NRA anti Obama ads......is this true?

POSTED BY: OPPYH
UPDATED: Thursday, October 16, 2008 18:20
VIEWED: 6897
PAGE 1 of 1

OPPYH

Sunday, October 12, 2008 8:58 PM

Is Obama really against gun ownership in America?
The new ads from the NRA state this.
I haven't been this upset since Rosie O'donell had a meltdown on Tom Selleck about gun ownership.

This is sad to hear. I was pretty decisive about who to vote for, but not any longer.

As Americans we have the right to gun ownership.

FUTUREMRSFILLION

Sunday, October 12, 2008 9:02 PM

No

I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"

FORSAKEN original

Trolls Against McCain

“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” Mahatma Gandhi

WHOZIT

Sunday, October 12, 2008 9:04 PM

The NRA has endorced McCain.

HKCAVALIER

Sunday, October 12, 2008 9:13 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by FutureMrsFIllion:
No

What she said.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

FUTUREMRSFILLION

Sunday, October 12, 2008 9:21 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by whozit:
The NRA has endorced McCain.

That has nothing to do with the question.

I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"

FORSAKEN original

Trolls Against McCain

“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” Mahatma Gandhi

OUT2THEBLACK

Sunday, October 12, 2008 10:54 PM

Decide for yourself :

There are many more facts on this matter , just waiting to be revealed...

KWICKO

Sunday, October 12, 2008 11:08 PM

Quote:
Is Obama really against gun ownership in America?

He's got a history of being fairly anti-gun, which is my single biggest problem with Obama. I have some faith in the Second Amendment, though, and I honestly don't think anyone is going to get enough support for a constitutional amendment to overturn it.

There's a lot of hysteria over Obama's stance on the issue, with lots of gun enthusiasts absolutely convinced that on January 21st, 2009, Obama (if he wins) will sign laws outlawing all gun ownership, and the feds will show up at your door that day to confiscate all your "illegal" weapons (which would be all of them). Truth is, that's not going to happen.

What he CAN do, and probably will try to do, is steer legislation favorable to his views. This is my worry, and it's a valid one. There was already a new, expanded version of Clinton's "Assault Weapons Ban" introduced in the House of Representatives this year, but it will surprise you WHO introduced it: four REPUBLICAN Congressmen!

I have little doubt that another AWB is coming, one way or another. All that gun enthusiasts can do in the meantime is contact their Congresspeople and make their views known.

And if you have your eye on a gun, it's a good idea to buy it sooner rather than later - especially if you desire something with a magazine capacity of more than 10 rounds. I've picked up a couple interesting items in the past few months, but now I'm stocking up more on ammo (prices have skyrocketed in the past few years) and "high-capacity" magazines rather than on any particular model of handgun or rifle. What good is a gun if you don't have any ammo for it?

But yeah, Obama's record on guns is definitely not one of his strong suits, in my opinion. :(

This world is a comedy for those who think, and a tragedy for those who feel.

Trolls Against McCain!

KIRKULES

Monday, October 13, 2008 1:07 AM

THE FACTS SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES:

Obama voted to ban hundreds of rifles and shotguns commonly used for hunting and sport shooting
Illinois Senate, SB 1195, 3/13/03

Obama endorsed a ban on all handguns
Independent Voters of Illinois/Independent Precinct Organization general candidate questionnaire, 9/9/96
Politico, 03/31/08.

Obama voted to allow the prosecution of people who use a firearm for self-defense in their homes
Illinois Senate, S.B. 2165, vote 20, 3/25/04

Obama supported increasing taxes on firearms and ammunition by 500 percent
Chicago Defender, 12/13/99

Obama voted to ban almost all rifle ammunition commonly used for hunting and sport shooting
United States Senate, S. 397, vote 217, 7/29/05

Obama opposes Right-to-Carry laws
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, 4/2/08, Chicago Tribune, 9/15/04

OPPYH

Monday, October 13, 2008 1:10 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
He's got a history of being fairly anti-gun, which is my single biggest problem with Obama. I have some faith in the Second Amendment, though, and I honestly don't think anyone is going to get enough support for a constitutional amendment to overturn it.

There's a lot of hysteria over Obama's stance on the issue, with lots of gun enthusiasts absolutely convinced that on January 21st, 2009, Obama (if he wins) will sign laws outlawing all gun ownership, and the feds will show up at your door that day to confiscate all your "illegal" weapons (which would +be all of them). Truth is, that's not going to happen.

What he CAN do, and probably will try to do, is steer legislation favorable to his views. This is my worry, and it's a valid one. There was already a new, expanded version of Clinton's "Assault Weapons Ban" introduced in the House of Representatives this year, but it will surprise you WHO introduced it: four REPUBLICAN Congressmen!

I have little doubt that another AWB is coming, one way or another. All that gun enthusiasts can do in the meantime is contact their Congresspeople and make their views known.

And if you have your eye on a gun, it's a good idea to buy it sooner rather than later - especially if you desire something with a magazine capacity of more than 10 rounds. I've picked up a couple interesting items in the past few months, but now I'm stocking up more on ammo (prices have skyrocketed in the past few years) and "high-capacity" magazines rather than on any particular model of handgun or rifle. What good is a gun if you don't have any ammo for it?

But yeah, Obama's record on guns is definitely not one of his strong suits, in my opinion. :(

This world is a comedy for those who think, and a tragedy for those who feel.

