Obama Looking For Ways Around Congress On Gun Policy

[billdeserthills]

Gee, and here I thought this was a forum about guns...

I will point out that Arizona isn't in the Northwest though.

Maybe after that next big quake tho...

 

[Blitzkrieg]

I voted for the Constitution Party candidate because all the rest left a stench in my nostrils. I didn't even agree with all of the CP platform

I am against the Bush wars and the totalitarian "patriot act" but I am a paleo conservative, ultra Constitutionalist. I despise the Klintons and I despise obongo

My neighbor is very conservative but voted for obongo because he thinks you people needed a wake up call, a real system shock. Many patriots did so. They are the hard core who are ready for the big one and have lost hope in the "wisdom" of the American voter. I'd say you got that shock treatment. You may need a 2nd obongo term to get your hats on right but I cannot bring myself to vote for "it"

Me? I'm ready for a real revolution, but I am the first to admit that here I sit in fantasy land. Well at least I can dream of the way things once were, it's better than today's reality of outright corruption and great evil in high places

 

[JGRuby]

billdeserthills
I guess that a conversation is out of the question - so to put it mildly I have the right to my opinion and as do you but since I really dont know you and as this has changed to a personal attack against me - I really dont care any longer what you think. I have paid my dues to voice my opinion and question things that I need to understand better. The ignorance that you have shown to me is one of the reasons why many anti's might win this battle and I hope that I am wrong. Basically as long as the second admendment is not touched no one seems to really care who gets harmed or hurt - you must a be a great example of a christian.

With little repect

James Ruby

 

[billdeserthills]

billdeserthills
I guess that a conversation is out of the question - so to put it mildly I have the right to my opinion and as do you but since I really dont know you and as this has changed to a personal attack against me - I really dont care any longer what you think. I have paid my dues to voice my opinion and question things that I need to understand better. The ignorance that you have shown to me is one of the reasons why many anti's might win this battle and I hope that I am wrong. Basically as long as the second admendment is not touched no one seems to really care who gets harmed or hurt - you must a be a great example of a christian.

With little repect

James Ruby

With your admitted vote for Oboner, You have become an Anti Yourself--Better Luck in the Future Anti-Gunner. As if it were any of your Anti-Gunner Loving business I am Jewish, so guess better next time Obama-Luver Trash

 

[mattg521]

With your admitted vote for Oboner, You have become an Anti Yourself--Better Luck in the Future Anti-Gunner. As if it were any of your Anti-Gunner Loving business I am Jewish, so guess better next time Obama-Luver Trash

Wow that's appropriate. Way to control your urges in public.

 

[billdeserthills]

Wow that's appropriate. Way to control your urges in public.

Whatsamatter, you an Obama voter too? Cause if you are feeling left out...

 

[mattg521]

Whatsamatter, you an Obama voter too? Cause if you are feeling left out...

I'm rubber and you're glue whatever you say...
Oops my bad, my intention in calling out your post was to elevate the level of discourse around here to just one tick above name calling.
Hmmm, wasn't there some rule in the user agreement about that?
Anyways you feel free to go ahead while I slip into something a little more asbestos.

 

[billdeserthills]

I'm rubber and you're glue whatever you say...
Oops my bad, my intention in calling out your post was to elevate the level of discourse around here to just one tick above name calling.
Hmmm, wasn't there some rule in the user agreement about that?
Anyways you feel free to go ahead while I slip into something a little more asbestos.

So Sorry Matt, I ain't no college boy, you better talk a little slower, maybe leave out the bigger words

 

[Equinox]

This thread has gotten so far away from the original topic, and turned into an Obama hate fest. The article only talks about stepping up background checks, unless your background has violent crime in it that has somehow escaped the normal background check, what are you so worried about? If you do have a history of violent crime, and it doesn't show up on the usual background check, then in my opinion your gun rights should be taken away. The Obama hating is just alientating the republican party far more than it already has been, several republican senators have already said with the nutjob tea party a republican will have a snowballs chance in **** of getting elected.

 

[Equinox]

And so far not a single one of you has produced a valid argument of why Obama is so bad other than the usual that you hear from every other conservative that is butt hurt that a republican didnt get elected. I am an independent so I vote either way, but you should know its this kind of talk that is going to reaffirm the opinion that the general public already has. Leave it alone, quit hating on everyone, and let's talk about what the thread was originaly about .

 

[Jamie6.5]

And so far not a single one of you has produced a valid argument of why Obama is so bad other than the usual that you hear from every other conservative that is butt hurt that a republican didnt get elected.

You mean other than that as a state legislator and US Senator he supported every anti-gun bill written by rabid supporters of Brady etc?
You mean other than the FACT that he has an Attorney General that allows the definition of "criminal" to be determined based on political agenda, race, and ideology?
You mean other than the FACT that he has nominated two SCOTUS candidates that have a track record of being anti-gun?
Or do you mean his Secretary of Homeland Security (Napolitano) that likes to demonize war veterans as "domestic terrorists?"

Just like the thread about Schumer's proposal that calls for "arrests without conviction" preventing you from owning a gun, if we are going to add another layer of "tough" new gun laws that prevent "criminals" from owning/possessing firearms, the definition of criminal, terrorist etc needs to be clearly defined, and proven with a court conviction, not supposition based on association. (Minority Report anyone?)
Furthermore, that (those) definition(s) MUST be based on The Constitution and the BoR.
Not tweaked around on the whims of political hysteria.

You guys love to bash Bush for the patriot act, because you believe he alone misused it.
The problem being, that it left the door open for future admins to abuse it. Just like Obama, Holder and Napolitano are abusing it now.
Just like the "laws" Obama is proposing may be abused by his, and future admins.
This is not about ideology. It is about how laws are supposed to become laws, and the reasons why the legislative process is outlined on the Constitution.

That is why "laws" are only supposed to be originated in the HoR, and screened/tweaked/approved by the legislative process before they reach the president's desk.

Not written and implemented on the desk of the President without input from the representatives closest to the citizenry.

 

[MA Duce]

James Ruby,
I find in your prior posts that you are Guilty of the crime of being a Liberal on a Conservative Forum. Were it in my power I would ban you forthwith, as should be done with anyone who not only admits to having voted for Freedom's enemy "Oboner" but who, in the face of harsh reality, still maintains that they would again vote for this same lying loser. You sir are what we call "Trash" in my state.

Last time I checked this was still a country where everyone had a right to express their opinion under the First Amendment. You Sir are the kind of right wing extremist we call a narrow minded idiot. Why should anyone be afraid of listening to and examining opposing viewpoints? Your statements are un-American, and your attitude goes against the Constitution I swore to defend against all enemies, foreign and domestic. I have noticed that the right wing is all about shouting about the Constitution until someone exercises their rights under it.

 

[Wheeler44]

Last time I checked this was still a country where everyone had a right to express their opinion under the First Amendment. You Sir are the kind of right wing extremist we call a narrow minded idiot. Why should anyone be afraid of listening to and examining opposing viewpoints? Your statements are un-American, and your attitude goes against the Constitution I swore to defend against all enemies, foreign and domestic. I have noticed that the right wing is all about shouting about the Constitution until someone exercises their rights under it.

And fighting amongst ourselves is exactly what is the desired outcome.....If we allow ourselves to be played like pawns, we won't be around for the end game and our fate will be decided by others.

Both sides are guilty of gross misconduct and corruption. The Patriot act..."real ID"... GPS of every census responders address...The list goes on and on ....Yet we sit here and call each other names......What is so ironic is that many who participate in these bash fests love to call others "sheeple"...Yet they follow the Judas goat where ever he leads them.

 

[MA Duce]

And fighting amongst ourselves is exactly what is the desired outcome.....If we allow ourselves to be played like pawns, we won't be around for the end game and our fate will be decided by others.

Both sides are guilty of gross misconduct and corruption. The Patriot act..."real ID"... GPS of every census responders address...The list goes on and on ....Yet we sit here and call each other names......What is so ironic is that many who participate in these bash fests love to call others "sheeple"...Yet they follow the Judas goat where ever he leads them.

Exactly right. There is nothing wrong with opposing views, but taking an "All my way or nothing" attitude has put the Congress in gridlock and the nation at odds with each other. Honest expression of opinion and mutual respect for others can lead to compromise and just solutions. Acting like kids on a playground will lead to exactly the scenario you put forth.

 

[Jamie6.5]

Time for a reminder about "compromise" on gun laws:
The LawDog Files: Ok, I'll play <---LINK

1. Will you continue a reasonable discussion towards an end that might lead somewhere or is this an exercise in futility?

Since what you consider to be reasonable isn't even in the same plane of reality with what I consider reasonable, probably not.

Allow me to explain.

I hear a lot about "compromise" from your camp ... except, it's not compromise.

Let's say I have this cake. It is a very nice cake, with "GUN RIGHTS" written across the top in lovely floral icing. Along you come and say, "Give me that cake."

I say, "No, it's my cake."

You say, "Let's compromise. Give me half." I respond by asking what I get out of this compromise, and you reply that I get to keep half of my cake.

Okay, we compromise. Let us call this compromise The National Firearms Act of 1934.

There I am with my half of the cake, and you walk back up and say, "Give me that cake."

I say, "No, it's my cake."

You say, "Let's compromise." What do I get out of this compromise? Why, I get to keep half of what's left of the cake I already own.

So, we have your compromise -- let us call this one the Gun Control Act of 1968 -- and I'm left holding what is now just a quarter of my cake.

And I'm sitting in the corner with my quarter piece of cake, and here you come again. You want my cake. Again.

This time you take several bites -- we'll call this compromise the Clinton Executive Orders -- and I'm left with about a tenth of what has always been MY DAMN CAKE and you've got nine-tenths of it.

Then we compromised with the Lautenberg Act (nibble, nibble), the HUD/Smith and Wesson agreement (nibble, nibble), the Brady Law (NOM NOM NOM), the School Safety and Law Enforcement Improvement Act (sweet tap-dancing Freyja, my finger!)

I'm left holding crumbs of what was once a large and satisfying cake, and you're standing there with most of MY CAKE, making anime eyes and whining about being "reasonable", and wondering "why we won't compromise".

I'm done with being reasonable, and I'm done with compromise. Nothing about gun control in this country has ever been "reasonable" nor a genuine "compromise".

LawDog

 

[Trlsmn]

Trlsmn
I do not understand the points that you are trying to make and question your ability to substantiate the statement "The more Obama does the more he seems to be helping out the super rich and doing nothing but paying lip service to the middle class and poor from what I can see." I really dont think Obama should have to apologize for the failings and crooked behavior of our last admiistration. Obama was handed a very poor hand and in my eyes he is actually trying t fix things in a positive manner as has been stated in my previous post. Yes I would vote for Obama given the choices we had this last election which was pretty poor in my opinion. You REPukes need to get a better candidate than a senile old man and a quitter.

James Ruby

You don't understand because you don't want to understand, your kind (lefties) only make excuses and defer blame. The first quality in a leader is to lead without excuses or blame of others. As I stated before the only class Obama has helped is the 1% of the super rich, all the rest has been smoke and mirrors. BTW I am not a Republican so your little school yard ad hominum attack means nothing but it is what I expect and what I always see from you lefties 100% of the time without fail.

 

[Trlsmn]

People have such a short term memeory - because it fits there need to rationlaizlize the mess we are in today. The country was in a much better place before Bush and gang invaded the white house. The bank bail outs started under Bush via Paulson, and yet that is Obama's fault. We went to war against two different countries under Bush and he was kind enough to leave that for Obama, thats Obama's fault as well. Increased unemployment and borrowing from China to support the war effort under Bush yet we place that blame on Obama. Iran is a much more powerful country because we got rid ot thier primary adversary for them and North Korea got Nueclear weapons under Bush. Yes GW's name wasnt in the last election, i wish it had not been in the previous two elections. The one thing we did get is stronger rights for the second amendment yet we got our other rights crapped on such as freedom of speech. Hope it was all worth - thanks to Bush, China owns more of the US than we own of China. You guys like that feeling - I dont on d*** bit.

Again with the excuses, leaders lead, losers blame, Obama is no leader. I honestly think Hillary Clinton would have been a 1000% better leader than Obama.

 

[Equinox]

To try, and somewhat get back to the original post, what we need are well informed intelligent individuals to speak for pro-gun rights. Jamie6.5 I agree with what you posted 100 percent you in my mind produce the correct argument without slandering anyone whom disagrees with you. The racist, subterfuge hate speak just gives the anti-gun groups more ammunition to lob against us. An anti-gun activist member could copy, and paste half the posts in this thread, and say hey look most of the people that own guns are either criminals, or nut jobs BAN THEM.

 

[JGRuby]

What we need are better candidates the represent those rights we beleive in. The last presedential election was very week.

 

[JGRuby]

Ok - I have been accused of being a lefty. a libertard and such - could someone intelligently please define what a libertard is, or a lefty so that these words are more than just name calling?

James Ruby