The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights > Legal and Political

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old July 13, 2000, 11:02 AM   #1
KilgorII
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I posted this on Glock Talk and have gotten a lot of disscussion on it, some of it heated. Thought I would post it here to get your thoughts. Please lets keep it civil.

These are quoted directly from his campaign's website. http://www.georgewbush.com/issues/do...uns/points.asp

On The Issues
Gun Laws

Supports stronger enforcement of existing gun laws, would provide more funding for aggressive gun law enforcement programs such as Project Exile in Richmond, Virginia

-No! Repeal the things! They do not work.

Supports automatic detention for kids who commit crimes with guns

-Sentences should be up to the judge on an individual basis. I am strongly against manditory sentences.

Supports requiring instant background checks at gun shows by allowing gun show promoters to access the instant check system on behalf of vendors

-Basically he supports the end of legal private sales.

Supports law-abiding American's constitutional right to own guns to protect their families and home

-I am having my doubts.

Supports the current ban on automatic weapons

-There is no ban on automatic weapons. A citizen can legally own them. With too much hassle though.

Supports banning juveniles from possession of semi-automatic "assault" weapons

-Would a .22 semiauto rifle count? A Browning BAR? An AR-15? If an AR-15 why? The BAR can be had in much more powerful calibers.

Supports increasing the minimum age for possession of a handgun from 18 to 21

-How will this help crime to go down?

Supports banning the importation of foreign made, "high-capacity" ammunition clips

-Geez, I really had hoped that he would refuse to resign the bill when it sunsets in the last part of his first presidential term. I know this is wishful thinking because he will do it right before the election to boost his reelection campaign.

Governor Bush supports voluntary efforts to equip all handguns with child safety locks. If Congress passed legislation requiring mandatory trigger locks for all new handguns, he would sign it. He is concerned, however, that such legislation not be seen as a panacea, because adults still have to be responsible for using the trigger locks and for monitoring their children's actions.

-Once again, how will this help? How will it be enforced?

Opposes government mandated registration of all guns owned by law abiding citizens

-Then why does he wish to make all private sales subject to governmental recording?

I will vote for Bush this election and libertarians where I can in local and state elections. If (I am really fooling myself here, it should be "When") he signs another law infringing on my rights as a citizen, then I will not vote for him in the next election. Nor will I vote for any Republican. I will vote for every libertarian I can. Then I will vote for other third parties where no libertarian is on the ballot. When there is only a choice between Dems and Repubs I will abstain. If by some miracle he does not infringe on my rights then he will have my full support. The only reason I will vote for him this time is because I will move out of the damn country if Gore Becomes the president.

Here is Libertarian Harry Browne's opinions on gun laws as quoted directly from his website: http://www.harrybrowne2000.org/

Harry Browne's stand on Gun Control

[Harry Browne's position on the Second Amendment is summed up in this article he wrote on May 13, 2000. - ed.]

For Safety Sake, Repeal All the Gun Laws

The Million Mom March
Is Pointed in the Wrong Direction
This weekend 100,000 women are expected to visit Washington to push for new gun-control laws, as part of the "Million Mom March."

I understand their desire to make the world safer for their children. But, unfortunately, their proposals would make their children -- and themselves -- less safe.

There already are 20,000 federal gun laws and regulations on the books. If those laws haven't made America safe by now, why should we think 20,001 laws will suffice?

We shouldn't. Instead, we need to recognize that those 20,000 laws are a principal cause of the current violence in society. They have made our children and all innocent adults much less safe -- by disarming innocent citizens and encouraging armed criminals to take advantage of us.

So it's time to face reality and repeal these laws -- all of them.

By definition, law-breakers don't obey laws. Hardened criminals do whatever is necessary to evade identification and arrest. So they don't buy guns that can be traced; they buy them in the underworld or simply steal them.

Thus the gun-control laws don't apply to criminals or stop gun violence. They simply make it much harder for innocent people to defend themselves -- encouraging criminals to take advantage of us.

In other words, gun-control laws make the world safer for criminals and less safe for you.

Stripping Away your Safety

Let's take a brief look at how the various kinds of gun-control laws make you more vulnerable.

Waiting periods: A waiting period means that a woman being stalked will have to remain defenseless for a few extra days. Will her stalker refrain from assaulting her until the waiting period is over?

Safety locks: Although safety locks might prevent a child from accidentally firing a gun, they also can slow you down when you need a gun in a hurry to defend yourself. Imagine a woman attacked by a rapist in a parking lot. Will she be grateful for the time it takes to unlock her gun? And, of course, if her adversary is carrying a gun, it won't have a safety lock.

Registration of handguns: What would this achieve? Nothing positive. Evil-doers won't register their guns; only law-abiding citizens will. And once your gun is registered, you'll have to be afraid that some future President whose heart isn't pure will use that registration to confiscate your only means of defense against armed criminals.

Licensing of guns or gun-owners: Since criminals won't acquire them, gun licenses won't help find the perpetrator of a violent crime. They are simply a gratuitous invasion of your privacy and that of other innocent citizens.

Background checks for purchasers: No one wanted by law-enforcement agencies is going to buy a gun in a way that requires a background check. He'll get his gun from another criminal or steal it. So the only achievement of a background check is your inconvenience.

But don't background checks catch people with criminal records?

If someone is wanted by the police, he certainly isn't going to undergo a background check. On the other hand, if the gun-buyer is an ex-convict who has paid his debt to society, he should have the right to defend himself from predators -- just as you or I do. Or should his criminal record also prohibit him from buying food or clothing?

Require guns to be locked up: If the law requires guns to be kept out of reach of children, how will the law be enforced? Will the police invade your house periodically to verify that your guns are in safe places? If not, what's the point of the law? If yes, this is another gratuitous invasion of your privacy.

Ban some types of guns: At first glance it might seem reasonable to ban such things as assault weapons or mortars. After all, you don't need such a weapon.

But some people do.

During most riots, the police have been outnumbered and have intentionally stayed clear of gangs that were looting and vandalizing. Suppose your life savings are invested in a store the gangs are about to loot. And suppose you have little or no insurance because your store is in a poor and dangerous section of town. How will you defend the store against the looters? With a knife? With a handgun against a dozen attackers? Or with an assault weapon?

If you prevent innocent citizens from acquiring assault weapons, criminal gangs will still have them -- even if they have to smuggle them into America from thousands of miles away. So why pass laws that disarm only the innocent?

You might be able to imagine the perfect law that allows just the right people to own just the right types of guns, while prohibiting other people from owning inappropriate firearms. But remember, you're only imagining such a law; it will never be a reality. Once the issue is turned over to the politicians, it will be decided by whoever has the most political influence -- and that will never be you or I.

A Sane Crime Policy

The only effective crime policy is to have no laws regulating the ownership of guns, but to prosecute anyone who intrudes on the person or property of another -- with or without a gun.

You really have only two choices. Either:


Politicians will decide what you can own -- and they will never stop their prohibitions at the point you believe best.

Or people will decide for themselves what they can own.
Any apparent middle ground between the two actually grants the politicians the power to choose for you.

And all such choices will be made by whoever has the most political influence. So attempts to limit gun ownership will do more to promote the political interests of well-connected people than to reduce crime.

A Safe Society

Disarmed citizens encourage crime and violence.

Armed citizens encourage criminals to find a safer line of work.

The National Rifle Association and Republican politicians have recently urged that today's 20,000 gun-control laws be enforced -- no matter how bad those laws.

Libertarians easily see the folly in this. Libertarians know that those laws are, at best, useless -- and, at worst, highly dangerous. Libertarians want all the counter-productive gun laws to be repealed immediately.

This year there will be 2,000 Libertarians running for federal, state, and local offices -- all the way from President of the United States to municipal offices. All of them support your right to defend yourself -- without qualification.

They provide the one avenue by which you can register your unqualified disapproval for today's gun-control climate.

For safety sake, we must repeal all the gun laws.

-So what do you guys think on this? What are your voting plans?


 
Old July 13, 2000, 11:06 AM   #2
Coinneach
Staff Alumnus
 
Join Date: February 23, 1999
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 4,272
Moving to Legal/Political... and staying the hell outta this one.
Coinneach is offline  
Old July 13, 2000, 11:18 AM   #3
Meiji_man
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 26, 2000
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Posts: 455
I'm In....

AT THIS CURRENT TIME...
A Vote for the Libertatian party is a Vote for Gore. A vote for Buchannan is a Vote for Gore. A vote For Nader is a Vote for Bush.

AT THIS CURRENT TIME...
There is NO effective 3rd party

AT THIS CURRENT TIME...
The best RKBA candidate is G. BUSH

AT THIS CURRENT TIME...
America needs a TRUE multiparty system

and AT THIS CURRENT TIME...
The Greens, Libers, and Indies need to start working at the State and House of Reps level. Where the elections are cheaper to win. Building up a base to launch a Presidential run later down the road. That's why I Vote Republican Nationaly and Libertarian Localy.

IN THE FUTURE....
American will see the hypocracy of the two partys and mreo party's will rise to represent all voters.

"You may flame when ready, Gidley"




------------------
"Big or Little, it's all the same to a .45
Which comment embraced the full philosophy of the Gunfighter"
R.E. Howard
Meiji_man is offline  
Old July 13, 2000, 11:37 AM   #4
Jack 99
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 5, 1999
Posts: 1,082
My only comment is this:

Its easy to be pro-RKBA in Texas. He gets on the national stage and WHOOOPS! Banning imports on hi-caps is suddenly on the agenda.
Jack 99 is offline  
Old July 13, 2000, 11:45 AM   #5
Valdez
Junior member
 
Join Date: October 16, 1998
Posts: 234
Meiji_man,

A vote for the Libertarians, Constitution or Reform at the Presidental level isn't necessarily a vote for Gore. Remember the Presidency isn't decided by majority vote, it is decided State by State through the electoral college. Some states the vote might be close, in other states it might not be. To the extent that polls are accurate just before the election voting third party probably has no effect. That isn't to say voting in the local elections and for Congress isn't important. Your vote has more of a say in smaller elections. Just in some states it's probably hopeless in other states it doesn't matter.

Just to note, I never voted for Clinton or the Republican nominee in the past two elections. In both cases the Republican nominee won the vote in my State.

Also, even if Bush wins, we are going to have to lobby hard. Remember how his Father Soutered us!

Valdez is offline  
Old July 13, 2000, 11:49 AM   #6
DorGunR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 13, 2000
Location: Maryland
Posts: 1,125
If all you Bush haters out there can find a pro gun, third party candidate, that has a snow balls chance in hell of winning then please tell me and I will vote for him.
Otherwise Gore will win if all of you continue with this crap.

My .02 cents

------------------
"Lead, follow or get the HELL out of the way."
DorGunR is offline  
Old July 13, 2000, 12:01 PM   #7
Monkeyleg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 25, 2000
Posts: 4,625
KilgoreII:

"Supports the current ban on automatic weapons
-There is no ban on automatic weapons. A citizen can legally own them. With too much hassle though."

Probably 90% of the public doesn't know this, and I don't think we want them to since someone will then have to "close that loophole." Of course, HCI and the others would have to also explain the difference between full-auto's and "AW's."

Having said that, I agree entirely with your post. I do think, though, that pressure can be kept on Bush to do the right thing. For now that's all we can do.

Dick
Want to send Bush a message? Sign the petition at http://www.petitiononline.com/monk/petition.html and forward the link to every gun owner you know.
Monkeyleg is offline  
Old July 13, 2000, 12:14 PM   #8
MikeK
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2000
Location: MD
Posts: 566
What meiji_man and DorGunr said.
MikeK is offline  
Old July 13, 2000, 12:30 PM   #9
TexasRusty
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 9, 2000
Location: Frisco, Texas, Collin
Posts: 108
Y'all need to remember, he did sign concealed carry here in Texas. That is a hell of a lot more than you could ever possibly get from Gore.

He has been a pretty good Govenor down here. I think we will need to keep the pressure on him. But I think we will have to do that with any candidate. The big difference between Bush and Gore is that there is a much better chance that Bush will listen to us. We have no chance with Gore.

My vote goes to "dubya".
TexasRusty is offline  
Old July 13, 2000, 12:52 PM   #10
USP45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 22, 2000
Location: Peoples Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Posts: 1,562
Here's my plan:

Nov. 7:
-VOTE-> for Carla Howell for MA Senator
-VOTE-> for 'W' for President
-VOTE-> write in Alan Keyes for VP

Nov. 8:
-Mail-> letter to MA Governor that i didn't vote Repub in this year's Senate Race (not that i had a choice) and that i will not be voting for another Repub from MA until they stop playing Liberal.
-Mail-> letter to Pres. 'W' expressing pro-2nd issues and a challenge.
-Mail-> CC of above letter to Speakah of the US House (or Repub. Whip).
-Mail-> CC of above to the Senate Repub. Whip.

Who's with me?

------------------

~USP

"[Even if there would be] few tears shed if and when the Second Amendment is held to guarantee nothing more than the state National Guard, this would simply show that the Founders were right when they feared that some future generation might wish to abandon liberties that they considered essential, and so sought to protect those liberties in a Bill of Rights. We may tolerate the abridgement of property rights and the elimination of a right to bear arms; but we should not pretend that these are not reductions of rights." -- Justice Scalia 1998
USP45 is offline  
Old July 13, 2000, 12:54 PM   #11
nralife
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 7, 1999
Location: The Lone Star State
Posts: 1,235
I agree with DorGunR! Show me a progun third party candidate that has a chance of winning and I will vote for him.

Vote for the Libertarian. Al Gore needs all the help he can get! A vote for Browne instead of Bush is a 1/2 vote for Al Gore!


Joe


NRA Joe's Second Amendment Discussion Forum

[This message has been edited by nralife (edited July 13, 2000).]
nralife is offline  
Old July 13, 2000, 12:54 PM   #12
Meiji_man
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 26, 2000
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Posts: 455
If you in a State that heavily one or the other I can see voting 3rd party to increase the amount of funds for the NEXT campaign. But if your in a swing state the best way to go is to support Bush. Even if you do consider him the lesser of two evils.
Meiji_man is offline  
Old July 13, 2000, 01:06 PM   #13
Brett Bellmore
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Location: Capac, MI, USA
Posts: 1,927
TexasRusty: So, Gore is our enemy out of principle, and Bush out of political calculation; He figures that the nation at large isn't as pro-gun as Texas. Only nice thing you can say about that is that political calculations can be altered; We have to convince him that he did his math wrong.

------------------
Sic semper tyrannis!
Brett Bellmore is offline  
Old July 13, 2000, 01:19 PM   #14
Jim March
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 14, 1999
Location: Pittsburg, CA, USA
Posts: 7,417
Oh hell, here we go again.

Rusty in Texas is right, except he didn't go far enough.

Bush *asked* for a shall-issue bill, gladly signed it the moment it hit his desk, gladly signed a nice little "fix-it package" a couple years later that eliminated some restrictions, and then recently signed a bill eliminating local lawsuits again the gun biz.

I don't give a rat's rear end what he thinks he needs to SAY in order to get elected. He probably DOES need to come out with a bit of grabber-sounding BS although the wise reader should note where stuff like the "full auto ban" is concerned, it's a smoke screen.

Y'all also need to realize that the NRA's strategy this year is to "stall" all new legislation with cries of "enforce existing law". And yes, long-term those laws need to be gutted so as a long-term strategy, the Bush/NRA plan is bad...but as short-term tactics, it's *inspired*, it embarasses and frustrates the REAL grabbers no end.

Guys, Bush is either going to be in office this year, or we're going to see fighting in the streets within a decade. No joke. Let Bush pick at least one or two new Supremes before Emerson blows through, we get the 2nd recognized as an individual right, and boys, the whole thing starts turning around.

Put Gore in there, Emerson pukes and dies, we get a strong anti-RKBA ruling from the Supremes and eventually, we're looking at civil war.

If that's what you want, cool, flame Bush up one side or down the other.

But if you've got half the brains God gave a WWF fan, you'll get down on bended knees and thank the almighty that LaPierre, Heston and company are the craftiest, sneakiest SOBs ever to lead the RKBA fight, and tht Bush ain't very far behind 'em.

It all culminates this year.

Jim March
Equal Rights for CCW Home Page http://www.ninehundred.com/~equalccw
Jim March is offline  
Old July 13, 2000, 01:22 PM   #15
Westtexas
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 1, 2000
Posts: 293
If Bush is so anti-gun, why is the NRA giving him the BIG BUCKS? Why is the media crucifying him for his concealed handgun law in Texas?

Bush is trying to APPEAR more moderate to snag the soccer mom's vote. He is pro-RKBA and will be so nationally, WHEN ELECTED.

Lib's give it up. You are trying to smear Bush. If you cared about RKBA, you'd support the only candidate with a chance of winning. By voting Browne, you're a becoming a closet Gore supporter.
Westtexas is offline  
Old July 13, 2000, 01:33 PM   #16
KilgorII
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Meiji_man:
If you in a State that heavily one or the other I can see voting 3rd party to increase the amount of funds for the NEXT campaign. But if your in a swing state the best way to go is to support Bush. Even if you do consider him the lesser of two evils.[/quote]


I agree exactly, I am in Texas and Bush will take it. So I will vote for Harry Browne instead of just piling another insignificant vote on Bush's heap.

I also agree with most of what Jim March says. I am not smearing Bush. I am just posting and citing what the man says. I think he is a hell of a lot better than Gore. But the Libertarian platform is a hell of a lot better than Bush's. Will they win the white house? Not a chance in heck. However, if the bean counters for the Republicans see votes going to the Libertarians then they will adopt some of the Libertarian platform to attract the Libertarian votes. Thus with my vote, I can influence future elections.
 
Old July 13, 2000, 01:53 PM   #17
fairln
Member
 
Join Date: June 13, 2000
Location: Salt Lake City, UT, US
Posts: 17
I will agree with the election of George Bush in this regard:

The Libertarian party has no chance of winning a presidential election this year, nor for at least 4 more. Due to this, a vote for Browne this year is a vote for Gore...which just makes my little Libertarian heart want to shrivel up and die.

I'm actually completely sick of "crafty little people" in office, but at present a crafty little person who is on the right side on the big issues is neccessary. Even if Bush is not a perfect RKBA candidate, he is at least manipulable where Gore is an intransigent enemy to every Libertarian ideal.

The Libertarians must concentrate their activities at the local and state level. Expend all resources here, win several key elections and THEN run for federal office after you have made a name.

With the upcoming Supreme Court nominations and the "AW" ban reaching its sunset period, it is absolutely vital that even a nominally pro gun candidate defeats a intransigently anti gun candidate.

As to other issues concerning free speech and the like, which the Republicans often stumble over, we have little to worry about as yet. Lose the RKBA and we will suddenly have a great deal to worry about.

Our long term goal must be succeed at the political battle without violence. If that is the goal, then keeping Gore out of office this year is vital. Otherwise, violence will eventually become our only recourse.
fairln is offline  
Old July 13, 2000, 02:22 PM   #18
Meiji_man
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 26, 2000
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Posts: 455
Just to show you how paranoid I'm getting. It's called seeing enemy action in incompetence.

I can't understand why a individual would take such a irrational approach in addressing some of these topics. It's comes under the example of FNG in the Central Park thread. If the person who thinks just like you can't possibly win. But the guy who's the next closest to your position can. But he's not; Conservative, Libertarian, Liberal, Commie, Green, Vegetarian, whatever for you, people will vote for the guy who has no chance to "Prove a Point." What point are you making except that you don't know how to compromise or your a extrmist. It literaly get to the point that I think either:
A) Some people WANT a revolution. And will do anything to make that happen.
B) The People running are only in it for the power and not the idealogy.
C) The people in charge of some of these 3rd parties are really working for the other guy, by sucking off the extremist votes.

If there is another line of thought here please, PLEASE tell me what the hell it is.
Meiji_man is offline  
Old July 13, 2000, 02:23 PM   #19
Claemore70
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 29, 2000
Location: Rock Springs, WY, USA
Posts: 176
I say the only way to resolve this is to vote for Gore. The only way is through civil war. And it needs to happen soon before we are all codgers and can't fight. Any vote for Project Exile and the NRA is a vote for more gun control. HCI endorses Project Exile, I bet, and will ask them. Compromise only screws us, ask the Indians.

------------------
"Vote with a Bullet."
Claemore70 is offline  
Old July 13, 2000, 02:34 PM   #20
nralife
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 7, 1999
Location: The Lone Star State
Posts: 1,235
Claemore 70

you said...

"I say the only way to resolve this is to vote for Gore. The only way is through civil war. And it needs to happen soon before we are all codgers and can't fight."


I'm truly sorry you feel that way. I disagree with what you say. Our ONLY hope lies in a Supreme Court decision in our favor. With the right judges in place on the Supreme Court and with a lot of fasting, and heartfelt prayer, this republic CAN be saved without a shot being fired.

I hate to say this, but people really do want security more than they want liberty. Sure, there could be some Waco type standoffs and shootouts at people's homes when the gun grabbers come collecting the firearms that Al Gore had all ready had them register, but there is not EVER going to be any mass revolt where this country is set back on track unless it is at the ballot box. It just ain't gonna happen any other way. People will go along to get along just as they always have everywhere there has been gun confiscation to date.

Joe



------------------
Need help writing a letter to Congress or whomever?
Do you have a great letter or post that you would like to share with us?
Then stop by the NEW 2nd Amendment Activist's 'Copy & Paste' Forum!!!
nralife is offline  
Old July 13, 2000, 02:35 PM   #21
Dennis
Staff Emeritus
 
Join Date: November 23, 1998
Location: a small forest in Texas
Posts: 7,079
Westtexas,
1) “Lib's give it up. You are trying to smear Bush.”
(chuckle) So by quoting Bush we’re smearing him.

2) “If you cared about RKBA, you'd support the only candidate with a chance
of winning.”
Sorry, but nobody here is qualified to tell me what I care about. The only
reason to vote for Bush’s gun control program is fear of Gore’s gun control
program. If enough people cared about our RKBA as much as they say,
neither Gore nor his protege Republican would be in the race.

3) “By voting Browne, you're a becoming a closet Gore supporter.”
By voting for Bush, you support part of Gore’s anti-gun agenda.
A vote for Bush is 1/2 vote for Gore. (That one's for you, Joe! )
-----

All,

Gore is a nightmare. Bush is a bad dream. Electing anyone else is merely
dreaming.

If I vote for a third party, and Bush wins, Republicans figure gun owners have
no power and can be raped at will.

If I vote for a third party, and Bush loses, gun owners will be raped because
of Gore.

If I vote for Bush, whether he wins or loses, he knows gun owners will vote
away their gun rights because we fear the Democrats. So, if Bush wins, he then signs
important bills with anti-gun amendments because he “has no choice”.

Looks to me like we’re screwed no matter what we do.

How did we get here? Every election in the past forty years has been
“different” and “critical” for some cause and we have been told to vote
“pragmatically, just this once.”

So, now we must pay hundreds of dollars for the “privilege” of exercising a
small, limited part of our Second Amendment Rights.

So, now we must pay hundreds of dollars pleading for the federal government
to give us permission to obtain a license to exercise the “privilege” of owning
a full-auto firearm.

So, now we have states ignoring the Constitution saying, “If you have this
kind of rifle, you’ve got a problem.”

So, now our nation’s Capital is a cess pool of crime where decent people are
not permitted to own a firearm.

So, now we have to be afraid of driving up I-95 in a U-Haul truck because
police may stop us and search our property for drugs and firearms.

So, now we virtually outlaw devices that muffle the retort of a firearm and
then have lawsuits about the noise of gun ranges.

So, now we can not have large amounts of cash in our homes because it is
“legally inadvisable”.

So, now we can not pull $10,000 cash out of our savings without completing
federal government “tracking” forms.

It goes on and on. The list never ends. And we keep voting for the same
tyranny time after time because “this time it’s different”.

Now we’ll tell kids they can go to war, fight and die, but they will be
forbidden to own a firearm at the very home, in the very country, they are
fighting and dieing for.

Now we’ll outlaw standard capacity magazines because we believe bad guys
can not reload quickly and good guys shouldn’t.

Well, if you’ve been around longer than all week, you notice a trend here.
We continue to be cursed with increasingly severe restrictions, none of which
are repealed. We have so many laws that we are in violation of some law or
another nearly at any given moment.

The Republicans have abandoned us! We did not leave them! They became
faux Democrats and partners in the crime of turning America into a Socialist
state acceptable to the United Nations and the “world village”.

So now we must vote for gun control to save our Right to Keep and Bear
Arms. It’s hilarious how we profess to be pro-RKBA while we grease the skids
on the slippery slope into tyranny.

Before Republican supporters tell me to take a “reality check”, take one
yourself.

[This message has been edited by Dennis (edited July 13, 2000).]
Dennis is offline  
Old July 13, 2000, 03:08 PM   #22
Meiji_man
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 26, 2000
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Posts: 455
Ok now this is a GREAT THREAD!

And I don't want to see this get locked down because we need to get this aired and fast.

If I was a anti-gunner, Claemore70 is a wet dream come true. That kind of talk gives ALL pro-gun groups a bad name. Talk about open revolution against the goverment, if not illegal, is just plain stupid. Your actions make it easier to convince the 60% of Americans who don't give a damn about guns to beleave "Rosie is Right" and someones going to blow up another Federal Building unless the BATF and FBI is given more leeway in chasing down "militias" and "Right Wing Wacko's"
In fact your doing HCI's job so well for them you MUST be a plant. Because your doing more work for them then for anyone else.

Rational Debate. Getting the Votes and Message out. We CAN win this.

If you want to prepare go ahead. Have fun, Dig your caches, watch Red Dawn, and play dress up in your cami's. Just don't be surprised when they come knocking on your door to collect you. And please for the love of God, don't be making a specticle out of yourselves when they do come. Your just making "Their" job easier.

And why are we fighting amongst ourselves? Let's remember the mission. RKBA and a free America.
Meiji_man is offline  
Old July 13, 2000, 03:23 PM   #23
Coinneach
Staff Alumnus
 
Join Date: February 23, 1999
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 4,272
Well, it *was* a great thread, until The Usual Suspects started yacking about how we're "smearing" Bush.

As far as "For G-d's sake don't make a spectacle of yourself when they come for you," shall we instead go quietly into that good night?

Not me, sorry.
Coinneach is offline  
Old July 13, 2000, 03:33 PM   #24
nralife
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 7, 1999
Location: The Lone Star State
Posts: 1,235
Dennis,

I have conceded to you that one vote for Brown is not one vote directly for Gore. Taking one vote away from Bush and giving it to Browne is like giving 1/2 of a vote to Al Gore.

Okay, now, why will you refuse to admit that this year things REALLY ARE DIFFERENT? You say that every year the Republicans say vote with us just this one more time. Well, I'll take your word for it that they do that, but that really is beside the point this time. Just because the Republicans have cried wolf in the past doesn't mean that the wolf isn't really coming to the door this time!!!

Considering Emerson and the future makeup of the Supreme Court, the assault weapons bill sunsetting, all of the frivilous lawsuits against legitimate firearms manufactures, and an out of control BATF, among other reasons, why won't you admit that the future of the Second Amendment is in peril like never before?

Dennis, I don't think you are being honest when you say this is "just one more year."

Sincerely,
Joe
nralife is offline  
Old July 13, 2000, 03:37 PM   #25
EricM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 28, 2000
Location: Idaho
Posts: 1,060
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Meiji_man:
Ok now this is a GREAT THREAD!

And I don't want to see this get locked down because we need to get this aired and fast.
[/quote]

Not really. This thread comes up nearly every other day. Hold your nose and vote for Bush, or Bush is Gore-light so vote with the other .2% of the country who likes Harry Browne .

Vote how you like. It doesn't matter which one of them gets in office; by this time next year, there will be more gun control laws on the books.

EricM is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.11660 seconds with 7 queries