Thanks for your honesty.

^^^You know, I expected a little more from most people who posted on this thread. I just wanted an honest answer. For some of you to just blatantly say "NO" without doing any research or knowing what your talking about is a disservice to the truth. Obama is clearly anti-gun(at least handguns). For me this is a deal breaker. I'm simply not voting.

OUT2THEBLACK

Monday, October 13, 2008 1:26 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by FutureMrsFIllion:
No

I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"

FORSAKEN original

Day-yam , I hate Gorramned Lie-yers !

Fear The Reaper !

http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app2/q-9.html

FUTUREMRSFILLION

Monday, October 13, 2008 1:29 AM

Obama is NOT anti gun OWNERSHIP. You can own guns. He is for gun CONTROL.

There is a difference.

I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"

FORSAKEN original

Trolls Against McCain

“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” Mahatma Gandhi

FUTUREMRSFILLION

Monday, October 13, 2008 1:29 AM

O2B

I could really care less.

NOT

I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"

FORSAKEN original

Trolls Against McCain

“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” Mahatma Gandhi

XRAFTERMANX

Monday, October 13, 2008 1:59 AM

What would the Captain think about gun control?

FUTUREMRSFILLION

Monday, October 13, 2008 2:05 AM

he would probably tell you to control your gun or he would control it for you

I am on The List. We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"

FORSAKEN original

Trolls Against McCain

“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.” Mahatma Gandhi

GEEZER

Monday, October 13, 2008 2:38 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by FutureMrsFIllion:
Obama is NOT anti gun OWNERSHIP. You can own guns. He is for gun CONTROL.

There is a difference.

I'd really like for you to explain that difference.

Convince me that Sen. Obama won't try to infringe my Second Amendment rights.

If you can't, then, based on the record, the "If he ain't for it he's against it" rule applies.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

OUT2THEBLACK

Monday, October 13, 2008 3:41 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by FutureMrsFIllion:
O2B

I could really care less.

Yeah , I know...

St00pid IS as St00pid DOES...--Forrest Gump

KWICKO

Monday, October 13, 2008 3:52 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:
Originally posted by FutureMrsFIllion:
Obama is NOT anti gun OWNERSHIP. You can own guns. He is for gun CONTROL.

There is a difference.

I'd really like for you to explain that difference.

Convince me that Sen. Obama won't try to infringe my Second Amendment rights.

If you can't, then, based on the record, the "If he ain't for it he's against it" rule applies.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

It's a hot-button issue for single-issue voters, that's for sure. But if gun rights are your ONLY issue, you really should look into McCain's record a bit deeper. Seems he co-sponsored a gun bill with Joe Lieberman some years ago that would have seriously curtailed sales at gun shows, even to the point of saying that any gathering of more than 5 or 10 people where guns were sold constituted a "gun show", and everyone who attended would have to be filed in a federal database - regardless of whether they bought anything or not. Just ATTENDING one of these "gun shows" put you on a Fed list!

Seems none of our candidates are squeaky clean on this one. Except maybe Ron Paul. Feel free to write him in.

Mike

This world is a comedy for those who think, and a tragedy for those who feel.

Trolls Against McCain!

OUT2THEBLACK

Monday, October 13, 2008 3:55 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:
Originally posted by FutureMrsFIllion:
Obama is NOT anti gun OWNERSHIP. You can own guns. He is for gun CONTROL.

There is a difference.

I'd really like for you to explain that difference.

Convince me that Sen. Obama won't try to infringe my Second Amendment rights.

If you can't, then, based on the record, the "If he ain't for it he's against it" rule applies.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

...Just ATTENDING one of these "gun shows" put you on a Fed list !

Seems none of our candidates are squeaky clean on this one. Except maybe Ron Paul. Feel free to write him in.

Mike

OUT2THEBLACK

Monday, October 13, 2008 3:56 AM

Gun Control is the ability to HIT YOUR TARGET !

OUT2THEBLACK

Monday, October 13, 2008 4:11 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by FutureMrsFIllion:
he would probably tell you to control your gun or he would control it for you

Control THIS !

Muh-Fuh !

KWICKO

Monday, October 13, 2008 4:14 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by out2theblack:
Gun Control is the ability to HIT YOUR TARGET !

I was taught that the best gun control is a steady hand.

This world is a comedy for those who think, and a tragedy for those who feel.

Trolls Against McCain!

OUT2THEBLACK

Monday, October 13, 2008 4:17 AM

'Steady Hand' enables you to HIT YOUR TARGET !

" In the next breath, he asserts that this constitutional guarantee does not preclude local "common sense" restrictions on firearms. Does the draconian prohibition in Washington fit that description? My attempts to get an answer have proved unavailing. The front-running Democratic presidential candidate is doing the gun dance. "

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/06/AR20080406016
52.html

HKCAVALIER

Monday, October 13, 2008 4:22 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by OPPYH:
Thanks for your honesty.

^^^You know, I expected a little more from most people who posted on this thread. I just wanted an honest answer. For some of you to just blatantly say "NO" without doing any research or knowing what your talking about is a disservice to the truth. Obama is clearly anti-gun(at least handguns). For me this is a deal breaker. I'm simply not voting.

