Yea Im sure he just wants more restrictions. Im sure he told the truth about what his intentions were before he got elected. Im sure we can compare him to Abe Lincoln. I say lets compare him to all of his self appointed, anti American, anti Freedom,anti constitution, anti Bill of rights csarzs. What a lying POS. K O O L A I D.
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Who was it on here that said Obama is not anti-gun?
- Thread starter rodbender
- Start date
Beretta92FSLady
Regular Member
In the video he did state that under the Constitution the individual has a right to arms. But of course, I am sure Romney is telling the truth.
ldsgeek
Regular Member
You need to look at what he has DONE, not what he has said. I can't think of many things that he said during the campaign that he actually stuck to, (unfortunately typical of most politicians on both sides) health care disaster excepted. Look at his underlings/advisers as well (Holder (F&F), Cas Sunstein (wants animals to be able to sue, outlaw hunting), probably others I can't think of), because he can say "It wasn't me, it was these people", throwing anyone under the bus to save his own neck.
CommonMan101
Regular Member
The big O is a S.C.O.A.M.F.
Not worth arguing over. Just defeating.
If someone doesn't get how he would love to do away with the second amendment and totally disarm all non-Govt people then they are probably self deluding about a lot of things in their life so that reality is altered enough to make sense to their pre-concluded perception of it. "More (sensible) regulation" is the slow path so don't fool yourself thinking that it's not. If one thing is OK to restrict the next becomes only a little step away. Most people already assume they have less rights than they do which helps more laws to be passed since they didn't excercise them anyway.
I took note recently that the big O said he would be MAD if it was true about his Secret Service agents mis-behaving. I find nothing particularly wrong about that but please notice that he made no such statement about Fast and Furious and it had good people die because of it. Nope, not only no outrage at it but NO co-operation with the investigation into it. Very telling indeed. Like I said, anyone who still thinks O is not against us having our arms is deluding themselves because the proof is right in front of their eyes - they just refuse to see it. Idiot? Evil? Mentally off? Something... but not someone who sees things as they actually are.
When looking for the truth I watch the actions and believe that. If my wife told me she really really loved me after I found her in bed with another I would probably laugh out loud at the ridiculousness of the notion. Her actions said otherwise. No honey, you obviously don't!
O's actions say it all. The spinning is only spinning to those of us who believe our eyes and experiences.
Oh, yeah, just to add: I think McCain wouldn't have been any better. He pushed cap & trade at one point. Yeesh. He's no answer.
Not worth arguing over. Just defeating.
If someone doesn't get how he would love to do away with the second amendment and totally disarm all non-Govt people then they are probably self deluding about a lot of things in their life so that reality is altered enough to make sense to their pre-concluded perception of it. "More (sensible) regulation" is the slow path so don't fool yourself thinking that it's not. If one thing is OK to restrict the next becomes only a little step away. Most people already assume they have less rights than they do which helps more laws to be passed since they didn't excercise them anyway.
I took note recently that the big O said he would be MAD if it was true about his Secret Service agents mis-behaving. I find nothing particularly wrong about that but please notice that he made no such statement about Fast and Furious and it had good people die because of it. Nope, not only no outrage at it but NO co-operation with the investigation into it. Very telling indeed. Like I said, anyone who still thinks O is not against us having our arms is deluding themselves because the proof is right in front of their eyes - they just refuse to see it. Idiot? Evil? Mentally off? Something... but not someone who sees things as they actually are.
When looking for the truth I watch the actions and believe that. If my wife told me she really really loved me after I found her in bed with another I would probably laugh out loud at the ridiculousness of the notion. Her actions said otherwise. No honey, you obviously don't!
O's actions say it all. The spinning is only spinning to those of us who believe our eyes and experiences.
Oh, yeah, just to add: I think McCain wouldn't have been any better. He pushed cap & trade at one point. Yeesh. He's no answer.
Last edited:
OldCurlyWolf
Regular Member
Idiots would seem to be appropriate. Maybe: Morons, Cretins, Pin Heads, Stupid. There might be a few other appropriate appellations.
randian
Regular Member
Give the guy more credit than that. He was very clear that he wanted energy to be much more expensive, that he wanted to bankrupt coal-burning power companies, and that he wanted to reduce our standard of living ("we must accept less in the future", paraphrased). He's been working very hard on all three fronts.
Beretta92FSLady
Regular Member
Idiots would seem to be appropriate. Maybe: Morons, Cretins, Pin Heads, Stupid. There might be a few other appropriate appellations.
Gun Free zones are for morons. Not permitting violent felons to hold, nor purchase firearms through legal channels, that's smart, IMO, of course; yes, "they are going to get firearms if they want them," but they ought not be offered the same access the rest of us have--although, it is likely easier for them to purchase a firearm than it is for us to purchase a firearm; I am sure they don't have to wait three freaking days! Listen Wolf, you are making it hard for me to be practical about this argument
Last edited:
ManInBlack
Regular Member
Not permitting violent felons to hold, nor purchase firearms through legal channels, that's smart, IMO, of course; yes, "they are going to get firearms if they want them," but they ought not be offered the same access the rest of us have--although, it is likely easier for them to purchase a firearm than it is for us to purchase a firearm; I am sure they don't have to wait three freaking days! Listen Wolf, you are making it hard for me to be practical about this argument
Yes, I am glad you are finally realizing the cognitive dissonance you suffer on every post you make.
Jack House
Regular Member
If they are out of jail and you admit that it's easier for them to obtain weapons than the law abiding citizen. Then what do you have left?
A silly belief that you cling to for emotional, touchy feely reasons.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk 2
A silly belief that you cling to for emotional, touchy feely reasons.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk 2
Beretta92FSLady
Regular Member
I think we have already established that I am emotive, and touchy-feely. I stated: It's likely. I was just guessing, I don't know criminals like that personally, so I am just speculating.
Beretta92FSLady
Regular Member
Don't take my post, or any post I make for that matter, as an admission of anything. Here is the sticker: if you believe that I am suffering from some sort of mental irregularity, then if I were to agree with you then that would mean you are suffering from the same irregularity as well; and who wants to be associated with someone who has mental issues?
Last edited:
ManInBlack
Regular Member
Logical fallacy.
If my watch says that it is two o'clock, and a broken clock also happens to be stopped at two, it does not mean my watch is also broken. Unlike a broken clock, however, you aren't right even twice a day; it's more like once a year.
Beretta92FSLady
Regular Member
Ah, but I am right once a year.
Last edited:
rodbender
Regular Member
Exactly which year was that?
Beretta92FSLady
Regular Member
If I am right once a year, then the Date I was right was...I'm not sure when I was right this year, to be honest with you.
Jack House
Regular Member
Who said you were right this year? Not even half way through yet.If I am right once a year, then the Date I was right was...I'm not sure when I was right this year, to be honest with you.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk 2
Beretta92FSLady
Regular Member
Who said you were right this year? Not even half way through yet.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk 2
ManInBlack accused me of being right once a year. I'm still waiting.
R
raifle
Guest
Everyone has their own point of view and freedom of thinking/expressing.In my point of view We need to quit calling these people anti gun. We need to call them anti freedom. They cant argue much when called that which is what they really are.
Jack House
Regular Member
You were soooo close recently! I'm rootin for ya, Lady.
I've been calling them anti-rights groups, I think I like that better than anti-freedom.