Pharmacy, Victoria's Secret

Comparing stores to marketplaces isn't very valid. Explain to me why eBay allows porn listings while banning firearms. They are making value judgments and not business risk judgments.

-Gene

ChibiPaw
05-12-2010, 9:08 PM
So Im thinking.. Do you guys think they'll ban me if I try to sell her shot up / blown up sign on ebay?
Just being silly and want to sort of troll..

ChibiPaw
05-12-2010, 9:28 PM
I'm not voting for meg - I don't want her as gov for many reasons, her choice to run her business how she wanted to run it is NOT one of them.

should the ice cream store down the street sell guns too? there is no 2a infringement by not allowing the sale of guns and related items...

I do agree this is not a debate about rather or not Ebay infringes on 2A, and I don't think Ebay had done anything wrong in terms of their selective clientele. Private business conducts is different than public leadership. It was her their choice as CEO. However, it does affect her creditability.

<soap box>
How can she successfully convince anyone when clearly she has no understanding of whats going on for gun owners. It baffles me to no end.

We judge people by their track records, her conducts does not show any evidence that she cares about gun rights as an individual, and as a business owner that is friendly to the cause.

Will you trust a vegan to cook your steak? will you believe this vegan when he/she promises you this will be the most succulent and flavorful steak you've ever sink your teeth into in your life?
</soap box>

turbosbox
05-12-2010, 9:43 PM
DNFTT

also,

I hope it's ok to use a Jewish term that comes to mind when I read what they are doing "CHUTZPAH": Perhaps the classic "legal" definition of chutzpah is the closest; a person who kills his parents and pleads for the court's mercy on the ground of being an orphan.

Being so anti gun and then implying an NRA endorsement and a pro gun stance. Chutzpah !!

dantodd
05-12-2010, 10:06 PM
Well, eBay is a private auction organization and what they sell has nothing to do with RKBA. Amazon doesn't sell firearms or ammunition on-line either. Neither does Sears, Barnes & Noble, CVS Pharmacy, Victoria's Secret (though the wife likes that nice paddle holster and black leather teddy combo she got on-line), and many other mainstream retailers. It their business decision and doesn't violate RKBA either way. It's our government that is infringing more and more.

Whitman is running for office but I'll support her or oppose her on what she'll do, not a private company's policies that are legitimate business decisions. Why is the firm's policy an issue only with Whitman. Look I won't likely support her as it now stands, but for more substantive reasons than this.

I bet she shows up in her Burberry coat with one of these next time:
Pink Digital Camo Cap (http://www.nrastore.com/nra/Product.aspx?productid=HT%2024174)

eBay sells nothing. They offer a marketplace and, as pointed out numerous times, deny access to that marketplace to those who sell firearms related items; even items that clearly have zero liability, such as pieces of leather or t-shirts with firearms on them. As others also pointed out eBay permits the sale of other items that are at least as risky wrt lawsuits.

As the CEO Whitman is responsible for those policies. If they were foisted upon her by the BoD she surely could come out and say so. She hasn't because there are probably plenty of emails floating around to dispute that claim. Meg Whitman created an anti-gun environment and policies while the CEO of eBay. End of story.

For you to try and ignore that fact in your decision making wrt her running for office is tantamount to doing the same for Paul Helmke if he were to run for office. Perhaps he was just doing the bidding of the BoD and since he's never held a public office you don't know how he will be on 2A right. It is a silly argument. Rush Limbaugh has never held elected office, do you think you might be able to draw some conclusions based on 20 years of being on radio? Why do you refuse to admit the same in the case of Whitman's tenure at the head of eBay?

ETA: Do you think that all 50 people who are members of the Brady Campaign should vote for Ben Cannon even though he runs GunPal? I mean; heck, he's never held public office and you can't assume he'd be pro-gun in office just because he runs GunPal. What you are claiming is exactly the same thing.

stitchnicklas
05-13-2010, 12:20 AM
i will be on the look out at the Ontario gun show for nutmegs.............

covertcombatant
05-13-2010, 12:27 AM
www.kenmiller2010.com

covertcombatant
05-13-2010, 12:29 AM
<<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/T29ifgNadDU&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/T29ifgNadDU&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

turbogg
05-13-2010, 1:35 AM
And so what makes you think she will start making pro-gun decisions once she becomes CEO of Kalifornia? She will believe (and many others will too) that more firearms restrictions are in the "best interest of the State." Second Amendment rights are not the bread and butter of the Kalifornia electorate, so why should she piss them off to satisfy us? Those who apologize for Meg are completely correct in saying that she and eBay can do whatever they want, but the fact is that Meg has a proven track record of sacrificing gun rights at the alter of economic/political expedience. Do you really want such a person deciding whether or not to veto a bill further restricting your right to keep and bear arms?

Well said! I don't trust any billionaire to have the average voters best interest in mind if he/she were to become a politician. Period. We are a nation run by the rich elite, and they are completely out of touch with what we want.

FatalKitty
05-13-2010, 9:47 AM
that's capitalism for ya

Meplat
05-13-2010, 10:40 AM
So who DOES NRA support?


As I mentioned before, I personally witnessed Whitman staff at the recent Cow Palace gunshow using large-letter-log NRA hat(s) in a cagey way.

I now have multiple other reports of the same thing at other such events.

The staffers would not necessarily wear the hat, but the headwear would be on the table along with campaign literature, and arranged in a 'strategic' readily-viewed fashion.

When the NRA hat was on the table, it was not crushed/collapsed or suffering from any wear (i.e., was fresh/new appearing) and was not casually placed: it was clearly positioned to trigger fraudulent inference the NRA might be endorsing Meg Whitman.

I yelled at the Megholes staffing the booth on this - a guy quickly put the hat on, said he was an NRA life member, blah blah blah, and tried to act like he'd just taken his hat off -- and that Meg really was pro-RKBA.

[If Meg were pro-RKBA, Ben Cannon wouldn't have had to create GunPal!]

If Calgunners see Meg (or, for that matter Poizner) events where NRA hats are used as an artifice like this, please call them out on this - loudly. You don't have to start a riot, but the folks around these booths need to be 'informed'. Please also let contact your local NRA Members Council leadership or the folks at the NRA recruiting booth (typically outside most guhshows) so it's piped thru the right channels ASAP.

boxbro
05-13-2010, 10:50 AM
We are a nation run by the rich elite, and they are completely out of touch with what we want need.

FTFY

stitchnicklas
05-13-2010, 11:00 AM
the gun owners of California website announced today they are endorsing poizner for gov.

bwiese
05-13-2010, 11:25 AM
So who DOES NRA support?

As I understand it, NRA typically does not endorse in primaries.

Reading between the lines, I'd bet that candidates misusing NRA logos or telling the NRA to "f** off, rightwing
redneck" would never be candidates for endorsement unless the opponent in the general was worse, which is
certainly not the case.


the gun owners of California website announced today they are endorsing poizner for gov

GOC has little relevance; they're less about gunrights than being a certain streak of Republican.

Shintao
05-13-2010, 11:38 AM
So just to stoke the fire...

Which Republican should be endorsed? I know many of you do not like either, but which one has a better chance of beating Brown? Because really at this point that is what it comes down to. In my humble opinion, we have to reason with the idea that Brown will be more detrimental to CA as a whole. I know this is a fine line to walk, but one has to be realistic about the type of person who can get elected in California. It will be a slow change over time.

I am very much in favor of gun rights and repealing many of the laws that exist in CA. I would very much like to see a candidate who is vocal about that. But right now there is a mess the takes precedence over gun legislation. Although if CA goes bankrupt and there are riots, you bet my guns are going to be my new best friends.

bwiese
05-13-2010, 11:56 AM
So just to stoke the fire...

Which Republican should be endorsed? I know many of you do not like either, but which one has a better chance of beating Brown?

From a guns only perspective, why would we want Brown beaten? Read the above thread.

Shintao
05-13-2010, 12:25 PM
From a guns only perspective, why would we want Brown beaten? Read the above thread.

I understand this is a forum about guns...

BUT, little things like a budget deficit I think take precedence. If California does not turn around it's budget mess we will end up like Greece. Again, I WANT to see the AW ban repealed, hi cap mags and must issue ccws. But when it comes to those or living in a state that taxes the living heck out of me...

If you really think Brown is the best holistic candidate, then by all means cast your vote. See how far the Democratic-controlled legislature has got us thus far, and if you think Brown is going to be any different (never mind the fact that his track record is rubbish) then more power to you.

Meplat
05-13-2010, 1:54 PM
Yes! I sold a nice Fox Sterlinworth on eBay & several hundred dollars worth of unfired custom nitro express & Sharps brass (50-105 and such). I also am still kicking myself for not bidding agressivly enough and losing the bid on a nice Spencer Civil War era carbine.

Then came Meg Whitman. :puke:


Was there any a time in the past when firearms were originally allowed to be sold on Ebay? I know Ebay has been around since 1995, well before the California 2000 features based ban for firearms.

Pyrodyne
05-14-2010, 6:02 AM
Well, eBay is a private auction organization and what they sell has nothing to do with RKBA. Amazon doesn't sell firearms or ammunition on-line either.
...



Stand corrected, or did you mean amazon directly?

http://www.amazon.com/180gr-JHP-Bonded-PDX1-Per/dp/B002IY233I/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=sporting-goods&qid=1273841656&sr=8-1

Still no actual firearms, but parts, accessories, having firearms in the pictures to demonstrate the product, etc all present. And ammunition.

advocatusdiaboli
05-14-2010, 6:24 AM
Stand corrected, or did you mean amazon directly?

http://www.amazon.com/180gr-JHP-Bonded-PDX1-Per/dp/B002IY233I/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=sporting-goods&qid=1273841656&sr=8-1

Still no actual firearms, but parts, accessories, having firearms in the pictures to demonstrate the product, etc all present. And ammunition.

Directly. While it could be Whitman pushing her private agenda, could also be the corporation not wanting to get into transactions that require orders of magnitude more scrutiny, are illegal in many countries, and expose the corporation to a significantly elevated risk of protracted and costly law suits over the use of firearms bought through them and the federal violation committed by buyers and sellers. eBay is in a unique situation because they are based in CA. Amazon is in WA which has much more liberal firearms laws--and less litigious anti-gun advocacy groups. Amazon might be risking trouble here too--what if the buyer is in CA after Feb 2011--is the advert illegal if is doesn't mention this. Probably not, but you can bet someone will sue.

I think however, Whitman should issue a policy statement explaining it. I think she won't though--2A is a third-rail in CA politics and I think she's just hoping to duck it until the election.

ECVMatt
05-14-2010, 6:58 AM
This all seems pretty silly to me. The literature that I received from her plainly stated that she will not sign any new gun control. Now I am a big boy and now about politicians, but at least she is reaching out to the gun community.

I would think that the NRA should use this opportunity to find out what she is really about. In the mean time I don't think it does us any good to run around trying to shout down folks like some kind of code pink fiasco.

Suvorov
05-14-2010, 7:09 AM
This all seems pretty silly to me. The literature that I received from her plainly stated that she will not sign any new gun control. Now I am a big boy and now about politicians, but at least she is reaching out to the gun community.

And George Bush Sr. told us to "Read His Lips!"

Of course she is reaching out to the gun community! She isn't stupid and she knows that if she wants the Republican nomination, she has to at least give us a nod or two. Heck, even Hillary Clinton was proud to tell the voters of Pennsylvania how she used to go duck hunting with her Grandfather, but the real question is - where do they really stand? Meg's track record suggests there is a good possibility that she is anti-gun in her beliefs and she has nothing in her record that suggests (other than a few very weak statements) that she will do anything to preserve, no RESTORE, our rights if she gets elected.

