• 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.

USA Today poll about "meaning" of 2nd Amendment

Jesse

Jesse

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
67
Location
Cameron, WI
TAKES 10 SECONDS ........... DO IT AND PASS IT ON !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Guess they were not happy with the poll results the first time so USA today is running another one....vote now

Attorney General, Eric Holder, has already said this is one of his major issues. He does not believe the 2nd Amendment gives individuals the right to bear arms. This takes literally 2 clicks to complete. Please vote on this gun issue question with USA Today. It will only take a few seconds of your time. Then pass the link on to all the pro gun folks you know. Hopefully these results will be published later this month. This upcoming year will be come critical for gun owners with the Supreme Court's accepting the District of Columbia case against the right for individuals to bear arms.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/quickquestion/2007/november/popup5895.htm
 
H

hazek

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2011
Messages
88
Location
--
I wanted to vote "No" because I absolutely abhor the wording of the question. :banghead: The 2A doesn't give any rights, it protects every individual's God/nature given right to own and bear arms.
 
Grapeshot

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
Grapeshot said:
How can you tell that? - there is no actual accumulating/increasing number.

Could just be busy work. :uhoh:
Click to expand...

1Grizzly1 said:
There is a total vote tally at the bottom. When I looked it was at 9564481. That's an increase of 8970 votes since FTG-05 voted.
Click to expand...

That's embarrassing - you're right of course - guilty of not checking back and comparing. :cry:

Must have been on one of my sleep deprived days.
 
since9

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
It's a wonder the liberal anti-Second Amendment media keeps creating these polls. Do they expect the results to change, or something? Wishful thinking, perhaps? 9,585,524 responses isn't exactly a "small" sample population...
 
A

Aknazer

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
1,760
Location
California
XDFDE45 said:
People can debate the meaning of the 2nd amendment all they want, Heller and McDonald have decided this issue.
Click to expand...

Only parts of it. Neither really addressed the ability to "bear" arms. They also didn't address the issue of requiring a permit to exercise a right, among other things.
 
SouthernBoy

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,837
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
XDFDE45 said:
People can debate the meaning of the 2nd amendment all they want, Heller and McDonald have decided this issue.
Click to expand...

Actually Henry, Mason, Madison, and a bunch of "dead while males" decided the issue nearly 220 years ago. All that's happened with the rest of the idiots since then is them trying to reading something into it that isn't there. I'm going with those original guys as being the ones with whom I'll place my trust.
 
sudden valley gunner

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
SouthernBoy said:
Actually Henry, Mason, Madison, and a bunch of "dead while males" decided the issue nearly 220 years ago. All that's happened with the rest of the idiots since then is them trying to reading something into it that isn't there. I'm going with those original guys as being the ones with whom I'll place my trust.
Click to expand...

+1 And they left a method for correcting mistakes. Which the government and many others conveniently ignore. Of course the courts have took it upon themselves to define constitutionality too, not just determine whether something is constitutional or not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top