yeahYeah
Regular Member
imported post
Of course he does...any good nazi would want to ban anything and anyone who speaks against him.
Of course he does...any good nazi would want to ban anything and anyone who speaks against him.
Couldn't have said it better . . . .Like I've said in every political thread, gun control isn't the only issue this election and those of voting based solely on the wedge issue of who's more gun friendly are going to have a rude awakening, kind of like Dubya II.
So similarly, if a candidate agrees with me, and supports abortion rights, gay marriage, and foetal stem cell research, I shouldn't allow his support for de jure racial segregationin public accomodations to stop me from voting for him? I mean, THAT would make me a "single issue voter"...AWDstylez wrote:
Gunslinger wrote:Couldn't have said it better . . . .Like I've said in every political thread, gun control isn't the only issue this election and those of voting based solely on the wedge issue of who's more gun friendly are going to have a rude awakening, kind of like Dubya II.
The broader point is that we have been asked by the ownership of the forum to mostly restrict our discussions to 2A related matters. The issue of McCain v Obama is indeed very complex and goes far beyond 2A matters. For example, as a small business owner who has studied both candidate's tax plans and been involved in numerous discussions and a conferences with those much more knowledgeable than me about the issue, I could write pages on why I believe that Obama, if he got everything he wanted from a dem congress, would very likely lead us into an economic downfall that would make the Great Depression look less significant than the NASDAQ crash in comparison. But such matters, while extraordinarily important, are beyond the venue of this forum.On Second Amendment enforcement: OBAMA wins.
On AWB: MCCAIN wins, but matters less.
On UN: MCCAIN wins, but matters less.
On "gun show loopholes": tie
On "armor piercing" ammo: tie
On trigger locks: tie
On conservationissues: OBAMA wins.
The point: this is a much more complex picture than what some believe.
Really? Then how do you justify his push for a _federal_ ban on concealed carry?On Second Amendment enforcement: OBAMA wins.
There's no such thing as "de jure" racial segration, so I miss your point. And if it means one issue can override agreement in 99, then you 'd be an idiot. What some of the crypto-literate posters can't seem to understand is that democracy is compromise. Call it lesser of evils, or closer to the mark. You vote for whomever is best for you. No one is perfect. Obooba comes pretty close to perfection in being a ******* asshole, however. Hope that isn't too partisan for a certain halfwit on the thread.The Donkey wrote:So similarly, if a candidate agrees with me, and supports abortion rights, gay marriage, and foetal stem cell research, I shouldn't allow his support for de jure racial segregationin public accomodations to stop me from voting for him? I mean, THAT would make me a "single issue voter"...AWDstylez wrote:
Gunslinger wrote:Couldn't have said it better . . . .Like I've said in every political thread, gun control isn't the only issue this election and those of voting based solely on the wedge issue of who's more gun friendly are going to have a rude awakening, kind of like Dubya II.
The Donkey wrote:The broader point is that we have been asked by the ownership of the forum to mostly restrict our discussions to 2A related matters. The issue of McCain v Obama is indeed very complex and goes far beyond 2A matters. For example, as a small business owner who has studied both candidate's tax plans and been involved in numerous discussions and a conferences with those much more knowledgeable than me about the issue, I could write pages on why I believe that Obama, if he got everything he wanted from a dem congress, would very likely lead us into an economic downfall that would make the Great Depression look less significant than the NASDAQ crash in comparison. But such matters, while extraordinarily important, are beyond the venue of this forum.On Second Amendment enforcement: OBAMA wins.
On AWB: MCCAIN wins, but matters less.
On UN: MCCAIN wins, but matters less.
On "gun show loopholes": tie
On "armor piercing" ammo: tie
On trigger locks: tie
On conservationissues: OBAMA wins.
The point: this is a much more complex picture than what some believe.
The Donkey wrote:Really? Then how do you justify his push for a _federal_ ban on concealed carry?On Second Amendment enforcement: OBAMA wins.
In the lingo of today...EPIC fail.
How old are you? There was DE JURE racial segregation in this country well into my childhood. I was in grammar school when it was abolished.Deanimator wrote:There's no such thing as "de jure" racial segration, so I miss your point. And if it means one issue can override agreement in 99, then you 'd be an idiot. What some of the crypto-literate posters can't seem to understand is that democracy is compromise. Call it lesser of evils, or closer to the mark. You vote for whomever is best for you. No one is perfect. Obooba comes pretty close to perfection in being a @#$%ing @#$%, however. Hope that isn't too partisan for a certain halfwit on the thread.The Donkey wrote:So similarly, if a candidate agrees with me, and supports abortion rights, gay marriage, and foetal stem cell research, I shouldn't allow his support for de jure racial segregationin public accomodations to stop me from voting for him? I mean, THAT would make me a "single issue voter"...AWDstylez wrote:
Gunslinger wrote:Couldn't have said it better . . . .Like I've said in every political thread, gun control isn't the only issue this election and those of voting based solely on the wedge issue of who's more gun friendly are going to have a rude awakening, kind of like Dubya II.
Other than North Koreans, I've hunted ONCE in the last thirty years. Why should I give up my right to own a handgun because Obama SAYS he likes wetlands?deepdiver wrote:The Donkey wrote:The broader point is that we have been asked by the ownership of the forum to mostly restrict our discussions to 2A related matters. The issue of McCain v Obama is indeed very complex and goes far beyond 2A matters. For example, as a small business owner who has studied both candidate's tax plans and been involved in numerous discussions and a conferences with those much more knowledgeable than me about the issue, I could write pages on why I believe that Obama, if he got everything he wanted from a dem congress, would very likely lead us into an economic downfall that would make the Great Depression look less significant than the NASDAQ crash in comparison. But such matters, while extraordinarily important, are beyond the venue of this forum.On Second Amendment enforcement: OBAMA wins.
On AWB: MCCAIN wins, but matters less.
On UN: MCCAIN wins, but matters less.
On "gun show loopholes": tie
On "armor piercing" ammo: tie
On trigger locks: tie
On conservationissues: OBAMA wins.
The point: this is a much more complex picture than what some believe.
I think that NRA's selling out its membership on conservation issues is quite to the point because hunting is one of the reasons why many are interested in firearms, even though hunting might not be the predominant concern of this forum.
Conservation seems as pertinent -- certainly -- as armor piercing ammo -- to issues under discussionin this community.
Who do you think you're kidding?Teej wrote:The Donkey wrote:Really? Then how do you justify his push for a _federal_ ban on concealed carry?On Second Amendment enforcement: OBAMA wins.
In the lingo of today...EPIC fail.
Judges that Obama wouldappoint are likely to be much more friendly to civil enforcement of 2A because:
* they will tend to support incorporation into the 14th Amendment of newly recognized rights under 2A
* they will tend to look at qualified immunity more skeptically
* they may go for a more restrictive view of the 11th Amendment
* they will try to reach substantive claims in the face of procedural challenges like mootness and lack of standing.
Obama is not pushing for a federal ban now. If you are trying to nailthe candidateson history, McCain doesn't fare very well either.