• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama losing his gun control campaign

Signing the EO's combined with wingnuts like Feinstein wanting to take away all guns have done more damage to the cause than the NRA could do with $30M in ads. The left always implodes on this issue.
 
There is a difference between "gun control" concepts and their implementation reality. The more people see the "gun control" reality, the less they see it fitting with their original concepts of what would actually reduce gun crime. Laws that get only "future" guns out of the hands of criminals, but at current expense, make no sense at all. Schemes that cost law abiding gun owners plenty yet do not affect criminals at all are not going to "do the trick".

Forcing all law abiding gun owners to pay an extra $35 to $50 to transfer/sell/register a gun does not stop one criminal from getting a gun. It may raise the "street price" of a gun, but that "tax" on criminals will be paid by an increase in crime to "earn" the extra income to pay that "tax". We saw (and still see) this when recreational drugs were "banned"; they did not disappear, they simply spawned billions of dollars of criminal gang profits and increased the violent and property crime required to support that unregulated "industry".
 
When people hear ban on assault weapons and gun control, they think Hollywood movies and gangbanger being denied M-16's. They do not think that Glock in their purse or drawer. That is where the rubber hits the road.
 
The reason be hind the 2 amendment is so we can protect our selves from invading forces. I am not just talking about armies. A burgle invades other people homes. Anther reason is so the people could rebel against the government and start a new revolution when the government got too power full. (not if, when)

"Personally I think weapons should be open carry. If every one walk around showing they had a gun or other weapons their would be a lot of civilian heroes. Then attempts at crimes would start to drop. Personalty I would like to carry around a sword for self defense. (no ammo)"

2ed paragraph is a post i made in the "How to get guns banned in a society where there are many non-violent gun owners" thread
 
Fisher said:
Signing the EO's combined with wingnuts like Feinstein wanting to take away all guns have done more damage to the cause than the NRA could do with $30M in ads. The left always implodes on this issue.
Click to expand...

Wingnuts like Feinstein can do more damage at the state level than the national level.Currently anti-2nd amendment in states that are already severely anti-2nd amendment are concocting more ways to **** on the 2nd amendment.
 
blaxshep said:
Obama losing his gun control campaign - National Right Side Politics | Examiner.com
Click to expand...



Obama has four more years and wingnuts like Feinstein and other anti-2nd amendment scum will continue to get elected by idiots in their districts. So it is too early to declare a victory. Even if on a national level there is nothing to worry about there is plenty to worry about on a state level if you happen to live in a state where these anti-2nd amendment scum and other wingnuts live like California,Illinois, Massachusetts,New York and other anti-2bd amendment states. It isn't over until the fat lady croaks.
 
haymarket said:
Are you in the habit of pronouncing the winner of a football game after the opening kick-off?
Click to expand...

"........former President Clinton recently reminded Democrats what happened the last time the Democrats acted against gun rights and passed the so-called assault weapon ban:

"Clinton said that passing the 1994 federal assault weapons ban 'devastated' more than a dozen Democratic lawmakers in the 1994 midterms — and cost then-Speaker of the House Tom Foley (D-Wash.) his job and his seat in Congress."
 
Ray410 said:
"........former President Clinton recently reminded Democrats what happened the last time the Democrats acted against gun rights and passed the so-called assault weapon ban:

"Clinton said that passing the 1994 federal assault weapons ban 'devastated' more than a dozen Democratic lawmakers in the 1994 midterms — and cost then-Speaker of the House Tom Foley (D-Wash.) his job and his seat in Congress."
Click to expand...

And I think the Clinton advice is to be listened to lest the Dems go too far on this. I would hope they will concentrate on two things: 1 - mandatory and universal background checks for all gun purchases, 2- a national firearms registry.

beyond that, it well might be a bridge too far and I believe that is what President Clinton is being cautious about.
 
Ray410 said:
"........former President Clinton recently reminded Democrats what happened the last time the Democrats acted against gun rights and passed the so-called assault weapon ban:

"Clinton said that passing the 1994 federal assault weapons ban 'devastated' more than a dozen Democratic lawmakers in the 1994 midterms — and cost then-Speaker of the House Tom Foley (D-Wash.) his job and his seat in Congress."
Click to expand...