For her to get my vote, she will need to prove to me that she actually cares about 2nd Amendment issues, and truly believes in the principles that it stands for. She will have to explain her e-Bay stance and why she allowed a moratorium on firearms (legal) related goods, but nothing on drug (illegal at this point) related paraphernalia.

I don't want another Arnold! :mad:

GuyW
05-14-2010, 5:10 PM
I don't want another Arnold!

Meg would make Arnold look like a hardcore right-wing redneck....

.....and Poizner's just like her......

.

glbtrottr
05-14-2010, 6:01 PM
Some of your posts baffle me - does logic elude you?

The topic is Meg Whitman as a Governor and her stance on the 2nd Amendment.

Her choices to ban gun sales on ebay are a clear indicator of her personal views on how she would represent us gun owners in the state of California.

Her business choices are not the issue.

Her dishonesty in trying to persuade the voting public that she is pro gun when she has made a career of banning their sale in her personal business leads us to conclude that in addition to being anti gun, she's also dishonest - neither trait desirable to those who frequent this forum.

CWM4A1
05-14-2010, 8:08 PM
I will vote for Poizner in Primary just to get Meg off the list. Since eBay ban the sale of all firearm accessories, I have already cancel my eBay account. Her business decision as 556 said is all I need to know on her 2A position. She's not anywhere close to support 2A and all CA gunners needs to know this.

advocatusdiaboli
05-14-2010, 10:02 PM
Her choices to ban gun sales on ebay are a clear indicator of her personal views on how she would represent us gun owners in the state of California.
Her business choices are not the issue.

I think you should re-think that point. When she was acting as the CEO of eBay, her personal beliefs took a back seat to what was best for the shareholders. So to condemn her conduct in that role would be similar to condemning a police officer for reading Miranda rights to a gang member instead executing him on the spot because he knows he's guilty of wounding his partner. The latter would be wrong and so would Whitman putting her own interests above the shareholders. Sometimes in this complex life we need to rise above our personal interests and do what's right for a greater number of others whose welfare we are charged with--because that is our duty. You might want to cogitate on that a bit. Duty. Selfless duty. Our founders did and came up with better answers than selfish shallow emotional reactions. Maybe, just maybe, we could follow their example if we want to save this nation from the noise dive it's in. Think of others instead of ourselves only. Like the founders of this great nation. Wadda' ya' think? Wanna' give it a try?

Not saying Meg has won me at all--far from it--I am skeptical of her. But I won't lay false blame on her either.

wash
05-14-2010, 10:21 PM
The R is a lie.

The sad part about CA is that the "Republican" party is twisted beyond recognition.

I wouldn't exactly say the Republican spot on the ballot is for sale but effectively it is. Republicans are so anxious to have a winner to get behind that a big bankroll is all it takes to get on the ticket.

I bet Meg would be a Democrat if she thought she could get on the ticket. The fact is we have a better Democrat in the race.

The only reason we keep hearing about Meg is that there are some gun owners desperate to vote Republican and willing to put on blinders to do so. At the same time Meg is desperate for those votes so we see hat tricks.

Do not get fooled.

Vectrexer
05-14-2010, 10:53 PM
As I mentioned before, I personally witnessed Whitman staff at the recent Cow Palace gunshow using large-letter-log NRA hat(s) in a cagey way.

I now have multiple other reports of the same thing at other such events.

The staffers would not necessarily wear the hat, but the headwear would be on the table along with campaign literature, and arranged in a 'strategic' readily-viewed fashion.

When the NRA hat was on the table, it was not crushed/collapsed or suffering from any wear (i.e., was fresh/new appearing) and was not casually placed: it was clearly positioned to trigger fraudulent inference the NRA might be endorsing Meg Whitman.

I yelled at the Megholes staffing the booth on this - a guy quickly put the hat on, said he was an NRA life member, blah blah blah, and tried to act like he'd just taken his hat off -- and that Meg really was pro-RKBA.

[If Meg were pro-RKBA, Ben Cannon wouldn't have had to create GunPal!]

