Fred To Announce on Thurs.

[DaveTN]

I still fail to see what any inteligent person really thinks they can acheive by disarming law abideing citizens. Or converting those that will not be disarmed into criminals. Do they just not sit down and think about it becouse if they did I doubt that would really be what they want. Any one know what the real agenda is or is it just one more way to grow goverment bigger?

Crytes

There’s no hidden agenda or plan to grow bigger government (the Democrats are going to do that with or without gun control). It’s just desperation. They see gang bangers and thugs killing innocent people and think something needs to be done. They don’t stop and think that if all guns magically disappeared tomorrow; gang bangers and thugs would still be killing innocent people.

Many of them don’t know anything about firearms. When they hear Barrack Obama say he wants to ban all semi-automatic weapons; they think he is talking about assault weapons. They don’t know that he’s talking about their neighbors Remington 7400 deer rifle, his 1100 shotgun, and most modern handguns.

[The Rabbi]

I still fail to see what any inteligent person really thinks they can acheive by disarming law abideing citizens. Or converting those that will not be disarmed into criminals. Do they just not sit down and think about it becouse if they did I doubt that would really be what they want. Any one know what the real agenda is or is it just one more way to grow goverment bigger?

Crytes

It is the triumph of the statistical method. If crimes involve guns, then logically more guns around will lead to more crime. And conversely fewer guns will lead to less crime.

This is why you hear liberals bleating about "we got X number of guns off the street and that makes us all safer."

It has a specious logic to it. It is complete and utter nonsense of course, but that is how they see it.

[Mike.357]

inteligent person

You are giving the politicos too much credit, they have an agenda to be elected. If their constituents also believe in gun control this is part of the platform on which they will run.

If tomorrow guns were outlawed and had to be turned in, there certainly is a percentage of lawful people who would go and turn their guns in. Now over time, say 50 years the total of guns available would drop dramatically. There would be no more sources for them and eventually they would be gone. Guns illegaly owned for those 50 years would end up in the hands of children of the original owners. These children would certainly never have shot them as they guns would be in a deep dark hole lest Dad be arrested for gun possession. These kids or other heirs would be turning them in. In 100 years maybe all guns would be out of the dark holes and off the street. I believe this is the logic the anti's push to ban even if they do not think it would take that long.

Also we must keep in mind, and I am sure most of us do, that the politicos want to remain in power with their foot on our neck. If society is armed we are a direct threat to their percieved status as the superior class.

Now I also realize not all politicians are among those who would have their foot on our neck. And it is up to us as voters to sort them out and elect the right kind of candidate.

Back on topic, I hope Fred is one of the good guys, just not sure yet.

[Rightwinger]

Wow.... I never realized that if the US passes a gun ban that every other nation producing weapons would stop making them too...

I guess the gun ban would then prevent illegal immigration and drug traffic as we know nothing illegal that is wanted in the US ever makes it across that secure border.

I may change my mind, with that kind of power we should vote to ban guns, it will change everything....for the children.

(I'm not poking you directly Mike but your logic seemed a bit flawed that guns would go away over 50 to 100 years, not gonna happen, feel free to poke back, RW)

[Guest BigBoostDSM]

I'd rather vote for Ron Paul, but since Fred will more than likely get the republican ticket I'd vote for him. Thing is, I don't have a vote as a non-citizen.

My sister is a US citizen and she doesn't really care either way, so she's going to vote for me. At least that way my opinion is heard.

[Marswolf]

I'm just concerned that if Fred doesn't get the nomination, Rudy will.

[The Rabbi]

I'm just concerned that if Fred doesn't get the nomination, Rudy will.

If that happens Hillary is a shoo-in. Republicans will stay home in droves rather than pull the lever for that guy. I would honestly rather see Hillary as president than Rudy. At least the GOP would stand a better chance in '12.

As it is, I dont think Rudy will get it. He isn't a Republican any more than Bloomberg is a Republican. He wont play well in the heartland.

[molonlabetn]

I see Fred Thompson as an excellent opportunity to postpone the Apocolypse for another 4-8 years.

Go Fred!

-see below-

[Guest triggertime]

Rabbi, that's a scary statement. I wouldn't want to see a socialist feminist running this country. With her agenda, there wouldn't be a 2012...we'd be another Cuba

by then.

[The Rabbi]

Rabbi, that's a scary statement. I wouldn't want to see a socialist feminist running this country. With her agenda, there wouldn't be a 2012...we'd be another Cuba

by then.

You'd be amazed how being in power will limit what people can do. She wouldnt get to do half of what she wants. If elected she would screw up royally and probably be a one-term. That would be preferable to a Giuliani, who isn't any friend of gun owners either btw.

[Mike.357]

Wow.... I never realized that if the US passes a gun ban that every other nation producing weapons would stop making them too...

The US can't and should not try to control other countries. Get out of the UN now.

I guess the gun ban would then prevent illegal immigration and drug traffic as we know nothing illegal that is wanted in the US ever makes it across that secure border.

What does a gun ban have to do with this? Seperate issues.

I may change my mind, with that kind of power we should vote to ban guns, it will change everything....for the children.

Blanket frivolous statement.

(I'm not poking you directly Mike but your logic seemed a bit flawed that guns would go away over 50 to 100 years, not gonna happen, feel free to poke back, RW

If guns are illegal, basically there would be no manufacture or importation in this country. Legally owned guns would cease to exist, therefore law abiding citizens would not own guns. You still going to have guns? What are your plans for them then?

I want to know. You going to risk incarceration over it? So say you keep them, where are they? Buried or in a attic somewhere? You will not be shooting them. No more range practice. How would your kids be exposed to firearms then? Are you telling me that they would be willing to risk themselves to incaceration over your illegal guns?

Of course other countries may continue manufacture but the only buyers in the USA would be military, LEO and criminals. I know criminals have weapons but if criminals are the only market for sales of gun to non military and LEO how is there profit in that?

Can you totally eliminate guns? No, there would always be some out there.

Now riddle me this, what percentage of the US population is criminal? I am talking violent types, felonious hardcore types, not white collar crime. I don't know but I am thinking it is a very small number. These types would be the market to sell guns to. Is there really a market for them? I don't know. But certainly guns would be eliminated from the street. 100% well no, but 99+% yes.

Do not confuse things and do not think I am for a gun ban. I love guns, they are important to me. I gain great enjoyment from them and to me the 1A applies to guns as well as 2A. Shooting guns to me falls under Pursuit of Happiness.

[Mike.357]

You'd be amazed how being in power will limit what people can do. She wouldnt get to do half of what she wants. If elected she would screw up royally and probably be a one-term. That would be preferable to a Giuliani, who isn't any friend of gun owners either btw.

Rabbi, you hit the nail on the head. Rudy is a lib masquerading as a republican.

[Marswolf]

Rudy certainly isn't a friend of gun owners, but whoever wins the Presidency normally drags a few of their party members in with them. So, given a choice between a gun hating Democrat and a gun-hating Republican, I'd have to vote for the Republican.

[The Rabbi]

Rudy certainly isn't a friend of gun owners, but whoever wins the Presidency normally drags a few of their party members in with them. So, given a choice between a gun hating Democrat and a gun-hating Republican, I'd have to vote for the Republican.

Sometimes, but more typically in recent elections the electorate splits the difference and one party has president and the other congress. If the GOP held Congress (or the blue-dog Dems) and Hillary got elected, we'd have grid lock for 4 years. Not a bad prospect actually.

[The Rabbi]

OK< winning ticket for the GOP is:

Thompson-Sununu. Those of you under 35 will probably have to Google his name.

[saintsfanbrian]

Rabbi,

Kind of like the grid lock right now with Bush in office and libs in the congress? I think those are some of the best presidencies ever!!

[Mike.357]

You can't be serious about Sununu

I know Wikipedia is not the end all of information but what is in there does not do anything to make me want to vote for a ticket including this guy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_H._Sununu

He was born in Cuba, were his parents US citizens?

[The Rabbi]

If he wasnt a born US citizen then I guess he can't be POTUS.

I was looking at the level of experience he has, which is one of Fred's weaknesses.

[Mike.357]

Rabbi, go and read the wiki about him. I don't know if some of his experiences would make him a good candidate.

[The Rabbi]

Rabbi, go and read the wiki about him. I don't know if some of his experiences would make him a good candidate.

I didnt see anything that jumped out at me.

Republicans suffer from a bad tendency towards anal rectitis, a condition characterized by eliminating anyone with anything less than squeaky-clean credentials. The result has been a serious dearth of long term leadership, comparable to Ted Kennedy etc.

Where are the leaders of '94 and the Contract With America? Not one of them has done anything that a Dem would do without thinking, yet all of them are out of office or quiet.

The result has been front-runners with the thinnest of credentials (except for McCain the Insane). Granted the Dems' front runners arent any better. Richardson has the best resume of any of them, and probably the least likely to win the nomination.

I dunno. Pete Wilson??

[Mike.357]

comparable to Ted Kennedy etc

Kind of hard to compare a national candidate with a senator. Kennedy only has to keep people in his lib state happy.

Sununu is not a good candidate in my mind. I certainly hope that if Fred does get noominated that he chooses more wisely than this questionable hack.

Rabbi, why would your standards be so low as to say

didnt see anything that jumped out at me

A lot of his shenanigans caught my eye. I remember that guy in the news during the reign of King George I. He was a slimeball then and I bet he has not changed much.

How about Ron Paul in place of Fred and Thompson as his VP?

[Guest Hyaloid]

/snip

How about Ron Paul in place of Fred and Thompson as his VP?

Ahhh... that'd be a dream... but I don't think it's likely.

[Marswolf]

How about Howdie Doodie and Clarabelle? Be as likely to win.

[Mike.357]

How about Howdie Doodie and Clarabelle?

Showing some age there Mars, lol

[Marswolf]

Showing some age there Mars, lol

So are the candidates mentioned....