Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Joe v. Paul: A gun owners guide to vice presidents

  1. #1
    Administrator John Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Bristol, VA
    Posts
    1,735

    Joe v. Paul: A gun owners guide to vice presidents

    Last Saturday morning, in the great Commonwealth of Virginia, presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney announced Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan as his pick for vice president.

    Therefore, as part of my ongoing series about the presidential race, I decided to do an evaluation of where the two vice-presidential candidates stand on gun rights issues. I have a pretty good idea what the answer is going to be but it is vitally important that we base our views upon facts and not anecdotes. So let us see what a little research tells us about which of the two candidates would be better suited to protect our rights if they were called upon to assume the presidency or to cast a deciding vote in the Senate ...

    Read more at http://monachuslex.com/?p=1503

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    2,546
    What about Jim?
    "If we were to ever consider citizenship as the least bit matter of merit instead of birthright, imagine who should be selected as deserved representation of our democracy: someone who would risk their daily livelihood to cast an individually statistically insignificant vote, or those who wrap themselves in the flag against slightest slights." - agenthex

  3. #3
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
    What about Jim?
    I was thinking the same thing. Darn was supposed to go meet him.......
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  4. #4
    Administrator John Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Bristol, VA
    Posts
    1,735
    Quote Originally Posted by Shoobee View Post
    It seems to me that it is more important what are the 2A views of the US Supreme Court justices, than anybody else.

    http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf

    ...
    - 4 of the 9 (of whom all 3 of the women are included) disagree completely with Scalia and the majority, ergo it was probably not wise appointing female justices to the court.

    I could definitely live with a new amendment to the Constitution banning women from being appointed to the US Supreme Court, right about now.
    You are entitled to your belief but here at OCDO, we believe in equal rights and opportunities for ALL Americans! What we need are more pro-gun justices and I will take them black, white, hispanic, asian, male, female, trans-gender and bald. As long as they will uphold our rights, then I stand with them!


    John

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •