Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

California 2nd Amend. Political Discussion & Activism Discuss gun rights activism and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 04-18-2013, 1:45 PM
nhr310 nhr310 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Gardena
Posts: 128
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

@mud99
I thought your truck a 76


j/k

I dont think of you what you imply. And again if thats how you felt I apologize for offending you.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 04-18-2013, 1:48 PM
lasbrg's Avatar
lasbrg lasbrg is offline
Another 180ls1 avatar guy
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Orange County, NC
Posts: 4,241
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ja308 View Post
GOA Ratings
...
Heidi Heitkamp. Is not yet rated
...
If the NRA downrates her, after giving Toomey an "A" and Reid a "B", then it would be a complete travesty. She told the Newtown parents to their faces that she wasn't going to support ANY new restrictions.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 04-18-2013, 2:02 PM
ja308 ja308 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 6,805
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lasbrg View Post
If the NRA downrates her, after giving Toomey an "A" and Reid a "B", then it would be a complete travesty. She told the Newtown parents to their faces that she wasn't going to support ANY new restrictions.
The NRA is more complex than GOA . They also will go to any length to beat a politician who gets NRA funding and double crosses them . AlGore is a perfect example .

Many of us questioned NRA ratings after the Reid endorsement . But NRA wanted a Vegas shooting range and Reid got it for Clark county .
We need to give the NRA lots of credit and not disrespect any decision they make ( in public)
The way to change NRA is via the election process.
I have ZERO respect for any gunowner who is not NRA .

When in doubt I use both groups for input and vote for the most likely candidate who can win.

I will take an electable D- over an A rated person who has ZERO chance of getting elected
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 04-18-2013, 2:06 PM
tankarian's Avatar
tankarian tankarian is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,770
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Here is the letter I sent to my Democrat representative and president Obama:

Dear sir,
I am a liberal who loves guns and believes in the 2nd amendment. It bothers me a lot that you are trying to take my guns and restrict my rights. So in order to teach you a lesson, I decided to vote for you again. That's gonna show you how serious I am about my gun rights.

Respectfully,
Your pea brained supporter Joe Liberal

Last edited by tankarian; 04-18-2013 at 2:11 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 04-18-2013, 3:23 PM
451040's Avatar
451040 451040 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: So. PRK
Posts: 2,044
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nhr310 View Post
... last time i said anything remotely nice about Obama I got it hard ...

Justifiably so.


Quote:
Originally Posted by nhr310 View Post
Democratic Senators. Mark Begich of Alaska, Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, Mark Pryor of Arkansas and Max Baucus of Montana voted against it.

When are their terms up?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 04-18-2013, 3:26 PM
dfletcher dfletcher is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 10,677
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stony View Post
There is no such thing as UBC without a gun registry. It is completely unenforceable.
I agree. But I suppose as a statement of principle it's fine to toss in for effect.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 04-18-2013, 4:55 PM
ja308 ja308 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 6,805
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tankarian View Post
Here is the letter I sent to my Democrat representative and president Obama:

Dear sir,
I am a liberal who loves guns and believes in the 2nd amendment. It bothers me a lot that you are trying to take my guns and restrict my rights. So in order to teach you a lesson, I decided to vote for you again. That's gonna show you how serious I am about my gun rights.

Respectfully,
Your pea brained supporter Joe Liberal
OMG
Laughinggggggg
Thanx for the humor
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 04-18-2013, 5:22 PM
tankarian's Avatar
tankarian tankarian is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,770
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ja308 View Post
OMG
Laughinggggggg
Thanx for the humor
It's not supposed to be funny. But these people are so stupid it's hard not to laugh at them.
__________________
BLACK RIFLES MATTER!

Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 04-18-2013, 5:31 PM
BCDavis BCDavis is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 312
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

People seem to forget that there are more issues in politics, and an election, than just gun rights. As the OP said, things like wasteful wars, stock market and bank regulation, social issues, environmental issues, gay rights, health care, and so on.

If you are already Republican, or conservative, you probably disagree with Obama and most Democrats on many of those issues. But for other Democrats, they might agree with Obama on 75% of his viewpoints, but dislike his view on the other 25%. So they won't vote for a Republican, who will possibly fight against a bunch of things they feel are important.

I tend to vote Independent or Libertarian. But when looking at many Republican candidates, I see people who cater to rich people, and cater to corporations. I know the Democrats are also sell-outs, but I think the biggest problem is the candidates the Republican party pushes out. Especially in CA. To actually get votes in CA, Republicans need to be a hell of of a lot more moderate, if they want to win over Democratic and Independent voters. They need to be gay-friendly, latino-friendly, environment-friendly, etc, if they want CA voters to support them.

