JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Status
Well great...... How long do we have until we see an assault rifle ban and what ever else he decides? Also do you think people are going to start buying everything in sight? :s0131:

264842995_trollolol_hahahaha_answer_2_xlarge.jpe

Relaxing.
 
Uh..Well lets look at that "same government" thing, shall we ?

1) We now have an emboldened obama-version 2.0, who enjoys "bulletproof" status since he won't need to worry about another re-election bid (*) and has recently said that he will bring back Brady.
Without support, we'll have hoverboards and flying cars before we have that. With Obama we have a lower chance of an AWB anyway, as he's never signed one, and Romney had.

2) We now have a Supreme Court that is about to be furnished with at least two fresh obama appointee's. To add to that dismal mix, we now see that we have a "conservative" Chief Justice who blatantly demonstrated this year that he is corruptible, be it for personal gain or by blackmail.
Not relevant by much, Mittens appointees were about as Anti-2A as a kangaroo court could get in MA. As for a politician in a job for life being corruptible... you don't say?

3) We now have a eunuch Republicrat party, the supposed "champions" of the 2A, even further castrated (if it is even possible to cut off more than two).
Now they are not just unwilling to offend the left, they will be afraid of their own shadows !

They aren't afraid to offend, but we do have an Rtard party filled with guys who are simply just going to spend the next 2 years trying to block everything Obama does in order to strengthen party politics, and make him look bad. So, we'll have at least 2 more years of absolutely ZERO of any value happening, except maybe accelerated waste on war spending, which is what the Rtards want anyway, so that should be considered a boon by the partybots.

Silly to be concerned huh ?
Yup. However it's easy to be "concerned". If someone was ACTUALLY concerned, they'd get off their duff and spend the next 4 years trying to make things the way they want it, via getting out, and bringing people to their version of the party fiction they believe in, and teaching others why the opposite party is filled with liars, damn liars, and soul stealing ghouls.

However, that won't happen, so there will be more Trump polishing, and links to Alex Jones stuff. I for one am not worried other than passingly worried for the mental health of the R adherents.
 

People like this get me......... Got great discussion going and someone like this comes in and starts talking bubblegum about people. We love you opinion dave but keep it civil..... Thanks for getting off topic on our thread. Now that your done will you move on to the next thread you want to clogg up. Thanks.
 
We have elected almost the exact same government we've had for the last 4 years and yet people are getting hysterical.... Pure silliness.


If you recall (as I do) obama stated in the beginning of his first term that gun control was something that he would address in his second term. Also, he stated if he could turn this into a gunless nation then he would.

In reality I don't see us ever loosing our gun rights but I see everything gun related so heavily taxed or heavily ruled that it would make it almost impossible for us to enjoy our hobby.
 
Obama we have a lower chance of an AWB anyway, as he's never signed one, and Romney had.
You lie.
And you know it.
But that's just one more example of how lies, and lies of omission have wrought another term with the most inept, corrupt and dishonest admin in the history of the U.S.

And here you are in a gun forum championing the cause.
That's just flat disgusting.
 
Obama is a President not a Dictator. Congress is actually the most powerful branch of government, but since its made up of 535 people with divergent views, people find it easier to focus on the President. Obama may not have to worry about elections anymore but the Republicans in the House do, they will stop any new assault weapons ban dead in its tracks. Obama is not a dummy, he knows this and he is not going to take on the issue unless we have some big dramatic event where as he feels that the public outcry is overwhelming. So yeah not too worried about it.

Supreme Court vacancy's? Well the court hasn't done all that much anyhow. They've decided what the majority of citizens already believed (Heller v. D.C.) that the 2nd Amendment applies to individuals - then they applied the 2nd Amendment to the states (McDonald v. Chicago). But..... in these decisions they also declared quite plainly that firearms were still subject to "reasonable" regulation. Basically we currently have a court that is willing to declare unconstitutional only the most egregious infringements on gun rights as opposed to before where they just wouldn't hear the case. A slight improvement but hey I'll take it. So what will Obama appointees do? Well first off most of the aging Justices are Democratic appointees anyhow so replacing them won't tip the balance. We also have to consider the fact that it is rare for the Supreme Court to reverse it's own decisions, it makes the Court look partisan and illegitimate so they generally avoid it. So let's say the Court balance does get tipped, what can we expect? Well my prediction is that they won't back track on the 2nd applying to individuals, instead they will simply allow a higher threshold of "infringements". So that just puts the issue back into the legislatures (Federal and State).

Bottom line: want to keep your guns? stay on top of your congressional representatives. Let them know that you vote and that gun control is not a solution to crime.
 
People like this get me......... Got great discussion going and someone like this comes in and starts talking bubblegum about people. We love you opinion dave but keep it civil..... Thanks for getting off topic on our thread. Now that your done will you move on to the next thread you want to clogg up. Thanks.

Oh, you're right, people making stupid comments should get a pass so we can all go sing kumbaya later. Sorry, no. Delusional, stupid comments should be responded to as such.

I'm glad it upset you. Maybe we can work on stamping out baseless delusion together, then break for fried chicken. As far as civil goes, it was civil. I didn't use the term bubblegum once. :)
 
If you recall (as I do) obama stated in the beginning of his first term that gun control was something that he would address in his second term. Also, he stated if he could turn this into a gunless nation then he would.

In reality I don't see us ever loosing our gun rights but I see everything gun related so heavily taxed or heavily ruled that it would make it almost impossible for us to enjoy our hobby.

Can you point me to some proof of this please?
 
in these decisions they also declared quite plainly that firearms were still subject to "reasonable" regulation

Let's place our faith in a government entity that decided that it is reasonable to steal up to 80% of a man's earnings to fund their regime. What, it's down to 39.6% now? Praise the flying spaghetti monster. The government is not reason, it is force.

If you think your congressman gives a damn about what you have to say, you're a delusional sap.
 
That's just flat disgusting.
You angry cause you drank the koolaid, voted for the "winning complexion" and got walloped. You *could* have acted like an American and stepped up with a million other of us and voted for freedom from the single party with two faces, but nope. You wanted the status quo.

Your opinion is invalid, and your lies are transparent. You also lost yesterday.
 
You lie.
And you know it.
But that's just one more example of how lies, and lies of omission have wrought another term with the most inept, corrupt and dishonest admin in the history of the U.S.

And here you are in a gun forum championing the cause.
That's just flat disgusting.

As previously stated the AWB was created in 1998 ( before Romney ) - Romney only decided to modify it in his term which to me means if he did not create it he certainly did not defeat it - he added to it. Sorry - I disagree with you on this on Jamie.

James Ruby
 
You angry cause you drank the koolaid, voted for the "winning complexion" and got walloped. You *could* have acted like an American and stepped up with a million other of us and voted for freedom from the single party with two faces, but nope. You wanted the status quo.

Your opinion is invalid, and your lies are transparent. You also lost yesterday.
Mine wasn't an opinion, it was fact.
And the kool-aide went to those whose vote was wasted, in the high-and-mighty effort to convince themselves that they are better than the system they live under.
Utter fools that they are.

Romney did not sign an AWB, so yours are the only lies.
So you, who supposedly voted for freedom from a party, didn't lose? What did you win? Are you going to claim a moral victory over the forces of evil this time?
Victories are measured in accomplishments.
You achieved neither.

Are you really so delusional you can't even tell when you lie, or when you lose?
The evidence surely points that way.

Go on with your "bad self" sonny, but your accusations of racism hold no more truth today than they did last week.
And highlight the lack of morals you display in your loss.
 
Let's place our faith in a government entity that decided that it is reasonable to steal up to 80% of a man's earnings to fund their regime. What, it's down to 39.6% now? Praise the flying spaghetti monster. The government is not reason, it is force.

If you think your congressman gives a damn about what you have to say, you're a delusional sap.

I was simply pointing out that the Court decisions haven't really changed much so not sure where you are going with that.

Actually DMan it is you who is a delusional sap. Studies overwhelmingly show that Congressmen very much care about what their constituents think. Why? Simple self interest, their number one goal is to get re-elected.
 
As previously stated the AWB was created in 1998 ( before Romney ) - Romney only decided to modify it in his term which to me means if he did not create it he certainly did not defeat it - he added to it. Sorry - I disagree with you on this on Jamie.

James Ruby

Jamie's just mad about last night. It'll blow over.
 
As previously stated the AWB was created in 1998 ( before Romney ) - Romney only decided to modify it in his term which to me means if he did not create it he certainly did not defeat it - he added to it. Sorry - I disagree with you on this on Jamie.

James Ruby
If by "adding to it," you mean he made it more gun owner friendly, and re-legalized hundreds of models of guns, then you'd be correct.
Defeating it would have required a repeal from the MA legislature that was 87% liberal progressive.
And we KNOW that wasn't going to happen.\

So he opted to do what the state and national gun-rights people asked him to do.

But I know you prefer the liberal spin, so live with the lie, if that's what you prefer.
 
If by "adding to it," you mean he made it more gun owner friendly, and re-legalized hundreds of models of guns, then you'd be correct.
Defeating it would have required a repeal from the MA legislature that was 87% liberal progressive.
And we KNOW that wasn't going to happen.\

So he opted to do what the state and national gun-rights people asked him to do.

But I know you prefer the liberal spin, so live with the lie, if that's what you prefer.

Jamie, put down the Kool-Aid already. Any way you want to look at it Romney is on frickin video tape over and over again saying he would sign an assault weapons ban and is in support of some gun control measures... and then he changed his mind.... again.
 
Status

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top