Leftists constantly ask why we are such staunch supporters of the right to keep and bear arms. Here is my answer.

[RF667799]

So yiu wouldn't have voted for Reagan?

He supported an assault weapons ban, the Brady Bill. Etc.

What was he a candidate for when he supported those?

 

[NolanVoyd]

What was he a candidate for when he supported those?

Yes.

He was for gun control when he was governor of California.

He may have lied on the campaign trail to not alienate people like you but his history of supporting gun control was clear as day.

Reagan was a rino by today's standards.

 

[Lovebug]

A candidate can check every box for "conservative" that exists; but if he is anti-gun, he will not get my vote.

Likewise, a candidate can be a full blown communist; and get my vote if he supports and believes in the right of people to be armed.

It's how I filter out people who are not to be trusted.

Gun over country. Got it

 

[RF667799]

Gun over country. Got it

You think putting people in office who are not to be trusted is good for the country? I'm going to have to disagree with that.

 

[RF667799]

Yes.

He was for gun control when he was governor of California.

He may have lied on the campaign trail to not alienate people like you but his history of supporting gun control was clear as day.

Reagan was a rino by today's standards.

Did he support an assault weapons ban and the Brady Bill when he was governor of California?

 

[NolanVoyd]

Did he support an assault weapons ban and the Brady Bill when he was governor of California?

He supported and signed the mulford act in 1967.

Governor Ronald Reagan.......commented that he saw "no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons" and that guns were a "ridiculous way to solve problems that have to be solved among people of good will." In a later press conference, Reagan added that the Mulford Act "would work no hardship on the honest citizen."[3]

1967.

 

[RF667799]

He supported and signed the mulford act in 1967.

Governor Ronald Reagan.......commented that he saw "no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons" and that guns were a "ridiculous way to solve problems that have to be solved among people of good will." In a later press conference, Reagan added that the Mulford Act "would work no hardship on the honest citizen."[3]

1967.

So you've moved on from your earlier statement. I'll go ahead and assume Reagan wasn't supporting the Brady Bill or assault weapon bans while he was a candidate for anything other than an assisted living facility.

So what did the Mulford Act ban?

 

[NolanVoyd]

So you've moved on from your earlier statement. I'll go ahead and assume Reagan wasn't supporting the Brady Bill or assault weapon bans while he was a candidate for anything other than an assisted living facility.

So what did the Mulford Act ban?

I haven't moved on at all.

I am pointing out that he was consistently in favor of gun control. Throughout his career and life.

 

[RF667799]

I haven't moved on at all.

I am pointing out that he was consistently in favor of gun control. Throughout his career and life.

So? I am as well. But you asked if I would have voted for Reagan on account of his support for an assault weapon ban and Brady. That's pretty irrelevant a question, considering he wasn't running for any office during his support for those, and was suffering from dementia to boot.

 

[Daddyo]

A candidate can check every box for "conservative" that exists; but if he is anti-gun, he will not get my vote.

Likewise, a candidate can be a full blown communist; and get my vote if he supports and believes in the right of people to be armed.

It's how I filter out people who are not to be trusted.

Same here except I won’t vote for a communist ever. Even if they are pro gun today. The end result is always enslaving the people. I think you were probably making that comparison to show how important gun rights are to you. Same here.

The reason the leftist filth don’t teach our founding and constitution anymore is because they want folks like we see here on DP. Folks who not only have zero understanding of the 2nd amendment or our founders but who argue against their own rights failing to understand that history shows government always try’s to enslave the people sooner or later. Our founders predicted IT and provided a defense from IT.

Having access to firearms for freedom has a cost. We see it all the time. That cost doesn’t have to be as high if leftist filth would simply enforce existing law and not feel sorry for the garbage committing the violence. Gang violence can be eradicated. Gun crime reduced to nil simply by life in prison or the death penalty. Use a gun to harm another illegally and you get death even if that person survives. It over in a few years. The other option is for folks to grow some balls and take responsibility for their own lives and learn to defend themselves with a gun. Simply taking them away, as our founders warned, is the beginning of the end. Worst is always the result.

 

[Daddyo]

Gun over country. Got it

Guns are why we have a country. Now you got it.

Study history. Study our founders and founding. Examine the reasons behind the amendment. Don’t parrot leftist tripe. It won’t work on folks who have studied it.

 

[quip]

Paranoia is leftist filth freaking out over “assault weapons” when they are rarely used in the commission of gun crime. When they are hit ratios are ass…..8 to 17 rounds fired per fatality.

Alaska residents aren’t fearful or paranoid at the risk of being attacked by a bear yet they carry.

Hunters are not fearful or paranoid about dangerous game attacking them yet they often carry a sidearm.

Only when leftist filth want to insult a pro gun opponent does preparation become paranoia or fear lol. Funny and pathetic.

Well, all types hold some degree of fear, though basic conservative philosophy revolves around the concept. Conservatives are not extremely diverse nor broad thus the general fear of change - that their little world may be drastically altered in some way - holds tremendous sway. Your media outlets do a grand job in exploiting these slippery-sloped fears. Just objectively audit their content, you'll see nothing but updates on big bad boogy-man. Everything from "communist" incursions to perverts in public bathrooms...etc.

 

[Lovebug]

Guns are why we have a country. Now you got it.

Study history. Study our founders and founding. Examine the reasons behind the amendment. Don’t parrot leftist tripe. It won’t work on folks who have studied it.

Guns that they never imagined could exist. There is more to life, much more.

 

[NolanVoyd]

So? I am as well. But you asked if I would have voted for Reagan on account of his support for an assault weapon ban and Brady. That's pretty irrelevant a question, considering he wasn't running for any office during his support for those, and was suffering from dementia to boot.

Lol.

You just contradicted your earlier post.

Case closed.

 

[RF667799]

Lol.

You just contradicted your earlier post.

Case closed.

When you make such a claim, you should support it by quoting the supposed contradictory statements.

Can you do that, or will you fail?

 

[NolanVoyd]

When you make such a claim, you should support it by quoting the supposed contradictory statements.

Can you do that, or will you fail?

"A candidate can check every box for "conservative" that exists; but if he is anti-gun, he will not get my vote."

Yet Reagan had a long and consistent history of supporting strict gun control both before and after he was president.

 

[RF667799]

"A candidate can check every box for "conservative" that exists; but if he is anti-gun, he will not get my vote."

Yet Reagan had a long and consistent history of supporting strict gun control both before and after he was president.

Strict gun control? Background checks? Permit for public carry? Come now. How long have the anti-gun zealots told us those are mild "common sense" measures?

So anyway...where's the contradiction?

 

[NolanVoyd]

Strict gun control? Background checks? Permit for public carry? Come now. How long have the anti-gun zealots told us those are mild "common sense" measures?

So anyway...where's the contradiction?

So you are OK with the lose sorts of gun control measures?

That contradicts just about everything you've said previously.

Those are the types of things I consider common sense gun control measures and you rag on me about it constantly.

Try to argue honestly.

 

[RF667799]

So you are OK with the lose sorts of gun control measures?

That contradicts just about everything you've said previously.

Those are the types of things I consider common sense gun control measures and you rag on me about it constantly.

Try to argue honestly.

You've not shown where I contradicted myself, as per your claim. You should do that before you talk about arguing honestly.

 

[NolanVoyd]

You've not shown where I contradicted myself,

Yes I have.

Stop being dishonest.

Your record is clear. You contradict it in regards to Reagan.

 

[RF667799]

Yes I have.

Stop being dishonest.

Your record is clear. You contradict it in regards to Reagan.

Nah...you posted one quote of mine, and then made a claim about Reagan. To show a contradiction, you would have to show two of my quotes, and perhaps even explain how they are contradictory.

I'm not holding my breath. I suspect you will engage in your usual, always failing to get your claims and arguments into some semblance of defensible order.

 

[jaeger19]

So? I am as well. But you asked if I would have voted for Reagan on account of his support for an assault weapon ban and Brady. That's pretty irrelevant a question, considering he wasn't running for any office during his support for those, and was suffering from dementia to boot.

Actually Reagan signed into the law one of the first major gun control laws in California.

Mulford Act

The Mulford Act was a 1967 California bill that prohibited public carrying of loaded firearms without a permit. Named after Republican assemblyman Don Mulford, and signed into law by governor of California Ronald Reagan, the bill was crafted with the goal of disarming members of the Black...

dbpedia.org

It's what spurred gun control laws all over the country.

How Ronald Reagan learned to love gun control

A lifelong member of the NRA, Reagan might be the most consequential president for gun control legislation in the past century

theweek.com

 

[RF667799]

Actually Reagan signed into the law one of the first major gun control laws in California.

Mulford Act

The Mulford Act was a 1967 California bill that prohibited public carrying of loaded firearms without a permit. Named after Republican assemblyman Don Mulford, and signed into law by governor of California Ronald Reagan, the bill was crafted with the goal of disarming members of the Black...

dbpedia.org

It's what spurred gun control laws all over the country.

How Ronald Reagan learned to love gun control

A lifelong member of the NRA, Reagan might be the most consequential president for gun control legislation in the past century

theweek.com

Yep. I've used it as an example of gun control with its origins in racial bias.

 

[vegas giants]

Yep. I've used it as an example of gun control with its origins in racial bias.

It's not racially biased today

 

[jaeger19]

Yep. I've used it as an example of gun control with its origins in racial bias.

Exactly. Which gun control is..its a racially based policy.

Bit it is a fact that Reagan was a supporter of gun control.