Obama has said repeatedly that as President, he is not gonna take your guns away, loudly and often and in front of large crowds. Supporting anti-gun legislation in a state with an extremely high crime rate is a little different from wanting to ban all guns in all 50 states. You ever think he might be in favor of gun laws on a case by case, state by state basis? No where does Obama's Illinois record show that he would support Federal anti-gun laws. Best just to jump to conclusions, though: oh no, he obviously hates guns and wants to repeal the 2nd Amendment!

I echoed FMF's "no" because I've been through this argument half a dozen times already and I have researched his position and the answer is "no."

And a lot has changed in this country since Clinton was President. Thanks to them mouthy Libertarians and our own government's creeping totalitarianism, a lot of people have a much greater appreciation for the 2nd Amendment now (myself included).

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

OUT2THEBLACK

Monday, October 13, 2008 4:32 AM

'When a child says "I'm sorry." for misbehaving and then immediately does the same thing, he either does not know the meaning of the words he speaks or doesn't care about the value of his word.

Similarly, when a politician says he supports the Second Amendment, and then votes for bills that violate those rights, there are only two options. He either doesn't know what he is saying, or he is saying what is necessary to get elected.

Either way, actions speak louder than words.

And so it is with Barack Obama.

Before you take the shortcut to FactCheck's analysis, remember that they are funded by the Annenberg Foundation, which just happens to also fund the Brady Bunch. Also recognize that their analysis relies on Obama's words and misrepresentations of the mentioned bills.

We have been hearing for months about how Obama was a constitutional professor and respects the Second Amendment as an individual right. Sportsmen for Obama groups have sprouted up here and there to try to accent the point. A skeet shoot in Brighton, Colorado, hosted by Ray Shoenke of the AHSA, was Obama's version of the Kerry absurd.

So, do we believe the words of a candidate or do we examine readily available information? I am not suggesting anyone take the word of the AHSA or the NRA. Investigate for yourself. Obama's voting record will speak for itself.

And his voting record is consistent with his words when running as an Illinois politician instead of a federal politician.

I suggest that you do not trust this site. And do not trust Gun Law News. Link through to bills like SB-2579 (Illinois 2003) and read the kind of bills that Obama actually voted for and read his speech on the bill (page 123). Then examine the kind of bills that Obama voted against: S-397.

Do those votes reflect a position of support for the Second Amendment?

Do Obama's words mirror his actions or give the reflection of someone hoping you will not research his actions?

Do not let Barack fool you. Despite his words, Obama will support all the gun control he feels he can get passed. And he will do it while saying that he is not infringing the rights of hunters.'

http://www.sportsmenforobama.org

OUT2THEBLACK

Monday, October 13, 2008 4:38 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by FutureMrsFIllion:
No

Ignorant Partisan Shill !

KHYRON

Monday, October 13, 2008 8:32 AM

O2B, chill out, none of FMF's responses to you warrant the verbal abuse you're throwing at her at the moment. It's people who can't control their temper, i.e. people like you, who give gun owners a bad name.

------------------------------

McCain/Palin: The first presidential ticket that features two candidates who have both been found to have violated ethics standards.

KHYRON

Monday, October 13, 2008 9:15 AM

Quote:
"Obama's Ten Point Plan to 'Change' the Second Amendment…Ban use of firearms for home defense."

National Rifle Association on Friday, August 1st, 2008 in direct mail piece

Yes, and outlaw apple pie as well

In a hard-hitting direct-mail piece to its members, the National Rifle Association detailed an alleged plan by Sen. Barack Obama to transform gun-ownership regulations.

Obama's "plan" appeared on a section of the mailer designed to be cut out and carried around in a wallet. The front of the wallet card said, "Barack Obama's Ten Point Plan to 'Change' the Second Amendment." The reverse listed the 10 parts of the alleged plan, starting with, "Ban use of firearms for home defense."

An NRA spokeswoman confirmed the authenticity of the mailer, which first appeared in early August 2008, but would not provide details of what its claims were based on. For that, she referred us to various NRA Web sites.

We could find no support on any of them for the allegation that Obama has a plan to ban the use of firearms for home defense. What we did find, and what we suspect is the root of this allegation, was information about a vote Obama cast as an Illinois state senator in May 2004. (See this essay by NRA executive vice president officer Wayne LaPierre.)

The bill in question was a response to the case of Hale DeMar, a Wilmette, Ill., man who shot and wounded a burglar in his home in December 2003. Prosecutors did not charge him for the shooting, since they determined that he acted in self-defense, but they did fine him $750 for violating the local handgun ordinance. An outcry of sympathy for DeMar prompted the state legislature to take up a bill that would let people claim a self-defense protection for using a gun in their homes in violation of local weapons bans.

Obama voted against the measure. The legislature passed it, and later overrode the veto of Democratic Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

Like Blagojevich, Obama framed that debate as a home-rule issue. He told the Associated Press at the time that he voted against the measure out of respect for local governments' authority to set gun policy.

Here's what LaPierre wrote about the vote: "When Obama turned thumbs down on the bill, he voted against the most basic element of the Second Amendment — the right of defense of self and family — the reason that millions of Americans own firearms."

That's a bit of a leap. In concrete terms, Obama's thumbs-down was a vote against the state legislature tweaking a local gun ban. In any event, there's no fair way to interpret it as evidence that Obama has a future plan to ban the use of firearms for home defense.

Moreover, there's ample evidence to the contrary. Here's Obama speaking at a forum sponsored by WJLA-ABC7 and Politico.com on Feb. 12, 2008: "I think we have two conflicting traditions in this country. I think it’s important for us to recognize that we’ve got a tradition of handgun ownership and gun ownership generally. And a lot of people — law-abiding citizens use it for hunting, for sportsmanship, and for protecting their families (emphasis added). We also have a violence on the streets that is the result of illegal handgun usage…We can have reasonable, thoughtful gun control measures that I think respect the Second Amendment and people’s traditions.”

That doesn't sound to us like someone planning to "ban use of firearms for home defense." Quite the opposite, actually.

Ignoring that sort of evidence, and instead extrapolating from one vote on a jurisdictional debate in Illinois a broad-ranging plan to ban guns for home defense, is not just misleading, it's intentionally dishonest. That is, Pants on Fire wrong.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/709/

------------------------------

McCain/Palin: The first presidential ticket that features two candidates who have both been found to have violated ethics standards.

SIMONWHO

Monday, October 13, 2008 10:46 AM

Pah, if the founders had wanted guns to be well regulated, they'd have used those words in the amendment.

And guess who the NRA labelled "one of the premier flag carriers for the enemies of the Second Amendment"?

AURAPTOR

Monday, October 13, 2008 10:47 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by out2theblack:
Decide for yourself :

There are many more facts on this matter , just waiting to be revealed...

Why does Obama lie when asked a simple question ? That alone should send alarm bells off in some of y 'alls heads.

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

OUT2THEBLACK

Monday, October 13, 2008 2:04 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Khyron:
O2B, chill out, none of FMF's responses to you warrant the verbal abuse you're throwing at her at the moment. It's people who can't control their temper, i.e. people like you, who give gun owners a bad name.

Hey dude , she's the one that slipped in here , shooting from the lip...

Taking potshots in a drive-by ain't exactly fair play...If she had so much as a single fact on her side , she might be excusable...

But she doesn't . And she isn't...

She only shows up with a lie in the first place...Everything that followed that is not even so much as a well-formed opinion on her part...

Like I said , she's just a partisan shill seeking to mislead people...
Then she doesn't know to shut up and quit before she loses more ground...

That gets less than zero respect from me .

OUT2THEBLACK

Monday, October 13, 2008 2:09 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SimonWho:
Pah, if the founders had wanted guns to be well regulated, they'd have used those words in the amendment.

Yes , that's WHY they never said that...

What they said was , " the Right of THE PEOPLE to Keep And Bear Arms SHALL NOT Be Infringed ."

WULFENSTAR

Monday, October 13, 2008 2:41 PM

Well, we all know what happens if the government tries and takes our weapons.

Besides, think of the logistics of it.

They would have to first ban all weapons...which at that point, the people would rise up.

THEN they would have to go house to house, all across the country and try and take the weapons. Granted, they would start first with the people who had them registered.

But by that point....well....do you think the military or the police are prepared to have a gun battle everytime they show up at someones house?

For the record tho, I've seen those ads and done my own research.

The NRA ads are true.

SIGNYM

Monday, October 13, 2008 3:49 PM

If you can't control your temper maybe YOU shouldn't have a gun.

The best form of "gun control" is SELF control. Because an idiot with a gun is still just an idiot with a gun.

---------------------------------
Let's party like its 1929.

STORYMARK

Monday, October 13, 2008 3:57 PM

Wow, some big, scared reactionaries in here.

I do find it interesting, amid all this "Obaama's gonna ban gus talk", that the righties are totally ignoring McCain's record on ths issue, even after it was pointed out.

Rather telling.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

WULFENSTAR

Monday, October 13, 2008 4:52 PM

It doesnt matter the party.

Anyone tries to take our guns...good luck.

Its funny how the "gun-control" sheeple are always so ready to lie down and let those in "power" violate them. But, then again, they ARE the weak.

Im not saying everyone should have a gun, or that it should be the Wild West all over again.
But, it is a God given right for a person to defend themelves. Period. End of discussion.

OPPYH

Monday, October 13, 2008 4:59 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Obama has said repeatedly that as President, he is not gonna take your guns away, loudly and often and in front of large crowds. Supporting anti-gun legislation in a state with an extremely high crime rate is a little different from wanting to ban all guns in all 50 states. You ever think he might be in favor of gun laws on a case by case, state by state basis? No where does Obama's Illinois record show that he would support Federal anti-gun laws. Best just to jump to conclusions, though: oh no, he obviously hates guns and wants to repeal the 2nd Amendment!

I echoed FMF's "no" because I've been through this argument half a dozen times already and I have researched his position and the answer is "no."

And a lot has changed in this country since Clinton was President. Thanks to them mouthy Libertarians and our own government's creeping totalitarianism, a lot of people have a much greater appreciation for the 2nd Amendment now (myself included).

HKCavalier

Yeah, but don't you think if there were another gun disaster(Columbine) Obama as president would sit well with gun laws. Not very likely. He would most likely do everything in his power to make gun ownership(purchasing new guns that is) either impossible, or damn near illegal.

It's my opinion of course, but I can see him as being the "hero" in a situation like that. Killing a headache by cutting off the head!

STORYMARK

Monday, October 13, 2008 5:21 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
It doesnt matter the party.

Anyone tries to take our guns...good luck.

Its funny how the "gun-control" sheeple are always so ready to lie down and let those in "power" violate them. But, then again, they ARE the weak.

Yeah, but my point is, the righties are acting as if Obama is the ONLY one who is advocaqting gun control, and ignoring the fact that it's coming from their "side" as well.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

KWICKO

Monday, October 13, 2008 6:11 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
It doesnt matter the party.

Anyone tries to take our guns...good luck.

Its funny how the "gun-control" sheeple are always so ready to lie down and let those in "power" violate them. But, then again, they ARE the weak.

Yeah, but my point is, the righties are acting as if Obama is the ONLY one who is advocaqting gun control, and ignoring the fact that it's coming from their "side" as well.

Exact-a-mundo!

Just do some research. Start digging. You'll be shocked and ashamed to discover what the "other side" is doing on this front.

My take is that either way, we're somewhat screwed.

Mike

This world is a comedy for those who think, and a tragedy for those who feel.

Trolls Against McCain!

OPPYH

Monday, October 13, 2008 6:43 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Yeah, but my point is, the righties are acting as if Obama is the ONLY one who is advocaqting gun control, and ignoring the fact that it's coming from their "side" as well.

And Obama has been very vocal(now he's remaining quiet) about making gun ownership(handguns)a thing of the past. That's not not gun control, that's erasing an ammendment. Mccain has never stated anything more than a more thorough background check, and license to buy handgun ammo for handguns. Something I agree with completely.

WULFENSTAR

Monday, October 13, 2008 6:59 PM

I believe we should all be allowed to carry a gun, under any circumstance. (Unless, you are a convicted felon or a mental case).

The streets would be safer, and everyone would be a hell of a lot more polite.

As to those who want to take my guns from me, and leave me at the mercy of the evil in this world....or regulate me from protecting myself...

Let them come.

To quote "Jarhead"

I want the pink mist.

SIGNYM

Monday, October 13, 2008 8:50 PM

Quote:
I want the pink mist.

Wulf, you're not exactly a walking advert for gun ownership.

ETA: Reminds me of those news stories: Man Shoots Wife and Children in Custody Dispute. Kinda explains why the woman wanted a divorce AND custody, doesn't it?

---------------------------------
Let's party like its 1929.

KIRKULES

Monday, October 13, 2008 10:14 PM

WULFENSTAR

Tuesday, October 14, 2008 12:02 AM

Sigy,

Don't worry. When the shit hits the fan, folks like me will protect you.

I'd rather you be able to protect yourself, mind. But, whatever...

SIGNYM

Tuesday, October 14, 2008 12:11 AM

I have a gun, Wulf, and I know how to use it. If the shit hits the fan, if you come to MY door with a gun you better be careful.

---------------------------------
Let's party like its 1929.

WULFENSTAR

Tuesday, October 14, 2008 12:21 AM

Lol Well, its good to know you have SOME fight in you.

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, October 14, 2008 12:38 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Lol Well, its good to know you have SOME fight in you.

I am a lethal weapon my own self, guns would just slow me down, but I believe in the right to have 'em if y'all feel the need to.

Chrisisall

OUT2THEBLACK

Tuesday, October 14, 2008 2:07 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:

I am a lethal weapon my own self, guns would just slow me down, but I believe in the right to have 'em if y'all feel the need to.

Yeah , acute lead intoxication has a way of putting your gung-fu into slo-mo mode...

'Gun-fu' is known for that...Makes all the fancy posturing seem ridiculously silly...

FREMDFIRMA

Tuesday, October 14, 2008 2:21 AM

Out2B - Come on, that was a bit much, don'tcha think ?

I am pretty rabid about the 2A, and that's one of the reasons I do NOT like Obamalamadingdong, cause he's not only anti gun ownership, he's as thoroughly dishonest about is as any other politico, and while not having the guts to stand up and try a ban, seems intent on playing the game of slowly chipping away at those rights till there's nothing left but a hollow shell - with the INTENT in the end, of prettymuch an outright ban, taken to the level of utter ridiculousness the UK has.

That path leads to a rubber room with crayons, so we don't accidently hurt ourselves in between our shifts of working to enrich the elitist bastards who DO have control over all the weapons, or worse.

I have no respect for the mollycoddling milquetoast quisling collaborator sellout bastards of the NRA, none... having carefully observed their actions in the past few years, and their squeamishness in addressing the Katrina confiscations till forced to on the pike of member outrage - I see the same self-serving treachery as the AARP visited upon seniors over the medicare drug programs.

Nope, NOT good enough for me - and although we're at fairly different odds religiously, I am with the JFPO, cause they've been down that road, handed em in, and watched as their relatives and families were herded into the camps.
http://www.jpfo.org/

THAT is where it ends folks, never you doubt it, and any study of history worthy of note will tell you the exact same thing, again and again - once you hand over the means, you might as well just slit your own throat on the spot, at least it'd be quick.

I know I sound harsh, but the sad fact is with so many folks unwilling to stand up for constitutional rights, those few who remain seek refuge in absolute rabidity to multiply the force of their dwindling numbers - I could care less what happens to folk who vote away their own freedoms, but when you wrap that anchor chain around my ankles too, expect to be regarded with the vile rancor that your treacherous actions have earned.

If *I* voted away YOUR freedoms, how would you then feel about me, ehe ?

What part of SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED does not get across here, eh ?

"Liberty, the greatest of all earthly blessings - give us that precious jewel, and you may take every things else! Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. It is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth and listen to the song of that syren, till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty?"

