Election is over, get used to saying "President Romney" [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Election is over, get used to saying "President Romney"


Drjones
10-16-2012, 20:59
Zero plainly stated in the debate he wants another "assault weapon" ban.

There are many nails in his coffin, but this will by far be the biggest, IMO.

That and Romney introducing a huge segment of the public to Fast & Furious.

Game over, IMO....

Mr King
10-16-2012, 21:02
Ive said for a long time that its going to be BACK TO THE FUTURE 1980 on Nov 6th. Landslide, probably bigger than Carter's Loss.:rofl:

FLIPPER 348
10-16-2012, 21:02
Romney dodged the question (2X).

President Obama will win again.

Hummer
10-16-2012, 21:07
The fascists obvious think they can get away with it now. Just as bad was Romney's idiotic response. Clearly, he has no clue about the issues involved. But, Romney won't be a driver of any new AWB, Obama and the Dems will.

BSA70
10-16-2012, 21:07
Don't be so confident he will win.

Sounded like he banned the weapons in MA.He'll do it again...

frizz
10-16-2012, 21:08
Dude, it ain't over until it's over. Listen to Yogi.

ChuteTheMall
10-16-2012, 21:10
I guess Hussein thinks he'll have a lot more freedom after this election, as he told Russia's President Medyevev.

Looks like he'll have a lot more free time too.:elephant:

2bgop
10-16-2012, 21:11
[QUOTE=BSA70;19526034]Don't be so confident he will win.

Sounded like he banned the weapons in MA.He'll do it again


Who is going to send one to any President?

camelotkid
10-16-2012, 21:19
well considering that a AWB would not make it to the presidents desk no matter who the president is, I think it is not going to make a difference. Anyone that was afraid of an AWB was not voting for obama anyways.

shotgunred
10-16-2012, 21:23
This debate was close. I doubt it made the election for either of them.

G36's Rule
10-16-2012, 21:28
Romney dodged the question (2X).

President Obama will win again.

Romney was pretty clear right off the bat, no new gun laws.

Fox
10-16-2012, 22:07
Romney dodged the question (2X).

President Obama will win again.

So what brought you around to wanting Ho Chi Minh for president? You got a portrait of Che tattooed on your chest?

BTW, the marxist would not answer for Fast & Furious when it came up in the debate

LASTRESORT20
10-16-2012, 22:10
Romney dodged the question (2X).

President Obama will win again.



Win again with WHAT....his performance last 4 years?:upeyes:

TK-421
10-16-2012, 22:11
So what brought you around to wanting Ho Chi Minh for president?

He's cuter? :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

ND40oz
10-16-2012, 22:14
well considering that a AWB would not make it to the presidents desk no matter who the president is, I think it is not going to make a difference

Nothing needs to make it to his desk, he just needs to nominate another Justice like the last two that replaces one of the 5 on the other side of the aisle.

nmk
10-16-2012, 22:17
Zero plainly stated in the debate he wants another "assault weapon" ban.

There are many nails in his coffin, but this will by far be the biggest, IMO.

That and Romney introducing a huge segment of the public to Fast & Furious.

Game over, IMO....


So all the Obama voters that thought he was opposed to a new AWB will now vote for Romney? Was this a key issue for undecideds?

Fox
10-16-2012, 22:23
So all the Obama voters that thought he was opposed to a new AWB will now vote for Romney? Was this a key issue for undecideds?


We had alot of people here saying that the Democrats would avoid the gun issue because they lost Congress in the 1994 election. Now they can't delude themselves.

Some will vote for Romney, others might stay home on election day.

tsmo1066
10-16-2012, 22:25
Was this a key issue for undecideds?

For many, yes. It's also a key issue for many conservative gun owners who were planning on voting third party. Now that Romney is firmly on the record that he won;t seek new gun laws and Obama is equally on record that he will seek a new AWB, many of those conservative third party supporters will flock into the Romney camp.

That one question could become a HUGE deal changer.

skippz
10-16-2012, 22:34
Yes I agree it could be a game changer.... Did anyone else pick up what obama said about "cheap handguns in Chicago"? It won't just be semi-auto rifles folks... He's coming after handguns as well... I could hear it in his tone...
Also, they are giving Romney grief for decisions he made as governor of Mass... Now I'm no political science guru, but I'm sure decisions made on the national level will differ from those made on the state level... Just because he supported something as gov. for one state doesn't mean he will back it or oppose it for all 50.

