• 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.

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

John Pierce

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
May 5, 2006
Messages
1,777
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
 

Shoobee

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2012
Messages
599
Location
CCCP (Calif)
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

Whatever the respective figureheads of the Administration believe, true or false, seems irrelevant to me.

We know that Romney signed a state assault rifle ban. We know that Obama said he would do the same if given the chance.

It would take 60 or more senators and a majority of representatives in Congress in order to pass anything. And then, even if passed over a veto, the US Supreme Court would then get a crack at it, because the NRA has nothing else to do.

As such, the Senate races are the most important thing as far as 2A rights are concerned, although the USSC in Heller has spelled most everything out --

- Scalia says that he/they interpret "keep and bear arms" as keeping them and bearing them in your homes;

- Scalia says that he/they consider popular weapons as legitimate weapons, and since semi auto pistols and carbines are the most popular, it seems that they are both safe for now; ergo if either Romney or Obama promoted an assault rifle (battle carbine) ban, I think this curren Supreme Court would overturn it;

- Scalia believes that state governments have a right to regulate public weapons usage, whether concealed or open carry;

- 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.
 
Last edited:

John Pierce

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
May 5, 2006
Messages
1,777
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
 

Shoobee

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2012
Messages
599
Location
CCCP (Calif)
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

The female justices on the court have been very anti-2A and they seem to believe 2A does not apply to the states nor that it applies Federally outside of militia service. The dissenting opinions on that are quite clear in the recent Heller decision.

When it comes to personal carrying in public, every one of these justices, all 9, are totally worthless.

My own personal views are that due to out of control crime, each one of us needs to be CCW in town and OC in the parks, forests, and mountains. Arizona and Vermont have the right idea. I wish the other states would follow them.

Scalia said the states have the right to make any laws they want about CCW or OC. That's Scalia's view, not my view.

Nice website, btw. I used it to obtain info about O/C in the USFS lands at SMNRA near Las Vegas. The Las Vegas crew here are fantastic.
 
Last edited:
Top