All that being said - the Second Amendment is a last ditch defense to protect the rest, and while the Fourth is an endangered species, and the First well on it's way, they ain't gone yet.

And so it strikes me with the utmost annoyance, when folk will go so far to protect ONE Constitutional Right, but refrain from, or actively resist, protecting them ALL.

Those ennumerated rights are not the only ones we have, and although the government acts like they are, which the AntiFederalists fully predicted would happen in precisely the fashion it has, those are specifically mentioned as a tripwire to alert the people that the Gov has crossed the line.

So if you're willing to stand and deliver for my right to bear arms in self defense - but unwilling to stand and deliver for any of the others...

Or if you're willing to stand and deliver for the other rights, but not this one...

Then go stand somewhere else, cause I don't want you beside me.

You can't pick and choose, you defend em all, or just surrender and go the fuck home, allright ?

-Frem
It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from histor

WULFENSTAR

Tuesday, October 14, 2008 2:38 AM

What Frem said.

OUT2THEBLACK

Tuesday, October 14, 2008 4:57 AM

Out2B - Come on, that was a bit much, don'tcha think ?

What was ?

I know I sound harsh, but the sad fact is with so many folks unwilling to stand up for constitutional rights, those few who remain seek refuge in absolute rabidity to multiply the force of their dwindling numbers - I could care less what happens to folk who vote away their own freedoms, but when you wrap that anchor chain around my ankles too, expect to be regarded with the vile rancor that your treacherous actions have earned.

Hey bud ,

I've taken the Oath of office twice , to Support and Defend the Constitution , and the Bill of Rights , against all Enemies , Foreign and Domestic...

I hope your rant was a general one...We have much more to be concerned about from the Domestic Enemies , than the Foreign ones...

If this Republic were being governed in a genuine Constitutional manner , we'd have many fewer foreign enemies...

I find it odd that Obama is considered to be a 'constitutional scholar' , and yet he attacks the 2nd Amendment furtively...The question of this thread wasn't directed to the matter of McShame and his record , but in the interest of equal time , he's little , if any , better than his opponent...So far , though , I haven't seen anyone actively seeking to obscure the facts about his record within this thread...

Having said that , I have much less concern about Palin making an effort to establish a theocracy than I do about the continual erosion of civil liberties and Constitutional Rights...

Even in the face of the recent Supreme Court decision (re: DC gun ban) , the assaults against the 2nd continue unabated...

Actually , with redoubled vigor...

FREMDFIRMA

Tuesday, October 14, 2008 8:25 AM

All of my rants are generalist - trust me, if I go rippin someones head off in the specific, there's utterly no doubt about it.

I was however, smacking your hand a bit cause it's a damn fool thing to go all offensive like that without at least an effort to educate first.

Remember that our public education system has so warped any teachings of our history that most folk have a pretty distorted concept of what much of the Constitution means, in spite of it being very clearly worded to avoid this.

I would suggest taking a page from Anthony and hearing folk out, finding out why and where they disagree and addressing those points clearly instead of lighting up the flamethrower, cause there's a difference between misunderstanding the concept and nature of a thing, which can be corrected - and willfully distorting it.

As a general rule, I confirm the latter before firing off salvos, yanno ?

I took the Oath too, and that was kind of the root of much of my disagreement with the military, as they continued violating it on an ever widening scale, and handing me that survey was a capper - although it was a payroll dispute in the end that send me to IRR for all eternity.

They reneged on the college money, which was damn rare back then, but occasionally happened, and has become increasingly common now - considering what that did to my educational opportunities, I tend to hold a grudge.

And, that wasn't the typical weaseling, that was an outright violation of my DD-4 enlistment contract which in effect, broke it - thus the solution of eternal IRR, by the obscure rules of the service, preventing me from addressing that legally.

Oh the irony of holding me to an Oath that ensures my stance in regard to them is generally hostile, although I will service it as much as able in the case of civil emergency, which around here would be flooding - I can still fill sandbags, even old and gimpy that I am.

And yes, I find jug-ears despicable for his stealthy assault on the 2A, but that's all too typical of congress these days, and makes me value that punk Dingell in spite of wanting to rip his spine out over the bailout, cause Ding-Bat does respect the 2A a helluva lot more than most.

That's where we roadblock Obamalama, see, with OUR reps, and if yours ain't with the program, boot em the hell outta there.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

SHINYGOODGUY

Tuesday, October 14, 2008 8:53 AM

There's been a lot of talk about the 2d Amendment and Obama said this and McCain said that, but can anyone answer me this:

Can the President of the United States change, veto or ratify an amendment to the Constitution?

Just curious if anyone knows this for sure?

ARCLIGHT

Tuesday, October 14, 2008 11:57 AM

Quote:
Obama is NOT anti gun OWNERSHIP. You can own guns. He is for gun CONTROL.

There is a difference.
Quote:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Is that clear enough for you?

Bozobama is the most rabid gun grapper to come down the pike since Sarah Brady. His record speaks.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME

KWICKO

Tuesday, October 14, 2008 5:38 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Shinygoodguy:
There's been a lot of talk about the 2d Amendment and Obama said this and McCain said that, but can anyone answer me this:

Can the President of the United States change, veto or ratify an amendment to the Constitution?

Just curious if anyone knows this for sure?

Simple answer: No. Which is why I alluded to it in my first response on this thread. As President, Obama, McCain, Palin, or whoever is in charge can WANT to outlaw guns all they want. But without a specific Amendment nullifying the Second Amendment, they can't actually DO it. And Constitutional Amendments are damned hard to come by, because it takes a hell of a lot of will and agreement to get one up for a vote.

This world is a comedy for those who think, and a tragedy for those who feel.

Trolls Against McCain!

STORYMARK

Tuesday, October 14, 2008 5:44 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
Originally posted by Shinygoodguy:
There's been a lot of talk about the 2d Amendment and Obama said this and McCain said that, but can anyone answer me this:

Can the President of the United States change, veto or ratify an amendment to the Constitution?

Just curious if anyone knows this for sure?

Simple answer: No. Which is why I alluded to it in my first response on this thread. As President, Obama, McCain, Palin, or whoever is in charge can WANT to outlaw guns all they want. But without a specific Amendment nullifying the Second Amendment, they can't actually DO it. And Constitutional Amendments are damned hard to come by, because it takes a hell of a lot of will and agreement to get one up for a vote.

This world is a comedy for those who think, and a tragedy for those who feel.

Trolls Against McCain!

Yep. It's just scare tactics, to get certain single-issue voters in line. And it seems to work.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

PIRATENEWS

Tuesday, October 14, 2008 5:52 PM

Uncle Toms can't allow slaves to own guns on the plantation.

Quote:
New Orleans Mayor Admits Illegal Gun Confiscation

National Rifle Association of America
October 14, 2008

Fairfax, VA-After a three-year legal battle over the unconstitutional confiscation of lawfully owned firearms, the City of New Orleans has agreed to settle a law suit by the National Rifle Association (NRA). A permanent injunction has been issued against the city, Mayor Ray Nagin and current Police Chief Warren Riley. The Second Amendment Foundation assisted NRA in the legal battle against Mayor Ray Nagin and the City of New Orleans.

“Today’s outcome is an important victory for the citizens of New Orleans and the Second Amendment,” said Wayne LaPierre, NRA’s executive vice president. “We fought for three long years in a fundamental legal challenge to assert the inherent self-defense rights for law-abiding citizens, knowing the Constitution would prevail. Today it has prevailed and freedom has won.”

Judge Carl J. Barbier presided over the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. Judge Barbier signed the permanent injuncation against the City of New Orleans. The city admitted the firearm confiscations carried out by Nagin and Riley were unconstitutional and illegal.

Under the terms of the injunction, Mayor Ray Nagin, Police Chief Warren Riley and any agents or employees of the City of New Orleans shall:

· cease and desist confiscating lawfully-possessed firearms from all citizens;

· make an aggressive attempt to return any and all firearms which may have been confiscated during the period August 29 to December 31, 2005;

· within one month of the settlement, post on the City website the procedure for the return of confiscated firearms. This notice must include an interactive form for those claiming firearms to fill out, resulting in timely transmission of the information to the appropriate official. All other information on claiming a firearm will also be included on the site.

· within one month of the settlement, the City must mail notices to all individuals who are identified on the property tags of firearms in the City’s possession which were confiscated during the aftermath of Katrina.

“On behalf of the lawful gun owners of New Orleans, NRA is pleased with this outcome,” said Chris W. Cox, NRA’s chief lobbyist. “We thank Judge Barbier for his leadership and constitutional scholarship in presiding over our lawsuit. NRA will continue to aid however we can in the full return of all the firearms confiscated by the City.”

www.nraila.org/News/Read/NewsReleases.aspx?ID=11653

These guns were seized from affluent white folks in their homes untouched by floods or loss of power.

5,000 poor blacks were summarily executed in the streets under martial law. 100,000 blacks were forcibly deported out of state, and never allowed to return to their homes, which were then stolen. All part of the ethnic clensing by Jewish robber barons.

Hussein Obama is a black man's worst nightmare in the White House.
www.obamacrimes.com

KIRKULES

Tuesday, October 14, 2008 9:43 PM

KIRKULES

Tuesday, October 14, 2008 9:59 PM

KWICKO

Tuesday, October 14, 2008 11:01 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kirkules:

The Constitution is meaningless if Obama gets the chance to load up the Supreme Court with liberal judges. The recent Heller decision was a 5-4 vote. You really think an Obama appointed judge would have voted with the majority. I can't believe you are willing to just resign yourself to the reinstatement of the "Assault Rifle Ban" when there's something you can easily do about it in the voting booth.

and

Quote:
Even Kwicko is honest enough to admit the a new gun ban is inevitable in a Obama administration.

Kirk, I think you missed the part where I pointed out that the latest Assault Weapons Ban was a REPUBLICAN-sponsored bill. My point is that we're almost assuredly screwed no matter WHO wins, since it's a safe bet that it's NOT going to be Dr. Paul. I might be "resigned" to it, but that doesn't mean I'm giving up; I'm writing my Congresspeople to demand that they stand up and strongly support MY rights, not just the rights of their rich donors.

As for the Supreme Court, that is a major concern. One thing that should be noted, however - Supreme Court justices have a habit of not really finding themselves beholden to the Presidents who appoint them, nor to anyone else, really. Once they're appointed, they don't owe allegiance to anyone or anything except the United States Constitution, and as such, have often found themselves at odds with the people who thought they had those Justices all figured out. Once in a while they'll vex the hell out of a president.

