PDA

View Full Version : Gunz and Prez Choices


11Z50
01-19-2008, 8:14 AM
I've been following the primaries with 2A in mind. So far, here's my.02:

Dems: All would at least retain the status quo or make it worse for 2A supporters. With a Dem congress for the next 2 years at least, this is devastating for us.

GOP:
Huckabee is the only candidate that consistently brings 2A issues up. Arkansas is solidly 2A and he has supported 2A vigorously as Governor. He's my choice right now because of that. If elected, I don't think he would sign into law anything that reduces our 2A rights.

McCain is nominally pro-2A, and AZ is a decidedly 2A state. McCain the politician is a complex player. One of his positions is that having been a Senator and a Beltway insider for 20+ years, he knows how to get things done. I think he might bargain away some 2A rights to appease the Dem-controlled congress in order to make deals in other issues.

Romney is a slickey boy and a talking head. He would compromise our 2A rights. Look at Massachusetts, one of the most abysmal 2A states in the union. As Governor, he has not even made mention of 2A anywhere I can find.

Thompson would be my choice if he had a chance to pull it off. Maybe a VP slot?

Giuliani was the mayor of NY.......'nuff said. There is no 2A there.

Paul is a little too crazy for me, but he is strong on 2A.....

The real question is who will it be for the election? It really boils down to who is the most pro-2A candidate we can find to go against the other side. It doesn't really matter on the Dem side, since any of them will be terrible for us if elected. My guess is either McCain/Huckabee v the Dark Side.

I don't want to sound like a one-issue voter, but I find that if a candidate is pro-2A, I generally agree with him on most other issues as well.

grywlfbg
01-19-2008, 8:46 AM
Yeah, the one good Dem (Richardson) has backed out. Now I don't have time to change my party to vote for Ron Paul. I'm screwed. I may vote for Richardson anyway :banghead:

Rob P.
01-19-2008, 9:06 AM
This election will cost us American citizens much no matter who wins the seat.

A dem will most likely win because of GW's insane domestic policies. Sheeple voters will vote for a dem because they like the idea of national health care, lower taxes, and more handouts.

The average republican will vote party ticket but will spread that vote all across the board and thus diluting the vote percentages so that a dem will win.

The independents/unconcerned voters will vote for the leading candidate of which ever party looks like it's going to win.

In the end, the Dem winner will have an issue that will either get rid of ALL guns (and I mean ALL of them) or will be prevented from signing an AW ban again. This is Heller. IF Heller goes the way we'd like it to, then no matter who wins, there will be no Fed AWB. Hillary may still try to pass one, but it would be struck down in short order.

If Heller goes against us, this country will either see a revolution or will be invaded by another country and conquered.

Hopi
01-19-2008, 9:36 AM
If Heller goes against us, this country will either see a revolution or will be invaded by another country and conquered.
Wow, that is a bit melodramatic. If Heller 'goes against us' most likely the decision for firearms regs will be handed to the states, some states will be very free, others not so much. And as far as being invaded.........:rolleyes:

Rob P.
01-19-2008, 9:59 AM
Not so far fetched as you would think.

America has never had a foreign invader (except for the Aleutian Islands) because "every American has a gun" (I forget the name of the guy who said this - Japanese I think). Take away our guns and that statement no longer applies. We would not be as strong a nation as we are now. When you combine that fact with the realization that MOST American's won't fight (or even join the military) even when pressured. Wait a few years and those who know how to fight will be too old to fight or dead from old age. All that will be left are those who think with their billfold. We will have become unarmed nation of sheep ready for slaughter.

If Heller goes against us, do you REALLY think that States will let us keep our guns? States like DC, NY, NJ, Calif, Mich, Fla, and on and on and on? There are a VERY FEW States which have gun ownership as a constitutional right but most do not. Of those, maybe one or two will pass a constitutional amendment allowing it. The rest will just seize the guns.

They did this with taxes on property (you no longer really own your home). They did this with alcohol (prohibition). They have/are doing this with drugs (war on drugs). They are doing this with OTC drugs (cough/cold capsules). They have attempted this with abortion and have been foiled (so far). They WILL do this with guns if given the chance because they have publicly said they will.

Once they do the US will no longer be "free". We will be just another country as messed up as the rest of the world and subject to "cleansing." All that stands between that and our freedom is our guns.