Regardless of what Clinton has said it is still too early and foolish to declare victory against the anti-2nd amendment loons. Declaring victory too early may cause people to let their guard down. This is dangerous.
 
haymarket said:
And I think the Clinton advice is to be listened to lest the Dems go too far on this. I would hope they will concentrate on two things: 1 - mandatory and universal background checks for all gun purchases, 2- a national firearms registry.

beyond that, it well might be a bridge too far and I believe that is what President Clinton is being cautious about.
Click to expand...

Why do you want a national firearms registry?
 
haymarket said:
And I think the Clinton advice is to be listened to lest the Dems go too far on this. I would hope they will concentrate on two things: 1 - mandatory and universal background checks for all gun purchases, 2- a national firearms registry.

beyond that, it well might be a bridge too far and I believe that is what President Clinton is being cautious about.
Click to expand...

Stick with your first and drop your second. I guarantee national registration will leave a bad taste in voters' mouths for QUITE some time to come.
 
haymarket said:
And I think the Clinton advice is to be listened to lest the Dems go too far on this. I would hope they will concentrate on two things: 1 - mandatory and universal background checks for all gun purchases, 2- a national firearms registry.

beyond that, it well might be a bridge too far and I believe that is what President Clinton is being cautious about.
Click to expand...

background is fine, registry is wrong.
 
jamesrage said:
Regardless of what Clinton has said it is still too early and foolish to declare victory against the anti-2nd amendment loons. Declaring victory too early may cause people to let their guard down. This is dangerous.
Click to expand...

That's true, but who are you referring to that has declared victory?

Like all liberal attempts to steal American rights, the Liberals never stop and never give up.

It is always important to provide some encouragement to American freedom fighters to counterbalance the endless daily MSM newscasts declaring liberal victory and attempting to depress and suppress those remaining American traditionalists who believe in American culture, history and traditions. Feel encouraged by news stories such as this.
 
Shewter said:
Stick with your first and drop your second. I guarantee national registration will leave a bad taste in voters' mouths for QUITE some time to come.
Click to expand...

do you have any polling evidence of this suspicion?
 
Ray410 said:
That's true, but who are you referring to that has declared victory?
Click to expand...

The thread title implies victory.

It is always important to provide some encouragement to American freedom fighters to counterbalance the endless daily MSM newscasts declaring liberal victory and attempting to depress and suppress those remaining American traditionalists who believe in American culture, history and traditions. Feel encouraged by news stories such as this.
Click to expand...

You see providing encouragement I see declaring victory to early.Declaring victory to early is dangerous because it may cause 2nd amendment advocates to drop their guard.
 
haymarket said:
It could be a useful tool for law enforcement to investigate crime.
Click to expand...

Considering the fact you know why 2nd amendment advocates oppose registries you clearly support firearm registries. Nice to see that you were up front about it and didn't weasel out answering this by saying I need to see the text of that bill before I can make up my mind.
 
If the cowboys win, you will be regarded with even greater contempt by everyone. I suppose this nuttiness matters to the Mother's boys who feel that sneaking around like gunned-up mafia-type Sicilian peasants somehow makes them men. I should try to help them grow up instead.
 
Penderyn said:
If the cowboys win, you will be regarded with even greater contempt by everyone. I suppose this nuttiness matters to the Mother's boys who feel that sneaking around like gunned-up mafia-type Sicilian peasants somehow makes them men. I should try to help them grow up instead.
Click to expand...

Why do you feel the need to stick around and talk to Americans about our own issues like your opinion matters?

You remind me of the gossipy house-wife who has to get into everyone else's business because there's nothing interesting to talk about in her own life.
 
Penderyn said:
If the cowboys win, you will be regarded with even greater contempt by everyone. I suppose this nuttiness matters to the Mother's boys who feel that sneaking around like gunned-up mafia-type Sicilian peasants somehow makes them men. I should try to help them grow up instead.
Click to expand...

If you're from the UK, you will recall that we parted ways on this issue one time in the past.

We have your viewpoint, here is the American viewpoint:

Two-thirds of U.S. weapons owners would 'defy' a federal gun ban - Washington Times
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom