Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Obama Pushing Shooters Off Public Lands

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    694

    Obama Pushing Shooters Off Public Lands

    http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/was...f-public-lands

    Gun owners who have historically been able to use public lands for target practice would be barred from potentially millions of acres under new rules drafted by the Interior Department, the first major move by the Obama administration to impose limits on firearms.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    694
    http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/was...arget-practice

    ""It's the difference of driving two minutes [to shoot] or 15 minutes," said the official."

  3. #3
    Regular Member Redbaron007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    1,637
    What a load of crap.

    First, they want to ban.

    Then they want to change their verbage to 'instead of driving 2 minutes, now they will only have to drive 15 mins'.

    Come on, either way they are trying to limit shooting in those areas. Instead of taking a mile at first, they are will try for a yard; then next year another yard, then the next maybe the rest of the mile.

    Incrementalism!

  4. #4
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    The nearest range to me is over an hour away...

    Posted using my HTC Evo

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    America
    Posts
    2,226
    Quote Originally Posted by Redbaron007 View Post
    What a load of crap.

    First, they want to ban.

    Then they want to change their verbage to 'instead of driving 2 minutes, now they will only have to drive 15 mins'.

    Come on, either way they are trying to limit shooting in those areas. Instead of taking a mile at first, they are will try for a yard; then next year another yard, then the next maybe the rest of the mile.

    Incrementalism!
    the correct term is progressivism.
    Don't believe any facts that I say! This is the internet and it is filled with lies and untruth. I invite you to look up for yourself the basic facts that my arguments might be based upon. This way we can have a discussion where logic and hints on where to find information are what is brought to the forum and people look up and verify facts for themselves.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Redbaron007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    1,637
    Quote Originally Posted by Daylen View Post
    the correct term is progressivism.
    OK, That one can be used, too!

  7. #7
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by Daylen View Post
    the correct term is progressivism.

    You should research the term "Progressivism." You will find "Prigressivism" is not affiliated with a specific party (although it is attributed a Liberal connotation, but only by implication), but rather, it is an act which 'progresses' an agenda.

    Liberals, as well as Conservatives are Progressives. Seriously, individuals need to not throw terms around unless they understand, at the least on a elementary level, what the meaning of the term is, and how the term is applied.

    Regarding utilizing land for shooting. It does not appear, as the OP subject suggests, that "Obama Pushing Shooters Off Public Land." The 'subject' is a blatant lie.
    Last edited by Beretta92FSLady; 11-21-2011 at 02:28 PM.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    America
    Posts
    2,226
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    You should research the term "Progressivism." You will find "Prigressivism" is not affiliated with a specific party (although it is attributed a Liberal connotation, but only by implication), but rather, it is an act which 'progresses' an agenda.

    Liberals, as well as Conservatives are Progressives. Seriously, individuals need to not throw terms around unless they understand, at the least on a elementary level, what the meaning of the term is, and how the term is applied.

    Regarding utilizing land for shooting. It does not appear, as the OP subject suggests, that "Obama Pushing Shooters Off Public Land." The 'subject' is a blatant lie.
    I understand the term very well and know full well it is not just one party or even just liberals. McCain and the Bush family are good examples of progressives in the Republican party. Why do you think libertarians hate them so much? I was, clearly, referring to those in government who incrementally change things in an attempt to push society in a direction instead of leaving society alone. One person said incrementalism, such a word lacks a reference to the wide array of government types that work in this way and the historical prospective.
    Don't believe any facts that I say! This is the internet and it is filled with lies and untruth. I invite you to look up for yourself the basic facts that my arguments might be based upon. This way we can have a discussion where logic and hints on where to find information are what is brought to the forum and people look up and verify facts for themselves.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,011
    I consider the term "progressive" a compliment.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    America
    Posts
    2,226
    Quote Originally Posted by beebobby View Post
    I consider the term "progressive" a compliment.
    Consider it what you like, its just a descriptive word.
    Don't believe any facts that I say! This is the internet and it is filled with lies and untruth. I invite you to look up for yourself the basic facts that my arguments might be based upon. This way we can have a discussion where logic and hints on where to find information are what is brought to the forum and people look up and verify facts for themselves.

  11. #11
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    It does not appear, as the OP subject suggests, that "Obama Pushing Shooters Off Public Land." The 'subject' is a blatant lie.
    The article referenced in the OP directly, clearly, and most emphatically refutes your assertion:

    "Gun owners who have historically been able to use public lands for target practice would be barred from potentially millions of acres under new rules drafted by the Interior Department, the first major move by the Obama administration to impose limits on firearms." This is the key paragraph foes say could lead to shooters being kicked off public lands: "When the authorized officer determines that a site or area on BLM-managed lands used on a regular basis for recreational shooting is creating public disturbance, or is creating risk to other persons on public lands; is contributing to the defacement, removal or destruction of natural features, native plants, cultural resources, historic structures or government and/or private property; is facilitating or creating a condition of littering, refuse accumulation and abandoned personal property is violating existing use restrictions, closure and restriction orders, or supplementary rules notices, and reasonable attempts to reduce or eliminate the violations by the BLM have been unsuccessful, the authorized officer will close the affected area to recreational shooting."

    Since these measures are undeniably supported by Obama, this most certainly appears that Obama is pushing shooters off public land, and is not, as you falsely allegate, a "blatant lie." If anything, it's the blatant truth, which relegates your comments into the bin of untruthfulness.

    Your support of Obama is well-known here. When you have to resort to untruthful tactics in support of him, what kind of impression do you think that leaves any of us with respect to the integrity of Obama and anyone supporting him in this manner? Quite frankly, my impression of the integrity of this approach is rock bottom. It's not unrecoverable, but any attempt to justify the deceit only serves to further bury what little integrity may be left.

    There are two ways to approach life:

    1. Wade in with an ideal and use any and all means necessary to garner support for your ideal.

    2. Gather as many facts as humanly possible and all the facts themselves to dictate the stance one should take and defend.

    The former leads to lunacy. The latter leads to reality.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

Posting Permissions

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