|
|
|
|
treesail
Oct 14, 2004, 1:18 PM
Post #26 of 173
(1695 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 16, 2004
Posts: 204
|
In reply to: I agree w/ arrettinator, and I also felt that the crack geared towards CBS was a low blow that was entirely out of line. :? That said, Kerry made a flip~flop of insurmountable proportions tonight, and it's gonna cost him in a huge way! On the issue of gay marraige ( aside from dragging Cheney's daughter into it), he mentioned that he would never do anything to alter or violate the Constitution... not the 1st Amendment, nor the 5th Amendment. Later on, when asked about the sunsetting of the weapons ban ( a misnomer btw), he claimed that he is a hunter, but also stated emphatically that NOBODY needed to have an AK47 ( buzz word)... So while saying he supports the Constitution wholey as it is, and wouldn't change a thing, he later said he supported the raping of the 2nd Amendment and completey supports the weapons ban as enacted in 94! If you're a firearms owner, take note that Kerry has every intention of once again stripping away your rights that were just restored, after being unconstitutionally stripped away 10 years ago by the last democratic administration!!!! :evil: Also keep in mind, that Kerry is one of the leading supporters of the Feinstein bill on a Federal level. An identical version of this particular bill, has completely outlawed many weapons types in California, and is the most restrictive gun bill ever to be written. After all, the 2nd Amendment specifically states that you have the right to buy assault weapons at Wal-Mart.
|
|
|
|
|
vertical_reality
Oct 14, 2004, 1:18 PM
Post #27 of 173
(1695 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 19, 2002
Posts: 2073
|
In reply to: I'm always impressed at how well talks out of both sides of his mouth. "I'm a Catholic, but I'm in favor of allowing abortions. Even as Pesident of the United States, it's none of my business. :wink: "I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman, but I'll go on and o, insinuating that I'm for gay marriage. :wink: Like usual you ignore his reasoning. I thought that part of the debate was excellent.
|
|
|
|
|
treesail
Oct 14, 2004, 1:20 PM
Post #28 of 173
(1695 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 16, 2004
Posts: 204
|
In reply to: BTW, Kerry solidified his reputation as a waffler tonight. He was downright embarassing! How?
|
|
|
|
|
vertical_reality
Oct 14, 2004, 1:24 PM
Post #29 of 173
(1695 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 19, 2002
Posts: 2073
|
In reply to: 1) Banning something that is specifically allowed under the Constitution, is a direct violation of it, and the 2nd isn't about hunting! Please explain where in the 2nd it specifically states the type of firearms allowed. If you could only own a musket, you still have all the rights afforded to you by the 2nd.
In reply to: 2) Violation = Rape I guess I rapped the speed limit the other day.
In reply to: 3) I'm against ANYONE making changes to the Constitution, and when Bush sought to do so, I began to consider 3rd party candidates. Riiiiiight
|
|
|
|
|
arrettinator
Oct 14, 2004, 1:28 PM
Post #30 of 173
(1695 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2002
Posts: 8522
|
In reply to: In reply to: Oh, and Kerry isn't that liberal. I don't understand that attacking point. There are numerous sites on the web that rank the conservative/liberal leaning of Senators, based solely on their voting records. The ones I've seen put Kerry and Edwards waaaaay over on the left. Actions speak louder than words, but apparently his words (during this campaign season) have convinced you that he's not the ultra-liberal that his voting record indicates. They are ranked on their voting score in the Senate, which they didn't vote as much as they should have. I don't agree w/ the that neither of them voted very much during the campaign. I think they should have been there and done their job instead of campaigning. As for all politicians. There's way too much money being spent on campaigns when it could be used in much better ways. Or, maybe I'm just more liberal than I think I am. :roll:
|
|
|
|
|
bumblie
Oct 14, 2004, 1:35 PM
Post #31 of 173
(1695 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 18, 2003
Posts: 7629
|
In reply to: Or, maybe I'm just more liberal than I think I am. :roll: John Kerri to Arretinator:
In reply to: Ryan, I am your father. Come over to the dark side. :lol: :lol: :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
madriver
Oct 14, 2004, 1:37 PM
Post #32 of 173
(1695 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2001
Posts: 8700
|
...flipping back every so often from the Yankees Game....I called up to my wife watching the debate.. ...honey...were the debates cancelled?...it sounds like a re-run of last weeks debate? ....no...she yelled back...they've just run out of new material.. love mr
|
|
|
|
|
tgreene
Oct 14, 2004, 1:48 PM
Post #33 of 173
(1695 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 7267
|
In reply to: In reply to: 1) Banning something that is specifically allowed under the Constitution, is a direct violation of it, and the 2nd isn't about hunting! Please explain where in the 2nd it specifically states the type of firearms allowed. If you could only own a musket, you still have all the rights afforded to you by the 2nd. That is quite possibly, the most asinine thing I have ever seen you write! :wtf:
|
|
|
|
|
madriver
Oct 14, 2004, 1:50 PM
Post #34 of 173
(1695 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2001
Posts: 8700
|
...yeah.... ...and your sister is gay!!! ...nah!!
|
|
|
|
|
arrettinator
Oct 14, 2004, 1:54 PM
Post #35 of 173
(1695 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2002
Posts: 8522
|
In reply to: I'm always impressed at how well talks out of both sides of his mouth. "I'm a Catholic, but I'm in favor of allowing abortions. Even as President of the United States, it's none of my business. :wink: "I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman, but I'll go on and o, insinuating that I'm for gay marriage. :wink: 50% of Catholics in America are pro-choice, if not more. Kerry all but says straight out he's against abortion, but as a legislator he can't impose his personal religious beliefs on the US. In the second debate after Kerry was done talking about abortion, Bush said "I'm trying to decipher that. " I understood what he was saying. Why couldn't Bush? Now, I don't think Kerry should have mentioned Cheney's daughter, but I think it was probably to show that Bush and Cheney don't see eye to eye on that matter. As far as his stance on the issue of gay marriage, Kerry was very clear to me that he doesn't agree w/ it, but isn't going to ban it outright. I don't agree w/ him on that, but at least he's a step in the right direction. (at least my direction) And insinuating me coming to the darkside would mean I have the force. I wish. That would be frickin great. But I'd need to learn how to make a light saber first.
|
|
|
|
|
treesail
Oct 14, 2004, 1:55 PM
Post #36 of 173
(1695 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 16, 2004
Posts: 204
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: 1) Banning something that is specifically allowed under the Constitution, is a direct violation of it, and the 2nd isn't about hunting! Please explain where in the 2nd it specifically states the type of firearms allowed. If you could only own a musket, you still have all the rights afforded to you by the 2nd.That is quite possibly, the most asinine thing I have ever seen you write! :wtf: Especially because -- again -- the 2nd Amendment clearly states your right to an assault rifle from Wal-Mart ("& can I get some Freedom Fries with that?").
|
|
|
|
|
madriver
Oct 14, 2004, 2:01 PM
Post #37 of 173
(1695 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2001
Posts: 8700
|
arrettinator wrote:
In reply to: 50% of Catholics in America are pro-choice, if not more. ...I would tend to believe this. We need a Vatican III
|
|
|
|
|
tgreene
Oct 14, 2004, 2:01 PM
Post #38 of 173
(1695 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 7267
|
Treesail: You obviously don't know anything about me or my background, so we'll simply leave it at that! :roll: I would however suggest a few of you educate yourselves by actually READING the 2nd Amendment sometime... :idea:
|
|
|
|
|
madriver
Oct 14, 2004, 2:06 PM
Post #39 of 173
(1695 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2001
Posts: 8700
|
...if gay marriage is a deciding issue in the election I will seriously consider taking a permanent vacation...Iraq has some great off season deals I hear..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vertical_reality
Oct 14, 2004, 2:09 PM
Post #41 of 173
(1695 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 19, 2002
Posts: 2073
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: 1) Banning something that is specifically allowed under the Constitution, is a direct violation of it, and the 2nd isn't about hunting! Please explain where in the 2nd it specifically states the type of firearms allowed. If you could only own a musket, you still have all the rights afforded to you by the 2nd.That is quite possibly, the most asinine thing I have ever seen you write! :wtf: :lol: It's not nearly as asinine as what you wrote. Obviously I need to explain... the 2nd only says that you have the right to bear arms. If the only gun legal in the US was a shot gun, it is not affecting your rights per the admendment. You still have the righ to bear arms (a shot gun).
