A vote for a Democrat is a vote against the Second Amendment!

[JohnC]

I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but....

A vote for a democrat is a vote against the Second Amendment as originally intended by our framers.

They are patently Anti-Second Amendment. None of the democrats running for the office of president are pro-2A in the sense of "shall not be infringed" for law abiding citizens. They're all in favor of Assault Weapons bans, which again, are modern semi-auto sporting rifles, and numerous other restrictions, such as magazine capacity limits, etc.





Vote accordingly so we don't have another Clinton era of Second Amendment (Constitutional) oppression!

If we lose these rights now, we'll never get them back because I don't believe democrats will allow another sunset clause since it backfired on them when we got a Republican president (Bush) who refused to renew the law.

Again, vote accordingly. Your constitutional rights are at stake here! :usa:

[Randall53]

You can add quite a number of RINO's to that group also. A number that seems to keep growing.

[JohnC]

You can add quite a number of RINO's to that group also. A number that seems to keep growing.

How about we just make a complete list of all the Anti-2A politicians.

#1 by going by their voting records.
#2 by their public and private verbal threats.

Etc....

[Randall53]

Sounds like a good idea. Then have a sticky post  :up:

[Randall53]

Here's a link that has list. It's from the NAGR.  Ya'll know Dudley I'm sure.

 

http://nagr.org/2014/House/Betrayed.aspx?pid=1b

 

 

Here is a much better site. You can actually see that there are a few Democrats that are members of the NRA and don't always follow the herd.

 

http://thedailybeast.thisisyourreponguns.com

 

If I counted right in the above Daily Beast list, 18 Democrats have voting records against gun control and 5 Republicans support gun control. That's something to think about.

Edited November 2, 2015 by Randall53

[Wingshooter]

...

A vote for a democrat is a vote against the Second Amendment as originally intended by our framers.They are patently Anti-Second Amendment.

...

Truth Edited November 2, 2015 by Wingshooter

[JayC]

Sorry to rain on your parade, but Bush would have signed the assault weapons ban in a heart beat.  He also supported mandatory background checks on all gun sales....

 

Also, the landmark Heller v DC court case, Bush's DOJ fought tooth and nail to support the complete handgun ban in Washington for more than 4 years.

 

Don't believe me, here is Bush in his own words, complaining about the AWB not being renewed:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xh8oubGJo8M

 

BTW, John Kasich who is currently running for President as a Republican helped round up 48 republican votes in the house to get the AWB passed in the first place....  Just a quick note, Kasich, even though he campaigned and voted for the AWB, has an A rating from the NRA, whats wrong with that picture?

 

I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but....

A vote for a democrat is a vote against the Second Amendment as originally intended by our framers.

They are patently Anti-Second Amendment. None of the democrats running for the office of president are pro-2A in the sense of "shall not be infringed" for law abiding citizens. They're all in favor of Assault Weapons bans, which again, are modern semi-auto sporting rifles, and numerous other restrictions, such as magazine capacity limits, etc.





Vote accordingly so we don't have another Clinton era of Second Amendment (Constitutional) oppression!

If we lose these rights now, we'll never get them back because I don't believe democrats will allow another sunset clause since it backfired on them when we got a Republican president (Bush) who refused to renew the law.

Again, vote accordingly. Your constitutional rights are at stake here! :usa:

Edited November 2, 2015 by JayC

[bersaguy]

Can you really trust any politician to do what they say they will do once elected? I think for the most part they all speak out both sides of their mouths and as the Indians use to say Speak with Forked Tongue!!!! They will tell you what they think you want to hear depending on who they are talking to just to get that vote! Once they get elected the very first time they automatically become eligible for all the benefits they will receive for life when they leave or get kicked out of office by the people that vote them out because of the first lies. We have a man in the Oval office that has blatantly lied to the American people with every speech he has ever made and everyone knows it yet no one in Washington does anything about it. His most recently lie arises last week with No Boots on the Ground in Syria he made in 2013. How about if you Like your Insurance you can keep it!!! that was a whopper that he knew was a lie yet he kept saying it. Now we have a Female Democrat running for President that has been caught in more lies than most can count and yet is still in the lead in the polls for her party. I say until the people begin to hold all of their feet to the fire it will remain a status Quo.......jmho 

[Randall53]

Voting a party line without researching the candidates voting records, if there are any, is about like voting for a person because of his race. 

[bersaguy]

Voting a party line without researching the candidates voting records, if there are any, is about like voting for a person because of his race. 

I agree with you 1000% and that is what scares the hell out of me. I am hoping and praying that because Hillary is a women she does not get elected just because of her sex!!!!!  I don't think the country can stand another history making election like the one in 2008 and electing another habitual well known liar...jmho

[Randall53]

While all career politicians seem to be liars, the Democrats are far in the lead and will use any means possible to further their agenda. They must spend a lot of time reading the Koran, if you get my drift.

[DaveTN]

If our economy isn’t fixed the 2nd amendment won’t matter. I couldn’t possibly care any less what a Federal government candidate thinks about the 2nd amendment; that fight has been fought and will be left up to our state legislators.

I care what they can do for the economy at the Federal level. So I certainly won’t be voting for any Democrats I’ve seen.

[JohnC]

Sorry to rain on your parade, but Bush would have signed the assault weapons ban in a heart beat.  He also supported mandatory background checks on all gun sales....
 
Also, the landmark Heller v DC court case, Bush's DOJ fought tooth and nail to support the complete handgun ban in Washington for more than 4 years.
 
Don't believe me, here is Bush in his own words, complaining about the AWB not being renewed:
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xh8oubGJo8M
 
BTW, John Kasich who is currently running for President as a Republican helped round up 48 republican votes in the house to get the AWB passed in the first place....  Just a quick note, Kasich, even though he campaigned and voted for the AWB, has an A rating from the NRA, whats wrong with that picture?

Yes, we all know some Republicans are anti-2A...  :shrug: 

My point is, all the current democrats running for POTUS have sworn they'll fight for more gun control, restriction, bans (AWB's), etc.

 

While many on the right have sworn to protect 2A rights and not renew any AWB's, etc.

So again, vote accordingly or suffer the consequences. :up:

Edited November 2, 2015 by JohnC

[Cruel Hand Luke]

Funny how no one can explain how if Bush was supposedly so anti 2nd Amendment but yet he put ZERO effort into renewing the AWB in 2004.....it was simply allowed to go away and that was that....

 

Do we really think that if he REALLY wanted an AWB renewal that he would not have suggested to Tom Delay (the speaker of the house at the time) that they allow the renewal to happen and to come to a vote?   So did he just "forget" to get an AWB done on his watch? Or was he saying what he felt he had to say to get elected and allow the Republican controlled congress to do their job?

 

The "fix was in" on the AWB expiring and most people in the industry knew that it was NOT going to get renewed according to what Tom Delay's office was telling us in the summer of 2004. There was NO support for it from the White House and they (the speaker's office) were making sure that it did not get support in the congress......

Edited November 2, 2015 by Cruel Hand Luke

[Shepherd Master]

They are all evil.

[btq96r]

I refuse to be goaded into picking a candidate on one issue alone.  The 1st, 4th, and 5th amendments are under some serious flak from both sides of the isle, and they are as important as the 2nd.

 

As long as the House of Representatives is Republican, anything significant can't get passed.  Since the House is gerrymandered for the foreseeable future, I'd wager we're safe.  Democratic candidates can say whatever they want, they're just placating their electorate...they know they can't do much more than the current President has through EOs, and that they are loosing in the states and in important court cases. 

[Wingshooter]

I don't see any democrats running. During the first democrat debate, the candidates were asked to state how they saw themselves politically (or something like that). Sanders claimed to be Socialist and hillary said she is a progressive.

It really baffles me how some people think that either of the two leading "democrat" candidates would be a good choice for america. It would be like voting to continue the train wreck that has been the last 7 years. I really wonder if those that still complain about Bush have been paying attention recently beacuse obama makes bush look like a saint IMO.

[Wingshooter]

I refuse to be goaded into picking a candidate on one issue alone.  The 1st, 4th, and 5th amendments are under some serious flak from both sides of the isle, and they are as important as the 2nd.
 
As long as the House of Representatives is Republican, anything significant can't get passed.  Since the House is gerrymandered for the foreseeable future, I'd wager we're safe.  Democratic candidates can say whatever they want, they're just placating their electorate...they know they can't do much more than the current President has through EOs, and that they are loosing in the states and in important court cases.

I see the next SCOTUS appointment(s) as the biggest deal going. If we have a liberal making those appts, then God help us.

[JayC]

Exactly who do you think has a track record where you can trust them to note vote for gun control measures?  We're lucky in some respects that Obama won re-election in 2012, because if Romney had been in office, he would have passed gun control, and large chunks of the republican party would have voted for it.  The only reason Obama was opposed was to prevent him from having a 'win'.

 

Lets go down the list:

 

Jeb Bush - Weak at best on gun rights - supports closing the 'gun show loophole'

Ben Carson - Has spoken out in support of a new AWB

Chris Christie - Anti-gun rights

Ted Cruz - Very Pro gun rights

Carly Fiorina - No track record, but says the right things

Lindsey Graham - A rating, but has in the distant past voted for anti-gun legislation

Mike Huckabee - Luke warn, talks a good game but opposed unlicensed carry

Bobby Jindal - Signed 2 anti-gun bills in the 2012 session.

John Kasich - Whipped votes for the 1994 AWB

Rand Paul - Very Pro gun rights

Macro Rubio - Has opposed pro gun rights legislation in FL while in the legislature - much like Beth Harwell does here

Donald Trump - supported waiting period, AWB, and other anti-gun rights measures

 

So out of 12, 2 have a rock solid track record of supporting gun rights no matter what, and another says the right things but has no track record.  The other 9 have opposed pro gun legislation, or out right supported anti-gun rights legislation in the past.

 

How exactly is this better than the democrats....  Truth be told, as far as gun rights go, we may be better off with a democrat in the white house, and republicans controlling congress.

 

 

 

Yes, we all know some Republicans are anti-2A...  :shrug: 

My point is, all the current democrats running for POTUS have sworn they'll fight for more gun control, restriction, bans (AWB's), etc.

 

While many on the right have sworn to protect 2A rights and not renew any AWB's, etc.

So again, vote accordingly or suffer the consequences. :up:

 

[JayC]

I'm sorry but Bush was NEVER a strong support of gun rights...  he was almost always on the wrong side, AWB, trying to increase the legal age of gun ownership, banning certain types of bullets, preventing the importing of legal high capacity magazines.  Closing the 'gun show loophole' which means background checks on all sales.

 

Many of the same things Obama would like to pass, Bush supported.  Do you think he would have opposed any of the legislation the democrats were pushing after Sandy Hook?  Do you think Remoney would have opposed any of it?

 

Making it out like Republican's are somehow better on gun rights is just not true...  There are a minority of Republican legislators at both the state and national level that truly support gun rights...  it just so happens they are republican...  but make no mistake republicans have taken away are gun rights in the past, and oppose repealing stupid laws that do nothing to protect us...  

 

Funny how no one can explain how if Bush was supposedly so anti 2nd Amendment but yet he put ZERO effort into renewing the AWB in 2004.....it was simply allowed to go away and that was that....

 

Do we really think that if he REALLY wanted an AWB renewal that he would not have suggested to Tom Delay (the speaker of the house at the time) that they allow the renewal to happen and to come to a vote?   So did he just "forget" to get an AWB done on his watch? Or was he saying what he felt he had to say to get elected and allow the Republican controlled congress to do their job?

 

The "fix was in" on the AWB expiring and most people in the industry knew that it was NOT going to get renewed according to what Tom Delay's office was telling us in the summer of 2004. There was NO support for it from the White House and they (the speaker's office) were making sure that it did not get support in the congress......

[Mike.357]

While all career politicians seem to be liars, the Democrats are far in the lead and will use any means possible to further their agenda. They must spend a lot of time reading the Koran, if you get my drift.

 

 

back that up with fact.  

[Randall53]

There are two forms of lying to non-believers that are permitted under certain circumstances, taqiyya and kitman.  These circumstances are typically those that advance the cause Islam - in some cases by gaining the trust of non-believers in order to draw out their vulnerability and defeat them.  

 

Sounds like a Democrat to me Mike357. LOL

 

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/011-taqiyya.htm

Edited November 4, 2015 by Randall53

[Mike.357]

There are two forms of lying to non-believers that are permitted under certain circumstances, taqiyya and kitman.  These circumstances are typically those that advance the cause Islam - in some cases by gaining the trust of non-believers in order to draw out their vulnerability and defeat them.  

 

Sounds like a Democrat to me Mike357. LOL

 

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/011-taqiyya.htm

 

 

sounds like a politician to me,  party affiliation is irrelevant.

[Randall53]

Yep. that's what I said, but the democrats are far worse the way I see it.

[Worriedman]

Yep. that's what I said, but the democrats are far worse the way I see it.

You expect the democrats to oppose gun rights issues, but, here in Tennessee Republican lie to us more, at least the Democrats are honest in trying to take those rights away.