• 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.

Doug Wilder will NOT endorse Deeds

nova

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2007
Messages
3,149
Location
US
imported post

T Dubya wrote:
I knew I was going to get some :uhoh:when I said I have no problem with the one-gun-a-month law. There are some folks on this forum that have met me and can vouch that I am an activist that's in it to win it. If you look at my past posts and my affection for the VCDL it probably looks like I am being sarcastic maybe even trolling.

Someone brought up a good point about the military. I had not put thatinto perspective. We do not need to make it difficult for our service members to exercise their rights. Point noted.

Here's my thing. Too often when I go to one of my favorite gun stores I see mobs role in. I mean foul-mouthed, disrespectful, thugs and the like. All to often I see them spitting gum, leaving trash, and talking nonsense. They go into the stores, they talk a lot,and thenthey get someone to buy a pistol. More often than not a female. They sometimes walk into the store and take pictures of guns with their cellphones, ask absurd questions, act foolish, etc. etc. I know they arenot responsible citizens much less responsible gun owners.

CHP holders are exempt from the one-gun-a-month law. It doesn't have any effect on me. I don't care, but I think that there is the possibility that the one-gun-a-month law slows down the thugs and at the very least slows them from providing firearms to bad guys.

I hope you all don't hate me now.



By the way, my first post might have been a little abrasive. Maybe I could have formatted itdifferently. My apologies if it rubbed my fellow activists the wrong way.
Gun control does not stop bad guys from getting guns. It does not make it harder for bad guys to get guns. Criminals in fact disregard the law which is why they are criminals.

As stated, dealers (and for that matter private sellers) can deny sale to whoever they want already.
 

T Dubya

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Feb 11, 2008
Messages
914
Location
Richmond, Va, ,
imported post

nova wrote:

Gun control does not stop bad guys from getting guns. It does not make it harder for bad guys to get guns. Criminals in fact disregard the law which is why they are criminals.

This argument may work for people that sit on the fence or for the opposition, but as for me it doesn't work. I don't sit on the fence. I have a strong opinion. It may not make it "harder" for bad guys to get guns, but it makes it slower. Therefore slowing the amount of guns that get into bad guys' hands.

CHP holders & possibly military would be exempt. Works for me.
 

T Dubya

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Feb 11, 2008
Messages
914
Location
Richmond, Va, ,
imported post

kennys wrote:
I for one don't hate you because of your view. To a certain extent I do agree. In saying that, it should be a voluntary issue with the gun dealer to deny them the purchase. This would be a good pro gun example for the dealers to make a statementin saying we don't need any more laws and we are responsible enough to question with good judgment and deny sales of the questionable kind.

If I ran a gun store I would be like the "Soup Nazi" on Seinfeld. Hell, I would even have a dress code.

Customer: How many times can you shoot someone and get away with it?

Me: Out of my store!Come back 1 year!!

Customer: How many clips does this gun come with?

Me: Out of my store! Come next month!

Customer: Do you have any high point 9's?

Me: Out of my store! Come back 5 years!
 

crazydude6030

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2009
Messages
512
Location
Fairfax, va
imported post

T Dubya wrote:
If I ran a gun store I would be like the "Soup Nazi" on Seinfeld. Hell, I would even have a dress code.

Customer: How many times can you shoot someone and get away with it?

Me: Out of my store!Come back 1 year!!

Customer: How many clips does this gun come with?

Me: Out of my store! Come next month!

Customer: Do you have any high point 9's?

Me: Out of my store! Come back 5 years!
:lol: Hey, you know where i can reload my bullets? j/k
 

TexasNative

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2007
Messages
856
Location
Austin, TX
imported post

T Dub, my problem with your position is that OGAM restricts normal, law-abiding folks from certain gun activity with no beneficial effect. Why should someone have to get a CHP in order to buy a matched set of guns, for instance?

And I think you're incorrect in your belief that it slows down the criminals. It just makes them find other means to buy their guns illegally, either through straw purchases or theft.

I just don't like having my rights curtailed so Doug Wilder and his ilk can feel better about it, since it makes little difference to the criminals.

~ Boyd
 

nova

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2007
Messages
3,149
Location
US
imported post

T Dubya wrote:
nova wrote:

Gun control does not stop bad guys from getting guns. It does not make it harder for bad guys to get guns. Criminals in fact disregard the law which is why they are criminals.

This argument may work for people that sit on the fence or for the opposition, but as for me it doesn't work. I don't sit on the fence. I have a strong opinion. It may not make it "harder" for bad guys to get guns, but it makes it slower. Therefore slowing the amount of guns that get into bad guys' hands.

CHP holders & possibly military would be exempt. Works for me.
So you're alright with having different classes of people, some with more 'rights' than others, even though they're all law abiding citizens? I'm NOT ok with that.
 

Repeater

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
2,498
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
imported post

T Dubya wrote:
This argument may work for people that sit on the fence or for the opposition, but as for me it doesn't work. I don't sit on the fence. I have a strong opinion. It may not make it "harder" for bad guys to get guns, but it makes it slower. Therefore slowing the amount of guns that get into bad guys' hands.

CHP holders & possibly military would be exempt. Works for me.
Gun rationing is wrong because it limits our freedoms. It's Prior Restraint. And it's futile. Bad guys will always find ways to get whatever they want, including handguns.
 

Jero1987

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2009
Messages
191
Location
Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
imported post

"Gun rationing is wrong because it limits our freedoms. It's Prior Restraint. And it's futile. Bad guys will always find ways to get whatever they want, including handguns."

+1
 

Repeater

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
2,498
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
imported post

GOP jumps on Wilder non-endorsement

Ed Gillespie, the chairman of Republican Bob McDonnell’s campaign for governor of Virginia, hit Democratic nominee Creigh Deeds on Friday for not being able to secure the endorsement of former Gov. Doug Wilder.

After rattling off a list of endorsements McDonnell has received in the last week from groups around the state during a conference call with reporters, Gillespie pointed out that “there was one endorsement that did not come yesterday. And that endorsement, or lack thereof, was from former Governor Wilder.”

Wilder, a Democrat and Virginia’s first African-American governor, not only held off from endorsing Deeds on Thursday but also attacked the state’s Democratic nominee on guns and taxes.


Gillespie pointed out that the last Virginia Democratic nominee who did not get Wilder’s endorsement was former Lt. Gov. Don Beyer in 1997. “You may remember the outcome of that race,” Gillespie said. Beyer lost that race to Republican Jim Gilmore.

“This election is not about President Obama, it’s about Virginia,” Gillespie said. “In some ways President Obama is a negative for Creigh Deeds, in other ways he’s a positive.”
 

user

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,516
Location
Northern Piedmont
imported post

cbackous wrote:
"Bob McDonnell understands that one of the primary functions of government is to keep citizens safe,''

So how does arming law-abiding citizens not make communities and society safe?

Considering that police show up AFTER a crime is commited, an armed society is the most logical step. Wait, there I go with logic again.

Not only are these good points, but I would add that a candidate who states that it is a function of government to keep people safe is a candidate who is in favor of prior restraint, not liberty. The only way to keep us safe from ourselves is to impose external regulation on all of us; a police state.
 

T Dubya

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Feb 11, 2008
Messages
914
Location
Richmond, Va, ,
imported post

nova wrote:
T Dubya wrote:
nova wrote:

Gun control does not stop bad guys from getting guns. It does not make it harder for bad guys to get guns. Criminals in fact disregard the law which is why they are criminals.

This argument may work for people that sit on the fence or for the opposition, but as for me it doesn't work. I don't sit on the fence. I have a strong opinion. It may not make it "harder" for bad guys to get guns, but it makes it slower. Therefore slowing the amount of guns that get into bad guys' hands.

CHP holders & possibly military would be exempt. Works for me.
So you're alright with having different classes of people, some with more 'rights' than others, even though they're all law abiding citizens? I'm NOT ok with that.
Yes, I am. You have done well to point out an inconsistency in my logic and my opinion. Usually I have very progressive libertarian views and opinions. This view (the one gun a month) maybe inconsistent with my political philosophy, but it is what it is. I am what I am.
 

nova

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2007
Messages
3,149
Location
US
imported post

T Dubya wrote:
nova wrote:
T Dubya wrote:
nova wrote:

Gun control does not stop bad guys from getting guns. It does not make it harder for bad guys to get guns. Criminals in fact disregard the law which is why they are criminals.

This argument may work for people that sit on the fence or for the opposition, but as for me it doesn't work. I don't sit on the fence. I have a strong opinion. It may not make it "harder" for bad guys to get guns, but it makes it slower. Therefore slowing the amount of guns that get into bad guys' hands.

CHP holders & possibly military would be exempt. Works for me.
So you're alright with having different classes of people, some with more 'rights' than others, even though they're all law abiding citizens? I'm NOT ok with that.
Yes, I am. You have done well to point out an inconsistency in my logic and my opinion. Usually I have very progressive libertarian views and opinions. This view (the one gun a month) maybe inconsistent with my political philosophy, but it is what it is. I am what I am.
and that's your right, I won't argue that.
 
Top