Blotan Hunka
Master Black Belt
The founding fathers made their opinion on individualism pretty clear.
Presidential Canidates: Who will be good for gun owners?
- Thread starter Cruentus
- Start date
And that *should* be all that counts.
I'm sure there will be another "scholar" along any minute now to assure us that the Founders actually intended to grant all power to a central government... yeah, that's what they really meant... maybe the new one will be from Emory University, too :shock:...
Sigung86
2nd Black Belt
I am late to the fray, as it were. It seems to me that we are missing the crux of a number of things. Primarily, in my considered opinion, once the 2md ammendment was made legal all those years ago, in my mind, the Federal Government gave up any right to be involved in the gun control situation. It is, essentially, and should always be a State's rights issue, simply because I don't see how ownership of firearms is a Federal issue. Unless the Feds are afraid of what could be...
After all, wasn't it Thomas Jefferson who said, "An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject"... Andt that pretty much sums it up.
On the other hand... I think our government is too big, too waddly, and too apt to want to take all the power and give none of the perks. Unfortunately, we don't seem to have one person out there running for office who is even minimally qualified, insofar as taking care of the people, in a hands off State Government sort of way.
I read of the illegal, and often times brainless actions and stances of many of the people running for office, and don't understand how people with minimal intelligence can vote for them. Seems like we, as voters, are getting awfully good at only picking someone who "kind of, and almost" thinks like we the people do.
'Twould be truly amazing if for one primary, no one won, and they got the distinct message that people are getting really tired of the political, Ol' soft shoe, and Shuffle off to Buffalo, second rate politicians we are getting.
It's almost as if we should not consider voting anybody into office who is running for it. :uhyeah:
After all, wasn't it Thomas Jefferson who said, "An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject"... Andt that pretty much sums it up.
On the other hand... I think our government is too big, too waddly, and too apt to want to take all the power and give none of the perks. Unfortunately, we don't seem to have one person out there running for office who is even minimally qualified, insofar as taking care of the people, in a hands off State Government sort of way.
I read of the illegal, and often times brainless actions and stances of many of the people running for office, and don't understand how people with minimal intelligence can vote for them. Seems like we, as voters, are getting awfully good at only picking someone who "kind of, and almost" thinks like we the people do.
'Twould be truly amazing if for one primary, no one won, and they got the distinct message that people are getting really tired of the political, Ol' soft shoe, and Shuffle off to Buffalo, second rate politicians we are getting.
It's almost as if we should not consider voting anybody into office who is running for it. :uhyeah:
newGuy12
Master of Arts
Its late at night, and I did not read the whole thread. I will say this:
1) By the time our civil liberties are severely eroded (as in "show me your papers")
AND
2) The country is totally, surely, "I mean what I say" broke (as in no money, no credit) from all of the spending that we are doing,
Its time for the final crack down.
When that time comes, citizens can raise up their little pea-shooters all they want to, because it won't even slow down the powers that be, won't even slow them down.
1) By the time our civil liberties are severely eroded (as in "show me your papers")
AND
2) The country is totally, surely, "I mean what I say" broke (as in no money, no credit) from all of the spending that we are doing,
Its time for the final crack down.
When that time comes, citizens can raise up their little pea-shooters all they want to, because it won't even slow down the powers that be, won't even slow them down.
newGuy12
Master of Arts
Its almost as if anyone who is too sickened to vote should vote for a third party candidate.
Not that that would matter much (I'm not sure how widespread electronic voting will be in the general election --> its WAY easy for an election to get owned).
The last call has been made. The party's over folks. Its only a matter of time. We deserve it. We waited too late to act.
When it comes right down to it, we had to choose between freedom and safety. We chose safety.
You pay your money and you take your chances.
OP
OP
Cruentus
Grandmaster
New Guy,
I think your view is incredibly pessimistic, and one that I cannot ascribe too. We have 2 choices; give up or use the means that we have available to fight for our freedoms. Sitting back and not voting, or getting pissed and blowing up a federal building (not saying your advocating this, but some people with the same pessimistic view do) is giving up. And if you do that, you've lost.
We still have means available to advocate for our freedoms, and it would behoove us to use those means.
In my world, we have a saying, and that is 'extreme pessimism gets you killed.'
I think your view is incredibly pessimistic, and one that I cannot ascribe too. We have 2 choices; give up or use the means that we have available to fight for our freedoms. Sitting back and not voting, or getting pissed and blowing up a federal building (not saying your advocating this, but some people with the same pessimistic view do) is giving up. And if you do that, you've lost.
We still have means available to advocate for our freedoms, and it would behoove us to use those means.
In my world, we have a saying, and that is 'extreme pessimism gets you killed.'
newGuy12
Master of Arts
I am extremely pessimistic, have been all my life, yes, to a fault. I've had people call me a nihilist. I see no hope for this world. But, I'm not one to try to hasten its demise.
I do realize that I can't trust my perspective too much, so I have that going for me.
I support gun rights, big time, though I'm not a gun owner (I don't wish to have the responsibility of gun ownership, its too much for me).
Sorry about messing on this thread, Cruentus. I should have just read posts last night without posting. I hope that the readers of this thread can determine who the best candidate for gun-rights is, and throw their support behind their candidate!
I do realize that I can't trust my perspective too much, so I have that going for me.
I support gun rights, big time, though I'm not a gun owner (I don't wish to have the responsibility of gun ownership, its too much for me).
Sorry about messing on this thread, Cruentus. I should have just read posts last night without posting. I hope that the readers of this thread can determine who the best candidate for gun-rights is, and throw their support behind their candidate!
KenpoTex
Senior Master
*bump*
just ran across this site. It give a quick and dirty look at the 2A-related voting record of all the candidates
http://www.ontheissues.org/Gun_Control.htm
just ran across this site. It give a quick and dirty look at the 2A-related voting record of all the candidates
http://www.ontheissues.org/Gun_Control.htm
Guardian
Black Belt
Here is the point right here. It's the House and Senate that we have to worry about with Gun Laws, the President just signs those laws if they apply federally. It's up to us to vote in people that are Pro-Gun at the Congress/Senate (State Side) that are Pro-Gun, not the President so much.
Sorros
Orange Belt
New guy,
turn off the HBO and turn on the comedy channel. you'll feel a lot better.
KenpoTex
Senior Master
*bump again* 
found this about Obama (what a ****ing moron:angry
-------------------------------------
http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2007...ees_need_for_ru.html
Obama: My wife sees need for rural gun ownership
by John McCormick
HARLAN, Iowa -- From his days of campaigning in Downstate Illinois, Sen. Barack Obama has been asked plenty of times about his views on gun ownership.
But the Illinois Democrat and presidential candidate added a new wrinkle Saturday night while campaigning in conservative-leaning western Iowa, when he said his Chicago-native wife, Michelle, recently commented that she could see why rural folks might want to own guns.
Here was Obama's discussion of gun ownership and his wife's thoughts during a campaign stop at a middle school:
"We should be able to combine respect for those traditions (traditions? what happened to inaliable rights?) with our concern for kids who are being shot down. This is a classic example of us just applying some common sense, just being reasonable, right? (reasonable? like gun free zones such as shopping malls and um...how 'bout college campuses, yeah, reasonable works) And reasonable would say that lawful gun owners – I respect the Second Amendment. I think lawful gun owners should be able to hunt, be sportsmen, protect their families.
"And by the way, Michelle, my wife, she was traveling up, I think, in eastern Iowa, she was driving through this nice, beautiful area, going through all this farmland and hills and rivers and she said 'Boy, it's really pretty up here,' but she said, 'But you know, I can see why if I was living out here, I'd want a gun. Because, you know, 911 is going to take some time before somebody responds. (so people in the cities always have a cop right there and don't have to worry about response times?) You know what I mean? You know, it's like five miles between every house.'
"So the point is, though, we should be able to do that, and we should be able to enforce laws that keep guns off the streets in inner cities because some unscrupulous gun dealer is, you know, letting somebody load up a van with a bunch of cheap handguns or sawed-off shotguns and dumping them and selling them for a profit in the streets." (cause this happens soooo often
)
--------------------------------------------
(red text is mine)
found this about Obama (what a ****ing moron:angry
-------------------------------------
http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2007...ees_need_for_ru.html
Obama: My wife sees need for rural gun ownership
by John McCormick
HARLAN, Iowa -- From his days of campaigning in Downstate Illinois, Sen. Barack Obama has been asked plenty of times about his views on gun ownership.
But the Illinois Democrat and presidential candidate added a new wrinkle Saturday night while campaigning in conservative-leaning western Iowa, when he said his Chicago-native wife, Michelle, recently commented that she could see why rural folks might want to own guns.
Here was Obama's discussion of gun ownership and his wife's thoughts during a campaign stop at a middle school:
"We should be able to combine respect for those traditions (traditions? what happened to inaliable rights?) with our concern for kids who are being shot down. This is a classic example of us just applying some common sense, just being reasonable, right? (reasonable? like gun free zones such as shopping malls and um...how 'bout college campuses, yeah, reasonable works) And reasonable would say that lawful gun owners – I respect the Second Amendment. I think lawful gun owners should be able to hunt, be sportsmen, protect their families.
"And by the way, Michelle, my wife, she was traveling up, I think, in eastern Iowa, she was driving through this nice, beautiful area, going through all this farmland and hills and rivers and she said 'Boy, it's really pretty up here,' but she said, 'But you know, I can see why if I was living out here, I'd want a gun. Because, you know, 911 is going to take some time before somebody responds. (so people in the cities always have a cop right there and don't have to worry about response times?) You know what I mean? You know, it's like five miles between every house.'
"So the point is, though, we should be able to do that, and we should be able to enforce laws that keep guns off the streets in inner cities because some unscrupulous gun dealer is, you know, letting somebody load up a van with a bunch of cheap handguns or sawed-off shotguns and dumping them and selling them for a profit in the streets." (cause this happens soooo often
)--------------------------------------------
(red text is mine)
OP
OP
Cruentus
Grandmaster
Well, this is a classic example of someone with a clear anti-2nd amendment view trying to pander. He clearly does not understand the right, or how illegal firearms get on the street for that matter.
He actually scares me a lot more then Hillary. Too bad Edwards isn't doing better in the polls; if I had to pick a democrat, he's probably my favorite right now.
He actually scares me a lot more then Hillary. Too bad Edwards isn't doing better in the polls; if I had to pick a democrat, he's probably my favorite right now.
Guardian
Black Belt
Since she needs the Gun lobbies support to win the Democratic Side of the house, she can't alienate 2 Million+ Voter and hope to win, now she's for us, that won't last long though, trust me on that.