So, attempting to take away our guns will either spur a revolution or we will acquiesce. If we give away our protection, we will be invaded at some point. When, I don't know because my crystal ball is broken. I just know that any half rational thinking person could see the truth in it.

mk19
01-19-2008, 10:01 AM
voting in the primaries are the most important, the world is full of tards, and they'd elect barney for prez if you let them, i'm voting for Ron a true constitutionist.

troyus
01-19-2008, 10:07 AM
Yeah, the one good Dem (Richardson) has backed out. Now I don't have time to change my party to vote for Ron Paul. I'm screwed. I may vote for Richardson anyway :banghead:

You have until the 22nd to change! It is not too late.

Switch to repub and vote for who you WANT.

http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/elections_vr.htm

Patriot
01-19-2008, 10:11 AM
America has never had a foreign invader (except for the Aleutian Islands) because "every American has a gun" (I forget the name of the guy who said this - Japanese I think)

The quote is attributed to Admiral Yamamoto and goes something like "You cannot invade the United States...there is a rifle behind every blade of grass"

Rob P.
01-19-2008, 10:14 AM
You have until the 22nd to change! It is not too late.

Switch to repub and vote for who you WANT.

http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/elections_vr.htm

It's no longer a matter of who you want. It's a matter of who do you NOT want to win.

Hopi
01-19-2008, 10:20 AM
The quote is attributed to Admiral Yamamoto and goes something like "You cannot invade the United States...there is a rifle behind every blade of grass"

Perhaps not exactly an invasion, but the Japanese did bomb the mainland U.S. during WWII.....about 10 miles from my house.

Alan Block
01-19-2008, 10:26 AM
there is no need for handwringing either. In 6 years of republican government (pres/sen/house) they could not get abortion banned or a flag burning ammendment. I dont think the dems will be able to get rid of guns either. That is what is great about 4 year governments. (even with the AWB, nobody had theirs taken away).
Huk scares me with his literal belief in the bible and desire to bring the constitution in-line with biblical law.

jmlivingston
01-19-2008, 10:36 AM
America has never had a foreign invader (except for the Aleutian Islands)

So I guess the Brits never burned our capitol during the war of 1812?

John

Hopi
01-19-2008, 10:38 AM
there is no need for handwringing either. In 6 years of republican government (pres/sen/house) they could not get abortion banned or a flag burning ammendment. I dont think the dems will be able to get rid of guns either. That is what is great about 4 year governments. (even with the AWB, nobody had theirs taken away).
Huk scares me with his literal belief in the bible and desire to bring the constitution in-line with biblical law.

Survey says: XXX

How did the assault weapons ban not "take theirs away"? Hundreds of businesses went under, citizens were prohibited from owning firearms that were allowable for ownership by our paternal caretakers, and people became unintentional criminals based only on the configuration of their weapons. Perhaps the guns themselves were not "taken away" from current owners, but your rights, and freedoms certainly were. All thanks to that Democrat Clinton.......

troyus
01-19-2008, 10:39 AM
So I guess the Brits never burned our capitol during the war of 1812?

John

http://home.ma.rr.com/twpics/pwned.jpg

phbiggs
01-19-2008, 12:48 PM
Perhaps not exactly an invasion, but the Japanese did bomb the mainland U.S. during WWII.....about 10 miles from my house.

Correct, the Japanese use helium balloons with the jet stream to send bombs to the north west of the US, Calif, Oregon and Washington. Some made it and detonated but the information was kept up for security reasons.

In the 1800's there were hundreds of Mexican incursions into Texas as well.

Hopi
01-19-2008, 12:52 PM
Correct, the Japanese use helium balloons with the jet stream to send bombs to the north west of the US, Calif, Oregon and Washington. Some made it and detonated but the information was kept up for security reasons.

In the 1800's there were hundreds of Mexican incursions into Texas as well.

Well, partially correct. The shelling on the Gaviota coast came from submarines.

BigDogatPlay
01-19-2008, 12:57 PM
The Japanese Navy shelled an oil refinery near Santa Barbara from a submarine as well. It was a one time deal, which was too bad for them because if they had kept up hit and run attacks like that strategy might have been entirely different and the length (but not the eventual outcome) of the war might have changed.