If Calgunners see Meg (or, for that matter Poizner) events where NRA hats are used as an artifice like this, please call them out on this - loudly. You don't have to start a riot, but the folks around these booths need to be 'informed'. Please also let contact your local NRA Members Council leadership or the folks at the NRA recruiting booth (typically outside most guhshows) so it's piped thru the right channels ASAP.


Why don't we do something better and get her to wear the hat. Then let the media dogs tear her hypocrital butt apart?

Shintao
05-14-2010, 11:08 PM
Ok so now I have a question:

Lets hypothetically say that Ted Nugent is a Republican candidate for governor in California. Lets also say that there is someone more moderate running, such as, John Stossel (dunno why I picked him). Do you think that someone like Nugent has a chance of getting elected in California?

IMO, change comes slowly, and running the farthest right candidate we can find makes no sense because they will never get elected. So do we want to vote for Nugent in a primary, where he will then loose to a Democrat and we will get nothing accomplished, or maybe vote for someone who has a chance and will get 50% of the stuff we want accomplished.

I am as far right as it gets. But I live in California. The majority of the citizens in California do not agree with me and I have to accept that. I will also not give up and let the libs take total control. We have seen what they have done with partial control. Change is a slow process. And for me, I am going to settle with 50% now, versus 0.

Anonymous Coward
05-15-2010, 6:57 AM
The literature that I received from her plainly stated that she will not sign any new gun control. Now I am a big boy and now about politicians, but at least she is reaching out to the gun community.

If she does not sign it and not veto it, it goes into law. So there is a loophole unless she stated "I'm going to veto any new and amended gun laws that increase gun control."

glbtrottr
05-15-2010, 8:36 AM
"When she was acting as the CEO of eBay, her personal beliefs took a back seat to what was best for the shareholders."

Please provide clear and convincing evidence to support your point, specifically on Meg's 2nd amendment beliefs. Not namby pamby devil's advocate "what if" beliefs, doubts, fear and uncertainty, but incontravertible evidence.

"So to condemn her conduct in that role would be similar to condemning a police officer for reading Miranda rights to a gang member instead executing him on the spot because he knows he's guilty of wounding his partner. "

That's the fear part. Your argument hits an emotional chord, sounds a lot like a "for the children" argument, but provides no clear and compelling evidence that Meg has any love for the 2nd amendment.

"The latter would be wrong and so would Whitman putting her own interests above the shareholders. "

Assumption not based on evidence. Her policies are clear for all to see in Ebay's terms of use. As a CEO, the buck stops with her. She has provided no clear accounting of her policies in light of the second amendment, and further, has done nothing to clearly and convincingly win the second amendment contingent.

Here's what Meggie has done:

"I am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment and our clear constitutional right to keep and bear arms. I believe current gun laws need to be enforced but we do not need any new restrictions on gun owners. Second Amendment rights must be rigorously protected.”

...this includes discretionary CCW issue, the 10 round limit, the 50 cal limitations, AWB, the roster, and on and on and on..."Current Gun Laws but no new restrictions" means exactly that.

On her blog, she provides no answers on 2nd amendment issues.

"Sometimes in this complex lifes we need to rise above our personal interests"

Again, you have failed to provide any evidence that her beliefs and clear and convincingly pro 2A.

We have provided both ebay and paypal policy, and a statement that equates to Sheriff Hutchens' current policy in Orange County.

Cogitate on that.

1st5
05-15-2010, 10:04 AM
http://www.pjtv.com/v/3557

Check out Poizner's interview on PJTV.

We need to vote for him the Republican Primary to make sure that Meg doesn't get the nomination. Then we can go from there.

packnrat
05-15-2010, 10:20 AM
last i looked we are still a free country, if e-bay does not want to have any dealings with guns..then than just don't.
if meg whitman or any of her peoples want to be the same way so be it.

i do not have to deal with them or give them any of my moneys. so be it.

now if they are so anti anything then they should/must not have anything on there political table with ANY body's logo that does not endorse them.
and this goes for anyone running for any office.
said hat should be put in a box/bag or removed from the building. sight not to be seen.


:TFH:


.