GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-27-2012, 16:03   #251
kirgi08
Silver Membership
Watcher.
 
kirgi08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Acme proving grounds.
Posts: 26,718
Blog Entries: 1


Quote:
Originally Posted by Schlitz View Post
I'd rather see Obama win a second term than abandon my values and support an anti-gun politician like Romney.


^says the gun enthusiast who supports a politician that passed an assault weapons ban
Didn't the one just say he's for a new AWB.'08.
__________________
I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6

If you look like food,You will be eaten.

Rip Chad.You will be missed.
kirgi08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2012, 16:40   #252
Schlitz
Senior Member
 
Schlitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 330
Quote:
And you would rather see Obama win? Ignore the fact that the Supreme Court will be stacked against us for a long time?
Implying that someone who has passed legislation banning assault weapons and has flip flopped more than John Kerry is going to put gun nuts into the supreme court.

The more you talk the dumber it sounds!
__________________
The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, ...
Schlitz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2012, 16:41   #253
Schlitz
Senior Member
 
Schlitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 330
Quote:
Originally Posted by kirgi08 View Post
Didn't the one just say he's for a new AWB.'08.
Didn't the one actually sign an AWB into law in his history as a politician?
__________________
The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, ...
Schlitz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2012, 16:44   #254
kirgi08
Silver Membership
Watcher.
 
kirgi08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Acme proving grounds.
Posts: 26,718
Blog Entries: 1


Romney would loose a veto battle and he knew it,so he negotiated some of the most onerous parts out of it.'08.
__________________
I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6

If you look like food,You will be eaten.

Rip Chad.You will be missed.
kirgi08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2012, 18:55   #255
Schlitz
Senior Member
 
Schlitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 330
Quote:
Originally Posted by kirgi08 View Post
Romney would loose a veto battle and he knew it,so he negotiated some of the most onerous parts out of it.'08.
^He didn't just do that, he also made it clear that he believes assault weapons are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people. Yea, he was really looking out for gun owners.

"Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts."
^This statement was made by the life time member NRA gun supporting hunter for life don't tread on me come and take them constitution respecting candidate

You guys will support the GOP candidate no matter who he is! I bet if Obama was running on the GOP ticket you'd be here defending him as some champion to the 2nd amendment when compared to the democrat alternative!
__________________
The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, ...
Schlitz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2012, 19:17   #256
JFrame
Senior Member
 
JFrame's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Mid-Atlantic, US of A
Posts: 31,578
It's a pretty safe bet that neither candidate would violate the official 2012 platform of their respective parties.

Following are the official platforms of the two parties relative to the Second Amendment.

It's pretty clear which candidate any supporter of the Second Amendment should prefer.

Quote:
GOP

The Second Amendment: Our Right to Keep and Bear Arms

We uphold the right of individuals to keep and bear arms, a right which antedated the Constitution and was solemnly confirmed by the Second Amendment. We acknowledge, support, and defend the law-abiding citizen’s God-given right of self-defense. We call for the protection of such fundamental individual rights recognized in the Supreme Court’s decisions in District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago affirming that right, and we recognize the individual responsibility to safely use and store firearms. This also includes the right to obtain and store ammunition without registration. We support the fundamental right to self-defense wherever a law-abiding citizen has a legal right to be, and we support federal legislation that would expand the exercise of that right by allowing those with state-issued carry permits to carry firearms in any state that issues such permits to its own residents. Gun ownership is responsible citizenship, enabling Americans to defend their homes and communities. We condemn frivolous lawsuits against gun manufacturers and oppose federal licensing or registration of law-abiding gun owners. We oppose legislation that is intended to restrict our Second Amendment rights by limiting the capacity of clips or magazines or otherwise restoring the ill-considered Clinton gun ban. We condemn the reckless actions associated with the operation known as “Fast and Furious,” conducted by the Department of Justice, which resulted in the murder of a U.S. Border Patrol Agent and others on both sides of the border. We applaud the Members of the U.S. House of Representatives in holding the current Administration’s Attorney General in contempt of Congress for his refusal to cooperate with their investigation into that debacle.
We oppose the improper collection of firearms sales information in the four southern border states, which was imposed without congressional authority.
Quote:
DNC:

Firearms
. We recognize that the individual right to bear arms is an important part of the American tradition, and we will preserve Americans' Second Amendment right to own and use firearms. We believe that the right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation. We understand the terrible consequences of gun violence; it serves as a reminder that life is fragile, and our time here is limited and precious. We believe in an honest, open national conversation about firearms. We can focus on effective enforcement of existing laws, especially strengthening our background check system, and we can work together to enact commonsense improvements—like reinstating the assault weapons ban and closing the gun show loophole—so that guns do not fall into the hands of those irresponsible, law-breaking few.
.
__________________
"When newspapers are controlled, it's amazing how ignorant and immune from pressure the government can be." -- Amartya Sen

--
JFrame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2012, 19:40   #257
ilgunguygt
Enslaved in IL
 
ilgunguygt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The Peoples Republic Of Illinois
Posts: 4,481
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schlitz View Post
Implying that someone who has passed legislation banning assault weapons and has flip flopped more than John Kerry is going to put gun nuts into the supreme court.

The more you talk the dumber it sounds!
Romney is a puppet of the GOP, he will do exactly what is needed of him. Do you know anything at all about the AWB that Romney signed, I bet you dont. I come from IL, where Obama comes from, make no mistake that man will not stop at anything to attack gun rights. He supported a full on handgun ban for the entire state.

If you can honestly say that you think Obama is better for gun owners than Romney just come out and say that you want Obama to win, it would be a lot easier.
__________________
***RIP Okie, GT will never be the same without you Mr Mayor!***
ilgunguygt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2012, 19:42   #258
ilgunguygt
Enslaved in IL
 
ilgunguygt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The Peoples Republic Of Illinois
Posts: 4,481
Quote:
Originally Posted by JFrame View Post
It's a pretty safe bet that neither candidate would violate the official 2012 platform of their respective parties.

Following are the official platforms of the two parties relative to the Second Amendment.

It's pretty clear which candidate any supporter of the Second Amendment should prefer.

.
Dont go using common sense, you know better. Between the libtard twits and the "third party is the solution to everything" crowd we all know that Romney will push for an AWB on his first day in the office whereas Obama will plainly legalize all machine guns without permit and make mandatory nationwide permitless carry.
__________________
***RIP Okie, GT will never be the same without you Mr Mayor!***
ilgunguygt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2012, 00:06   #259
Schlitz
Senior Member
 
Schlitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 330
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilgunguygt View Post
If you can honestly say that you think Obama is better for gun owners than Romney just come out and say that you want Obama to win, it would be a lot easier.
Neither of them are good for gun owners. And I already said I'd rather see Obama win than abandon my values and vote for anti gun Romney.

Quote:
It's pretty clear which candidate any supporter of the Second Amendment should prefer.
It's pretty clear? One candidate supported banning handguns and the other says that guns that look cool are made solely for hunting people down and killing them, and that they have no place in the state he was governing.

It's pretty clear we have two major candidates that don't like guns nor care for the bill of rights in our constitution, which their oath is to support. The fact that you can support either of the two with your vote while owning a gun is hilarious.

The fact that the NRA endorses one of the two is even more laughable!
__________________
The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, ...

Last edited by Schlitz; 10-28-2012 at 00:07.. Reason: spelling
Schlitz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2012, 00:08   #260
Schlitz
Senior Member
 
Schlitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 330
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilgunguygt View Post
Dont go using common sense, you know better. Between the libtard twits and the "third party is the solution to everything" crowd we all know that Romney will push for an AWB on his first day in the office whereas Obama will plainly legalize all machine guns without permit and make mandatory nationwide permitless carry.
>talks about common sense
>owns a gun
>supports a candidate that has an anti gun history

if anyone knows anything about NOT using common sense...well....
__________________
The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, ...
Schlitz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2012, 15:58   #261
Acujeff
Senior Member
 
Acujeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 1,871
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schlitz View Post
Didn't the one actually sign an AWB into law in his history as a politician?
Actually, Romney was not yet in office and so did not sign the permanent 1998 MA AWB into law.

If you actually examine his record it is clear Romney signed no anti-2A bills while he was Gov. of MA 2002-2006. Romney only reduced gun control, removed gun control from bills or signed pro-2A bills into law.

What is known today as the highly restrictive gun control laws in MA were passed in 1998 by the Massachusetts legislature. It included MA’s assault weapons ban (MGL Chapter 140, Section 131M) that was more restrictive than the 1994 Fed AWB.

Here’s the entire 1998 CHAPTER 180 AN ACT RELATIVE TO GUN CONTROL IN THE COMMONWEALTH OF MA
http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/Se...998/Chapter180

If you actually read the law it is clear that this ban did not rely on the federal language, was not tied to the federal AWB and contained no sunset clause. The expiration of the Fed AWB in 2004 did not get rid of MA's own permanent AWB.

MA Gun owners wanted to get rid of the ban in 2004, but did not have the votes in the state Legislature (over 85% anti-gun Democrat). When the Fed ban expired in 2004, Gun Owners’ Action League (the MA based pro-2A group) and Romney used the opportunity to amend the MA AWB by including the federal assault weapon exemptions and a few other improvements that were not in the state law and correct some abuses in MA‘s gun laws.

CHAPTER 150 AN ACT FURTHER REGULATING CERTAIN WEAPONS
http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/Se...004/Chapter150

If Romney did not sign that bill, the more restrictive AWB would still be in place today.

So the actual truth is, in 2004, Romney signed a bill that amended the permanent AWB and made it less strict. Some folks are misrepresenting his record and claiming that Romney signed the AWB permanently into effect and that our AWB was set to expire in 2004. But, unlike those folks, I've posted the laws and facts. I challenge them to show us in those laws where their fabrications are documented.

Let's look at the rest of Romney's record:
During the Romney Administration he met and worked with Gun Owners’ Action League (the Mass. based pro-2A group) and no anti-second amendment or anti-sportsmen legislation made its way to the Governor’s desk. In addition, he removed any anti-second amendment language from bills like the Gang Violence bill passed in 2006, and signed five pro-second amendment bills into law.

Romney‘s entire record:
http://www.goal.org/newspages/romney.html

Recently discovered report forces the question: Do I owe Mitt Romney an apology?
by Chad D. Baus
http://www.ammoland.com/2012/10/02/g...#ixzz28AyBR021
- it appears that the central "fact" that most gun owners "know" about Mitt Romney - namely that he signed a new assault weapons ban in Massachusetts in 2004 - isn't a fact at all. My sense is that knowledge of the GOAL report may allow some pro-gun voters, who may have been hesitant to go "All In," to feel much better about voting for the only man who stands a chance at defeating Barack Obama. Mr Romney, for whatever it's worth, I apologize.

Romney has already been politically tested on the RKBA against a congress that was 85% anti-2A and his record is all pro-2A which is very encouraging for gun owners.

It is understandable that Obama supporters are going to come to gun forums and try to persuade us to avoid supporting and voting for Romney. The liberal mainstream media and politicians are using the same strategy to desperately misrepresent and revise Romney's record in all arenas and distract us from Obama's record and agenda. Expect to see a lot more leading up to the election.

Here's President Obama's record:
Fast and Furious and the subsequent cover-up (the biggest criminal political scandal in American history), which lead to orders registering gun purchases in the four southern border states, using the ATF to harass gun shops out of business and promoting the UN Gun Ban Treaty. He also appointed two anti-RKBA Supreme Court Justices and 125 anti-RKBA liberals to federal judgeships, including 25 to appellate courts.

Under an expansion of the civil forfeiture doctrine, Obama has just given the ATF the power to seize your firearms if they choose to, without due process, and even if you are not under investigation. Under Obama’s new decree, if the ATF says they are going to confiscate your firearms, they can.

Imagine what he'll do if he gets a second term. In the very least, more regulations and executive orders governing every aspect of gun and ammo ownership and commerce, lots more anti-gun judges and up to four more anti-gun Supreme Court justices. Obama and the Democrats are campaigning not only on making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, but also making guns “childproof”, banning private gun transfers and sales, and regulating ammo purchases.

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/20...n-second-term/
http://change.gov/agenda/urbanpolicy_agenda

Romney is not "the same as Obama", the "lesser of evils" or "Obama-lite". In 2008 he was rated "B" by the NRA and Obama was rated "F". Since then, Romney has only become more pro-2A and Obama more anti-2A. The NRA is endorsing the Romney/ Ryan ticket for this election. Romney would be a much better President for gun-owners than Obama.

Romney is campaigning on dismantling Obama's anti-gun actions in the UN and on the Southern border, appointing a new Attorney General and make sure Fast and Furious is actually investigated and prosecuted, stop the abuses of the ATF, and appointing up to four more pro-RKBA Supreme Court Justices.

It's up to individual gun-owners to to get the facts and make sure we're not scammed into giving Obama another term.

Romney‘s positions:
http://washingtonexaminer.com/gop-se...rticle/2506043
http://www.mittromney.com/issues/gun-rights
http://www.mittromney.com/issues/courts-constitution
__________________
Read "America's 1st Freedom" NRA's monthly magazine:
http://www.nrapublications.org/index.php/first-freedom/

Get free NRA-ILA legislative and RKBA e-mail alerts:
https://www.nraila.org/get-involved-...-informed.aspx
Acujeff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2012, 16:05   #262
ilgunguygt
Enslaved in IL
 
ilgunguygt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The Peoples Republic Of Illinois
Posts: 4,481
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schlitz View Post
>talks about common sense
>owns a gun
>supports a candidate that has an anti gun history

if anyone knows anything about NOT using common sense...well....
So given the choice we should vote for Obama, right? Because he is better for gun owners?

If you cant read the party platforms and listen to what they have to say in the debates to understand the difference, then you certainly the one lacking the common sense.

Why dont you read the post between mine and yours while you are at it! Its amazing how smart some internet trolls arent.
__________________
***RIP Okie, GT will never be the same without you Mr Mayor!***

Last edited by ilgunguygt; 10-28-2012 at 16:06..
ilgunguygt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-28-2012, 21:50   #263
Schlitz
Senior Member
 
Schlitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 330
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acujeff View Post
Actually, Romney was not yet in office and so did not sign the permanent 1998 MA AWB into law.

If you actually examine his record it is clear Romney signed no anti-2A bills while he was Gov. of MA 2002-2006. Romney only reduced gun control, removed gun control from bills or signed pro-2A bills into law.

What is known today as the highly restrictive gun control laws in MA were passed in 1998 by the Massachusetts legislature. It included MA’s assault weapons ban (MGL Chapter 140, Section 131M) that was more restrictive than the 1994 Fed AWB.

Here’s the entire 1998 CHAPTER 180 AN ACT RELATIVE TO GUN CONTROL IN THE COMMONWEALTH OF MA
http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/Se...998/Chapter180

If you actually read the law it is clear that this ban did not rely on the federal language, was not tied to the federal AWB and contained no sunset clause. The expiration of the Fed AWB in 2004 did not get rid of MA's own permanent AWB.

MA Gun owners wanted to get rid of the ban in 2004, but did not have the votes in the state Legislature (over 85% anti-gun Democrat). When the Fed ban expired in 2004, Gun Owners’ Action League (the MA based pro-2A group) and Romney used the opportunity to amend the MA AWB by including the federal assault weapon exemptions and a few other improvements that were not in the state law and correct some abuses in MA‘s gun laws.

CHAPTER 150 AN ACT FURTHER REGULATING CERTAIN WEAPONS
http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/Se...004/Chapter150

If Romney did not sign that bill, the more restrictive AWB would still be in place today.

So the actual truth is, in 2004, Romney signed a bill that amended the permanent AWB and made it less strict. Some folks are misrepresenting his record and claiming that Romney signed the AWB permanently into effect and that our AWB was set to expire in 2004. But, unlike those folks, I've posted the laws and facts. I challenge them to show us in those laws where their fabrications are documented.

Let's look at the rest of Romney's record:
During the Romney Administration he met and worked with Gun Owners’ Action League (the Mass. based pro-2A group) and no anti-second amendment or anti-sportsmen legislation made its way to the Governor’s desk. In addition, he removed any anti-second amendment language from bills like the Gang Violence bill passed in 2006, and signed five pro-second amendment bills into law.

Romney‘s entire record:
http://www.goal.org/newspages/romney.html

Recently discovered report forces the question: Do I owe Mitt Romney an apology?
by Chad D. Baus
http://www.ammoland.com/2012/10/02/g...#ixzz28AyBR021
- it appears that the central "fact" that most gun owners "know" about Mitt Romney - namely that he signed a new assault weapons ban in Massachusetts in 2004 - isn't a fact at all. My sense is that knowledge of the GOAL report may allow some pro-gun voters, who may have been hesitant to go "All In," to feel much better about voting for the only man who stands a chance at defeating Barack Obama. Mr Romney, for whatever it's worth, I apologize.

Romney has already been politically tested on the RKBA against a congress that was 85% anti-2A and his record is all pro-2A which is very encouraging for gun owners.

It is understandable that Obama supporters are going to come to gun forums and try to persuade us to avoid supporting and voting for Romney. The liberal mainstream media and politicians are using the same strategy to desperately misrepresent and revise Romney's record in all arenas and distract us from Obama's record and agenda. Expect to see a lot more leading up to the election.

Here's President Obama's record:
Fast and Furious and the subsequent cover-up (the biggest criminal political scandal in American history), which lead to orders registering gun purchases in the four southern border states, using the ATF to harass gun shops out of business and promoting the UN Gun Ban Treaty. He also appointed two anti-RKBA Supreme Court Justices and 125 anti-RKBA liberals to federal judgeships, including 25 to appellate courts.

Under an expansion of the civil forfeiture doctrine, Obama has just given the ATF the power to seize your firearms if they choose to, without due process, and even if you are not under investigation. Under Obama’s new decree, if the ATF says they are going to confiscate your firearms, they can.

Imagine what he'll do if he gets a second term. In the very least, more regulations and executive orders governing every aspect of gun and ammo ownership and commerce, lots more anti-gun judges and up to four more anti-gun Supreme Court justices. Obama and the Democrats are campaigning not only on making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, but also making guns “childproof”, banning private gun transfers and sales, and regulating ammo purchases.

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/20...n-second-term/
http://change.gov/agenda/urbanpolicy_agenda

Romney is not "the same as Obama", the "lesser of evils" or "Obama-lite". In 2008 he was rated "B" by the NRA and Obama was rated "F". Since then, Romney has only become more pro-2A and Obama more anti-2A. The NRA is endorsing the Romney/ Ryan ticket for this election. Romney would be a much better President for gun-owners than Obama.

Romney is campaigning on dismantling Obama's anti-gun actions in the UN and on the Southern border, appointing a new Attorney General and make sure Fast and Furious is actually investigated and prosecuted, stop the abuses of the ATF, and appointing up to four more pro-RKBA Supreme Court Justices.

It's up to individual gun-owners to to get the facts and make sure we're not scammed into giving Obama another term.

Romney‘s positions:
http://washingtonexaminer.com/gop-se...rticle/2506043
http://www.mittromney.com/issues/gun-rights
http://www.mittromney.com/issues/courts-constitution
The Okie Corral
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilgunguygt View Post
So given the choice we should vote for Obama, right? Because he is better for gun owners?
You still think that someone HAS to be republican or democrat? I don't advocate for supporting any of these guys.
Quote:
If you cant read the party platforms and listen to what they have to say in the debates to understand the difference, then you certainly the one lacking the common sense.
Listen to what they say in debates? Like when Romney tried to make us believe the AWB was about automatics? And when he said automatics are illegal here?
Quote:
Why dont you read the post between mine and yours while you are at it! Its amazing how smart some internet trolls arent.
>calling someone dumb on the internet
>simultaneously failing to use apostrophes when needed
__________________
The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, ...
Schlitz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2012, 07:00   #264
Cubdriver
Senior Member
 
Cubdriver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Southeastern Litchfield County, CT
Posts: 1,708
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schlitz View Post
And I already said I'd rather see Obama win than abandon my values and vote for anti gun Romney.
You STILL don't get the Supreme Court LIFETIME APPOINTMENT thing, do you?

-Pat
__________________
Speed has never killed anyone. Suddenly becoming stationary… that's what gets you.. (J. Clarkson)
Cubdriver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2012, 20:17   #265
wildmanjeff
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 30
freakin guy flopin' around LOL
wildmanjeff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2012, 07:52   #266
redbaron007
Lifetime Membership
A Nice Prick!
 
redbaron007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Southwest Missouri
Posts: 6,303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cubdriver View Post
You STILL don't get the Supreme Court LIFETIME APPOINTMENT thing, do you?

-Pat
It's the act of comprehension........




red
__________________
TopGun *357sig* Club - #2632
The 10 Ring #00720

R.I.P. Cajunator® ~ R.I.P. Mullah (aka El Ron)
R.I.P. GioaJack ~ R.I.P. Okie
redbaron007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 13:55   #267
Schlitz
Senior Member
 
Schlitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 330
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cubdriver View Post
You STILL don't get the Supreme Court LIFETIME APPOINTMENT thing, do you?

-Pat
You STILL don't get the ASSAULT WEAPONS ARE 'INSTRUMENTS OF DESTRUCTION WITH THE SOLE PURPOSE OF HUNTING PEOPLE DOWN AND KILLING THEM thing', do you?

That's the guy you want appointing justices? lol!
__________________
The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, ...
Schlitz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 15:21   #268
Acujeff
Senior Member
 
Acujeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 1,871
Only Obama and the Democrat party are campaigning for more gun control and a permanent AWB:

President Obama can use an executive order and bypass Congress all together. After all, as of October 2012, President Obama has already issued 140 executive orders.

We know what the old assault weapons ban looked like, but what would a new, federal assault weapons ban include?

http://cdn2.cheaperthandirt.com/blog...Iss13+Campaign
__________________
Read "America's 1st Freedom" NRA's monthly magazine:
http://www.nrapublications.org/index.php/first-freedom/

Get free NRA-ILA legislative and RKBA e-mail alerts:
https://www.nraila.org/get-involved-...-informed.aspx
Acujeff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 15:31   #269
Providence
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Woodstock, GA
Posts: 543
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acujeff View Post
President Obama can use an executive order and bypass Congress all together.
This is fact. Remember, "This is too important to wait on Congress to act."? O. Stated he wants gun control. R. Has stated that he does not.
__________________
Georgia Club Member #106
Tactical Shotgun Club #58
Rimfire Club #193
Snubbie Club #18
Providence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 15:42   #270
Acujeff
Senior Member
 
Acujeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 1,871
We were fortunate that 5 Supreme Court Justices in Heller and McDonald confirmed the Second Amendment as an individual right to armed self defense and must be applied to all levels of government. And, in case you forgot, we were fortunate that Bush, often labeled not pro-2A enough for making the same comment as Romney, appointed Alito and Roberts as Justices to make that pro-2A majority and obtain that opinion.

However, the minority opinion by the other four Justices was that the Second Amendment:

- did not protect a private right of armed self-defense
- does not apply to the states
- does not apply to individuals outside of the militia context

If there were five, instead of four, anti-Second Amendment Justices the RKBA would have been effectively written out of the Bill of Rights.

It could still happen. The composition of the Court can change and prior decisions can be overturned.

Four US Supreme Court Justices (Scalia, Kennedy, Breyer and Ginsburg) will be 80 or older, and two, Thomas and Alito above 65, by the end of Obama's second term. He could likely appoint 4 more Justices if he is re-elected - all of whom will be making momentous decisions about our lives for decades to come. An anti-2A Court would be free to re-define and dismantle the RKBA out of existence. The current anti-2A Justices have already stated their intention to do exactly that.

Anti-Second Amendment Justice Ginsberg has stated that the majority opinions in this case are “grievously mistaken”, that minority opinions would be used to rewrite legal history and create a purely “collective right connected to the militia” and she looks forward to the day a “future, wiser court“ overturns Heller. John Paul Stevens recently told Time magazine the one thing in particular he would change about the American judicial system “I would change the interpretation of the Second Amendment. The court got that quite wrong.”

Obama appointed anti-Second Amendment Justices, Sotomayor and Kagan. Given the opportunity he will do it again. All they need is one more like minded Justice to get a majority of five anti’s and implement their stated agenda through the courts.

Valerie Jarrett, the most influential senior adviser to President Obama, was recently addressing other Obama senior staffers… “After we win this election, it’s our turn. Payback time. Everyone not with us is against us and they better be ready because we don’t forget. The ones who helped us will be rewarded, the ones who opposed us will get what they deserve. There is going to be hell to pay..... Congress won’t be a problem for us this time. No election to worry about after this is over and we have two judges ready to go.”

If the Supreme Court becomes majority anti-2A, we’ll never see a pro-RKBA victory again in our lifetime.

There are already more RKBA cases headed to the Supreme Court involving the private right of carry and armed self-defense outside the home, the heavy restrictions in places like Chicago and Washington DC, whether police can arbitrarily deny firearm permits to law abiding applicants, and whether governments can ban entire classes of popular firearms.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...the-obama-era/

In addition, since taking office, Obama has appointed 125 anti-RKBA liberals to federal judgeships, including 25 to appellate courts. At present, there are 86 vacancies on district and appellate courts, 39 of which already have pending nominees before the Senate. It’s not in gun owners best interests to give him a second term and the opportunity to appoint more anti-2A judges and justices.

Though there are a few folks revising and misrepresenting his record, Romney has a much better record and a much better choice for gun owners than Obama. He is campaigning on appointing pro-2A conservative Supreme Court Justices like Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito. While Justices don't always vote the same way, these four Justices have consistently ruled in favor of the RKBA.

In order to do that, we have to fire Obama and hire Romney. If gun owners don’t care about a pro-RKBA Supreme Court, why should the rest of the voters?

http://www.mittromney.com/issues/courts-constitution
http://washingtonexaminer.com/gop-se...rticle/2506043
__________________
Read "America's 1st Freedom" NRA's monthly magazine:
http://www.nrapublications.org/index.php/first-freedom/

Get free NRA-ILA legislative and RKBA e-mail alerts:
https://www.nraila.org/get-involved-...-informed.aspx
Acujeff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 15:56   #271
JFrame
Senior Member
 
JFrame's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Mid-Atlantic, US of A
Posts: 31,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acujeff View Post
In addition, since taking office, Obama has appointed 125 anti-RKBA liberals to federal judgeships, including 25 to appellate courts. At present, there are 86 vacancies on district and appellate courts, 39 of which already have pending nominees before the Senate. It’s not in gun owners best interests to give him a second term and the opportunity to appoint more anti-2A judges and justices.
This is another very crucial point. We tend to focus -- when we focus at all -- on the SCOTUS judges, and forget that the president holds the key in spreading federal judges throughout the land. These are the judges who are establishing decisions and precedence at their respective levels, and are cutting their teeth and establishing "creds" toward a SCOTUS nomination in the future.

These ARE the breeding grounds for the Bader Ginsburgs and Sotomayors...


.
__________________
"When newspapers are controlled, it's amazing how ignorant and immune from pressure the government can be." -- Amartya Sen

--
JFrame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 18:07   #272
Cubdriver
Senior Member
 
Cubdriver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Southeastern Litchfield County, CT
Posts: 1,708
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schlitz View Post
You STILL don't get the ASSAULT WEAPONS ARE 'INSTRUMENTS OF DESTRUCTION WITH THE SOLE PURPOSE OF HUNTING PEOPLE DOWN AND KILLING THEM thing', do you?

That's the guy you want appointing justices? lol!
I'd rather him than the one that's ALREADY appointed TWO fervently anti-2nd amendment justices to the SC so far.

-Pat
__________________
Speed has never killed anyone. Suddenly becoming stationary… that's what gets you.. (J. Clarkson)
Cubdriver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 23:46   #273
Schlitz
Senior Member
 
Schlitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 330
I'm going to remember this moment in glocktalk history when years from now down the road one of Mitt's (if he's elected) judges ends up being the one that goes south when a big deal 2nd amendment case comes around. brb, adding this thread to my bookmarks.

+100000 internet points to me when it ends up being a assault weapons related case and Romney's judge says something along the lines of assault weapons being "instruments of destruction"
__________________
The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, ...
Schlitz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 07:44   #274
kirgi08
Silver Membership
Watcher.
 
kirgi08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Acme proving grounds.
Posts: 26,718
Blog Entries: 1


__________________
I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6

If you look like food,You will be eaten.

Rip Chad.You will be missed.
kirgi08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 07:52   #275
Cubdriver
Senior Member
 
Cubdriver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Southeastern Litchfield County, CT
Posts: 1,708
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schlitz View Post
I'm going to remember this moment in glocktalk history when years from now down the road one of Mitt's (if he's elected) judges ends up being the one that goes south when a big deal 2nd amendment case comes around. brb, adding this thread to my bookmarks.

+100000 internet points to me when it ends up being a assault weapons related case and Romney's judge says something along the lines of assault weapons being "instruments of destruction"
Riiiiiiiiight. Because of course if Obama gets in for a second term (which you've previously stated is what you'd rather see), he's certain to appoint justices that will wholeheartedly support the second, right? (That would be the polar opposite of the two that he's appointed thus far, just in case you weren't paying attention.)

When given the option of supporting the guy who might possibly appoint a justice that doesn't fully support the second versus the guy who HAS ALREADY placed TWO that are flat out opposed to it and when the opportunity presents itself in the future will almost assuredly do the same again, it defies logic to want the latter to win over the former.

Sometimes firearms owners are our own worst enemies.

-Pat
__________________
Speed has never killed anyone. Suddenly becoming stationary… that's what gets you.. (J. Clarkson)
Cubdriver is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Tags
debate
Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 -6. The time now is 17:38.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,332
413 Members
919 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42