|
|
|
|
|
blueeyedclimber
Oct 14, 2004, 2:28 PM
Post #42 of 173
(1695 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602
|
In reply to: Imagine if tomorrow; a law were passed that made it illegal to climb on any public lands, to own any trad gear, and the production of new caribiners and ropes was specifically outlawed... Also consider that attempted smuggling of gear from outside the US could be met with severe criminal penalties of up to 25 years in prison. Now imagine that a bill to further ban "grandfathered" climbing gear was quietly allowed to slip through and become law. A law which makes you a felon by not turning in all of your hard earned gear by a certain date. This new law is aimed at disallowing anyone from climbing, and in doing so, turns millions of climbers of all types into instant felons overnight! This is exactly what the Feinstein bill has already done to firearms owners in California, and an even broader bill is currently sitting in Washington, and it's a bill in which Kerry strongly supports! OK, I'll play along. Imagine if there was a sudden rise in hate crimes with climbing ropes becoming the noose of choice, a plethera of armed roberries where people were killed with a rack of nuts, children who accidentally cammed themselves to death because their father forgot to lock his rack up, private armies and terrorist groups all over the world arming themselves with black market belay devices, now considered the worlds #1 WMD. I would support your imaginary law, if it would save lives. Gimme a break!
|
|
|
|
|
treesail
Oct 14, 2004, 2:28 PM
Post #43 of 173
(1695 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 16, 2004
Posts: 204
|
In reply to: Treesail: You obviously don't know anything about me or my background, so we'll simply leave it at that! :roll: I would however suggest a few of you educate yourselves by actually READING the 2nd Amendment sometime... :idea: All I know about you is you've got the merit badge of god! Very cool, but I've never trusted it. :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
traddad
Oct 14, 2004, 2:30 PM
Post #44 of 173
(1695 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2001
Posts: 7129
|
As a strict Constitutionalist, I believe the Second Amendment only refers to the right to bear muzzel loading rifels, pistols and cannons. The framers had no ability to predict the rise in firearms technology. Therefore, any inclusion of weapons such as fourteen shot Glocks and AK-47s should be seen as activist interpretations of the Constitution. And we all hate activist interpretations.......