HollowHead
10-16-2012, 22:39
[QUOTE=tsmo1066;19526365]Now that Romney is firmly on the record that he won;t seek new gun laws... QUOTE]

When did debate promises become guaranties? HH

TK-421
10-16-2012, 22:44
[QUOTE=tsmo1066;19526365]Now that Romney is firmly on the record that he won;t seek new gun laws... QUOTE]

When did debate promises become guaranties? HH

When did anything that comes out of a politician's mouth suddenly become guarantees? :rofl:

certifiedfunds
10-16-2012, 22:47
[QUOTE=BSA70;19526034]Don't be so confident he will win.

Sounded like he banned the weapons in MA.He'll do it again


Who is going to send one to any President?

Even Harry Reid is pro-gun.

Happypuppy
10-16-2012, 22:48
The Republican platform is more Pro-Gun than any I can remember and that has a lot more to do what Romney personally thinks.


Sent via Messenger Pigeon

domin8ss
10-16-2012, 22:55
Yes I agree it could be a game changer.... Did anyone else pick up what obama said about "cheap handguns in Chicago"? It won't just be semi-auto rifles folks... He's coming after handguns as well... I could hear it in his tone...
Also, they are giving Romney grief for decisions he made as governor of Mass... Now I'm no political science guru, but I'm sure decisions made on the national level will differ from those made on the state level... Just because he supported something as gov. for one state doesn't mean he will back it or oppose it for all 50.

Can somebody point me to where these cheap handguns in Chicago are? I live about 45 minutes north of Chicago and can't find a store that'll let me touch a gun because I'm not a resident. Dick's Sporting Goods told me it was company policy that I need a copy of military orders just to touch one. Problem is, I'm a military spouse.

tsmo1066
10-16-2012, 22:56
[QUOTE=tsmo1066;19526365]Now that Romney is firmly on the record that he won;t seek new gun laws... QUOTE]

When did debate promises become guaranties? HH

I never said that going on the record was a "guarantee", but thanks to that one question, the two candidates have dug their trenches on one critical issue.

Obama = For AWB

Romney = Against AWB

That's big. This is the very issue that cost the Dems both houses of Congress not too long ago.

countrygun
10-16-2012, 23:00
Don't be so confident he will win.

Sounded like he banned the weapons in MA.He'll do it again...

You have missed a lot of information on Romney as Governor and that particular bill. You need to get up to speed and do some research

HollowHead
10-16-2012, 23:23
It's also a key issue for many conservative gun owners who were planning on voting third party. .

There is no such thing. HH

Slug71
10-16-2012, 23:27
[quote=HollowHead;19526413]

I never said that going on the record was a "guarantee", but thanks to that one question, the two candidates have dug their trenches on one critical issue.

Obama = For AWB

Romney = Against AWB

That's big. This is the very issue that cost the Dems both houses of Congress not too long ago.

Romney is NOT against it! He signed it in MA!!

Slug71
10-16-2012, 23:27
Romney was pretty clear right off the bat, no new gun laws.

Don't believe him.

countrygun
10-16-2012, 23:30
[quote=tsmo1066;19526455]

Romney is NOT against it! He signed it in MA!!

In the face of a majority in the legislature that was prepared to override his veto, and after he negotiated several favorable changes to it.

If he had vetoed it they would have overridden him and passed a more onerous version

skippz
10-16-2012, 23:37
Are some ppl on here anti-gun or what?
Let me pose this question, which candidate is the NRA backing? There's two reasons America still has guns and hasn't ended up like the UK...
1) the 2nd
2) the NRA to back it

bambikilr
10-16-2012, 23:38
The biggest thing I hear is..."I have insurance, I'll vote for him again" & I'm in Oklahoma!!!! He tripled the deficit in three years, is my only response, no sense going any farther....sad

bambikilr
10-16-2012, 23:40
I agree Slug71...but if the votes go like they did two years ago...Republicans will not let that happen...just sayin

NIB
10-17-2012, 00:25
I'm telling you Glock Talk has democrat plants in here.

Seriously, some posters think Obama is more pro-gun friendly than Romney. GTFO!

MrGlock21
10-17-2012, 01:16
Don't believe him.

You are free to believe whatever you want.

Truth is:
If Romney wins, gun rights will be a non-issue.
If Obama wins, there will be an other AWB and much more.

NEOH212
10-17-2012, 01:37
You are free to believe whatever you want.