I actually think the OP's letter, while somewhat biased, at least gets a good point across.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 04-18-2013, 5:51 PM
glbtrottr's Avatar
glbtrottr glbtrottr is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: By the Beach, Baby!
Posts: 3,404
iTrader: 44 / 87%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BCDavis View Post
People seem to forget that there are more issues in politics, and an election, than just gun rights. As the OP said, things like wasteful wars, stock market and bank regulation, social issues, environmental issues, gay rights, health care, and so on.
And while I agree with you, I can't think of any issue more important than preventing a leftist, Muslim fundamentalist, traitorous government who would just as soon disarm the American citizen, from doing so. Once disarmed, all the remaining issues become non issues since those in office take their "mandate" and abuse it by way of executive order - and once disarmed, the government is free to take anything else they want.
__________________
Visit http://www.policemisconduct.net to learn more about "isolated incidents"
Obama's Favorite TV show? "Homeland", about a Muslim who betrays his nation on the way to the White House...http://tinyurl.com/c8tvk92
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 04-18-2013, 5:53 PM
2000Yards 2000Yards is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 21
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nhr310 View Post
So far Villaraigosa (for you Tarn Helm) is the only one who has responded. Generic letter thanking me for my views.

Sorry If my letter, title, or responses offendended anyone as that was not my goal.

I'm new to calguns and would like to continure to be a part of it and hopefully sway others to see my views and why I support the 2A.
I doubt too many are offended. Studying Tarn Helm's long post and internalizing what was written would be helpful in other aspects of your life, not just in writing to representatives. There are many good points in that post.

Re-emphasizing what others said, consider joining the NRA.

Also, you (maybe I too) may be surprised at how liberal the members of Calguns.net are. This is California after all, not Alabama (for example), and your post was directed to the members of this board, not gun owners generally (who may be more conservative than CA gun owners).

Last, kudos and props to you for actually doing something in support of the 2nd Amendment. May you inspire others to do the same.

2KYDS
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 04-18-2013, 6:27 PM
collegegradditchdigger collegegradditchdigger is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 8
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lasbrg View Post
If the NRA downrates her, after giving Toomey an "A" and Reid a "B", then it would be a complete travesty. She told the Newtown parents to their faces that she wasn't going to support ANY new restrictions.
I quite like Heidi. Saw an interview with her right after the election and a big Democratic win. She gave on national television 1/2 dozen of her positions which were 180 degrees out of phase with Obama, everything from carbon cap, oil drilling, and gun control.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 04-18-2013, 6:53 PM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 9,079
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2000Yards View Post
Also, you (maybe I too) may be surprised at how liberal libertarian the members of Calguns.net are.
That is a more likely conclusion based on which way the debates on non-gun issues typically go. It's the way liberals were supposed to be: "live and let live." It's also the way conservatives were supposed to be: "judge, but don't oppress."
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 04-18-2013, 8:12 PM
krpduner krpduner is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor - Lifetime
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 197
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Thank you for your letter. We need more people with differing views who ultimately will band together to support the 2A. I can write letters all day and the majority of the CA pols will throw my letter in the trash. But if enough people whom they think will actually vote or not vote for them let their views be known there may be a change of heart or mind. Thank you again. I enjoyed your letter.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 04-18-2013, 8:33 PM
asm_'s Avatar
asm_ asm_ is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 744
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Boy, some of you need to cut this guy some slack. I enjoy reading his letter. I do not support Obama, but for the most part, he and I hold the same view on most, including background check without registry. While we are the topic of background check, if you are familiar with asymmetrical encryption theory (public/private key encryption), it can be done without creating a gun owner registry. The idea is not mine, it was mentioned by some else here on Calgun. Search for it, it's actually quite brilliant.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 04-18-2013, 9:44 PM
otalps's Avatar
otalps otalps is online now
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,595
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by asm_ View Post
Boy, some of you need to cut this guy some slack. I enjoy reading his letter. I do not support Obama, but for the most part, he and I hold the same view on most, including background check without registry. While we are the topic of background check, if you are familiar with asymmetrical encryption theory (public/private key encryption), it can be done without creating a gun owner registry. The idea is not mine, it was mentioned by some else here on Calgun. Search for it, it's actually quite brilliant.
I can't think of anything brilliant about having to ask permission from mommy and daddy government no matter how it's done. It's actually quite pathetic.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 04-18-2013, 10:15 PM
rugershooter rugershooter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,243
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NotEnufGarage View Post
Op- sorry but there are no 2a friendly democrat politicians, so if you don't vote for republicans, you do not support the 2nd amendment. Sad, but true



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I hope you're joking. Ever heard of John McCain? Mitt Romney? Ronald Reagan?
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 04-18-2013, 10:20 PM
SonofWWIIDI's Avatar
SonofWWIIDI SonofWWIIDI is online now
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Santa Clara county
Posts: 17,583
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

We do have differing views. But it seems that you are not an emotionally charged illogical thinker like the far leaning left. Which means to me that polite, reasoned discourse may be had on those other subjects when the time is right.

