JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Status
Messages
745
Reactions
3
Nominating an individual to serve on the Supreme Court represents a huge decision. Obama’s first pick, Sonia Sotomayor, is a bit of an enigma at this point. I haven’t been able to find any real Second Amendment case law that she has ruled upon.

More here:

<broken link removed>
 
We shouldn't just be worried about are 2nd amendment rights with her. She wants them all. Like I say, shes one of these princesses that wants to tell us how we can think, feel, and talk. We the people have lost are rights and tyranny is upon us.
 
Sotomayor on firearms: <broken link removed>

Sotomayor on private property: http://www.theagitator.com/2009/05/26/sotomayor-on-takings-and-property-rights

Is it surprising that Obama's pick has socialism written all over her? Is it surprising that this woman's ethnicity (not race, she's of the human race) is being heralded as "historic" and falls neatly into place with placating those that focus on ethnicity and NOT on achievements and positions?

Is it really surprising what Obama's agenda is on firearms? Consider his own words, consider his pick of Eric Holder for US AG, consider his pick of Janet Napolitano for DHS, consider all of the other picks at all levels. Now also consider his continuation of Bush policies of bailouts for all, furthering the "war on terror", "war on drugs", "war on _____", and trying to one-up the Bush administration with a creative way to detain people with no charges and no probable cause AKA "preventative detention" ..... is anything surprising? Consider everything government at all levels, and the only conclusion you can come to is WAR ON THE CITIZENS using police as the standing army.
 
Sotomayor on firearms: <broken link removed>

Sotomayor on private property: http://www.theagitator.com/2009/05/26/sotomayor-on-takings-and-property-rights

Is it surprising that Obama's pick has socialism written all over her? Is it surprising that this woman's ethnicity (not race, she's of the human race) is being heralded as "historic" and falls neatly into place with placating those that focus on ethnicity and NOT on achievements and positions?

Is it really surprising what Obama's agenda is on firearms? Consider his own words, consider his pick of Eric Holder for US AG, consider his pick of Janet Napolitano for DHS, consider all of the other picks at all levels. Now also consider his continuation of Bush policies of bailouts for all, furthering the "war on terror", "war on drugs", "war on _____", and trying to one-up the Bush administration with a creative way to detain people with no charges and no probable cause AKA "preventative detention" ..... is anything surprising? Consider everything government at all levels, and the only conclusion you can come to is WAR ON THE CITIZENS using police as the standing army.

Okay - I wrote my second piece on Obama's pick before seeing the SAF release...

<broken link removed>

Eeerily similar...
 
Be sure to keep this on the topic of firearms guys. There's a lot of merit in this post but if it turns into a discussion regarding her positions on other political issues we're going to have to shut it down.
 
Be sure to keep this on the topic of firearms guys. There's a lot of merit in this post but if it turns into a discussion regarding her positions on other political issues we're going to have to shut it down.

Please clear this up: if it's not firearms related, doesn't that mean it's "Off Topic" and is "fair game" to be discussed in the "Off Topic" forum? If not, then what is the purpose of the "Off Topic" forum if the topics must be firearms?
 
Please clear this up: if it's not firearms related, doesn't that mean it's "Off Topic" and is "fair game" to be discussed in the "Off Topic" forum? If not, then what is the purpose of the "Off Topic" forum if the topics must be firearms?

It would probably be fine in the off-topic forum but I'm thinking that since it is in the "Legal and Political" forum that he wants to make sure the legal and political discussions remain firearms related.
 
Please clear this up: if it's not firearms related, doesn't that mean it's "Off Topic" and is "fair game" to be discussed in the "Off Topic" forum? If not, then what is the purpose of the "Off Topic" forum if the topics must be firearms?

Bottom line: if it's political in nature, and not about firearms, it's not on here. "Off Topic" is for your favorite rib recipe or whatever.
 
Bottom line: if it's political in nature, and not about firearms, it's not on here. "Off Topic" is for your favorite rib recipe or whatever.

Define "political in nature" -- does this mean discussing anything related to anyone that has a government position as their employment (for example, school superintendent) or is a position only the titles of Mayor, Councilperson, Representative, Senator, Governor, etc.?
 
"on here" being the site or this forum?

Am I to understand there will be no political talk if it is not firearms related?

"or whatever" includes or does not include political discussion?

"on here" = site. The "off-topic" forum is for non-political & non-firearm related topics.

Define "political in nature" -- does this mean discussing anything related to anyone that has a government position as their employment (for example, school superintendent) or is a position only the titles of Mayor, Councilperson, Representative, Senator, Governor, etc.?

"political in nature" can encompass a number of different things and be somewhat gray at times. However, if you're talking about an elected official, government employee, law, policy, etc. - it should be related to guns. When the topic gets somewhat gray, moderators have discretion on when to step in.

The way I see it (and Joey may be able to articulate this better) is that 1) there are a number of people across the political spectrum who support gun rights & we're all here because of a shared interest in guns - trashing people's political/religious/etc. views distracts from our core reason for being here; and 2) it has been our experience that political discussions on here rarely turn out well.
 
The way I see it (and Joey may be able to articulate this better) is that 1) there are a number of people across the political spectrum who support gun rights & we're all here because of a shared interest in guns - trashing people's political/religious/etc. views distracts from our core reason for being here; and 2) it has been our experience that political discussions on here rarely turn out well.

Well I won't distract from this thread any longer but I think that not allowing anyone to discuss the political party that contains the majority of anti-gun members really doesn't help our interest in any way. Those who follow that party and would be offended should change the party or their party.
 
Status

Upcoming Events

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

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top