Even when she tries to beat-up BHO on guns...

[Okla-homey]

she blows it.

Now, I give her a penny for her time because unlike BHO, she doesn't want to ban all guns, and she's trying to make donks in flyover country understand BHO is the Big Cahuna of the gun grabber set.

But, HRC, let someone who knows a smidge about guns review your mailouts first. To wit, the picture is reversed. There is no Mauser 66 with the bolt handle on the left.:D What's more, why not use an American gun instead of a German import in your ads. :rolleyes:

http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/6841/obamagun2lw8.jpg

[Rogue]

Truth is, none of the 3 left standing are our best friends in terms of gun ownership. Why can't we get an environmentally friendly, bleeding-heart, gun-totin' liberal in office once in awhile?

[OKC-SLC]

bet we could use that thar gun to shoot the fish in a barrel that HRC and BHO can make themselves to be.

[soonerscuba]

Now, I give her a penny for her time because unlike BHO, she doesn't want to ban all guns
While no friend of the gun-nut, you don't have to make stuff up to prove your point.

http://www.sportsmenforobama.org/content/view/14/27/

[soonerscuba]

Why can't we get an environmentally friendly, bleeding-heart, gun-totin' liberal in office once in awhile?
We tried, he now runs the DNC. However, people thought he was crazy. Yaarrrrrghhhhhh!!!!!

[Okla-homey]

The guy wants to ban all guns. At least as late as 1996. I doubt his mood has changed. And by guns, I mean guns...not bolt-action rifles used for hunting or shotguns used skeet shooting. But that's a convenient canard he's using to hedge.

Bottomline, if you aren't allowed to own a revolver or pistol, you've lost to ability to defend yourself against an armed person bent on robbing or raping you anywhere but inside the walls of your home where you can stash your locked-up hunting rifle or trap shooting shotgun. And that my friend, is page one in the "control the masses" handbook.

QED.


1996 Independent Voters of Illinois – Independent Precinct Organization Questionnaire.

"35. Do you support state legislation ???

a. ban the manufacture, sale or possession of handguns?

Yes.

b. ban the manufacture, sale or possession of assault weapons?

Yes.

c. mandatory waiting periods with background checks for weapons?

Yes.

[soonerscuba]

The guy wants to ban all guns. At least as late as 1996. I doubt his mood has changed. And by guns, I mean guns...not bolt-action rifles used for hunting or shotguns used skeet shooting. But that's a convenient canard he's using to hedge.

Bottomline, if you aren't allowed to own a revolver or pistol, you've lost to ability to defend yourself against an armed person bent on robbing or raping you anywhere but inside the walls of your home where you can stash your locked-up hunting rifle or trap shooting shotgun. And that my friend, is page one in the "control the masses" handbook.

QED.
I never said that 12 years ago he filled out something you might disagree with, or that he wasn't against handguns, just pointed out that the phrase all guns is pure hyperbole. If you're crazy about guns, you're not voting for Obama, however in my opinion it's no different than when people say that McCain wants to be at war for 100 years, it's a distortion.

As an aside, how does one so greatly fear the government on gun control, and put such trust in them for surveillance?

[Okla-homey]

Because good guys have nothing to hide?

Congratulations! Tell that man what he's one Bob!

Look, remember Katrina? In her wake, the cops went around confiscating firearms from law-abiding citizesn who needed them to protect their lives and property from the roving hordes of looters and pillagers.

The gubmint can't surveil me to death, but they can sure as heck deny me the means of protecting my home and family when order breaks down.

Anyone who wants to take guns out the hands of law-abiding people is an enemy of the people IMHO. I just wish this guy would crawl back into the Chicago machine that created him and leave us all alone.

I acknowledge that gun violence has taken a mean toll on the mean streets he purports to champion. However, the proposition that the outlawing of the largest class of legally owned firearms will somehow make those streets safer is pure hyperbole. Newsflash: the guys doing the gang-banging are already breaking the flippin' law.

In fact, I know he doesn't like it when people say Barack "Hussein" Obama. I'm all for referring to him as Barack "Hyperbole" Obama instead. "Vote for me and I'll make all your dreams come true!" WTF, it worked for Pedro. I say, Big Rock Candy Mountain.

[SoonerBorn68]

If you're crazy about the Constitution, you're not voting for Obama..

fixed.

[OklahomaTuba]

BHO is too much of a weak kneed liberal panzy to actually commit to doing anything like a gun grab. No doubt its one of his secret wet dreams though.

Maybe if we're lucky, He will just vote "Present" on this topic.

[JohnnyMack]

Talk about takin' Middle America's guns away from 'em and watch 'em all get riled up.

Heh.

[OklahomaTuba]

I blame Thomas Jefferson & John Adams myself.

[soonerscuba]

Because good guys have nothing to hide?
Who defines what a "good guy" is?

[OklahomaTuba]

Who defines what a "good guy" is?
Hat color usually helps.

Black = bad, White = good.

[Sooner in Tampa]

Hat color usually helps.

Black = bad, White = good.
Well played.

Good = obeys the law
Bad = breaks the law

Pretty darn simple.

[BudSooner]

Newsflash: the guys doing the gang-banging are already breaking the flippin' law.
No kidding! Are they going to the local Sports Academy? hell no, the guns are stolen...traded in exchange for drugs.
A 7 day waiting period doesn't apply when the method of purchase involved a vial of crack or the killing of someone to obtain said guns.

[SoonerBorn68]

Talk about takin' Middle America's guns away from 'em and watch 'em all get riled up.

Heh.

Do you own any firearms?

[soonerscuba]

A 7 day waiting period doesn't apply:les:BUT I'M ANGRY NOW!!!!!!

[BudSooner]

Heh, learn to control thy anger young grasshopper. :D

[JohnnyMack]

Do you own any firearms?

Ummm....yes.....technically. Somewhere. I have one.

[SoonerBorn68]

It's not a .25 is it? 'Cause that doesn't count.

[JohnnyMack]

No. It's a .380.

[Okla-homey]

No. It's a .380.


a/k/a a 9mm Short. Get rid of it. All you'll do is anger the perp if you shoot him with it. Then, he'll kill you.

[JohnnyMack]

Ehh, I think it's in the attic actually.

[Mixer!]

squirrel pistol?

[BudSooner]

squirrel pistol?
Hell thats what I need.

[sooneron]

Daisy?

[JohnnyMack]

Daisy?

http://www.regansautographs.com/curentth/kilmervalphoto.jpg

[Okla-homey]

Ehh, I think it's in the attic actually.

You better check on it.

If BHO has his way and they get the bill passed, you can be charged with a felony if 1) that gun is ever stolen and you fail to report the theft and it is subsequently used to commit a crime or, 2) it is not "properly secured" (whatever that means -- trigger lock, cut in half with a bandsaw, plug welded?) and is taken by another and used in the commission of a crime.

just sayin';)

[CORNholio]

How would it even be possible for this guy to confiscate any guns from the American people given the Bill of Rights? It's like aspiring to take away freedom of speech from the public, one man cannot do this in one lifetime. It would take generations of propaganda and scare tactics for the political machine to change the minds of the american public.

[mdklatt]

How would it even be possible for this guy to confiscate any guns from the American people given the Bill of Rights?


First you declare war against an abstract concept, thus guaranteeing that said war will never end. Then you take you advantage of your expanded (in public perception if not in fact) wartime "powers" to circumvent the Constitution in the name of "national security" and paint the opposition in Congress as traitors until they finally wuss out and give you whatever you want.

Hey, wait a minute....

[Okla-homey]

How would it even be possible for this guy to confiscate any guns from the American people given the Bill of Rights? It's like aspiring to take away freedom of speech from the public, one man cannot do this in one lifetime. It would take generations of propaganda and scare tactics for the political machine to change the minds of the american public.

Okay, I'm gonna 'splain how this works. I will try to keep it somewhat light so it doesn't get all legal and stuff. For our purposes, assume you have two kinds of consitutional rights. 1) "fundamental rights" and 2) all the rest in the document.

Now, if the Supremes haven't declared gun ownership a "fundamantal right," which they haven't (altho we're hoping they will in this pending matter regarding the DC gun ban now before them) all the gubmint has to do is cook up some "rational purpose" for abridging, regulating or otherwise limiting that right, and they can do so. And believe me, they can be danged creative in cooking up those "rational purposes."

Example: Your right to property is a right under the Constitution. However, since that right is not vouchsafed as a "fundamental" right, if your town decides to condemn your backyard and build a highway through there (a/k/a iminent domain,) all they gotta do is give you 1) notice and 2) an opprtunity to be heard. After they do that, guess what? They have to pay you "reasonable value" for your backyard, then they can start laying asphalt through your kid's sandbox.

If, OTOH, we're talking a "fundamental right, " like freedom of religion, the press, speech, assembly and a few others, the gubmint can't jack around with it unless and until they can show some "compelling" (i.e. extreme) government purpose for doing so. Then, they have to narrowly tailor whatever limitation they place on that right and be able to show it wil fix that problem but not go too far. Example: You can't yell FIRE in a crowded theater, although you have a right to free speech and can yell just about anything else you want in there.

Thus, until gun ownership is declared a "fundamental" right under the Constitution, the gubmint can regulate, impede, or even outright ban private gun ownership based on some "rational purpose," like <pffft> making the streets safer -- and they don't even have to prove it will. Which is good for them, because they can't.

[Rogue]

When will SCOTUS rule on Heller v. DC?

[Jerk]

When will SCOTUS rule on Heller v. DC?

Sometime in June.

There is little doubt that they will rule it an individual right. The question is what standard they will apply to it.

[Animal Mother]

I need some sleep. Glad I stumbled across this thread.