• 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.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • 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.

Letter to Wayne LaPierre

DVC

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2010
Messages
1,185
Location
City? Who wants to live in a CITY?, Nevada, USA
Looks like we will have to disagree on this issue. I have absolutely no confidence that Romney will appoint the kind of judges we need.

However, Obama has a RECORD of appointing the kind of judges that we DON'T need.

And that was when he needed to run for re-election.

Consider the kind of mayhem which he can do if he is in power with no need ever to answer to the voters.

You're worrying that Romney isn't as good as you want, but we KNOW that Obama is worse.
 

DON`T TREAD ON ME

Regular Member
Joined
May 17, 2009
Messages
1,231
Location
Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
Grapeshot, I couldn't of said it better. Big Guy, I know how you feel. I'm 63 and have been around the block more than once. It took us about (25) years to go from guns, liberty, freedom and God(Reagan 1988) to Obama.

While Reagan was not all anti, his administration I would say was no better than the Clinton administration as far as guns go. I do beleive that he "marketed himself better to the gun folks than Clinton however.

Three years later, Congress had passed the Brady Bill and was working on another piece of gun control legislation, a ban on assault weapons. Reagan joined former Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter in a letter published in the Boston Globe that called on Congress to pass a ban on assault weapons. Later, in a letter to Rep. Scott Klug, a Wisconsin Republican, Reagan said the limitations proposed by the Assault Weapon Ban “are absolutely necessary” and that it “must be passed.” Klug voted in favor of the ban.[/
I]

Before Reagan left office in January 1989, efforts were afoot in Congress to pass legislation creating a national background check and mandatory waiting period for handgun purchases. The Brady Bill, as the legislation was named, had the backing of Sarah Brady, the wife of former Reagan press secretary Jim Brady, who was wounded in a 1981 assassination attempt on the president
.


The lone piece of significant legislation related to gun rights during the Reagan administration was the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986. Signed into law by Reagan on May 19, 1986, the legislation amended the Gun Control Act of 1968 by repealing parts of the original act that were deemed by studies to be unconstitutional.

The National Rifle Association and other pro gun groups lobbied for passage of the legislation, and it was generally considered favorable for gun owners. Among other things, the act made it easier to transport long rifles across the United States, ended federal records-keeping on ammunition sales and prohibited the prosecution of someone passing through areas with strict gun control with firearms in their vehicle, so long as the gun were properly stored.

However, the act also contained a provision banning the ownership of any fully automatic firearms not registered by May 19, 1986. That provision was slipped into the legislation as an 11th hour amendment by Rep. William J. Hughes, a New Jersey Democrat. Reagan has been criticized by some gun owners for signing legislation containing the Hughes amendment
.

Citing statistics suggesting 9,200 murders are committed each year in the United States using handguns, Reagan said, “This level of violence must be stopped. Sarah and Jim Brady are working hard to do that, and I say more power to them.” It was a 180 degree turn from Reagan’s 1975 piece in Guns & Ammo magazine, when he said that gun control is pointless because murder cannot be prevented
.


A more lasting impact of Reagan’s policy on guns was the nomination of several Supreme Court justices. Of the four justices nominated by Reagan — Sandra Day O’Connor, William Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia and Anthony Kennedy — the latter two were still on the bench for a pair of important Supreme Court rulings on gun rights in the 2000s: District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008 and McDonald v. Chicago in 2010. Both sided with a narrow, 4-3 majority in striking down gun bans in Washington D.C. and Chicago while ruling that the Second Amendment applies to individuals and the states.

The Clinton administration’s only lasting impact on gun rights are the lack of certain imports of foreign semiautomatic rifles and background checks for handgun purchases. Ironically, it was those early victories that had lost much of their effectiveness within 10 years that prevented Clinton from pushing through what might have been longer-lasting gun control measures during his second term. The Brady Bill and Assault Weapons Ban were blamed for the defeat of several Democrats who voted for them as Republicans took control of the House in 1994. As a result, Clinton’s gun control priorities in the latter years of his presidency were never able to meet the muster of Republican opposition. Among them were requirements for child trigger locks, a three-day waiting period for gun show purchases and high capacity magazine bans
.


It was Governor Ronald Reagan of California who signed the Mulford Act in 1967, "prohibiting the carrying of firearms on one's person or in a vehicle, in any public place or on any public street." The law was aimed at stopping the Black Panthers, but affected all gun owners “Twenty-four years later, Reagan was still pushing gun control. ‘I support the Brady Bill,’ he said in a March 28, 1991 speech, ‘and I urge the Congress to enact it without further delay.’"
.


From Sarah Brady:
It’s hard to believe that despite this success, some conservatives who claim to revere Ronald Reagan still reject the common-sense gun reforms he backed. Reagan, a lifetime member of the National Rifle Association, believed in the Brady bill and the 1994 assault weapons ban, which helped stem the flow of those weapons of war to American streets. After the ban was allowed to expire in 2004, law enforcement reported a dramatic increase in seizures of guns using large-capacity assault magazines. It’s hard to believe that people who worship Reagan’s legacy would oppose policies he rightly understood would help save lives and dreams from the death and destruction of gun violence
.
Cite:http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...e-still-reigns/2011/03/28/AFEpxEyB_story.html

Ten years ago, as Ronald Reagan recovered from near fatal gunshot wounds, he declared that he still opposed gun control. Last week the former President announced that he had changed his mind. In a speech at George Washington University, where he was treated after being shot by John W. Hinckley, Reagan called on Congress to enact a law requiring a seven-day waiting period for the purchase of handguns
.


Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,972660,00.html#ixzz1yp9I8cMZ

And a good straightforward article: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/newsarchives/XcNewsPlus.asp?cmd=SHOWTOP


As far as obama goes BS aside we are now open carrying in National parks. and Transporting firearms on Amtrack, not steller, but worthwhile.
 

NAVYBLUE

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2011
Messages
109
Location
Peoples Republic of North Las Vegas
While Reagan was not all anti, his administration I would say was no better than the Clinton administration as far as guns go. I do beleive that he "marketed himself better to the gun folks than Clinton however.

I]

.



.



.

.


From Sarah Brady:
.Cite:http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...e-still-reigns/2011/03/28/AFEpxEyB_story.html

.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,972660,00.html#ixzz1yp9I8cMZ

And a good straightforward article: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/newsarchives/XcNewsPlus.asp?cmd=SHOWTOP


As far as obama goes BS aside we are now open carrying in National parks. and Transporting firearms on Amtrack, not steller, but worthwhile.


Very balanced expression of Reagan's background, but if you are looking for a "perfect" President on gun control you are not going to find it in the 20th and 21st centuries. Even many of the founding fathers we revere were slave owners. I like to look at the "whole" of a man's presidency and I feel a lot more comfortable with Reagan style presidency than I do a Bush the 1st, Clinton or Obama.

I have NEVER found a President that I disagree with on 100% of everything he has done except Obama. I know in the eyes of MSNBC I am a racist yet it doesn't hold water as I am a big fan of Congressman(Colonel, US Army) West, Condoleezza Rice(my VP chocie), Justice Thomas, Walter Williams and other conservative blacks or as the liberals like to call them "house Negroes".

As far as open carrying in National Parks and transporting weapons on AMTRAK, whoopee doo. That keeps guns away so they we can't shoot any of his "constituency" You know the gov't supported trash in and about the cities who think what is ours is theirs. What he allowed me to do is shoot a bear/mountain lion while I am hiking in the wilderness and watch while people get shot on AMTRAK or at the station.

No thank you. Give me CONSTITUTIONAL open/conceal carry which would allow me to open/conceal carry on ALL federal land which is OUR land. Allow me to open carry on AMTRAK. Anything less is a sop to the squishy "independents" and pretend Republicans.

"The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government."
Patrick Henry


"The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun."
"Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?"
PATRICK HENRY


March 23, 1775:
Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
PATRICK HENRY







NAVYBLUE
 
Last edited:

DON`T TREAD ON ME

Regular Member
Joined
May 17, 2009
Messages
1,231
Location
Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
Sory If I got you wound up NAVYBLUE, I agree with you and would rather be dealing with a Reagan type than what we have. I still beleive it is worth looking backwards sometimes and I would also argue that at the time with the crime rate where it was, I can see a lot more pressure on the politicians than from where it is today. So at the end, my point is, we have to be vigilant citizens with our government no matter who it is.
 

NAVYBLUE

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2011
Messages
109
Location
Peoples Republic of North Las Vegas
Sory If I got you wound up NAVYBLUE, I agree with you and would rather be dealing with a Reagan type than what we have. I still beleive it is worth looking backwards sometimes and I would also argue that at the time with the crime rate where it was, I can see a lot more pressure on the politicians than from where it is today. So at the end, my point is, we have to be vigilant citizens with our government no matter who it is.

I'm on side your bro'. As I said previously said, I'm so right wing I make a John Bircher look like a liberal. I try to do everything by the law. I am not wound up. I am passionate just like you. I love this country. I spent many years overseas while in the NAVY and 95% of Americans have no idea how lucky they are. How passionate am I ? After what I have seen overseas in foreign countries, I cry during our national anthem. I cry when I hear God Bless the USA by Lee Greenwood. I cry when I see my (4) grandchildren and wonder if there will be a "shining city on the hill" for them. I cry when I see vets coming back from Irag and 'Stan and realize a welfare queen will eat better and get better, quicker medical service than them.

The career "poor" in this country live better than most of Africa, Latin America, Asia and southern and eastern Europe. I see hope in not the politicians but in the people on this forum and forums like this. Decent, hardworking, Christians, constitutionalists whether they be black or white, male or female, rich or poor. I believe in our individual exceptionalism and our ability to make things better.

Keep your chin up my friend as a new day is coming and his name is freedom



NAVYBLUE
 

Irish.40

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2012
Messages
57
Location
Minnesota
I have to jump in to report that my smarter-than-me phone is dripping Red,White and Blue all over my floor. To read those posting here fills my 31 year old heart with pride. Pride of knowing that no matter what the idiot politicians do or say, the People are still albeit quietly, for now, keeping vigil. It makes me proud to know that my children just might see the retaking of this great country by those that have blood rights to it. I am proud to call myself an American. Proud to wake everyday, strap my gun to my hip and go to work. Thank you all for not forgetting what those that came before, fought an died for. I love you all, my Patriot brothers. With hats off, hands over hearts and heads held high We the People pledge our allegiance to the Flag of Our United States. If any don't like it, GET THE HELL OUT.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Top