Gubernatorial Candidates positions on guns

[LagerHead]

It's purely an uninformed emotional reaction. What I don't understand is how they can cling to those views in the face of logic. I just don't know what to do with that mindset, except not vote for it.

The feeling is mutual. They don't understand how you can cling to logic in the face of their views.

[Guest PapaB]

... So, he is a no go for me unless it is him vs a dem. Then I guess I will hold my nose and vote.

It's up to us to prevent that option during the primaries.

JayC wrote

I agree Ramsey appears to be more inline with folks here on the 2A.

+1

[DaveTN]

When I see a Politician giving lip service to the 2nd amendment for political gain it makes me want to puke.

2nd amendment rights are something you have or you don’t. I don’t want a Governor that doesn’t know the difference.

[Worriedman]

When I see a Politician giving lip service to the 2nd amendment for political gain it makes me want to puke.

2nd amendment rights are something you have or you don’t. I don’t want a Governor that doesn’t know the difference.

Expound please, which candidates do you perceive as giving lip service to the 2nd Amendment for political gain?

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Now you're talking, Dave. You said it right. Right, not privilege.

[DaveTN]

Expound please, which candidates do you perceive as giving lip service to the 2nd Amendment for political gain?

Any of them that referred to their support of the 2nd amendment, or infringing on a 2nd amendment right they imply citizens have.

There are a couple of states that recognize the 2nd amendment as a right; our state is not one of them. But I guess it is easier to make a big deal about whether or not someone from a special group can carry a gun in a bar than it is to address the elephant in the room.

And who pitched them those softballs? This is the Governor we are talking about.

Question: 95% of the citizens of Tennessee would be arrested and charged with a crime if they were stopped carrying a loaded gun or had one in their car. Would you continue to support these laws that many feel are in direct violation of the 2nd amendment?

[Krull]

Well Ramsey is out for me....due to his stance on PRE-K which is what my wife teaches. He wants to do away with it. I'm going to go to his church and talk to him about that.

He thinks these kids should be at home and not at school. All of my wife's children are low income and to give two examples out of 20; one has lesbian "parents" who do not work, conduct sexual acts in front of her( so the kid says and knows what a " pus!!" is. The "man" told my wife the girl has to be in bed by 1900 every night so there is no time for home study to help the child with abc and such. Next case is a girl who lives with her granparents in a camper. The grandad just got out of prison and drinks lots of "skunk" according to the child. This child has no toys and only a backpack to play with at home. The papaw beats the mamaw, allegedly. One last case is my wifewent on a home visit and one child lived in a trailer with about a 4+4 hole in the floor and was playing with a beer can.

Now I'm sorry but if Ron Ramsey thinks this grant should be cut and these children need to be at home he is a tool. There are 20 children in her classroom and each one has a similar story. I'm going to invite hi

to spend a day with my wife and her children to see for himself. I want to like him and vote for him, but I stand strong on this.

[1gewehr]

I'm going to stand with Ramsey on this one.

While I deplore treating children the way your examples show, I don't believe that a taxpayer-funded state program is the way to do it. The reason our Federal and State budgets are in the mess they are is because so many people have told our government to handle these problems. Government programs are NOT the answer. They rarely actually accomplish anything, and are typically 3-5 times more expensive than private programs.

Are there no churches in your area with pre-K programs? I'll tell you what. I'll gladly donate $100 to a local church to help take in one of these kids. Get a couple more folks here to do the same and we've solved your problem.

But I will fight you all the way against trying to use the power of government to steal my money to accomplish your goals.

[Krull]

I'm going to stand with Ramsey on this one.

While I deplore treating children the way your examples show, I don't believe that a taxpayer-funded state program is the way to do it. The reason our Federal and State budgets are in the mess they are is because so many people have told our government to handle these problems. Government programs are NOT the answer. They rarely actually accomplish anything, and are typically 3-5 times more expensive than private programs.

Are there no churches in your area with pre-K programs? I'll tell you what. I'll gladly donate $100 to a local church to help take in one of these kids. Get a couple more folks here to do the same and we've solved your problem.

But I will fight you all the way against trying to use the power of government to steal my money to accomplish your goals.

All I can do is laugh at this. You want to fight a waste of money you need to start with these idiots who get wellfare and foodstamps. You want to save the taxpayers money, then let's get strippers and servers at restuarants to pay their fair share. This is laughable to me that people would cut childrens programs for the reasons you have outlined. I can't believe people would want to punish children for their own personal reason such as what is stated here. With all the bs that we waste money on let's go ahead and cut jobs even more. You cut this program and you cut 100' s of jobs and take a few more out of the workplace or you add MORE welfare and tax payer money for each child these parents stick into another govt funded child care program. This will cost the taxpayers even more money in child assistance for each one of the children that will probably go to booze and cig's. This is absurd, but then again just my opinion.

[tntnixon]

All I can do is laugh at this. You want to fight a waste of money you need to start with these idiots who get wellfare and foodstamps. You want to save the taxpayers money, then let's get strippers and servers at restuarants to pay their fair share. This is laughable to me that people would cut childrens programs for the reasons you have outlined. I can't believe people would want to punish children for their own personal reason such as what is stated here. With all the bs that we waste money on let's go ahead and cut jobs even more. You cut this program and you cut 100' s of jobs and take a few more out of the workplace or you add MORE welfare and tax payer money for each child these parents stick into another govt funded child care program. This will cost the taxpayers even more money in child assistance for each one of the children that will probably go to booze and cig's. This is absurd, but then again just my opinion.

Unfortunately, there is no data to suggest that they still won't "go to booze and cigs" even with the Pre-K programs. They are still exposed to the same when they go home.

The real answer is to take these kids out of the homes, but god forbid that we do that.

The truth is that the outlay of money to "childrens programs" is inversely proportional to the actual results achieved by them. While that may not make us feel all warm and fuzzy, it is fact. Our society has come to believe, wrongly so, that we can cure all of our ills by throwing money at it. That way we don't have to personally do anything, because the "gubment gonna take care of it for us". These programs actually reinforce this message.

Think about it. These kids will grow up with the belief that they don't actually have to raise their own children because some government program will raise their children for them. Their children will have some government sponsored sense of right and wrong, which includes believing that they have no personal responsibilty (we've been doning this in our schools for about 40 years now and look what it's gotten us).

[Krull]

"Are there no churches in your area with pre-K programs? I'll tell you what. I'll gladly donate $100 to a local church to help take in one of these kids. Get a couple more folks here to do the same and we've solved your problem."

And I just now saw this. Pre-k in churches??? No there isn't. There is a preschool in churches they are entirely different things. I'm sure you are an educated man so your children probably know where they live and know how to dial 911 in an emergency.

These children know nothing of the sort. They come from homes that don't even teach them how to spell their names. Now with that said look at the big picture. They are already behind in basic skills and knowledge your children already have. So in the long run these are the children that are at high risk for future welfare and criminals. If you save just a few from a close to certain outcome, you pay for the " rip off " to tax payers you speak of in future welfare and court costs we have to pay for anyway. Maybe you should go to my wife's school with Ron.

[macville]

All I can do is laugh at this. You want to fight a waste of money you need to start with these idiots who get wellfare and foodstamps. You want to save the taxpayers money, then let's get strippers and servers at restuarants to pay their fair share. This is laughable to me that people would cut childrens programs for the reasons you have outlined. I can't believe people would want to punish children for their own personal reason such as what is stated here. With all the bs that we waste money on let's go ahead and cut jobs even more. You cut this program and you cut 100' s of jobs and take a few more out of the workplace or you add MORE welfare and tax payer money for each child these parents stick into another govt funded child care program. This will cost the taxpayers even more money in child assistance for each one of the children that will probably go to booze and cig's. This is absurd, but then again just my opinion.

You can spend all the money you want at the Pre-K level, and the majority of these kids are still going to be screwed up because there parents aren't there pushing them and they are very unlikely to find teachers later on who are going to push them. It's putting a band-aid on the cut instead of preventing the cut. The problem is....it's almost impossible to reverse the problem unless we take away these welfare programs that enable people who shouldn't be parents to keep being parents (aka: make them realize they need to give their kids up for adoption) or make them realize they shouldn't be having sex in the first place if they don't want kids. 100+ years ago natural selection did it's job and these people just died. Now, those of us who actually want to do something with our lives are being forced to keep those idiots alive. The worse part, is we are spending money on people who had every opportunity (free public school, libraries, job placement help and actual jobs) when there are alot of people out in the world that didn't have any options for any of that we could be helping.

If we stopped helping these people they would either finally step up to the plate or natural selection would do it's job (although, I'm guessing 98% would actually just step up.)

Matthew

[Krull]

Well this is my final post on the matter. The results achived with all students in school can not be shown on a bs test or piece if paper. The problem is that the school teachers suck and that isn't the kids fault. It's the fault of the horsecrap colleges in this state that dish out teaching degrees like they are candy. Believe it or not there are some good teachers out there who want to make a difference and not take the jobs to get summers and holidays off.

But hey let's support those kids in Haiti and waste tax payer money on them. They are going to contribute a lot to society. Natural Selection would have cured the world of a major drug port and vodoo nation if we would have just left them alone.

Edited January 22, 2010 by Krull

[macville]

Well this is my final post on the matter. The results achived with all students in school can not be shown on a bs test or piece if paper. The problem is that the school teachers suck and that isn't the kids fault. It's the fault of the horsecrap colleges in this state that dish out teaching degrees like they are candy. Believe it or not there are some good teachers out there who want to make a difference and not take the jobs to get summers and holidays off.

I have to slightly disagree with you. Yes, ALOT of teachers suck. But I don't believe they are all bad teachers. Teachers get almost no support from their school administration, none form downtown (at least not here in Knoxville), and not much for parents--even in "rich" schools. When teachers get no support, it's hard to want to fight for the kids because you are getting nailed on all fronts--the administration, parents, and kids. Why would you expect a teacher to do a good job if no one cares about the kids except for them? Teaching is a team sport and we've turned it into gladiator sport.

Matthew

[-boatman-]

Well Ramsey is out for me....due to his stance on PRE-K which is what my wife teaches. He wants to do away with it. I'm going to go to his church and talk to him about that.

He thinks these kids should be at home and not at school. All of my wife's children are low income and to give two examples out of 20; one has lesbian "parents" who do not work, conduct sexual acts in front of her( so the kid says and knows what a " pus!!" is. The "man" told my wife the girl has to be in bed by 1900 every night so there is no time for home study to help the child with abc and such. Next case is a girl who lives with her granparents in a camper. The grandad just got out of prison and drinks lots of "skunk" according to the child. This child has no toys and only a backpack to play with at home. The papaw beats the mamaw, allegedly. One last case is my wifewent on a home visit and one child lived in a trailer with about a 4+4 hole in the floor and was playing with a beer can.

Now I'm sorry but if Ron Ramsey thinks this grant should be cut and these children need to be at home he is a tool. There are 20 children in her classroom and each one has a similar story. I'm going to invite hi

to spend a day with my wife and her children to see for himself. I want to like him and vote for him, but I stand strong on this.

While I'll admit this is very sad, unless this pre k is 24-7 they are still going to be exposed to this after they get home. Pre k is not the answer to this. Getting these children out of these homes for good is the only think that will fix this and pre k IMO is not the answer.

[Guest rj8806]

Great link mike.357, thanks.

Did anyone else notice a trend coming from the democrap candidates?

[Guest rj8806]

Well Ramsey is out for me....due to his stance on PRE-K which is what my wife teaches. He wants to do away with it. I'm going to go to his church and talk to him about that.

He thinks these kids should be at home and not at school. All of my wife's children are low income and to give two examples out of 20; one has lesbian "parents" who do not work, conduct sexual acts in front of her( so the kid says and knows what a " pus!!" is. The "man" told my wife the girl has to be in bed by 1900 every night so there is no time for home study to help the child with abc and such. Next case is a girl who lives with her granparents in a camper. The grandad just got out of prison and drinks lots of "skunk" according to the child. This child has no toys and only a backpack to play with at home. The papaw beats the mamaw, allegedly. One last case is my wifewent on a home visit and one child lived in a trailer with about a 4+4 hole in the floor and was playing with a beer can.

Now I'm sorry but if Ron Ramsey thinks this grant should be cut and these children need to be at home he is a tool. There are 20 children in her classroom and each one has a similar story. I'm going to invite hi

to spend a day with my wife and her children to see for himself. I want to like him and vote for him, but I stand strong on this.

Your last post in this thread said you were done with this thread so I doubt you'll even see my response.,......

While I feel bad for the kids in your examples, I don't feel it is the .govt job to fix this. The parents need to be held accountable at some point. There are already laws on the books regarding child endangerment and such and maybe your wife should call DCS or something?

On another note......is there a PDF like the original one showing the candidates stance on other issues besides 2A?

[OngoingFreedom]

Your last post in this thread said you were done with this thread so I doubt you'll even see my response.,......

While I feel bad for the kids in your examples, I don't feel it is the .govt job to fix this. The parents need to be held accountable at some point. There are already laws on the books regarding child endangerment and such and maybe your wife should call DCS or something?

/\ /\ /\ I agree with this post! /\ /\ /\

[Worriedman]

Well Ramsey is out for me....due to his stance on PRE-K which is what my wife teaches. He wants to do away with it. I'm going to go to his church and talk to him about that.

He thinks these kids should be at home and not at school. All of my wife's children are low income and to give two examples out of 20; one has lesbian "parents" who do not work, conduct sexual acts in front of her( so the kid says and knows what a " pus!!" is. The "man" told my wife the girl has to be in bed by 1900 every night so there is no time for home study to help the child with abc and such. Next case is a girl who lives with her granparents in a camper. The grandad just got out of prison and drinks lots of "skunk" according to the child. This child has no toys and only a backpack to play with at home. The papaw beats the mamaw, allegedly. One last case is my wifewent on a home visit and one child lived in a trailer with about a 4+4 hole in the floor and was playing with a beer can.

Now I'm sorry but if Ron Ramsey thinks this grant should be cut and these children need to be at home he is a tool. There are 20 children in her classroom and each one has a similar story. I'm going to invite hi

to spend a day with my wife and her children to see for himself. I want to like him and vote for him, but I stand strong on this.

I would be very interested in knowing what the "curriculum" is for the program. Is it State mandated? Do all the different systems get direction as to the things they attempt to teach?

[Guest TnRebel]

As a new voter here in Tn , Thanks Mike