# Gun control & the Democrats



## james dilley (Mar 21, 2004)

Any Sportman/Woman ,Who would Vote for Hillary ,Is voting to have 100% gun control. She wants NO guns at all in private Ownership. Can we say 1928 germany?? And the New Anti Christ!! The world will NEVEr recover from A thing like her in office. The rest of them Democrats are just about as bad. Remember A vote for the Skank is A vote for NO guns. And that means A True ruling class of Anti's and their ilk!!!


----------



## marvella (Oct 12, 2003)

well, that's quite ugly. 

you have any proof for any of this, or is it just your considered opinion?


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

I don't need any proof. I thought that was common knowledge.
I will agree without any additional proof, your opinion is pretty much the same as mine.


----------



## DocM (Oct 18, 2006)

Please document your statement. This sounds a little like "Homeschoolers for Huckabee". A lot of hype, very little fact. 

I'm a gun owner, and voting for Hillary.


----------



## james dilley (Mar 21, 2004)

Try looking At the Voting records and the candidates Stance on Gun control. Its A FACT that any one can look up, If they so Desire. I for one Don't like Huckabee. So theres No reason to bring him into this! But Hillary is the TRUE Anti-Christ!


----------



## DocM (Oct 18, 2006)

I hate to be the one to tell you this, no, actually, I enjoy telling you this. The president doesn't have the power to change law the way you're describing. Try reading up on how our government enacts federal law and how it pertains to existing state laws. What is scarier than gun control is the fact that people who know so little about how our government works are the ones most likely to vote in our new congress and president, because ignorance rules in this country.


----------



## Guest (Jan 3, 2008)

Now James, how do you REALLY feel?

Your attack is unbiased and not backed up by evidence. You are speculative at best and fear mongering at worst. Verbage like this does NOTHING for your cause, but rather shows an Orwellian fantasy gone psycho side.


----------



## CGUARDSMAN (Dec 28, 2006)

DocM said:


> I hate to be the one to tell you this, no, actually, I enjoy telling you this. The president doesn't have the power to change law the way you're describing. Try reading up on how our government enacts federal law and how it pertains to existing state laws. What is scarier than gun control is the fact that people who know so little about how our government works are the ones most likely to vote in our new congress and president, because ignorance rules in this country.


what amazes me is you know so little about her stance on guns and that the dems will vote in lockstep with her on this issue...


----------



## JJ Grandits (Nov 10, 2002)

You people got to be kidding?Clinton is in lockstep with George Soros and the Brady's which is about as anti gun as you can get.


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

Anyone who does not already know Hillary's stand on gun control should not be voting.


----------



## PyroDon (Jul 30, 2006)

What I notice is your completely ignoring the voting records of the republicans running .
Fred Thomson vote for every gun control bill that came along while he was in office. Ruddy G , well can we say police state, the man hate private ownership just look at what he did in NYC.
Your still trying to blame solely the dems for the assult weapons ban , go look at who voted for it then take note of who didnt vote and who voted against it , do the same with the brady bill which BTW both R Reagan and Gbush Sr both supported.
Then start looking at who it was that gave regulating agencies the power to define a legal fire arm (provided by Homeland security) who was it that push HLS through again ?? Then maybe you should start looking at other agencies and what they are doing in the name of national security. Like the DOT CPSC BATFE. Then maybe you'll understand why the price of ammo is going up and why ammo is getting harder to get. How many local gun shops in your area stopped carrying Black powder do to the new storage regs? sure they have BP subs but BP is getting hard to find .


----------



## JJ Grandits (Nov 10, 2002)

A I understand, in New York you can not even own black powder. The gun issue does fall on both sides of both parties. However the Democrats are much more obvious about it. I don't think I will run into Feinstein or Kennedy at a trap shoot.


----------



## PyroDon (Jul 30, 2006)

JJ Grandits said:


> A I understand, in New York you can not even own black powder. The gun issue does fall on both sides of both parties. However the Democrats are much more obvious about it. I don't think I will run into Feinstein or Kennedy at a trap shoot.


well kennedy maybe if you've ever seen the family movies they did a lot of trap shooting.
The difference seems to be the dems will often tell you they plan to vote for a guncontrol bill, while the republicans will claim they want gun rights but then vote for guncontrol. Kinda depends on whether you want a politician that will tell you what they plan to do or do you prefer one that will lie and tell you what you want to hear. 
Frankly I'm not fond of either but given the choice


----------



## brownegg (Jan 5, 2006)

I've had 8 years of the republicans spending all the money in a war they will never win.
The second ammendment gives the right to keep and bear arms.
The trillions spent abroad, could have been used here at home, with alot of young folks still alive. I think all republicans should run and hide!
If you think the country wants 4 more years of idiocy......well then?


----------



## kendall j (Mar 30, 2007)

brownegg said:


> If you think the country wants 4 more years of idiocy......well then?


Unfortunately we will have four years of idiocy no matter who wins.

Kendall


----------



## gunsmithgirl (Sep 28, 2003)

Hillary is very anti-gun. :flame: :flame: I would never vote for her. :flame: 
Yes ,Bush is an idiot but both the Clintons make him look like a genius in comparison.
Firearm ownership is a deep personal thing for me and I don't tolerate any wavering on this subject. In my opinion every citizen should be able to own any firearm they want including full-auto and .50 BMG's.


----------



## PyroDon (Jul 30, 2006)

gunsmithgirl said:


> Hillary is very anti-gun. :flame: :flame: I would never vote for her. :flame:
> Yes ,Bush is an idiot but both the Clintons make him look like a genius in comparison.
> Firearm ownership is a deep personal thing for me and I don't tolerate any wavering on this subject. In my opinion every citizen should be able to own any firearm they want including full-auto and .50 BMG's.


And who do you blame for the laws concerning full atuos?? 
Guess what it was one of the very first gun control laws and it was pushed through by republicans opening the door for all future guncontrol laws , Just like personal taxation was pushed through by republicans. In both cases they now claim they are against both taxes and guncontrol but their voting records tell a different story.
I fully agree that firearm ownership is near and dear to my heart as is pyrotechnics Im currently watching the same tactics that have been used in the last 6 years against pyrotechnics being turned against firearms.
Your watching for a direct assault which wont come . that would send up warning flags and rally people to action . In stead its being done in the same way they have been doing fireworks. Instaed of banning something they use the DOT to make it impossible to ship. The CPSC will get involved and start filing suits against reloading suppliers forcing them to stop selling supplies , the first few hundred will go unnoticed (just as it was in pyro) by the time you take notice it will be too late because there will be a precident in place giving them the legal right. In addition the BATFE will start (witch they already have) reclassifying reloading componants and require an approved magazine ( making it impossible to store supplies in most cities and counties). This will be followed by some semi auto being reclassified as "possible full auto" and the dominos will fall . BTW Bush and the republicans opened this door , read very carefully every word in both the Homeland security act and patriot act and take notice of the authority granted regulating agencies. It allows an end run around congress . 
I personally take my view of the 2nd amendment from letters discussing the amendment which were exchanged between Jefferson and Adams. They make it quite clear that a US citizen should have a right to own any weapon the US government has.


----------



## Cabin Fever (May 10, 2002)

james dilley said:


> Any Sportman/Woman ,Who would Vote for Hillary ,Is voting to have 100% gun control. She wants NO guns at all in private Ownership. Can we say 1928 germany?? And the New Anti Christ!! The world will NEVEr recover from A thing like her in office. The rest of them Democrats are just about as bad. Remember A vote for the Skank is A vote for NO guns. And that means A True ruling class of Anti's and their ilk!!!


I agree 100%


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> What I notice is your completely ignoring the voting records of the republicans running .


Maybe thats because the thread is "Gun Control and* DEMOCRATS*"

If you cant refute the facts, you just change the subject LOL


----------



## PyroDon (Jul 30, 2006)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Maybe thats because the thread is "Gun Control and* DEMOCRATS*"
> 
> If you cant refute the facts, you just change the subject LOL


Very trollish of you
Feel free to point out where I claimed the democrat in question was pro gun .
Just keep marching in step and you wont have to worry about it


----------



## crafty2002 (Aug 23, 2006)

DocM said:


> Please document your statement. This sounds a little like "Homeschoolers for Huckabee". A lot of hype, very little fact.
> 
> I'm a gun owner, and voting for Hillary.


You are a gun owner and voting for her.  :baby04: :help: 
Better hide your gun then. 
Don't you remember Bill and Al??????????????


----------



## EDDIE BUCK (Jul 17, 2005)

Yea, Yea, Yea For some reason I have this vision of Hillary seated and raising her right hand saying " I HAVE NEVER HAD ANY KIND OF RELATIONS WITH THEM GUN CONTROL BILLS." Being as truthful as she knows how, now come on, how can you not believe a statement coming directly from the heart. :Bawling:


----------



## DavidUnderwood (Jul 5, 2007)

Hillary is a gun control freak. Its hard
to believe everyone doesn't know it.
Now whether or not you "CARE" is a
whole other argument. Or if there are
things important enough to you that
you are willing to look the other way.
We are a free country (to the degree
that we are free) because of the second
amendment. When it is gone, so will all
other rights be gone also.
It is no secret that the Democrat party
is strong on gun control.


----------



## alleyyooper (Apr 22, 2005)

Personally I have had enough of the good times we are enjoying now.
I was paying $1.35 a gallon for fuel for my truck in 2000 and yesterday it was $3.49 a gallon.

Here in Michigan it is hard to find a Job, well I would guess so with so many going to China.
People are looseing their homes and you seem to have to be farly well off to fall under the new guide lines Bush just signed to get help.

China has imported Emerald Ash bore that are killing all my ash trees. Imported pet food to kill our pets, Lead paint on toys to endanger our children and grand children. Untill recently those republicains held a majorty in the sente and congress and I don't see or have I heard of any thing they have did to try to stop all this imported crap from China.

Every election the yelling starts that some democrat is running for the white house job is anti gun. Way I see it is the last major gun control bill was started by a republician BRADY remember.

And least we forget that we are at WAR over a lie. The main guy we are told caused 9-11 to happen is still free as a bird. 

 Al


----------



## seedspreader (Oct 18, 2004)

Interesting about China...


Hey... who gave them "Most Favored Trade Nation" status???


Anyone? Anyone? Buehler... Buehler...



> The Chinese connection exploded with the arrival of the Clinton administration. A younger crowd of American politicians had skipped the part about patriotism, about the pledge of allegiance, about loyalty not only to country but to much of anything other than themselves. The Clinton policy toward China was merely an extension of these values: What's in for us and how soon? The notion of national security was almost alien to them; besides, they had the new paradigm of globalization to keep them warm. Here are just a few of the things that happened along the way:
> 
> â¢ Named Commerce Secretary, Ron Brown treated his post as just another place to wheel and deal. He was irrepressible, on one occasion okaying the sale of new American engines for China to put in its cruise missiles. The engines had been built as military equipment but Brown reclassified them as civilian.
> 
> ...


continued...


----------



## seedspreader (Oct 18, 2004)

> â¢ Newsweek quoted intelligence officials as saying that the Chinese "penetration is total. They are deep into the [U.S. nuclear weapons] labs' black programs."
> 
> â¢ In an AP story ignored by major media, former CIA Director R. James Woolsey accused the Clinton administration of pursuing a policy of appeasement toward China and likened it to the way Britain and France dealt with Nazi Germany on Czechoslovakia before World War II.
> 
> ...


http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/2/21/181251.shtml


Ah yes... the good old days.


American Politicians DEPEND on short term memories of Americans.


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

seedspreader said:


> http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/2/21/181251.shtml
> 
> 
> Ah yes... the good old days.
> ...



Most of the time it works. Seems like most have already forgotten what you posted. Wanna bet the forget again by tomorrow?


----------



## PyroDon (Jul 30, 2006)

Just as some seem to have forgotten that both Nafta and Cafta were first propose and promoted under Reagan Bush  
As was the brady bill but dont let that stop you .
Continue to tow the party line while both parties strip our rights


----------



## mdharris68 (Sep 28, 2006)

The question is when will there be an awakening to all the corrupt bullsh**going on in our government, and people take it back to what it was designed for? It doesn't matter if you vote republican or democrat, thier all crooks and only looking out for themselves and thier power trip. "All" is a blanket statement I know, but how many elected officials on the U.S. Gov level do you really think have the cahoonas to stand up to this crap? They see how things work for thier fellow cohorts and soon enough thier wheels are turnin and thier trying to get thier piece of the pie. The bad thing is, this is still probably the best country to live in, but it could be so much better.


----------



## DavidUnderwood (Jul 5, 2007)

Who is really responsible for the trade
situation with China?
China could not sell one thing in the
good ol' US of A, if the American people
were not running all over themselves to 
buy it. You can buy American if you wish.
Politicians? Same deal. I want you to throw 
out your crook, but I'll re-elect mine.
Party politics make me sick.


----------



## jross (Sep 3, 2006)

DocM said:


> I hate to be the one to tell you this, no, actually, I enjoy telling you this. The president doesn't have the power to change law the way you're describing. Try reading up on how our government enacts federal law and how it pertains to existing state laws. What is scarier than gun control is the fact that people who know so little about how our government works are the ones most likely to vote in our new congress and president, because ignorance rules in this country.


Bill Clinton unleashed Janet Reno and the BATF on many gun owners and dealers, up to and including Ruby Ridge and Waco. Hillary as senator voted in favor of the so called misnamed Assault Weapons Ban. Bill Clinton violated the Gun control Act of 1968 by allowing illegal holding of electronic gun purchase records by the FBI for six months instead of the 24 hours allowed. You are right, no president can make laws, but as the Bush haters state, they can break many just as Bill did. You think Hillary will be be better? One thing if she is elected, as soon a one of the mullahs calls her a fat cow of goat droppings, maybe she will push the buttons and sterilize the middle east.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> I promise to be nicer, if you promise to be smarter.


It's pretty much been proven most are smarter. When will you start being nicer?


----------



## Irish farmer (Dec 21, 2007)

I havent been able to find a candidate among the Democrats or Republicans that I like in this election. I had hoped for an independant to support, but Ron Paul comes off a little to kooky for me.


----------



## BigBoy (Oct 24, 2005)

Irish farmer said:


> I havent been able to find a candidate among the Democrats or Republicans that I like in this election. I had hoped for an independant to support, but Ron Paul comes off a little to kooky for me.


I'll take "a little too kooky" from someone that has the right ideas and willingness to try and implement them over the same ole crap from the usual Dempublicans And Republicrats. Almost anything would be preferable. 
To rephrase another saying... What is kooky is to vote for the same people or type of people and expect a different result. That's actually called insanity.


----------



## Rascal (Oct 18, 2007)

Any Sportman/Woman ,Who would Vote for Hillary ,Is voting to have 100% gun control. She wants NO guns at all in private Ownership. Can we say 1928 germany?? And the New Anti Christ!! The world will NEVEr recover from A thing like her in office. The rest of them Democrats are just about as bad. Remember A vote for the Skank is A vote for NO guns. And that means A True ruling class of Anti's and their ilk!!!

About 6 months ago I had a nightmare two nights in a row, same theme that Hillary got elected president & turned america into nazi germany
If I was paying attention to politics or obsessing over it I could understand the dream
To have the same the same nightmare &/or dream theme 2 nights in a row is incredibly rare.I will spare the details,yet it was ugly.
I do believe that sometimes we all get warned in dreams


----------



## bowdonkey (Oct 6, 2007)

I think major 2nd amendment restrictions are coming from both parties starting with the next election. There are two issues driving this in my book. The one we all know, more control maybe even total control of the population and a way to grab all federal lands. If sportsman are a thing of the past, who will provide the $$$$ for their upkeep? And with little opposition the public lands will be auctioned off to most favored people and nations. Of course they'll explain it that it's to pay off our massive federal debt and will halt your rising taxes. And the sheeple will go along with it, to busy making a living or to cowardly to stand up. Can't blame them, you don't want to bite the hand that feeds you. Most people are to afraid of losing the ability to shop at Walmart, life's ultimate pleasure. The worst part of all this, is we have a Constitution that should protect us, and it's being ignored by the elected. This shouldn't even be an issue.


----------



## EDDIE BUCK (Jul 17, 2005)

Well if it was just Hillary, we would have nothing to fear, afterall how can she control guns when she can't even control who Bill sleeps with in the Governors House,in the White House and in her own house, But she knows the right folks to get control of guns. And further more speaking of her houses, Mr Bush did and said some things that I think he should not have, I guarantee he checked every foot of the whitehouse for Bin ladan and thats more than I can say for Hillary. Bill had women in every house they ever lived in, right under her nose and she never knew it. I want someone who at the very least, knows whats going on around them and Hillary's name don't make that list. Oh she's on a list but it ain't that one.  She'll come bout as close getting my vote as she does getting Monica's.


----------



## TSYORK (Mar 16, 2006)

How does Hilary get to run again??????????????

I thought you could only be President for two terms, and she's already served her two when her husband was in the Oval Office with his legs spread open!


----------



## Montanarchist (Feb 24, 2005)

Everyone here is absolutely 100% correct, Republicrats are traitorous quislings, the Democans are traitorous quislings. If you really feel you have to vote, vote third party. Or do as I do and don't legitimatize their farce by not voting at all.


----------



## PyroDon (Jul 30, 2006)

EDDIE BUCK said:


> Well if it was just Hillary, we would have nothing to fear, afterall how can she control guns when she can't even control who Bill sleeps with in the Governors House,in the White House and in her own house, But she knows the right folks to get control of guns. And further more speaking of her houses, Mr Bush did and said some things that I think he should not have, I guarantee he checked every foot of the whitehouse for Bin ladan and thats more than I can say for Hillary. Bill had women in every house they ever lived in, right under her nose and she never knew it. I want someone who at the very least, knows whats going on around them and Hillary's name don't make that list. Oh she's on a list but it ain't that one.  She'll come bout as close getting my vote as she does getting Monica's.


what makes you think hillary didnt know bill was getting it on the side ??

I notice you all will completely ignore the latest guncontrol bill which was an obvious deception and offense against our system of government. 
It past unanimously of course with both leaders of the majority (dems) and minority(reps) as well as full backing of the president. Real nice trick wait till everyone else in congress is gone to railroad a bill into law . 
Of course its only the dems fault , Im sure they told GW he was ordering the attack on Iran to get him to sign


----------



## EDDIE BUCK (Jul 17, 2005)

PyroDon said:


> what makes you think hillary didnt know bill was getting it on the side ??
> 
> I notice you all will completely ignore the latest guncontrol bill which was an obvious deception and offense against our system of government.
> It past unanimously of course with both leaders of the majority (dems) and minority(reps) as well as full backing of the president. Real nice trick wait till everyone else in congress is gone to railroad a bill into law .
> Of course its only the dems fault , Im sure they told GW he was ordering the attack on Iran to get him to sign


 Because I can't picture in my mind anybody that would be stuped enough to remain in a marriage with an adulterous husband that had affairs with other women their whole life and had the nerve to lie to her and America by raising his hand under oath saying" I never had sexual relations with that woman". Makes me think, if she was president, would she let terrorist countries run over America like she let her husband run over her. Maybe she did know and if thats the case thats all the more reason not to give her my vote because she is just as sorry as her lying husband bill. America deserves better and my vote will be for America.


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE (Jul 25, 2006)

no one can argue that hillary wants to see the brady bill legislaton come back she has voted for it her husband singed it and as you know she was and instemental part of her husbands presidency as she likes to tell us she has been in the white house and has gained what she feels is the nessasary experience to run this nation form her curtial role as first lady. 

so we can agree that hillary wants brady legislation

now what you don't nessisarily know is that her husband re-wrote the definition of a semi automatic to read any gun that with no more action than the repeated pull of a triger can fire 2 or more times 

so if they gain the ground in banning semi autoes they will also take double barreled shotguns with a single triger and double action revolvers 

so we can add this to the brady legislation wich bans guns based soley on the way they look, we can not descrininate against anything else in this manner.

brady did not work , the numbers show it did not work but hillary and her freinds barbra boxer and diane finestien don't care they have bought into the United nations lie hook line and sinker it is also no secret that the UN has a global agenda to remove guns from legal owner ship of anyone who would use them to protect themselves or their nation.

violent crime and murder has not gone down in austrailia , or the UK as a result of their near total ban on firarms.

canada has now relaxed thier registration some it is no longer anual after they saw it did nothing but tie up resources that could be spent going after the real criminals.

when the politicians are ready to give up there security personel or disarm the police and secret service then i will be ready to talk about giving up my handguns 

you could say but you are not a trained security personel , i am not a trained plumber , carpender or electritian either but i have never called one . i do my own plumbing , electrical , carpendry , landscaping , tree removal , and i will do my own security.


----------



## nathan104 (Nov 16, 2007)

All gun control will do is make it harder for honest and peaceful folks to own weapons. It will not make a bit of difference to the criminals who use them for harm. Do they honestly think that the 20 year old gang banger pulling a drive by with an uzi or AK is buying it from a dealer? 

But, if they really wanted to control guns, all they would have to do is prohibit or limit ammunition sales. Ammo would dry up fairly quick. There are those who could make reloads but its not something common gang bangers would do.


----------



## EDDIE BUCK (Jul 17, 2005)

Gun control to stop killers from killing is about as foolish as match control to stop an arsonist from setting fires. Put the electric chair in the courtroom for those found guilty of murder. It won't stop all murders, but it will stop him or her from commiting another one. And anyone else thinking about it, will give it a second thought. As the old folks used to say "You can believe it or you can leave it alone".


----------



## michiganfarmer (Oct 15, 2005)

brownegg said:


> I've had 8 years of the republicans spending all the money in a war they will never win.
> The second ammendment gives the right to keep and bear arms.
> The trillions spent abroad, could have been used here at home, with alot of young folks still alive. I think all republicans should run and hide!
> If you think the country wants 4 more years of idiocy......well then?


the second amendment gives nothing to anyone. It tells the feds what right people were born with, and they cant deny to anyone.


----------



## alleyyooper (Apr 22, 2005)

Amendments mean nothing to the croud in Washington.
Remember the patriot act. how many admendments does that tramp on?
It's for the good of the country.
You are all going to have a national drivers permit soon too, so you can be watched over better.

 Al


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

This is what the Demorats have to say about gun control if THEY are elected
http://www.frugalsquirrels.com/upload/showthread.php?t=199822


----------



## billy (Nov 21, 2005)

Gun Control 
Presidential hopefuls have mixed views on gun-control issues
By Gannett News Service 

(Editorâs note: On Feb. 5, Arkansans will be among those voting in the âSuper Duper Tuesdayâ presidential preferential primaries. This is part of a series on presidential hopefulsâ views on different issues.)

Democrats

New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton
Clinton said law-abiding citizens should be able to own guns but laws are needed to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. Clinton supports legislation to provide incentives to states to forward records of prohibited gun buyers to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards
Edwards has said protecting gun-owner rights and working to stop gun crimes can both be achieved. Edwards supports legislation to provide incentives to states to forward records of prohibited gun buyers to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. 

Illinois Sen. Barack Obama 
Obama has advocated tougher gun-control measures on the federal level and voted for them as a state senator. In Illinois, he backed changes to state law that included a ban on assault-weapons sales and limiting handgun sales to one a month. He called for tighter background checks on gun buyers, making gun locks mandatory and holding parents criminally responsible for children who injure someone with a gun found in the home. Obama supports legislation to provide incentives to states to forward records of prohibited gun buyers to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

Former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel
Gravel supports the Second Amendment but believes potential gun owners should be licensed and properly trained before they may own a gun, according to his campaign Web site. Gravel said he supports the National Instant Criminal Background Check System Improvement Act.
Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich

Kucinich supports a national ban on handguns. Kucinich supports incentives to states to forward records of prohibited gun buyers to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

Republicans

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee 
Huckabee, a hunter, said he is a strong supporter of the Second Amendment and opposes laws that would restrict gun ownership for law-abiding citizens. Huckabee supports legislation to provide incentives to states to forward records of prohibited gun buyers to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani
As mayor, Giuliani was an outspoken supporter of a federal ban on assault weapons and favored the Brady Bill that created waiting periods and background checks for handgun purchases. Giuliani spokesman Jarrod Agen declined to answer specifically questions in October 2007 from The Des Moines Register about his position on legislation that would provide incentives to states to forward records of prohibited gun buyers to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System and background checks at gun shows. In 2000, Giuliani supported an idea that would require all gun buyers to pass a written exam, much like motorists must do to obtain a driverâs license.

Arizona Sen. John McCain
McCain opposes gun control, which he calls âa proven failure in fighting crime.â He has voted against bans on assault rifles and opposes waiting periods for citizens to buy firearms. He supports instant criminal background checks on people seeking to buy guns. He also has supported legislation requiring gun makers to include trigger locks with their products. McCain supports legislation to provide incentives to states to forward records of prohibited gun buyers to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney
As governor, Romney signed into law in 2004 a state ban on certain assault weapons. He also supported a federal assault weapons ban and the Brady Bill, which imposed a five-day waiting period on gun sales. He joined the National Rifle Association in 2006 and has been touting his efforts as governor to ease gun-licensing laws and grant licenses for longer periods. Romney supports legislation to provide incentives to states to forward records of prohibited gun buyers to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

Former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson
Thompson opposes gun control, saying it does not reduce crime and prevents law-abiding citizens from defending themselves. While senator, Thompson voted against requiring background checks of customers seeking to buy firearms at gun shows. Thompson supports legislation to provide incentives to states to forward records of prohibited gun buyers to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System

California Rep. Duncan Hunter
In 2006, Hunter received an âAâ grade from the National Rifle Association, based on lifetime voting records on gun issues and results of a questionnaire sent to all congressional candidates. Hunter supports legislation to provide incentives to states to forward records of prohibited gun buyers to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. 

Texas Rep. Ron Paul
Paul believes the Second Amendment forbids the government from infringing upon the right to own weapons. He would seek to repeal all federal gun-control legislation. 

Sorry for including some Republicans, also. I just thought the contrast or lack thereof might interest some.


----------



## Haggis (Mar 11, 2004)

DocM said:


> Please document your statement. This sounds a little like "Homeschoolers for Huckabee". A lot of hype, very little fact.
> 
> I'm a gun owner, and voting for Hillary.


I too am a gun owner, a lifetime hunter (not the Romney type) and I'm voting Hillary, Obama, or Edwards.


----------



## PyroDon (Jul 30, 2006)

billy said:


> Former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson
> Thompson opposes gun control, saying it does not reduce crime and prevents law-abiding citizens from defending themselves. While senator, Thompson voted against requiring background checks of customers seeking to buy firearms at gun shows. Thompson supports legislation to provide incentives to states to forward records of prohibited gun buyers to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System
> .


I think your source needs to double check Freds record


----------



## pheasantplucker (Feb 20, 2007)

What does it matter? They are all politicians, and you can't believe a word any of them say. If it comes down to it, I guess I will have "sold" every last one of mine, and I didn't get any records of who purchased them.


----------



## Haggis (Mar 11, 2004)

pheasantplucker said:


> What does it matter? They are all politicians, and you can't believe a word any of them say.


This is not entirely true; you can believe a politician when they are saying some other politician is dishonest, misrepresenting the facts, or spinning the facts. 

This buisness of keeping and bearing arms doesn't mean what it once did anyway; ask the survivors of Waco or Ruby Ridge if their arms did them any good, or if being armed is more likely to get someone killed by their own government. I have plenty of rifles and shotguns, none of them, under any circumstance, are for shooting people, ever, but I know if my own government was planning a raid on my home, and they knew in advance I owned weapons, even for hunting, they would most likely come in shooting. I am just one old swamp running Scot, but they come in armies and with tanks. I have never feared any ruffian, but I have always been in fear of governments, more especially my own.


----------



## Peepsqueak (Apr 6, 2005)

Gun control is necessary in large populated areas. However, since everyone that shouldn't have a gun are getting them gun control will just make it worse because the people who should not have them will still have them. 
There are many gun related mishaps with children mishandling them, etc., however, that can happen anyway with people who break the laws. 

Policemen can have them, but they may take advantage of the power they have..so can the military. Nowadays you can't even have a guard dog in the city without getting into trouble....and that is where you really need one.


----------



## pheasantplucker (Feb 20, 2007)

Peepsqueak said:


> Gun control is necessary in large populated areas. However, since everyone that shouldn't have a gun are getting them gun control will just make it worse because the people who should not have them will still have them.
> There are many gun related mishaps with children mishandling them, etc., however, that can happen anyway with people who break the laws.
> 
> Policemen can have them, but they may take advantage of the power they have..so can the military. Nowadays you can't even have a guard dog in the city without getting into trouble....and that is where you really need one.


I disagree with your statement that "gun control is necessary in large populated areas"....those are exactly the areas where people need to be permitted to arm themselves. How can the 2nd ammendment be applicable here, but not there?...opening a huge can of worms


----------



## Haggis (Mar 11, 2004)

pheasantplucker said:


> How can the 2nd ammendment be applicable here, but not there?...opening a huge can of worms



It is curious that some folk (the priveleged few?) are "allowed" to enjoy their 2nd Amendment right, by way of the issuance of permits, while others: due to not being in favor with the local constabulary, or not being in possession of ample capital with which to purchase firearms are denied their 2nd Amendment right. Could it be that for some folk; "here, but not there" is not acceptable, while; 'these, but not those" is?

Out here in the bush, it seems that nearly anyone with ample cash may purchase a long arm, but the so called "self-protection" type weapons (belly guns) are a whole other affair; this is where favoritism and nepotism plays a huge role in whether or not a person is trully permitted (pun intended) to have their 2nd Amendment right.


----------



## texican (Oct 4, 2003)

Today is Super Tuesday...

Hillary? Hillary Who? Seems the freshman senator (who was elected easily, since he didn't have anyone running against him... dirty illegal tactics forced his opposition to leave the race) with no record at all, won most of the primaries today....

Worry about the Obama fellow... the perfect cypher... a blank slate... Other than being a White Flag Social Progressive, what can we read about his stance on gun control. Between the two evils, I'm afraid I'd have to go with Hillary (as opposed to Osama/bama).

I'm totally amazed that the social progressives are willing to choose a blank slate as their candidate... too bad I'm not a social progressive, or I'd swoon too....

A good man can never have too many firearms, and I need some for my GF,...yeah, that's it!!! and lots more bullets for said weapons...


----------



## EDDIE BUCK (Jul 17, 2005)

billy said:


> Gun Control
> Presidential hopefuls have mixed views on gun-control issues
> By Gannett News Service
> 
> ...


 IF LAWS DID NOT KEEP THE CRIMINALS FROM BECOMING CRIMINALS, HOW ARE LAWS SUPPOSED TO KEEP CRIMINALS FROM GETTING GUNS! :doh: :doh: Eddie


----------



## hfwarner3 (Feb 19, 2008)

If you are interested on Hillary's stance on gun control, here is the position according to CNN - Link



> Hillary Clinton
> Voted for a 10-year extension of the assault weapons ban. Voted for requiring extensive background checks at gun shows. Supports licensing and registration of handguns, mandatory trigger locks for handguns, holding adults responsible for their children's use of guns, raising the youth handgun ban from age 18 to 21, limiting gun sales to one per month and allowing the Consumer Products Safety Commission regulate guns.


Keep in mind that the Consumer Products Safety Commission would be able to regulate the firearm industry to the point of saying what calibers could or could not be made, what designs could be manufactured, etc. They could bury the industry in red tape.

Full Disclose - I live in Kennesaw, Ga. Do not consider me an unbiased source - which is why I quoted CNN instead of more conservative sources.


----------



## True2Spirit (Apr 21, 2005)

The upcoming election definitely plays a role in why I am applying for my FFL as we speak...


----------



## hfwarner3 (Feb 19, 2008)

michiganfarmer said:


> the second amendment gives nothing to anyone. It tells the feds what right people were born with, and they cant deny to anyone.


It actually does one thing more - it reminds the Federal government that the people are the militia - the last line of defense against ANY agressor, foreign or DOMESTIC! They really WANT to forget that one.

If I could go back in time, I would show the founding fathers what has come of the Bill of Rights. My money says that the second amendment would be worded a little differently and would become the first amendment. The next nine amendments would add a sentence at the end that would say something like this...

"If this amendment is infringed upon and all other recourses fail, see the first amendment."


----------



## shiningpath (Mar 27, 2008)

I agree - both democrats in the race are extremely anti-2nd Amendment. I'm surprised that anyone would question it. If you don't think so, then the 2nd amendment just isn't a critical issue with you. Hillary Clinton has supported every single challenge to the second amendment since she's been in office. I don't need to check her voting record again because I already have. The evidence some of you are asking for is online and publicly available. You are in denial and voting for her because she's a democrat and you don't like GWB (who isnt running for the office, so that seems foolish if it's your real reason) If you want evidence use google to find the congressional records.

As for "The Republicans" who gave us the war in Iraq, you're wrong there too. The votes on that issue are also publicly available. Look it up on Wikipedia under "vote for war in iraq." If anything, you can accuse them of not pulling our troops out and coming home when things didn't go like they expected. The real problem was DONALD RUMSFELD 's and DICK CHENEY's micromanagement from the White House, and all of the senior pentagon brass that went along with them. _John McCain _was the only voice in the crowd that made any sense and nobody was listening. This may not be the proper forum for a lengthy explanation of that. I will explain it if someone really doesn't understand what I'm talking about and wants to know. 

If I had to take a wild guess, I'd say that about 75% of the people in this country don't know what went wrong in Iraq. Of those, probably another 75% don't want to hear about it because they think they got everything they need to know from the network news and newspapers. (Who incidently, have never asked the right questions of the right people.)
I'm retired military, so the sources I listen to are mostly people you've never heard of, and won't see as a talking head on TV. Listen the the field commanders who had to implement the white house/pentagons foolish strategies. . 

Do you trust PBS? Go to their website and see if they still have a documentary available that aired on "Frontline". I don't remember the name but it had to do with "the surge" and why it was was critical to our success, and about two years late. The people interviewed were cherry picked for the show, and of course they get there spin in a round about way, but there are good points made. They are supposedly a liberal media outlet so maybe thats an acceptable source to some of you. The surge wasn't too late though, it worked. I could also point you to some blogs that have more in depth articles about why the strategies were flawed (Hint: Sunni vs Shia was never the principle issue or problem, but it was simple enough for people to grasp, and the morons that reported and editorialized never got past the dichotomy.)

Some of you are voting for someone that you like the sound of, but don't really know much about. Barack Obama is just as bad. I won't try to convince you otherwise, because you've already made up your mind for other reasons or don't care about the issue. 

I wish we had those billions back too, but they're gone. I've never cared for John McCain either. He isn't exactly a pro-gun candidate folks. He's too soft on immigration issues also. I'm only voting for him because he is the only one in the race with any credentials. Clinton hasn't accomplished anything on her own since she graduated from law school. Her senate seat was a given - unopposed and heavily backed. She's never won an election. Barack Obama? Who's he? 

However, I think the "skank" comment was ugly and uncalled for. I second the motion about party politics. It's a distraction that prevents us from dealing with real issues.


----------



## Haggis (Mar 11, 2004)

I'm a lifetime hunter/gun owner voting for Obama or Hillary. I don't trust anyone in politics of either party, but just now I trust the Republicans least. I'm not in anyway afraid of losing my gun ownership rights; I do however fret about the government making it illegal for the general public to buy or sell ammunition, given we have no right to anything more than the ownership of arms.


----------



## stranger (Feb 24, 2008)

Democrats have always meant gun controll and people controll, 
this election is a loser for thye people no matter who is elected..
It's a real shame that a poweful country like the US can only come up with these 3 people, who would have ever thought it, plus look at the people that are comming out of the wood work to support them and the corp. owned media thinke it's great..Leiberman, richardson,kerry kennedy and the list goes on, how did we ever get so blind?.


----------



## texican (Oct 4, 2003)

Our local Dem representative (who lost the last election, unfortunately) was not in lockstep with the progressive socialists party (Democrat Party). He was very pro gun... and actually owned a small arsenal.

So, it's not all Democrats... there are still a few Real Dem's out there... unfortunately, they have zero say so in the once great party of the people.

I hope Lieberman runs with McCain... what a dream ticket...


----------



## FUZZYBEAR (Apr 8, 2008)

Its not very hard to find their stance on gun control . But I see where their all lacking in good ole common sense . Vote for the lesser evil? You guys rember the gun ban , right.They learned from that and wont make that mistake again , the next time its going to be worst . i heard Obama say that he didnt think the 2nd admendmentnwas talking about handguns. We lived though Clintons ideals , so I guess i'm stuck with McCain even though I dislike him for reaching out to the other partys and backing down in his beliefs. I agree party politics makes me sick.


----------