Truth is:
If Romney wins, gun rights will be a non-issue.
If Obama wins, there will be an other AWB and much more.

No, the truth is that politicians lie to you in order to get your votes.

Believe what you want but that's the real truth.

:wavey:

NEOH212
10-17-2012, 01:37
Romney was pretty clear right off the bat, no new gun laws.

At least not until his second term. :whistling:

ICARRY2
10-17-2012, 02:56
Like I said after the first debate, obama doesnt seem like he wants to be reelected.

First debate he is just a body on stage. Wont challenge Romney.

Second debate he is calling for AWB.

concretefuzzynuts
10-17-2012, 03:02
I'm telling you Glock Talk has democrat plants in here.

Seriously, some posters think Obama is more pro-gun friendly than Romney. GTFO!

This. Only they aren't as covert as they think they are.

concretefuzzynuts
10-17-2012, 03:07
Direct quote from Obama, 2nd debate:

“My belief is that, (A), we have to enforce the laws we’ve already got, make sure that we’re keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, those who are mentally ill. We’ve done a much better job in terms of background checks, but we’ve got more to do when it comes to enforcement.
“But I also share your belief that weapons that were designed for soldiers in war theaters don’t belong on our streets. And so what I’m trying to do is to get a broader conversation about how do we reduce the violence generally. Part of it is seeing if we can get an assault weapons ban reintroduced. But part of it is also looking at other sources of the violence. Because frankly, in my home town of Chicago, there’s an awful lot of violence and they’re not using AK-47s. They’re using cheap hand guns.”

Clutch Cargo
10-17-2012, 03:10
Don't be so confident he will win.

Sounded like he banned the weapons in MA.He'll do it again...

Not if he wants Congress to play ball on other issues.

Clutch Cargo
10-17-2012, 03:12
Win again with WHAT....his performance last 4 years?:upeyes:

His supporters will be to busy at their NEW JOBS to vote.:rofl:

Psychman
10-17-2012, 04:50
Romney was pretty clear right off the bat, no new gun laws.

That is clearly what Romney said. Obama clearly said he would work to reinstate the "assault" weapons ban.

jp3975
10-17-2012, 05:08
No, the truth is that politicians lie to you in order to get your votes.

Believe what you want but that's the real truth.

:wavey:

The truth is, one guy said no new gun laws and the other said we need a new ban and he dosnt like cheap pistols being available.

Anyone who thinks theyre the same is mentally deficient, biased Or a sore loser.

Psychman
10-17-2012, 05:12
The truth is, one guy said no new gun laws and the other said we need a new ban and he dosnt like cheap pistols being available.

Anyone who thinks theyre the same is mentally deficient, biased Or a sore loser.

Gosh, I wonder what he considers cheap pistols?

I do wish Romney had a chance for a rebutal to Obamas comment about Chicago and the high crime rate.

"So Mr. President, since you brought up Chicago, isn't it true that Chicago has the toughest restrictive gun laws in the country, yet has one of the highest if not the highest gun violence rates?" " I guess more restrictive gun laws does not equate to less gun crime"

gwalchmai
10-17-2012, 05:30
Direct quote from Obama, 2nd debate:

“Because frankly, in my home town of Chicago, there’s an awful lot of violence and they’re not using AK-47s. They’re using cheap hand guns.”So if you can't afford the latest jewel-encrusted Sig or ceramic Glock, your life isn't worth protecting. Millionaires like Obama just don't care about the poor.

engineer151515
10-17-2012, 05:38
When our currency collapses under massive federal debt, worrying about gun laws will become invalid.

Surviving without a gun, that may be more of a challenge.

frizz
10-17-2012, 05:40
I'm telling you Glock Talk has democrat plants in here.

Seriously, some posters think Obama is more pro-gun friendly than Romney. GTFO!

Plants? Damnation! Do you think everyone who is pro-gun is a Republican? There are pro-gun Democratic politicians who are on the record as being pro gun.

There are Republicans who are pro-choice, if you didn't know.

Random
10-17-2012, 07:05
Plants? Damnation! Do you think everyone who is pro-gun is a Republican? There are pro-gun Democratic politicians who are on the record as being pro gun.

There are Republicans who are pro-choice, if you didn't know.

Most people seem eager to stand divided. If you ain't with us you against us. Everyone has to be part of a gang. Part of that is automatically hating and discounting anything said or done by others not wearing your colors. I equate anyone claiming to be republican as being equally moronic to someone claiming to be a blood. I also see anyone that says they are a democrat to be just as sheep-minded as a crip.

I can't help but hear fear and ignorance when I see groups divide themselves and proclaim their status as "Republican-Americans" or "Democrat-Americans". All done by the same people who cry "Either you're American or you ain't. No such thing as an African-American. You can't be Mexican-American."

After subtracting everyone that claims to be something other than just American I'm pretty sure I can count the number of Americans on this board on one hand. That is, of course, after subtracting all of the people that said "Well, he isn't MY president" after the last election. Man, I wish they would actually make it official and leave for Canada like some of them promised. (They lied)

gwalchmai
10-17-2012, 07:31
After subtracting everyone that claims to be something other than just American I'm pretty sure I can count the number of Americans on this board on one hand. That is, of course, after subtracting all of the people that said "Well, he isn't MY president" after the last election. Man, I wish they would actually make it official and leave for Canada like some of them promised. (They lied)He isn't my president, Ran, and neither was Clinton.

And I ain't going ANYWHERE, TYVM.

SpectreRider
10-17-2012, 08:04
As much as I would love to have a Republican candidate with sterling conservative credentials and a record to match, we have Mitt Romney. His record as governor is one of leading one of the bluest of blue states. Because Massachusetts is and was so liberal, there are things in his record that reflect that reality. Including signing the MA AWB in 2004.

Some more reality... Obama will never be sent an AWB bill in a second term. The house will not pass it and the senate probably would not pass it either.

So what is the difference between the two candidates when it comes to the 2A.

OBAMA will continue to pack the federal courts with the most liberal judges/justices that he can get confirmed.

ROMNEY will nominate judges that are at least moderate if not conservative.

In the courts we can lose 2A rights quickly and nearly irreversibly.

OBAMA has pledged to work around congress to put in place policies that the congress will not pass, Obama has said that his administration was working on gun control under the radar and Obama has said that after his last election he will have more flexibility. He has said "As those of you who are familiar with my record know, I have consistently made gun control one of my top priorities," he wrote in the Hyde Park Herald (http://ddd-hph.dlconsulting.com/cgi-bin/newshph?a=d&d=HPH20000112.1.4&e=00-00-0000-99-99-9999--20--1----obama+guns-all) on Jan. 12, 2000. "It's absolutely critical that we pass strong gun control at the federal as well as the state level. As the congressman, I will work for increased penalties for the use of guns, a one gun per month law for buyers, money for violence prevention and tougher laws stopping sales of firearms at gun shows." No call for an AWB as it was in place already from 1994-2004. But Obama wanted still more restrictions.

ROMNEY has at least given lip service to supporting 2A rights. While he may be camped out on the position for no better reason than the fact that it is politically expediant for a Republican to hold the position, fact is that he is not advocating for more gun laws.

From the debate last night:


OBAMA- But I also share your belief that weapons that were designed for soldiers in war theaters don’t belong on our streets. And so what I’m trying to do is to get a broader conversation about how do we reduce the violence generally. Part of it is seeing if we can get an assault weapons ban reintroduced, but part of it is also looking at other sources of the violence, because frankly, in my hometown of Chicago, there’s an awful lot of violence, and they’re not using AK-47s, they’re using cheap handguns.

ROMNEY- I’m not in favor of new pieces of legislation on — on guns and — and taking guns away or — or making certain guns illegal. We of course don’t want to have automatic weapons, and that’s already illegal in this country to have automatic weapons. (As WE all know that last part is wrong... full auto is not illegal but is strictly regulated)

Goerge Wallace famously said, "There's not a dime's worth of difference between the Republicans and Democrats" and sometimes there is not. There isn't a dime's worth of difference when it comes to the accumulation of power at the federal level for example. But in the issue of restricting your gun rights there is a huge difference between the two candidates.

Gun rights are probably not the end all and be all for most of us, even here on GT, but truth is truth and lying in the face of the truth just makes a person look stupid.

Truth is Barack Obama is not a supporter of the second ammendment and neither will be the judges he appoints.

I do not expect many Obama supporters to change their vote based on Obama actually admitting his support for a new assault weapons ban. But do not throw it out there that Romney signed a ban as Governor and imply that he is a larger danger to gun rights than a liberal Democrat President.



.

FLIPPER 348
10-17-2012, 08:07
Romney was pretty clear right off the bat, no new gun laws.


President Obama said the same thing.

.264 magnum
10-17-2012, 08:10
Most people seem eager to stand divided. If you ain't with us you against us. Everyone has to be part of a gang. Part of that is automatically hating and discounting anything said or done by others not wearing your colors. I equate anyone claiming to be republican as being equally moronic to someone claiming to be a blood. I also see anyone that says they are a democrat to be just as sheep-minded as a crip.

I can't help but hear fear and ignorance when I see groups divide themselves and proclaim their status as "Republican-Americans" or "Democrat-Americans". All done by the same people who cry "Either you're American or you ain't. No such thing as an African-American. You can't be Mexican-American."

After subtracting everyone that claims to be something other than just American I'm pretty sure I can count the number of Americans on this board on one hand. That is, of course, after subtracting all of the people that said "Well, he isn't MY president" after the last election. Man, I wish they would actually make it official and leave for Canada like some of them promised. (They lied)

That's pretty silly.

certifiedfunds
10-17-2012, 08:11
President Obama said the same thing.

No, he didn't.

FLIPPER 348
10-17-2012, 08:11
[quote=tsmo1066;19526455]

Romney is NOT against it! He signed it in MA!!


this

He dodged the direct AWB question two times. He would not dare address it directly.

Psychman
10-17-2012, 08:13
[quote=Slug71;19526525]


this

He dodged the direct AWB question two times. He would not dare address it directly.


So, you did not hear the part where he said "I am not in favor of new gun laws"?

FLIPPER 348
10-17-2012, 08:16
No, he didn't.


The first thing he said, see post #40

FLIPPER 348
10-17-2012, 08:17
[quote=FLIPPER 348;19527178]


So, you did not hear the part where he said "I am not in favor of new gun laws"?


Yes, and I heard it when President Obama said it also.

MtBaldy
10-17-2012, 08:21
I think the election is far from over but last night's debate PO'd me enough to give Romney more money, something I hadn't planned to do. Crowley's sticking up for Obama's false account of his statements after the Libya attack was unconscionable and unprecedented. The questions from the supposedly undecided voters were obviously stacked against Romney and some appeared to have been written by the Obama campaign itself.

G36's Rule
10-17-2012, 08:22
President Obama said the same thing.

No he did not. Obama clearly said he was in favor of a reintroduction of the assault weapons ban. That would require new law.

tsmo1066
10-17-2012, 08:24
Flipper348...

Please correct your post #55. I did not say what you are quoting me as saying.

And for the record, the AWB in Mass. was passed before Romney ever took office. He DID NOT sign that legislation into law.

When the law came up for extension Romney signed it under condition that changes were made to it toning down some of the more restrictive provisions. This was his only political option because if he refused to extend that bill, the Democrats would have overruled him and done so anyway as they enjoyed a 70+% majority in the state legislature.

Romney fought the battle he could win, and at least got the law toned down somewhat.

SpectreRider
10-17-2012, 08:26
I think the election is far from over but last night's debate PO's me enough to give Romney more money, something I hadn't planned to do. Crowley's sticking up for Obama's false account of his statements after the Libya attack was unconscionable and unprecedented. The questions from the supposedly undecided voters were obviously stacked against Romney and some appeared to have been written by the Obama campaign itself.

I felt the same way, but hadn't thought to send (more) money. Good idea. Going to do that RIGHT NOW.

Donation made.

mgs
10-17-2012, 08:32
When our currency collapses under massive federal debt, worrying about gun laws will become invalid.

Surviving without a gun, that may be more of a challenge.

Oh yea......because an Executive Order will take care of that also.....never miss an opportunity!

certifiedfunds
10-17-2012, 08:41
[quote=FLIPPER 348;19527178]


So, you did not hear the part where he said "I am not in favor of new gun laws"?

Did you happen to hear the "but" right after it?

DanaT
10-17-2012, 08:45
Gosh, I wonder what he considers cheap pistols?

crime"


The simple answer....anything you can afford to buy is "too cheap"

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

MrGlock21
10-17-2012, 08:54
No, the truth is that politicians lie to you in order to get your votes.

Believe what you want but that's the real truth.

:wavey:

Absolutely. Polititicians lie, indeed, as shamelessly as it gets. But some lie more frequently than others. Some lie more skillfully than others.

Forget about the two candidates for a moment. They both are on record about gun rights and both suck in that regard. But again, some suck more than others.

Ask youself, which party is more likely to push for gun restriction?

Yes, I'm picking my believe following the odds. :wavey:

domin8ss
10-17-2012, 09:02
Most people seem eager to stand divided. If you ain't with us you against us. Everyone has to be part of a gang. Part of that is automatically hating and discounting anything said or done by others not wearing your colors. I equate anyone claiming to be republican as being equally moronic to someone claiming to be a blood. I also see anyone that says they are a democrat to be just as sheep-minded as a crip.

I can't help but hear fear and ignorance when I see groups divide themselves and proclaim their status as "Republican-Americans" or "Democrat-Americans". All done by the same people who cry "Either you're American or you ain't. No such thing as an African-American. You can't be Mexican-American."

After subtracting everyone that claims to be something other than just American I'm pretty sure I can count the number of Americans on this board on one hand. That is, of course, after subtracting all of the people that said "Well, he isn't MY president" after the last election. Man, I wish they would actually make it official and leave for Canada like some of them promised. (They lied)

I'm sorry I haven't fled to Canada yet. Serving in the military to protect your freedoms under the first amendment had kept me very busy over the last several years.

sourdough44
10-17-2012, 10:07
I did hear that last night. I do think he will try much harder to get an 'assault weapons ban' if he were to get a 2nd term. He may have a tough time in congress, either way, hopefully he won't be there.

certifiedfunds
10-17-2012, 10:46
I did hear that last night. I do think he will try much harder to get an 'assault weapons ban' if he were to get a 2nd term. He may have a tough time in congress, either way, hopefully he won't be there.

Well there's always the Executive Order

MrGlock21
10-17-2012, 10:51
[quote=Psychman;19527186]

Did you happen to hear the "but" right after it?

I did.
"But" the "but" may only be a rhetorical attempt to appeal to the antis in the audience. This very "but" may be irrelevant.

Romeny is "agnostic" on guns. He doesn't care one way or the other. Romney may sign another AWB, IF legislation comes up and IF it is politically expedient.

The other guy will push for one.

Drjones
10-17-2012, 15:34
No, the truth is that politicians lie to you in order to get your votes.

Believe what you want but that's the real truth.

:wavey:


Right. Romney's actually more of a socialist than obama. Just don't tell anyone...these mouth-breathers on this forum are too stupid to realize it. The joke's on them!




:upeyes:

gwalchmai
10-17-2012, 15:38
I said it before - if the choice were Hitler and Obama I'd vote for Hitler. Romney will do just fine.

Glock20 10mm
10-17-2012, 16:10
Gosh, I wonder what he considers cheap pistols?

I do wish Romney had a chance for a rebutal to Obamas comment about Chicago and the high crime rate.

"So Mr. President, since you brought up Chicago, isn't it true that Chicago has the toughest restrictive gun laws in the country, yet has one of the highest if not the highest gun violence rates?" " I guess more restrictive gun laws does not equate to less gun crime"

I was thinking the same thing... Glocks are not cheap (and that I suppose is relative to ones income).

CBennett
10-17-2012, 16:12
Romney was pretty clear right off the bat, no new gun laws.

agreed^

CBennett
10-17-2012, 16:14
Romney was pretty clear right off the bat, no new gun laws.

Win again with WHAT....his performance last 4 years?:upeyes:

Unfortunately for MANY this does not seem to matter..if it mattered Rmoney would be up 20+ points lol

Slug71
10-17-2012, 16:36
[quote=FLIPPER 348;19527178]


So, you did not hear the part where he said "I am not in favor of new gun laws"?

The AWB is not a new law! Its an expired one. That is his way around it!

Drjones
10-17-2012, 16:53
Yes, and I heard it when President Obama said it also.


That's not what he said. He said he believes we should enforce existing laws AND re-enact the AWB.

Drjones
10-17-2012, 16:54
The simple answer....anything you can afford to buy is "too cheap"

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


And any expensive gun is "too accurate, high-powered, military-grade" to belong in the hands of mere peasants.

sns3guppy
10-17-2012, 17:17
Nobody listened, apparently. Romney was too busy losing the debate to bring his points up. More performances like last night, and he certainly won't be president. Flip-flopping on his policies isn't doing him any favors, and he's done with his running mate what McCain did with Palin last time around. Palin lost the election for McCain, and the boy wonder is doing a great job of dragging Romney down, too.

Not that Romney needs any help.

