RobertNashville

We don't have the option of moving to another, largely unsettled continent as did the early settlers (perhaps space travel will, in the future, offer such an option) and there are larger differences than just population size and reasonableness of men. An armed rebellion would have us fighting against and killing not some huge military power from across the Atlantic but against brothers and sisters and friends and neighbors (that's already happened once on our soil and it didn't end well). We have an election process and a Constitution precisely so that the use of arms is unnecessary - it would be foolish to hasten the use of force while there is any chance to avoid it and still accomplish the same thing. I'd rather have history tell a story of rational thought and peaceful transition than one of of American's fighting and killing American's. That said, supporting candidates for office who can not and will not win is not a position of rational thought.

Because supporting someone who can not and will not win election against a liberal communist dictator-want-a-be doesn't provide a "u-turn" at all; it only supports continuing down the same road and likely at a faster pace than would happen if we elected the Republican candidate.

It might come to that but I think it would be a bad decision to allow it to happen if we have a chance to avoid it.

No...you can buy it. Lately, I've been buying most of my ammo from AmmunitionToGo; they have 500 rounds 62 grain green tip penetrator (not in an ammo can) for $198.95 ($0.40/round compared to WalMart's $0.39/per) so I'll probably stick with them. I do need to buy some too as I'm taking the Fighting Rifle course from Tactical Response in a few weeks.

I agree, supporting a RINO doesn't bring the country back to a Constitutional Republic but it may halt additional movement away from that republic as a RINO is more likely to make a good/right decision for the country than a liberal and I'm too much of a pragmatist to support someone who cannot win and/or would only serve to elect a liberal (or in the case of this November, a communist who truly seems to hate America). I truly believe that this country will not survive two terms of BHO. As such, I WILL vote for the candidate who has the best chance of defeating him, RINO or not.

Shopping at Wal-Mart is against my religion. It's also too dangerous as it seems as if somebody it getting shot in a Wal-Mart parking lot almost every time you turn around.

Agreed.

Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see how does supporting candidates with little (actually I'd say no) chance to be President can bring the country back to a Constitutional Republic.

I call total Bovine Scatoloty on this. I don't care what this guy wants, says or believes; the President doesn't have that power to begin with(and if this guy thinks the President does then it automatically disqualifies him from office because he clearly doesn't understand the powers of the Presidency) and the chance of getting Congress to do away with the IRS is such a non-starter that there are no adequate words to express how much of a non-starter it is.

That change happened at least a few yeas ago and I suspect their reasons were the similar to why I carry 357 Sig; I think it's simply a better round. Dick Metcalf said it this way...

Viability is what it is...there were only two viable options in 2000 and in 2004 just as there are only two in 2012 - beating one's head against that brick wall about it won't change that; it will only make our head bloody. It isn't fond memories of GWB that causes me say I would rather he be president than Obummer nor that causes me to say that GWB was a better President than Kerry or Gore would could have ever been; it's observation, logic and pragmatism. Warts and all, including the Patriot Act, GWB was clearly a better choice against his two opponents and I do not and never will regret voting for him...were it possible and he were running today against Obummer I'd gladly vote for him again. That's why I miss that guy.

There was no other viable candidates running and voting for anyone other than Bush would only have served to put Mr. Tree or Catsup man in office.It isn't a matter of attitude; it's a matter of math.No one here and certainly I'm not saying GWB was perfect or even close to it but do I miss him compared to the socialist dictator-want-a-be we currently have in office (which is the point of the thread)? HELL YES.

I'm not sure why you say that but I don't agree and I think it's somewhat immaterial to my point in any case. My point being that GWB, while far from perfect and Patriot Act nothwithstanding, was a far better President than Obama, Kerry and/or Gore could ever be or would have ever been. Given the choice of GWB and/or any of the three stooges I just mentioned, I'd vote for GWB this November too.

The patriot act...I don't like it...I don't like it a lot; but I don't like Mr. Tree and John "I voted for it before I voted against it" Kerry MUCH more and would still vote for GWB over either of them any day of the week and twice on Sunday even knowing he would put the patriot act through.

Haslam is no conservative nor is he a friend of firearm owners (although he'll claim he is both).

I'm not afraid of "religion", Islam or any other. I do detest, rebuke and will actively oppose any religion or philosophy, that promotes the death and destruction of any who don't practice their particular brand of religion/philosophy.

I like the luxury home inside a missile silo. There was a "Doomsday Preppers" episode this season where a couple had done just that (don't know how luxurious it was) and for surviving a Zombie (or any other kind of) apocalypse it seemed like a good place.

WHAT???? Them are almost fight'n words.

Amen to that...I once put the foil wrapper from a stick of gum into a light socket...I didn't have got to the emergency room/wasn't hurt but it probably could have turned into an ER trip!

I can't help but wonder why some businesses "post" at all when the sign is so small or posted in such an out of the way place that it's easy to not see at all or mistake it for something else??? One would think if they truly don't want HCP holders to carry in their business they would post properly with a sign big enough for people to see! I don't know if postings like the one you describe are done because they are too stupid to do it properly or if it's because they aren't really opposed to legal carry but are trying to placate someone else (the property owner, non-carrying customers who "hate" guns so they want to appear to appease them, etc).

I'll always takes the prayers but just be be clear, I have no desire to shoot anyone and I too hope I never have to do so and especially hope I never hit an innocent bystander in the process. I carry in the event I am ever put into a position where I do need to defend my life. I presume that's why you carry. I presume that is why most people who carry have made that decision. Aside from my past military training I put in a considerable amount of time and $$$ each year to train for an event I hope never happens precisely because I want to be ready to do what's necessary if it becomes necessary and to reduce the chance that I'll "hit an innocent bystander in the process"; I pray others do the same.

That's exactly what I do - for some reason, you seem to have a problem with that.

I'm not sure if the above was directed at me or not but in my above post, I did not say that a posted business has "taken away" my right to go armed; I've said they don't "respect" my right to go armed. Some may see the the difference between the two phrases as minor but I see them as significantly different from each other. I absolutely agree, not being armed doesn't mean I can't defend myself or that I have to be a victim but it DOES mean that the most effective tool available for me to defend myself has been eliminated from the equation - any business that chooses to make that decision for me and eliminates that tool is a business that doesn't deserve my custom.

^^^ That's a pretty comment - it isn't about being "defenseless"; it's about common sense. I've been in a few fights in my life but at my age, I'm probably not going to come out on the winning end of a round of street fighting with a 20-something bad guy (especially if there are more than one of them) no matter how mamy self-defense courses I've had. However, it's not the boxing match that is the issue; the issue is a life-threatening use of force by one or more bad guys who are intent on killing me or other innocent people and what makes your comment a bit absurd is that the bad guys, aside from often being younger and in better shape than their victims are also often ARMED. Jackie Chan can beat up 20 armed thugs with his karate moves but in real life, the guy(s) with the gun(s) is/are usually going to win against the guy who only has his fists or his hand-to-hand self-defense courses to rely on especially since the guy with the gun is generally going to have the element of surprise on his side. Yes they do and if they didn't I wouldn't bank there (not that I need to go into my bank's actual building all that often). Perhaps for you going armed it about "fear" but for me it's about being a responsible citizen and about making sane, logical choices for ME - I see nothing sane or logical about foregoing the best tool for self-defense available to me just because some stupid business owner/corporation doesn't want me to be armed. For me, the decision and the principle is quite simple - I will not voluntarily give my money to a business that doesn't support my right to go armed and that is ESPECIALLY so if that business makes their profit by selling firearms/firearm related products to firearm enthusiasts.

He was far too progressive/not as conservative as I wanted him to be but on his worst day he was a FAR better president than either of his challengers could have EVER been and I don't for one moment regret voting for him. Obviously I don't know him personally but I believe he was an honest man who truly loved our country and those two things alone make him stand out above most of the politicians we have in office or running for office (in both parties).