We do agree on the 2A. It was enacted for much more then just hunting and self defense.

I too hope that the governor vetoes the legislation currently in progress.
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 04-18-2013, 10:32 PM
speleogist speleogist is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 211
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nhr310 View Post
I wrote a letter today for the first time ever about any subject to a bunch of politicians. Including Boxser, Fienstien,Brown, Villaragosa, Waters and a few more.

heres a copy let me know what you think. Keep in mind brothers and sisters we must rally support on both sides of the aisle to keep our right from being infringed.

Governor Brown

Thank you for taking the time to read my letter. I am not a member of the NRA; I support gay-rights, I agree with universal background checks with no national registry, and identify myself as a democrat supportive of President Obama. I am strongly opposed to any new gun laws being added to the books in the wake of the Newtown Massacre. A law should not be based on emotion but what is right and wrong. If a law was based on emotion whichever group displays the largest emotion would win. Abortion may be a differnt story (as we are seeing in other states) if emotion was greater than support of an individuals right to choose. Please do not take any action or move forward on any new Gun control legislation that infringe on our rights.
The 2nd amendment has deeper meaning than hunting and home protection and that should be genuinely acknowledged. I agree that military weapons to do not belong on the streets of Los Angeles however the people should be able to arm themselves at a level equal to their local law enforcement agency. We rely on local law enforcement to "protect and serve” as required. Should they fail or be hindered in ability to fulfill their duty an individual should be able to protect their lives and the lives of others as well as personal property.

I was 11 years old when the city of Los Angeles erupted in riots after the verdicts of the police charged in the Rodney King beating were given. I remember the skyline filled with smoke trails from fires. The rampant crime and violence was everywhere. I remembered the police left us, they ran, they were overwhelmed, they fled, they re-grouped, they abandoned us....whatever you want to call it. They left the people to fend for ourselves. Over the next 6 days with police grossly overwhelmed and with the National Guard called in the riots claimed 58 lives. Loss was in the hundreds of millions.

It is important as I stated the 2 Amendment is rooted in our most sacred of documents. I truly believe that everyone should take the time sit down and read it and most importantly ask why? Why? Why did our founding fathers see such an importance in acknowledging the average person has a right "to bear arms that shall not be infringed upon"? Tyranny does exist hopefully we will never have to deal with that. Civil unrest, natural disaster, disease outbreak, terrorism and crime in general all could create a situation where a person may need to defend themselves and protect their loved ones from harm.

Do you realize police actually utilize military weapons?

Get out, don't want you here.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 04-18-2013, 10:44 PM
dieselpower's Avatar
dieselpower dieselpower is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Ventura
Posts: 10,386
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

No one should be forced to comply with a background check to own or buy a firearm.

Why?

Because any person with unpaid late library books will be denied a firearm by the very people you have a reason to want a firearm to protect yourself from.

You see what the DOJ is denying California residents for...parking tickets, late child support payments, similar names to a convicted criminal, CANT FIND INFO so they hold the sale up... UBC is what the Second Amendment was written to STOP.

No one should support background checks.
Reply With Quote
  #61  
Old 04-18-2013, 11:11 PM
tuolumnejim's Avatar
tuolumnejim tuolumnejim is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Stagecoach, Nv.
Posts: 9,801
iTrader: 29 / 100%
Default

If you support barry or any demoNrat causes in ANY way I have no use for you at all.
__________________
There is no crueler tyranny than that which is perpetuated under the shield of law and in the name of justice.
Charles de Montesquieu

“In a state where corruption abounds, laws must be very numerous.”
Publius Cornelius Scipio

Malo periculosam libertatem quam quietam servitutem
"I prefer liberty with danger to peace with slavery"
Count Palatine of Posen
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 04-18-2013, 11:12 PM
MacDaddy's Avatar
MacDaddy MacDaddy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 268
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

nhr310, I appreciate our common ground. Good job.
__________________
NRA Life Member
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 04-18-2013, 11:22 PM
asm_'s Avatar
asm_ asm_ is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 744
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by otalps View Post
I can't think of anything brilliant about having to ask permission from mommy and daddy government no matter how it's done. It's actually quite pathetic.
I guess you are the far right extremist and Obama is the far left extremist. Neither side refuses to listen. No wonder we can't get any thing done in this country.

B
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 04-18-2013, 11:25 PM
JoshuaS's Avatar
JoshuaS JoshuaS is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 1,615
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NotEnufGarage View Post
Op- sorry but there are no 2a friendly democrat politicians, so if you don't vote for republicans, you do not support the 2nd amendment. Sad, but true



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That is not true everywhere. The Alaskan and the North Dakota Democratic Senators would beg to differ.

In CA it is true. At best some of the central valley have to be careful not to be too anti-2a.

Of course there was a time well being Democrat and pro-life was not contradictory either, without getting into the debate over abortion, it is clearly the case that Dems have effectively excluded the likes of Bob Casey Sr. I suppose the same push of "unity" in their ranks is being made in this area
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 04-18-2013, 11:59 PM
rugershooter rugershooter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,243
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by asm_ View Post
I guess you are the far right extremist and Obama is the far left extremist. Neither side refuses to listen. No wonder we can't get any thing done in this country.

B
Not wanting the 2nd Amendment to be violated is extremist? No wonder the Constitution is always being raped by the politicians now. If you think neither side listens, you should pull your head out of your a**. Our side as been giving in for decades. We have given in to countless bans, restrictions, taxes, regulations, fees, background checks, and all kinds of other infringements.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 04-19-2013, 12:43 AM
snorky snorky is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 454
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Default

As a young gun owner, I find the bigotry in this thread revolting, so let me lay some knowledge on ya.

Quote:
lib·er·al noun \ˈli-b(ə-)rəl\
Definition of LIBERAL

a : one who is open-minded
b capitalized : a member or supporter of a liberal political party (see 1liberal)
c : an advocate or adherent of liberalism especially in individual rights
Anybody who claims to be a liberal, but supports gun control or is anti-2A, is NOT a liberal at all. The truest form of liberalism advocates for ABSOLUTE INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM.

This B.S. of having to choose Democrat or Republican is absolutely disgusting. Those that reject pro-gun Democrats, on the basis of being a Democrat, sicken me and cast a shameful image of EVERY gun owner, regardless of political affiliation. If you fall in that category, you should be ashamed and seriously reconsider the logic that led you to that conclusion.

I don't give a rats *** what you believe about gay marriage, abortion, taxes, education, religion, war, or anything other than the rights of gun owners and the preservation of the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America.

Some may call me a radical or an extremist, but at least I am willing to fight for what I believe in, and that is exactly what this country was founded on.

That being said, I have but one thing to say. ANY GUN GRABBER, REPUBLICAN OR DEMOCRAT, IF YOU WANT MY GUNS, COME AND GET 'EM!!!

/rant

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 04-19-2013, 1:50 AM
arsilva32's Avatar
arsilva32 arsilva32 is offline
Senior Member
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Huntington Beach/Buena Park
Posts: 862
iTrader: 10 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NotEnufGarage View Post
Op- sorry but there are no 2a friendly democrat politicians, so if you don't vote for republicans, you do not support the 2nd amendment. Sad, but true



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

this ^^^^

sorry but you say your pro 2nd but support and vote for politicians that are anti 2nd amendment . this does not help the cause it only makes it far worse.

Quote:
Originally Posted by snorky View Post
As a young gun owner, I find the bigotry in this thread revolting, so let me lay some knowledge on ya.



Anybody who claims to be a liberal, but supports gun control or is anti-2A, is NOT a liberal at all. The truest form of liberalism advocates for ABSOLUTE INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM.

This B.S. of having to choose Democrat or Republican is absolutely disgusting. Those that reject pro-gun Democrats, on the basis of being a Democrat, sicken me and cast a shameful image of EVERY gun owner, regardless of political affiliation. If you fall in that category, you should be ashamed and seriously reconsider the logic that led you to that conclusion.

I don't give a rats *** what you believe about gay marriage, abortion, taxes, education, religion, war, or anything other than the rights of gun owners and the preservation of the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America.

Some may call me a radical or an extremist, but at least I am willing to fight for what I believe in, and that is exactly what this country was founded on.

That being said, I have but one thing to say. ANY GUN GRABBER, REPUBLICAN OR DEMOCRAT, IF YOU WANT MY GUNS, COME AND GET 'EM!!!

/rant

the reality is 99.9% of the gun grabbers are democrats,so if you value the 2nd and vote in people like obama, Nancy Pelosi , Dianne Feinstein ect. then your killing the constitution not helping maintain it as written.. face it, liberal democrats are not the same party they used to be. your truest form of liberalism does not exist in todays democratic party,as can be seen by there wanting to control every aspect of your life.democrats today want you depending on government for everything.......health-care , food , work , money , protection and so on.



Quote:
Originally Posted by asm_ View Post
I take it you also support convicted felon with their right to purchase firearm? or are you also against the current legal system to revoking convicted felon's right to vote or serve as a juror.

Don't get me wrong, I support the 2A just like everyone else here. However, I think you and I both agree, there are people in our society that shouldn't own a firearm or even drive a car.

B
sorry but i don't support stripping away 2nd amendment rights from all convicted felons. a friend of mine was convicted of felony drunk driving 35+ years ago and now he does not have a right to protect his family?


Quote:
Originally Posted by asm_ View Post
I guess you are the far right extremist and Obama is the far left extremist. Neither side refuses to listen. No wonder we can't get any thing done in this country.

B
if Neither side refuses to listen then why are we here where we are now?
__________________

More armed citizens = Quicker response times, less victims.
Less armed citizens = more victims


Guns should only be surrendered one bullet at a time.

Last edited by arsilva32; 04-19-2013 at 2:41 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 04-19-2013, 2:05 AM
asm_'s Avatar
asm_ asm_ is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 744
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rugershooter View Post
Not wanting the 2nd Amendment to be violated is extremist? No wonder the Constitution is always being raped by the politicians now. If you think neither side listens, you should pull your head out of your a**. Our side as been giving in for decades. We have given in to countless bans, restrictions, taxes, regulations, fees, background checks, and all kinds of other infringements.
I take it you also support convicted felon with their right to purchase firearm? or are you also against the current legal system to revoking convicted felon's right to vote or serve as a juror.

Don't get me wrong, I support the 2A just like everyone else here. However, I think you and I both agree, there are people in our society that shouldn't own a firearm or even drive a car.

B
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 04-19-2013, 2:09 AM
philobeddoe's Avatar
philobeddoe philobeddoe is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Venice
Posts: 1,909
iTrader: 17 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BCDavis View Post
People seem to forget that there are more issues in politics, and an election, than just gun rights. As the OP said, things like wasteful wars, stock market and bank regulation, social issues, environmental issues, gay rights, health care, and so on.

If you are already Republican, or conservative, you probably disagree with Obama and most Democrats on many of those issues. But for other Democrats, they might agree with Obama on 75% of his viewpoints, but dislike his view on the other 25%. So they won't vote for a Republican, who will possibly fight against a bunch of things they feel are important.

I tend to vote Independent or Libertarian. But when looking at many Republican candidates, I see people who cater to rich people, and cater to corporations. I know the Democrats are also sell-outs, but I think the biggest problem is the candidates the Republican party pushes out. Especially in CA. To actually get votes in CA, Republicans need to be a hell of of a lot more moderate, if they want to win over Democratic and Independent voters. They need to be gay-friendly, latino-friendly, environment-friendly, etc, if they want CA voters to support them.

I actually think the OP's letter, while somewhat biased, at least gets a good point across.

Pffft. WGARA about democratic and independent voters. The GOP needs to embrace conservatism and bring out the conservative vote. I don't want socialism-lite. We have a constitution, and we need elected representatives that will obey it.

The GOP caters to rich people? Do a little research. The obama administration may as well be the front office of Goldman Sachs AND the SEIU. Come out of your cave once in a while.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 04-19-2013, 2:13 AM
Full Clip's Avatar
Full Clip Full Clip is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Playa Vista, CA
Posts: 9,005
iTrader: 38 / 100%
Default

You lost me at "identify myself as a democrat supportive of President Obama..."
__________________
“Political tags — such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth — are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire.” — Robert A. Heinlein

“It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds” — Samuel Adams
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 04-19-2013, 6:59 AM
EM2's Avatar
EM2 EM2 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Prather, CA
Posts: 1,845
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tarn_Helm View Post
(Truncated by me.)

What do I think?

In your post, here is what I care about, in order of occurrence, not in order of importance: "My views may be differnt than most of you but I am all for the 2nd Amendment."

Learn how to check the spelling of what you post and/or send to politicians: "differnt."

Learn what academic English is and then use it consistently: "different from," not "differnt than."

Learn how to use your keyboard's space bar correctly: "I wrote a letter today . . . to . . . Boxser, Fienstien,Brown, Villaragosa, Waters and a few more."

Learn how to spell the names of politicians correctly: “Boxer” not “Boxser,” and “Villaraigosa” not “Villaragosa.” "Feinstein," not "Fienstien."

Learn how to apply capitalization and punctuation rules and then do so consistently: "heres a copy . . ."

Learn what a sentence is so that you can consistently apply the correct end punctuation to it and consistently separate it from the next sentence.

Write: "Here's a copy. Let me know what you think." Do not write: "heres a copy let me know what you think."

Join the NRA: "I am not a member of the NRA." Despite its flaws and numerous mistakes over the years, the NRA today is the most effective and powerful lobbying organization in the United States of America, if not in the world.

I have no interest in oppressing gays: "I support gay-rights." Stop implicitly stereotyping Second Amendment supporters. There are no "gay-rights." There are only "rights."

Do some research. Find out if most Second Amendment supporters on this forum oppose "gay-rights" or support them.

You can launch a poll here the next time you feel like making a generalization about us. After you get a numerically relevant number of responses, you can then cite the numbers—but only as anecdotal evidence of course.

Do not invent new hyphenation rules: "gay-rights" should not be hyphenated.

Buy, read, study, and memorize a simple book that will show you the conventions of academic English. I recommend this paperback: English Grammar Simplified, by George Curme. You can buy it for $4.00, including shipping, from a well-known online vendor whose name rhymes with Obamazon.

Please learn the true and main purpose of the Second Amendment.

It is not duck hunting, recreational sport shooting, pistol competition, etc.

It is to keep the citizenry armed in the event that we should need to take arms against the government.

When you write: "I agree with universal background checks with no national registry," you show that you have not taken this seriously.

All forms of background checks run the risk of creating records that identify who owns what. These are precisely the kinds of records a tyrannical government would use, preliminarily, to track down gun owners for the sake of disarming us.

(This explains a lot: "I . . . identify myself as a democrat supportive of President Obama.")

This sounds like a sixth-grader wrote it: "I am strongly opposed to any new gun laws being added to the books in the wake of the Newtown Massacre. A law should not be based on emotion but what is right and wrong."

If you want to say something mature, write something like: "Gun laws should be formulated according to the same standard of strict scrutiny that all other fundamental rights (freedom of expression, etc.) are protected by."

Do some legal research and find out what the concept of “strict scrutiny” means.

Again, please learn the deepest purpose of the Second Amendment. It is based on an assumption that most adults in America today regard as unendurably pessimistic: The government could turn on the people. The people need to retain and exercise effective armed defense against that eventuality.

This is nonsense: "If a law was based on emotion whichever group displays the largest emotion would win."

All forms of rationale for any bill take into account affective factors.

Humans are not robots.

All good laws take into account “feelings,” one way or another.

Do not ham-handedly start mixing in other topics about which you know little or nothing: "Abortion may be a differnt story (as we are seeing in other states) if emotion was greater than support of an individuals right to choose. Please do not take any action or move forward on any new Gun control legislation that infringe on our rights.”

Learn the correct way to form a possessive form (“an individual’s right”).

"Different," not "differnt." (You did that twice!)

Do not randomly capitalize words: "any new Gun control legislation." The word “gun” is not a proper name.

Do not contradict yourself in arguments aimed at supporting the Second Amendment: "The 2nd amendment has deeper meaning than hunting and home protection and that should be genuinely acknowledged. I agree that military weapons to do not belong on the streets of Los Angeles however the people should be able to arm themselves at a level equal to their local law enforcement agency."

Have you noticed lately how your "local law enforcement agency" is armed with respect to hand-held firearms? Answer: Just like the military. Wake up.

These are all routinely issued to and carried by both the U.S. military and the LAPD (currently or in the past): Beretta 92FS 9MM, 12-gauge shotguns (Mossberg, Remington, Ithaca, etc.), AR-15-type "patrol rifles," and Remington 700s.

You fail to separate subordinate clauses from main clauses with the necessary punctuation (see the square brackets in what follows): "We rely on local law enforcement to 'protect and serve' as required. Should they fail or be hindered in ability to fulfill their duty[,] an individual should be able to protect their lives and the lives of others as well as personal property."

"I was 11 years old when [Delete execessive verbiage: "the city of"] Los Angeles erupted in riots after the verdicts of the police charged in the Rodney King beating were given."

Do not shift illogically from present tense to preterite ("simple past"): "I remember the skyline . . . I remembered."

Learn when to use the plural form of a verb: Write this, "Rampant crime and violence were everywhere," not this, "The rampant crime and violence was everywhere." And do not put a definite article in front of a pair of abstract, indivisible nouns. Academic English does not do this.

This is a run-on sentence, a needlessly repetitive one at that: "I remembered the police left us, they ran, they were overwhelmed, they fled, they re-grouped, they abandoned us....whatever you want to call it."

Learn how to use ellipses. You do not put four consecutive unspaced periods in a sentence to indicate ellipsis. Look up this topic in the book I mentioned above.

Do not use two consecutive unpunctuated introductory constructions--sixteen words in length--to introduce a five-word sentence (notice the commas I've inserted in the square brackets): "Over the next 6 days[,] with police grossly overwhelmed and with the National Guard called in[,] the riots claimed 58 lives."

This is your third or fourth fused construction: "It is important as I stated the 2[nd] Amendment is rooted in our most sacred of documents." Learn how to separate one sentence from the next.

Do not write "2" or "2nd" in a letter to a letter in which you are attempting to argue that the "Second" Amendment shall not be infringed.

This is another incorrectly punctuated construction that results in a run-on sentence: "I truly believe that everyone should take the time [to] sit down and read it and most importantly ask why?" You also neglected to use the infinitive form of the verb “sit.” Look up “infinitive” in Curme.

Omit unnecessary repetition: "ask why? Why? Why . . ." This sounds more like you do not know why the Second Amendment is there or what it means.

You wrote: Why did our founding fathers see such [an] importance in acknowledging the average person has a right "to bear arms that shall not be infringed upon"?

If you use quotation marks, make sure you get the wording exactly right. The word "upon" does not appear anywhere in the Second Amendment as ratified.

Also, you need to learn how to punctuate the end of a sentence with double quotation marks. The pair on the right goes outside of the question mark and not to the left of it.

You end with yet another fused construction: "Tyranny does exist hopefully we will never have to deal with that." (At least you're consistent!)

You could have punctuated it like this: "Tyranny does exist. I hope we will never have to deal with that."

However, you still would have been wrong on factual grounds even if you had corrected your solecisms.

American civilians have already used armed force to put tyrannical government back in check. Read about the "Battle of Athens" that took place in 1946.

This is awkward and unclear. It is also riddled with faulty pronoun reference: "Civil unrest, natural disaster, disease outbreak, terrorism and crime in general all could create a situation where a person may need to defend themselves and protect their loved ones from harm."

You could have rewritten it thus: "Civil unrest, natural disaster, disease outbreak, terrorism, and crime could create, individually or in combination, a situation in which a person might need to defend himself and protect his loved ones."

"Protect from harm" is redundant.

What else do we protect each other from?

Again, I strongly recommend this paperback: English Grammar Simplified, by George Curme.

That is all.

This has got to be the single best educational post I have ever seen on this forum.
Thank You very much.
EM2
__________________
Quote:
"The 'Spray and Pray' system advances triumphantly in law enforcement. In a recent case in a southwestern city...a police officer, when threatened with a handgun, emptied his 15 shot pistol at his would-be assailant, achieving two peripheral hits. The citizen was charged with brandishing a firearm, but the cop was not charged with anything, lousy shooting not being a diciplinary offense."
--- Jeff Cooper, June 1990

Quote:
Originally Posted by EM2
Put you link where your opinion is.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 04-19-2013, 8:01 AM
jnojr's Avatar
jnojr jnojr is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 7,987
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stony View Post
There is no such thing as UBC without a gun registry.
There could be. It's entirely possible to run a background on someone with no information about what gun they want to buy. Just, "Is this person eligible to purchase a firearm, yes or no?" And that's something I could accept. But we all know that isn't what the left wants at all, so it's a moot point.
__________________


San Diego FFLs | San Diego ranges
I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it. --Thomas Jefferson
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 04-19-2013, 8:09 AM
jnojr's Avatar
jnojr jnojr is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 7,987
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nhr310 View Post
I wrote a letter today for the first time ever about any subject to a bunch of politicians. Including Boxser, Fienstien,Brown, Villaragosa, Waters and a few more.
It was a good letter, but only one thing matters... will you stop voting for them and their platform when they continue with their gun-grabbing agenda, yes or no? No equivocation, no waffling, no "There are more important things". When you KNOW they support a gun-grabbing agenda, and you vote for them, you are voting for gun-grabbing, period.

There is no such thing as a vote "against" something. A vote for a "lesser evil" is still a vote for evil.

I really believe more and more Americans are like you... socially liberal, for individual liberty, and in favor of fiscal restraint and balanced budgets. You think you're torn between two choices, both noxious, but you "have" to pick one. That isn't the case at all. A lot of you are a lot more Libertarian than you are Republican or Democrat. If more people would seriously question and consider ALL parties, and vote their consciences, we'd have a better country.

I will vote Republican when the R is the best choice. If the Democrat was the best choice, I'd vote that way. But when they're both "lesser evils", and there's a Libertarian running, I vote L. Sure, they probably won't win... but they have a little more of the vote than they would have otherwise. At some point, enough of those individual drops might put enough water in the bucket to make it worth considering to more people. And if more people started to vote Libertarian, and that party became a serious contender, how would we be anything but better off? Even if you think Libertarians are "kooks" (which would be because you really don't understand the philosophy), if Rs and Ds both had to compromise towards greater liberty and fiscal conservatism instead of toward their extreme bases, we'd all be better off.

Think about it.
__________________


San Diego FFLs | San Diego ranges
I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it. --Thomas Jefferson
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 04-19-2013, 11:12 AM
rugershooter rugershooter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,243
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by asm_ View Post
I take it you also support convicted felon with their right to purchase firearm? or are you also against the current legal system to revoking convicted felon's right to vote or serve as a juror.

Don't get me wrong, I support the 2A just like everyone else here. However, I think you and I both agree, there are people in our society that shouldn't own a firearm or even drive a car.

B
Yes, I support the right of a convicted felon to keep and bear arms. Where in the Constitution are convicted felons exempt from the protection of the Bill of Rights? And yes, I also believe convicted felons should be able to serve on a jury and should be able to vote. Obviously, you only believe in freedom for those you don't considered to be society's "undesirables".

And no, you don't support the 2nd Amendment. You support government infringement on the 2nd Amendment. You think it's "extreme" to be opposed to asking permission to exercise a natural right. No matter how you try to spin it, that sure as hell is not support of the 2nd Amendment.
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 04-19-2013, 11:24 AM
mud99 mud99 is offline
Mall Ninja
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 1,061
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

"Convicted felon" is an interesting term.

Presumably, the person in question committed a crime, and was put in jail (where they have no 2A or various other rights), and was then released since they had "paid their dues"

Once that person has "paid their dues" in the eyes of the law, doesn't that imply that they should again have all the same rights as a normal person?

If these "convicted felons" are so dangerous, then why did a judge allow them to be released from prison?

"Convicted felon" is an emotional term. Don't get tricked by it.
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 04-19-2013, 11:25 AM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 9,079
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rugershooter View Post
Obviously, you only believe in freedom for those you don't considered to be society's "undesirables".
Think of it as an "extended parole" rather than the "undesirables." Integration back into society is a gradual process and sometimes there are lasting consequences, e.g., for sex offenders. The limitations are through the due process and are in nature similar to incarceration itself, except that the person is not physically restrained.

While I agree that at some point most rights should be restored, I don't necessarily see the current restrictions as being a priori unconstitutional.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 04-19-2013, 11:30 AM
mud99 mud99 is offline
Mall Ninja
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 1,061
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IVC View Post
Think of it as an "extended parole" rather than the "undesirables." Integration back into society is a gradual process and sometimes there are lasting consequences, e.g., for sex offenders. The limitations are through the due process and are in nature similar to incarceration itself, except that the person is not physically restrained.

While I agree that at some point most rights should be restored, I don't necessarily see the current restrictions as being a priori unconstitutional.

If I had to design a legal system, the crimes would be divided into the following punishments with no granularity between levels.

Level 1: Monetary Ticket
Level 2: Up to 1 year in jail
Level 3: Death

I do not believe that putting someone in jail for more than a year is necessary for "rehabilitation"

The longer they are kept out of society, the less likely they ever reintegrate.
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 04-19-2013, 11:41 AM
lasbrg's Avatar
lasbrg lasbrg is offline
Another 180ls1 avatar guy
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Orange County, NC
Posts: 4,241
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rugershooter View Post
Where in the Constitution are convicted felons exempt from the protection of the Bill of Rights?
Good point, but a little bit tricky. Imprisonment is infringing on a person's right to liberty, capital punishment is infringing on their right to life, etc. Both liberals and conservatives alike believe in the idea of "bad people". Only libertarians really think differently about basic rights.

It's no coincidence that it was Rand Paul who was the one to give the filibuster on the use of predator drones against US citizens. "Mainstream" politicians from both parties are quite happy with blowing up people from space. If they have that power, then anything else is just an inconvenience by comparison.
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 04-19-2013, 12:17 PM
BCDavis BCDavis is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 312
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Let me make it very, very clear to those of you who are Republican voters.

People vote for Democrats because they *dislike* the candidates
the Republicans put out there. If the candidates were more moderate,
you'd see a lot more people being willing to switch sides.
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 04-19-2013, 12:29 PM
CessnaDriver's Avatar
CessnaDriver CessnaDriver is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,163
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BCDavis View Post
Let me make it very, very clear to those of you who are Republican voters.

People vote for Democrats because they *dislike* the candidates
the Republicans put out there. If the candidates were more moderate,
you'd see a lot more people being willing to switch sides.

The RINOs tend to get their asses handed to them.
People vote for democrats because they are ignorant, emotional, fools, love the "free" stuff or koolade drinkers.
__________________
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/signaturepics/sigpic28512_1.gif

"Yeah, like... well, I just want to slap a hippie or two. Maybe even make them get jobs."

Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:56 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2016, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.