ErikO
Member
Many of us do, every day.
The NRA comments on expressed desire for new gun bans
- Thread starter gopguy
- Start date
- Status
JustinJ says......"Sorry, but you're gona have to defend that nonsense. Please explain how Obama's voting record proves he plans on banning all guns. Then explain why his voting record indicates he wants to ban all guns but Romney's history on gun issues doesn't. I won't hold my breath."
Well, JustinJ, maybe he'd leave you with a bean shooter. Like I said, look at his voting record as a state senator. It's a matter of record. Look it up. I don't necessarily trust Romney either, but I'd trust him a lot more than Obama.
Obama will appoint anti-gun Supreme Court Justices. Romney would be less likely to do so. I suppose you want me to explain that to you also. If that's the case, you are hopeless and should just go back to sleep.
Well, JustinJ, maybe he'd leave you with a bean shooter. Like I said, look at his voting record as a state senator. It's a matter of record. Look it up. I don't necessarily trust Romney either, but I'd trust him a lot more than Obama.
Obama will appoint anti-gun Supreme Court Justices. Romney would be less likely to do so. I suppose you want me to explain that to you also. If that's the case, you are hopeless and should just go back to sleep.
JustinJ
Member
"Look it up" is a dodge, not even close to an answer of my questions. I'm sorry if you did not expect somebody to call you on such a claim but they did. If you can't back it up then so be it. Obama has a poor record on gun rights and has favored further gun control. But again, if that equates to "wants to ban all guns" then the same must be true of Romney.
Explain that too? I'm still waiting for you to explain your first statement. But no, if you think he will get guns banned by making supreme court appointments then i don't believe you are the one to be explaining anything about the supreme court.
Personally I want to someone here who has graphic or ad design skills to work with me on some flyers clearly showing and citing the cold hard facts from the FBI reports. I want them to be handed out put on walls used in mailings. I want to see Anti's try and say well the data is wrong and say oh is the FBI pushing a pro-gun agenda? Same with the DOJ Criminal Purchase Surveys.
....
I also want to make a few humorous ones implying Bruce Lee was wrong (since technically you could argue martial arts are more deadly to American than an AR...granted those unarmed deaths would have to be trained in martial arts too...but its more of a joke).
Seriously though in this day of social media and facebook image shares or twitter tweets or whatever the hell the hipsters are doing with that there instagram...we need something that is flashy, substantive, and not just an image macro meme.
jcwit
member
I'm amazed this thread is still active and not locked!
Actually its good reading!!
Actually its good reading!!
ArfinGreebly
Moderator Emeritus
1) Fast & Furious was not "nothing," seeking to achieve a UN treaty affecting gun ownership was not "nothing."
2) Did you actually follow that link to the GOAL site and read what they said? Gun owners had their situation improved under Romney.
Vote accordingly.
Queen_of_Thunder
member
Its time to face up to reality. Romenys record on guns is worse than Obama's. So what do we do. We make sure our reps.in the House and Senate are supporters of the RKBA. Thats our responsibility. So quit the squabbling over Obama vs. Romeny on gun rights and focus your energy in the right direction of having reps. in the House and Senate that support us regardless of party. We do that and our Rights are secured. This also goes for elected officials at all levels of local government.
Our biggest problem as I see it is having a place to shoot. Ranges are being shut down or forced to curtail their operations due to encroachment of development. This is why we should be very active at the local level where we are simply MIA.
Our biggest problem as I see it is having a place to shoot. Ranges are being shut down or forced to curtail their operations due to encroachment of development. This is why we should be very active at the local level where we are simply MIA.
coloradokevin
Member
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2008
- Messages
- 3,285
Here's the NRA's stance, for anyone who is interested. Incidentally, this CNN video link also has part of the statement Obama made during the debate:
http://www.cnn.com/video/?hpt=hp_t2.../nr-brooke-nra-gun-control-chris-cox-intv.cnn
http://www.cnn.com/video/?hpt=hp_t2.../nr-brooke-nra-gun-control-chris-cox-intv.cnn
This habit of calling everything an AK47, and the stupidity of the public, who think that a semi-auto handgun can't accomplish the same thing ,is getting old. They need to put a show on TV, showing exactlly what a pistol, rifle and revolver are. It's just as easy to demonize any semi auto firearm as an ak47. And as far as that goes, a pump or lever gun with a decent shooter behind it, can fling lead just almost as fast. Maybe we shouldn't tell them that several states have fully automatic weapons and supressors. But any gun can be used to kill someone, it's not the dam gun, it's the idiot shooting it.
In this world of billions of people, there are going to be some crazy people, you cannot expect crazy people to follow rules, even at one tenth of one percent, it's still a lot of wack jobs. Sooner or later one will surelly show up, you deal with that when it happens, by good people having the ability to protect each other, not bu turning them into targets.
I am so sick of this discussion on a daily bassis. Hearing people are coming to take our guns, and websites selling tubes, to bury you equiptment.
We have a half a dozen Marines here where I live, and no one is taking any guns from any of us. If they plan on it, they better plan on bringing a tank.
In this world of billions of people, there are going to be some crazy people, you cannot expect crazy people to follow rules, even at one tenth of one percent, it's still a lot of wack jobs. Sooner or later one will surelly show up, you deal with that when it happens, by good people having the ability to protect each other, not bu turning them into targets.
I am so sick of this discussion on a daily bassis. Hearing people are coming to take our guns, and websites selling tubes, to bury you equiptment.
We have a half a dozen Marines here where I live, and no one is taking any guns from any of us. If they plan on it, they better plan on bringing a tank.
JohnBT
Member
"Its time to face up to reality. Romenys record on guns is worse than Obama's."
It's time for you to face up to reality. President Obama mentioned support for another ban, not his debate opponent. Unless of course you have more recent evidence of their individual positions - current evidence; like from this week.
John
It's time for you to face up to reality. President Obama mentioned support for another ban, not his debate opponent. Unless of course you have more recent evidence of their individual positions - current evidence; like from this week.
John
I don't like posting on these kind of threads, but this statement is blatantly, demonstrably false. It is simply not true. Repeating it again and again does not make it true. It is a lie that has been spread by the anti-gun crowd for the express purpose of confusing gun owners.
I think some of the folks who post this are simply mislead, but I suspect others like Obama for other reasons and want to confuse us about his record and philosophy on guns.
Romney supported and passed what he did in MA out of compromise because he's a politician, and the bill, though bad in some ways, was actually more positive to to MA gun owners in general. Romney is not a "gun guy" like Ryan; it's not his issue, and I don't see him personally being particularly either pro or anti.
Obama on the other hand, is anti-gun to his very core. A minimal amount of research will quickly show that he has supported every single anti-gun idea that has ever come his way. The only reason he hasn't pushed it in the last four years is because there is no political will in congress at this time, and to do so would be political suicide. That's why he promised Sarah Brady that he would do all he could for gun control "under the radar".
Two more hard-core anti-gun judges on the Supreme Court are a pretty big deal in my book, actually far, far worse in the long run than just pushing some anti-gun bills. Can you even imagine a couple more? To say this doesn't matter is disingenuous at the least, and really makes me question your motives.
If you like Obama for other reasons, please just say so. It's OK to say you're voting for him for whatever other reason, and that's more important to you than guns. At least that would be honest.
ArfinGreebly
Moderator Emeritus
Seriously?
In the face of Fast & Furious you can say that?
The current administration was willing to kill people to undermine gun rights.
Their actual plan was that people would die and that the "American guns" would be recovered at the crime scenes, thus supporting the narrative that "America's Second Amendment is killing babies in Mexico."
This isn't some "conspiracy theory." This is now a matter of public record.
The plan required that people die in order for it to achieve the proper emotional loading so it would be effective at bypassing constitutional protections.
That plan, that program, that international crime is part of Obama's record. He owns it, no matter how many people he gets to fall on their swords. This belongs to him.
Ain't nobody in the office of POTUS ever had a gun rights record that bad.
Ignition Override
Member
ArfinGreebly superbly demonstrated better than anyone how ruthless our present Administration is, and their contempt for both US law and the Constitution.
Along with some of the Admin. and staff in federal agencies, many members of Congress work to support the UN Small Arms Treaty.
November 6, if not sooner.
Along with some of the Admin. and staff in federal agencies, many members of Congress work to support the UN Small Arms Treaty.
November 6, if not sooner.
Last edited:
Black Butte
Member
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2008
- Messages
- 888
Not even close. Obama's involvement in Operation Fast & Furious and the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty blows your statement right out of the water. That doesn't even take into account all the other anti-gun activities Obama has been involved in.
Combine this with the fact that Obama would stack the five/four-on-Heller Supreme Court with über-lefty legislate-from-the-bench judges and you begin to see why no sane person possessing more than two brain cells could argue that Romney is anywhere near as anti-gun as Obama.
lobo9er
Member
Ronald Wilson Reagan banned guns in mational parks. there is no 2 parties, they both have the same agenda its pro wrestling at best.
lobo9er
Member
which of the 2 has actually signed an AWB. Romney ran Mass the way Obama wants to run the country. "Have guns go to jail" ring a bell?
Mittens and Berry are both politicians, they will say and do whatever gets them the votes, plain and simple. Either way, as far as 2A goes, they are both a lost cause. Accept it, and go on. I'm confident that if congress put a AWB in front of Romney, he'd also sign it into law, citing the broad "bipartisan support" that brought him that particular bill, while Berry would sign it out of sheer principle of the matte.r
Where the action will have to be at is in the House and Senate races. Put pro-2A senators and representatives in office. They are the ones who write and make the laws, not the POTUS. Berry and Mittens can want a AWB so bad they want to cry, but if the house and congress refuses, they are both out of luck.
Where the action will have to be at is in the House and Senate races. Put pro-2A senators and representatives in office. They are the ones who write and make the laws, not the POTUS. Berry and Mittens can want a AWB so bad they want to cry, but if the house and congress refuses, they are both out of luck.
RustHunter87
Member
they better start building jails and coffins in a hurry than
enough
- Status
Similar threads