Will Obama try to stack the Court with anti-gun nominees if he gets the chance? Probably, to some extent. It's incumbent ON US to make sure that shit doesn't fly. When we the people speak loudly and boisterously enough, our Representatives and Senators find it in their best interests to listen. And unsuitable SCOTUS nominees find themselves "Borked".

It IS a valid concern, but I don't see much in McCain's record that really me much hope, either. He's been pretty staunchly anti-gun when he's had the chance, too.

If this is the ONLY issue you're voting on, your best bet is to write in Ron Paul, or stay home and not vote at all, because neither of the major-party candidates have your Second Amendment rights high on their list of things to protect.

Mike

This world is a comedy for those who think, and a tragedy for those who feel.

Trolls Against McCain!

FREMDFIRMA

Wednesday, October 15, 2008 12:42 AM

Who the fuck says I am willing to hand em over, Kirk ?

Nobody, that's who - keep holding a grudge if ya like, but while I distrust Jug-ears for very valid reasons, his opposition doesn't seem to have any respect for multiple amendments, particularly the fourth, and I doubt their respect for the 2A as well.

So what to do but pull for the guy less dangerous and blockade him from actually doing any of this crap, we do not have to LET them, you know.

Neither one of these pissants has a proper respect for our rights, and it's well past due that we reminded em - and since we need to do that, the course of wisdom is to get someone a little more bendable and less beholden to the party line in place, and then bend em for all we're worth.

As for everything else, like I said, if yer not gonna defend em all, what's the point of defending one ?

Either you ain't heard a word I said in a week and more, or you just ain't listenin if you have the idea that imma hand over ANY rights, yours, mine, or even those of folks I hate and think use them badly - cause to me they are universal, unless we ALL have em, no one really does.

-Frem
It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

PIRATENEWS

Thursday, October 16, 2008 6:20 PM

Illinois State Rifle Association Executive Director Richard Pearson Issues Open Letter to Nation's Sportsmen Regarding Obama's History in the Illinois Senate:

Quote:
CHICAGO, Oct 15, 2008 /PRNewswire-USNewswire via COMTEX/ -- The following is the text of an open letter to the nation's hunters and sportsmen issued today by Illinois State Rifle Association Executive Director Richard Pearson:

Fellow Sportsman,

Hello, my name is Rich Pearson and I have been active in the firearm rights movement for over 40 years. For the past 15 years, I have served in the Illinois state capitol as the chief lobbyist for the Illinois State Rifle Association.

I lobbied Barack Obama extensively while he was an Illinois State Senator. As a result of that experience, I know Obama's attitudes toward guns and gun owners better than anyone. The truth be told, in all my years in the Capitol I have never met a legislator who harbors more contempt for the law-abiding firearm owner than does Barack Obama.

Although Obama claims to be an advocate for the 2nd Amendment, his voting record in the Illinois Senate paints a very different picture. While a state senator, Obama voted for a bill that would ban nearly every hunting rifle, shotgun and target rifle owned by Illinois citizens. That same bill would authorize the state police to raid homes of gun owners to forcibly confiscate banned guns. Obama supported a bill that would shut down law-abiding firearm manufacturers including Springfield Armory, Armalite, Rock River Arms and Les Baer. Obama also voted for a bill that would prohibit law-abiding citizens from purchasing more than one gun per month.

Without a doubt, Barack Obama has proven himself to be an enemy of the law abiding firearm owner. At the same time, Obama has proven himself to be a friend to the hardened criminal. While a state senator, Obama voted 4 times against legislation that would allow a homeowner to use a firearm in defense of home and family.

Does Barack Obama still sound to you like a "friend" of the law-abiding gun owner?
And speaking of friends, you can always tell a person by the company they keep. Obama counts among his friends the Rev. Michael Pfleger - a renegade Chicago priest who has openly called for the murder of gun shop owners and pro-gun legislators. Then there is his buddy Richard Daley, the mayor of Chicago who has declared that if it were up to him, nobody would be allowed to own a gun. And let's not forget Obama's pal George Soros - the guy who has pumped millions of dollars into the UN's international effort to disarm law-abiding citizens.

Obama has shown that he is more than willing to use other people's money to fund his campaign to take your guns away from you. While a board member of the leftist Joyce Foundation, Barack Obama wrote checks for tens of millions of dollars to extremist gun control organizations such as the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence and the Violence Policy Center.

Does Barack Obama still sound to you like a "friend" of the law-abiding gun owner?
By now, I'm sure that many of you have received mailings from an organization called "American Hunters and Shooters Association(AHSA)" talking about what a swell fellow Obama is and how he honors the 2nd Amendment and how you will never have to worry about Obama coming to take your guns. Let me make it perfectly clear - everything the AHSA says about Obama is pure hogwash. The AHSA is headed by a group of left-wing elitists who subscribe to the British view of hunting and shooting. That is, a state of affairs where hunting and shooting are reserved for the wealthy upper-crust who can afford guided hunts on exclusive private reserves. The AHSA is not your friend, never will be.

In closing, I'd like to remind you that I'm a guy who has actually gone nose to nose with Obama on gun rights issues. The Obama I know cannot even begin to identify with this nation's outdoor traditions. The Obama I know sees you, the law abiding gun owner, as nothing but a low-class lummox who is easily swayed by the flash of a

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME