close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Obama just said...

Discussion in 'The Okie Corral' started by Rabbi, Oct 16, 2012.

  1. Hef

    Hef Stop Obammunism

    3,909
    31
    Sep 12, 2004
    Hilton Head, SC
    I wouldn't be surprised if the media deliberately acts to incite riots on election night should it appear Obama will lose, or does in fact lose.
     
  2. Anyone who knows Obama knows that he is not an American. His views are very extreme and he has clouded vision. :whistling: I talk to lots of people in the area and they don't like either guy but Romney seems more liked than obama except to the media.
     

  3. Peace Warrior

    Peace Warrior Am Yisrael Chai CLM

    30,706
    6,818
    Jan 12, 2007
    the narrow way
    Decoding postest the bestest! :supergrin:
     
  4. jp3975

    jp3975

    7,309
    399
    Nov 13, 2008
    Texarkana, Tx
    I'll play.

    The liberal side of the court has said that they look forward to a "wiser" future court overturning the ruling.

    They overturn past rulings about twice a year.

    What you're saying is true...its rare that they overturn past decisions, but what about when they really want to...AS THEY SAY.

    In addition to our two new far left scotus members, Obama has appointed 125 liberal judges to lower courts.

    There are other gun cases that should go before SCOTUS before 2017.

    Again...THEY SAY THEY WANT TO OVERTURN IT.

    I dont think it takes a genius to figure out that they arent kidding. Only a fool would blow it off as nothing.

    If one of the 5 pro-gun justices who are pushing 80 retires...by choice or because of illness/death, and Obama's in. You can bet your *** that the second will be redefined and there will be no pro-gun victories until we replace a lib justice with pro-gun, God knows when, since its a life appointment.
     
  5. AK74play

    AK74play

    1,604
    3
    Jun 26, 2010
    Indiana
    It really wont matter when right after the election Hillary signs the NATO treaty. Then Obamanation can testify live on TV that he has nothing agains our 2nd Ammendment rights and again lie through his teeth because NATO will now be in control via the treaty which will over ride our constitutional rights. This is why O has been silent on the issue throughout most his campaign and avoiding it at all cost. He didn't want you to know that Hilliary was doing his dirty work for him behind the scenes with NATO.
    I know this is kinda off the wll but I for one will NEVER recognise NATO as any kind of governing power and certainly not when they do not recognise my Constitunial rights.
    O may seem stupid on the surface, but his strength has always been, mis direction and just outright lieing about anything to do with ANY important issue.
    I am not sideing with Romney because I beleive the Republican party could have and SHOULD have submitted a far better representative, but if the last 4 years hasn't proved what O is all about then your just not recognising the destruction of America and it's finishing if he is given 4 more years to acheive his goal.
    Remember Mrs. O's comments on the American flag befor his election ?? She said it was nothing more than a symble of oppression and hatred. I still watch the recording I have of her saying that and it makes me beleive beyond a shaddow of a doubt that they fully intend to destroy America. This is only a 2 step process: 1, Break us down financially so we have nowhere to turn but the Federal Government.: 2, the you MUST dis arm said Americans so when they rebel against your demands as the now Dictatorship, known as the Federal Government they (US) will not be able to protect ourselves. NOW you have total control and folks, Step 1 is almost completed. :help:
     
    Last edited: Oct 19, 2012
  6. Panglоss

    Panglоss I am the NRA

    80
    0
    Oct 11, 2012
    Contrary to all the propaganda out there about gun ban treaties, international treaties cannot usurp the constitution. This has already been decided by the supreme court. Treaties can never supersede what is constitutionally protected. And DC v Heller just affirmed that what the 2nd amendment protects is an individual right to bear arms.
     
  7. But as so many in this thread would have you believe, the Court is just chomping at the bit to completely change everything they've said on the issue of guns for the last couple of centuries.
     
  8. If during a 7-11 robbery A hands B a gun and B murders a clerk with that gun, A is a murderer...even though B had another gun.




    Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine
     
  9. Detectorist

    Detectorist

    15,582
    4,638
    Jul 16, 2008
    Missouri
    I guarantee you that if Obama is reelected he's not going to appoint any pro gun Justice. The next president may have the opportunity to appoint up to 3 SC judges.

    So yes. If those judges are appointed by Obama, it will radically change the picture.

    I don't understand why folks can't see that.
     
  10. Panglоss

    Panglоss I am the NRA

    80
    0
    Oct 11, 2012
    Well, maybe about half the court is. Heller was actually the decision that "changed everything", because before that ruling the 2nd amendment had never been held to protect an individual right to bear arms.

    The thing is, Heller still leaves a lot of questions/clarifications to be decided in future cases. For one thing, how broad/narrow is the individual right to "bear arms"...e.g., what kinds of arms are protected under this right? An assault weapons ban, for instance, could very well be found constitutional if it goes to the supreme court.
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2012
  11. I believe this case is going to be the "Heller"/"McDonald" case in regards to Bear (those dealt with Keep):

    http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/a...-illinois-carry-case-(shepard-v-madigan).aspx

    It's actually two cases that were combined in the 7th Circuit. The attorney for the state got hammered pretty hard on why they think a ban on carrying should be allowed to stand.
     
  12. jp3975

    jp3975

    7,309
    399
    Nov 13, 2008
    Texarkana, Tx
    I quoted you and answered your question with facts. Why did you ignore me and agree with a guy and continue trying to sell your disproven idea?

    Because what you're saying makes 0 sense.

    THEY HAVE SAID THEY WANT TO OVERTURN THAT RULING AND REDEFINE THE SECOND.

    REPLACE ONE PROGUN SC JUSTICE AND IT WILL HAPPEN.

    Why do we tell you the left side of the SC wants to change things?

    BECAUSE THEY SAID SO.

    Now then...either we can believe you...that scotus would never go back on its ruling...ignoring the fact that they reverse past rulings twice a year.

    Or we can believe SCOTUS...the left of which says they want to overturn the ruling and that they got it very wrong. They only need one more vote to do just that.

    SCOTUS or Warcry on a gun forum...which shall we trust?


    Seriously. Ignore logic and keep spewing bs.

    I proved you wrong and you refuse to address it.
     
    Last edited: Oct 22, 2012
  13. NEOH212

    NEOH212 Diesel Girl

    8,983
    12
    Mar 25, 2008
    North East Ohio
    Until his second term you mean. :whistling:
     
  14. Panglоss

    Panglоss I am the NRA

    80
    0
    Oct 11, 2012
    lol @ the irony here
     
  15. jp3975

    jp3975

    7,309
    399
    Nov 13, 2008
    Texarkana, Tx
    What irony?

    I stated fact. You have evidence to the contrary?

    If it doesnt make sense to you, that's your problem. Makes sense to everyone else.

    It probably makes sense to you and WarCry as well because you have nothing to say about it.

    Let me guess...butt hurt Paul fanatics? Obama lovers?

    Scotus said it, not me. Logic isnt on your side.
     
  16. dogmower

    dogmower

    152
    0
    Feb 18, 2009
    az
    Pangloss, WTF are you thinking? anyone who would even THINK of trusting BHO is in for a rude awakening. the plan to destroy the US is obvious to anyone with eyes. you don' t need an advanced degree in economics to know you can't borrow your way out of debt. and that is the first step, economic destruction. c'mon man, wake up!
     

  17. Your statement is a legitimate concern. This is part of the reason I have not bought an AR to date. IMO, a no grandfather clause would be hard to pass. We can only wait and see. Hopefully by November 7th we will have a better idea of the future.
     
    Last edited: Oct 22, 2012
  18. Panglоss

    Panglоss I am the NRA

    80
    0
    Oct 11, 2012
    Ok, please post up the full quotation, with proper citation, of all and any supreme court justices who have claimed that they support trying to overturn the Heller decision in the near future.

    Once you do that, then we'll discuss your logic...or lack thereof.

    I don't trust Obama. I hope he loses this next election and gets sent packing back to Chicago.

    But the reality is that with all of the legal precedents there is little that he or any other politician can do to ban gun ownership at the federal level...even at the state level.

    Now, as I pointed out, there are still issues that could be decided by the supreme court that were not determined in Heller. So they could take a case on an assault weapons ban, or a high capacity magazine ban, or perhaps the concealed carry case in Illinois. And the ruling on those future cases will of course be dependent on who is on the court. And who is on the court will be dependent on who makes the appointments.

    To recap my main points - UN gun ban: not something to worry about. Full on national gun ban: also not something to really worry about.
     
  19. jp3975

    jp3975

    7,309
    399
    Nov 13, 2008
    Texarkana, Tx
    Sure thing Mr. Eastwood.

    http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/a...-reminds-us-what-is-at-stake-in-november.aspx

    ^ quick google search.

    Accujeff said it best...

     
  20. JFrame

    JFrame

    39,767
    8,808
    May 29, 2001
    Mid-Atlantic, US of A