|
|
|
|
|
tgreene
Oct 14, 2004, 3:01 PM
Post #45 of 173
(1695 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 7267
|
In reply to: In reply to: Imagine if tomorrow; a law were passed that made it illegal to climb on any public lands, to own any trad gear, and the production of new caribiners and ropes was specifically outlawed... Also consider that attempted smuggling of gear from outside the US could be met with severe criminal penalties of up to 25 years in prison. Now imagine that a bill to further ban "grandfathered" climbing gear was quietly allowed to slip through and become law. A law which makes you a felon by not turning in all of your hard earned gear by a certain date. This new law is aimed at disallowing anyone from climbing, and in doing so, turns millions of climbers of all types into instant felons overnight! This is exactly what the Feinstein bill has already done to firearms owners in California, and an even broader bill is currently sitting in Washington, and it's a bill in which Kerry strongly supports! OK, I'll play along. Imagine if there was a sudden rise in hate crimes with climbing ropes becoming the noose of choice, a plethera of armed roberries where people were killed with a rack of nuts, children who accidentally cammed themselves to death because their father forgot to lock his rack up, private armies and terrorist groups all over the world arming themselves with black market belay devices, now considered the worlds #1 WMD. I would support your imaginary law, if it would save lives. Gimme a break! The firearms specifically mentioned, are not the root of all evil as many have been blindly led to believe. Street crimes generally place with concealable and disposable Saturday Night Specials, that cost next to nothing... Not a heavy rifle that cannot be concealed! Furthermore, increasing an enforcement of the laws we already have, will certainly help. In addition, people need to be held accountale for the resuklts of their own actions or inactions as the case would be with firearms being left unsecured. Also, the Constitution is about giving the citizens an equal oportunity to defend themselves against a tyranical government, and without the use of equal weaponry, we are unable to do that. Thus, your muzzleloading rifels, pistols and cannons are an absolute joke! :roll: FWIW: Rowe -v- Wade was nothing more than an ACTIVIST INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION as well.
|
|
|
|
|
the_pirate
Oct 14, 2004, 3:04 PM
Post #46 of 173
(1695 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2003
Posts: 3984
|
In reply to: In reply to: Imagine if tomorrow; a law were passed that made it illegal to climb on any public lands, to own any trad gear, and the production of new caribiners and ropes was specifically outlawed... Also consider that attempted smuggling of gear from outside the US could be met with severe criminal penalties of up to 25 years in prison. Now imagine that a bill to further ban "grandfathered" climbing gear was quietly allowed to slip through and become law. A law which makes you a felon by not turning in all of your hard earned gear by a certain date. This new law is aimed at disallowing anyone from climbing, and in doing so, turns millions of climbers of all types into instant felons overnight! This is exactly what the Feinstein bill has already done to firearms owners in California, and an even broader bill is currently sitting in Washington, and it's a bill in which Kerry strongly supports! OK, I'll play along. Imagine if there was a sudden rise in hate crimes with climbing ropes becoming the noose of choice, a plethera of armed roberries where people were killed with a rack of nuts, children who accidentally cammed themselves to death because their father forgot to lock his rack up, private armies and terrorist groups all over the world arming themselves with black market belay devices, now considered the worlds #1 WMD. I would support your imaginary law, if it would save lives. Gimme a break! So, to paraphrase Archie Bunker: If there was a sudden rise in the numbers of people pushed out of windows, whould you support banning windows? btw, I met you at rumney on monday with your wife, 'cept i didn't know you were you at the time. I was with kathy and jake in the parking lot at the end of the day.
|
|
|
|
|
tgreene
Oct 14, 2004, 3:07 PM
Post #47 of 173
(1695 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 7267
|
More people die every day in automobile accidents, than the total number of firearms accidents each yaer. Swimming pool drownings also far outweigh firearms related deaths.
|
|
|
|
|
tgreene
Oct 14, 2004, 3:20 PM
Post #49 of 173
(1695 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 7267
|
I don't support the NRA, nor do I care for them, as they are nothing more than big business sellouts... I do however support and pay very close attention to GOA, JPFO and SAS!
|
|
|
|
|
the_pirate
Oct 14, 2004, 3:31 PM
Post #50 of 173
(1695 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2003
Posts: 3984
|
Sorry for the assumption. I support GOAL because they are active in local regulations, but that's the extent of my joinership. My dad is an NRA member though and that is exactly the language that they are distributing in their monthly news letters. I shot trap with John Kerry three years ago, (he's about an 85% shooter). While I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him, I didn't get the impression that he was a threat to my firearms ownership. He may possibly be more succeptible to irresponsible mothers crying because their dumbass kid shot himself, but I worry a lot less aboput having gun lock requirements than I do about neocons practicing firearms roundups.
|
|
|
|
|
|