I'm thinking hard about switching to Democrat and voting for Obama... anything that can be done at the ballot box to keep those conniving, gun grabbing Clintons away from the White House is fine with me.

Bad Voodoo
01-19-2008, 1:02 PM
I'm thinking hard about switching to Democrat and voting for Obama... anything that can be done at the ballot box to keep those conniving, gun grabbing Clintons away from the White House is fine with me.

They're virtually the same - one is white; one is black; one is man; one is woman; but they are both selling the same messages, albeit packaged differently. We're screwed, plain and simple. With a Dem Congress chomping at the bit to approve everything sent their way, we're screwed.

Rascal
01-19-2008, 1:19 PM
http://home.ma.rr.com/twpics/pwned.jpg

Please excuse my ignorance, but what does "pwned" mean?

jmlivingston
01-19-2008, 1:26 PM
Please excuse my ignorance, but what does "pwned" mean?

Owned...

http://ezinearticles.com/?What-Does-Pwned-Mean-How-Do-You-Pronounce-Pwned?&id=685469

Ech0Sierra
01-19-2008, 1:30 PM
"You cannot invade the mainland United States.
There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass."

- Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto
(Japanese Navy)
Owned is a slang word e.g. "I owned you in the face", that originated among 1990s hackers, where it referred to "rooting" or gaining administrative control over someone else's computer.

By 1997, "owned" was regularly used in website defacements, and it subsequently spread to gaming circles, where it came to mean acquisition of superiority through the downfall of another entity, be it another gaming clan, or a single user. This can be in the context of winning an online game, triumphing in forum debate, or successfully hacking. It can also serve as the signature to a rebuttal, such as "You got owned!" to announce the defeat of another user on the internet in the form of a debate or flame war, or increasingly in real world situations.

Owned has now spread beyond computer and gaming contexts and become part of standard slang, where it usually entails defeat, loss or humiliation, often in an amusing way or through the dominance of an opposing party.Two other variations of the word owned include own3d and 0wn3d, terms which incorporate elements of leetspeak.

At some point, the variant term "pwned" appeared in the same subculture; this alteration originated from typos that occurred when hasty gamers tried typing too fast on the keyboard, thus missing the "o" and typing "p" instead. Pwn has become a term in its own right but is sometimes still verbally pronounced [oʊn] in recognition of its origin.

Lashlarue
01-19-2008, 1:48 PM
A dem will most likely win because of GW's insane domestic policies. Sheeple voters will vote for a dem because they like the idea of national health care, lower taxes, and more handouts.Which dem promised lower taxes, fact is none of them did. All are either in favor of letting the Bush tax cuts expire or immediately repealing them.Gw s insane domestic policies like cutting taxes, creating 8,000,000 new jobs, are those the ones you are talking about.I get medicare,that system is fubared and you want the government in charge of all healthcare????No one in this country is refused medical care, including illegal aliens.Suggest you look up medicaid.That which is not covered is written off, as federal law requires treatment for anyone who seeks it.

Rob P.
01-19-2008, 2:13 PM
So I guess the Brits never burned our capitol during the war of 1812?

John

My iggerent mistake since I have never been interested in being a scholar of history. However, this trivia, while interesting to some with small attention spans, does not defeat the main thrust of my other post.

Which is to say that we are strong because we have the means to defend ourselves. Take away those means and we lose our strength.

M. D. Van Norman
01-19-2008, 2:27 PM
Which dem promised lower taxes[?]

Senator Obama for one. He promised tax rebates to “middle-class families,” while simultaneously calling for a $10-billion bailout of the sub-prime mortgage fiasco. In other words, he would somehow lower taxes and spend more money at the same time. :rolleyes:

Rob P.
01-19-2008, 3:01 PM
Senator Obama for one. He promised tax rebates to “middle-class families,” while simultaneously calling for a $10-billion bailout of the sub-prime mortgage fiasco. In other words, he would somehow lower taxes and spend more money at the same time. :rolleyes:

As opposed to the GOP candidates who have all come out with even BIGGER economic stimulus packages while also supporting the existing Bush tax cuts which got us into this mess.

Which means - spend more, cut taxes deeper for those who don't need it, give temporary "rebates" to those who do, drive the dollar down while letting inflation take over, and hope to stay in office long enough to get that lifetime pension.

Face it, we're screwed.

Riodog
01-19-2008, 5:50 PM
Rob P.

Before you go and start spouting off about how we are all doomed why don't you do your homework, get your facts correct and maybe then you can make an intelligent, educated, choice about how to cast your ballot. We are only doomed when we start depending upon unfactual BS and voting accordingly. Sorta like all of the disinformation floating around about the legality of OLL.

Rio

11Z50
01-19-2008, 9:21 PM
The thing that scares me most is a Dem in the White House and Dems controlling congress. It will only last two years, but in 24 months alot of damage could be done. If the GOP controlled at least the House or Senate, we could at least slow the anti-gun march a bit.

If a Dem is elected prez, there will be no counter-balance to the congress, and that is a very bad thing for us. People who live in gun states will feel less pain, but for us in the PRK a new round of even more draconian gun control measures are sure to follow.

The SCOTUS is stacked with some reasonably conservative justices, so maybe they could prevent total defeat for gun owners.

All is not lost, and even if the Dems get total control, there are still enough moderates and Southern Dems who will shy away from strident gun control. There will be an impact, but maybe it won't be too bad. Maybe something like the rest of the country gets gun laws like we have now. It all sets us up for taking back the House in two years, and then the Senate. There is no doubt Liberal Dems in total control will result in chaos and sweeping rejection in the next congressional elections.

M. Sage
01-19-2008, 9:52 PM
Rob P.

Before you go and start spouting off about how we are all doomed why don't you do your homework, get your facts correct and maybe then you can make an intelligent, educated, choice about how to cast your ballot. We are only doomed when we start depending upon unfactual BS and voting accordingly. Sorta like all of the disinformation floating around about the legality of OLL.

Rio

When many (most?) of the front-running GOP candidates support idiocy like government-supplied health care? I'd say he's got it right...

Blackflag
01-19-2008, 10:27 PM
If Heller 'goes against us' most likely the decision for firearms regs will be handed to the states,

If Heller goes "against us," we could have a D.C. gun ban at the federal level.

Rob P.
01-20-2008, 9:23 AM
Rob P.

Before you go and start spouting off about how we are all doomed why don't you do your homework, get your facts correct and maybe then you can make an intelligent, educated, choice about how to cast your ballot. We are only doomed when we start depending upon unfactual BS and voting accordingly. Sorta like all of the disinformation floating around about the legality of OLL.

Rio

Actually, I DID "do my homework". After looking at ALL the candidates I determined that Bill Richardson was the best candidate to protect our liberties and freedoms from those who would try to forcibly assert their version of the constitution upon us as well as appointing reasonably SCOTUS justices and getting our house in order.

When I spoke my mind on this I was called a troll.

Now, Richardson has decided to no longer run and all we are left with are a tyrant, a tyro, several weasels, and a kook. NONE of whom have any real concept of what is hurting America or how to fix it.

Oh, they all have a "plan" but every plan is ridiculous and costly to either the economy or our liberty or both.

So, here's the current rundown:

McCain = wants to continue to keep the mideast pissed at us and take away our guns
Huckabee = wants everyone to pray for deliverance while making God's law the supreme law of the land and take away our guns
Paul = wants peace and love for everyone regardless of the consequences
Guilliani = Who knows what the hell he wants but it aint in our best interests that's for sure while taking away our guns
Romney = wants power and to take away our guns


Hillary = wants to dominate the world and take away our guns/money/pride/familes/honor and self respect/esteem
Obama = wants to "fix the problem" but has no real idea on how while pandering to minorities and inner city resdients at the expense of the greater good and take away our guns
Edwards = wants to be president but has no real concept of what that means while taking away our guns

ALL of the candidates (both sides) want gov health care.
ALL of the candidates support a national AWB.
ALL of the candidates have an economic plan which includes a "tax less, spend more, tax more in the end" formula.

So, like I said, if Heller goes against us, we're screwed on many levels.

Bad Voodoo
01-20-2008, 9:31 AM
Actually, I DID "do my homework".

You failed.

Hopi
01-20-2008, 9:45 AM
ALL of the candidates (both sides) want gov health care.
ALL of the candidates support a national AWB.
ALL of the candidates have an economic plan which includes a "tax less, spend more, tax more in the end" formula.

That is funny, it seems like you're looking for a candidate that is running on Ron Paul's platform......I thought he was a kook?

http://www.forumammo.com/cpg/albums/userpics/10063/fail%7E2.gif (http://www.forumammo.com/cpg/albums/userpics/10063/fail%7E2.gif)

oldrifle
01-20-2008, 9:48 AM
Getting either Hillary or a mainstream neo-con in office will mean continued war and bad foreign policy for the US. The goal is to get us into war with Iran and/or Russia. Iran is Russia's proxy now. Once our military is severely weakened by war with Iran, Russia will attack us.

M. Sage
01-20-2008, 10:16 AM
Actually, I DID "do my homework". After looking at ALL the candidates I determined that Bill Richardson was the best candidate to protect our liberties and freedoms from those who would try to forcibly assert their version of the constitution upon us as well as appointing reasonably SCOTUS justices and getting our house in order.

When I spoke my mind on this I was called a troll.

Now, Richardson has decided to no longer run and all we are left with are a tyrant, a tyro, several weasels, and a kook. NONE of whom have any real concept of what is hurting America or how to fix it.

Oh, they all have a "plan" but every plan is ridiculous and costly to either the economy or our liberty or both.

So, here's the current rundown:

McCain = wants to continue to keep the mideast pissed at us and take away our guns
Huckabee = wants everyone to pray for deliverance while making God's law the supreme law of the land and take away our guns
Paul = wants peace and love for everyone regardless of the consequences
Guilliani = Who knows what the hell he wants but it aint in our best interests that's for sure while taking away our guns
Romney = wants power and to take away our guns


Hillary = wants to dominate the world and take away our guns/money/pride/familes/honor and self respect/esteem
Obama = wants to "fix the problem" but has no real idea on how while pandering to minorities and inner city resdients at the expense of the greater good and take away our guns
Edwards = wants to be president but has no real concept of what that means while taking away our guns

ALL of the candidates (both sides) want gov health care.
ALL of the candidates support a national AWB.
ALL of the candidates have an economic plan which includes a "tax less, spend more, tax more in the end" formula.

So, like I said, if Heller goes against us, we're screwed on many levels.

Err, not ALL the candidates on both sides... the "kook" doesn't support an AWB, or government health care or increased spending.

But yes... overall I'd say we're screwed. I don't see Paul winning, unfortunately.

Rob P.
01-20-2008, 10:24 AM
You failed.

REALLY?

If the only "good" answer is Ron Paul I'm glad I choose none of the above. I'd rather be a total failure than go along with those who poison the well.

Bad Voodoo
01-20-2008, 10:43 AM
REALLY?

Really.

Because you bought into the propaganda delivered by GOPers, mainstream media, and anyone else with an agenda other than true freedom that RP is a "kook."

What's kooky to me is that we continue to foster the 'business as usual' politics in this state and country while spending inordinate amounts of time on internet message boards *****ing about the same people infringing upon our rights.

You want change? Then CHANGE for Christ's sake and stop posturing.

Liberty1
01-20-2008, 2:03 PM
[QUOTE=Rob P.;948633]
Paul = wants peace and love for everyone regardless of the consequences but I can still have my guns and liberties
QUOTE]

Fixed if for ya :D but I'll add that if you'd prefer voting for "none of the above", I've always thought that should be on the ballet, so whoever gets the nod can gauge that there is a strong voice out there waiting for the right candidate to kick them out of office. ;)

oldrifle
01-20-2008, 2:27 PM
Actually, I DID "do my homework".
...
Paul = wants peace and love for everyone regardless of the consequences
...
ALL of the candidates (both sides) want gov health care.
ALL of the candidates support a national AWB.
ALL of the candidates have an economic plan which includes a "tax less, spend more, tax more in the end" formula.

You need to do more homework.

I heard Ron Paul say he wants no restrictions on firearms at the federal level, not even on machine guns and full auto rifles. He said "it only takes one bullet to kill a man... why does it matter whether that bullet is fired from an automatic rifle or a pistol?" (paraphrasing).

Ron Paul wants to eliminate the personal income tax and the IRS by first cutting spending dramatically. He is not a kook and has a very well thought out and cogent plan to do what he plans to do. If you would just read it, you'd understand it. As a Libertarian, he does not support any form of government health care... I don't know where you're getting this misinformation, but it sure isn't from anything that Ron Paul has actually written or said.