I was embarrassed to watch him in the debate last night. Let's hope that doesn't happen again.

Drjones
10-17-2012, 17:30
Nobody listened, apparently. Romney was too busy losing the debate to bring his points up. More performances like last night, and he certainly won't be president. Flip-flopping on his policies isn't doing him any favors, and he's done with his running mate what McCain did with Palin last time around. Palin lost the election for McCain, and the boy wonder is doing a great job of dragging Romney down, too.

Not that Romney needs any help.

I was embarrassed to watch him in the debate last night. Let's hope that doesn't happen again.


Romney wasn't as great as he was in the first debate, but I think he did rather well overall. Obama just spent the entire second debate looking like a rude jerk.

Both of them did a fantastic job of not giving any straight answers to any questions though.

Glock20 10mm
10-17-2012, 17:35
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/330742/bizarre-coincidence-democrats-get-more-time-all-three-debates-katrina-trinko This is probably why Romney looked bad...

50 Cent
10-17-2012, 18:03
Romney wasn't as great as he was in the first debate, but I think he did rather well overall. Obama just spent the entire second debate looking like a rude jerk.

Both of them did a fantastic job of not giving any straight answers to any questions though.

All the polls are either indicating a Romney win or a tie. Best case by the most exhuberant libs is a slight Obama win. Reason for that were two comments by O:

1) "Reason gas prices were so low was the economy was in the tank."
:rofl:

2) "I stood in the Rose Garden after the Benghazi attack and declared it
to be terrorist." :rofl:

People also remember Romney's declaration "We can do better!!" Thats what people remember, which is why polls indicated Romney did well.

Acujeff
10-17-2012, 20:25
Actually, Romney was not yet in office and so did not sign the permanent 1998 MA AWB into law.

If you actually examine his record it is clear Romney signed no anti-2A bills while he was Gov. of MA 2002-2006. Romney only reduced gun control, removed gun control from bills or signed pro-2A bills into law.

What is known today as the highly restrictive gun control laws in MA were passed in 1998 by the Massachusetts legislature. It included MA’s assault weapons ban (MGL Chapter 140, Section 131M) that was more restrictive than the 1994 Fed AWB.

Here’s the entire 1998 CHAPTER 180 AN ACT RELATIVE TO GUN CONTROL IN THE COMMONWEALTH OF MA
http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/SessionLaws/Acts/1998/Chapter180

If you actually read the law it is clear that this ban did not rely on the federal language, was not tied to the federal AWB and contained no sunset clause. The expiration of the Fed AWB in 2004 did not get rid of MA's own permanent AWB.

MA Gun owners wanted to get rid of the ban in 2004, but did not have the votes in the state Legislature (over 85% anti-gun Democrat). When the Fed ban expired in 2004, Gun Owners’ Action League (the MA based pro-2A group) and Romney used the opportunity to amend the MA AWB by including the federal assault weapon exemptions and a few other improvements that were not in the state law and correct some abuses in MA‘s gun laws.

CHAPTER 150 AN ACT FURTHER REGULATING CERTAIN WEAPONS
http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/SessionLaws/Acts/2004/Chapter150

If Romney did not sign that bill, the more restrictive AWB would still be in place today.

So the actual truth is, in 2004, Romney signed a bill that amended the permanent AWB and made it less strict. Some folks are misrepresenting his record and claiming that Romney signed the AWB permanently into effect and that our AWB was set to expire in 2004. But, unlike those folks, I've posted the laws and facts. I challenge them to show us in those laws where their fabrications are documented.

Let's look at the rest of Romney's record:
During the Romney Administration he met and worked with Gun Owners’ Action League (the Mass. based pro-2A group) and no anti-second amendment or anti-sportsmen legislation made its way to the Governor’s desk. In addition, he removed any anti-second amendment language from bills like the Gang Violence bill passed in 2006, and signed five pro-second amendment bills into law.

Romney‘s entire record:
http://www.goal.org/newspages/romney.html

Recently discovered report forces the question: Do I owe Mitt Romney an apology?
by Chad D. Baus
http://www.ammoland.com/2012/10/02/gun-owners-do-you-owe-mitt-romney-an-apology-for-your-doubts-must-read-report/#ixzz28AyBR021
- it appears that the central "fact" that most gun owners "know" about Mitt Romney - namely that he signed a new assault weapons ban in Massachusetts in 2004 - isn't a fact at all. My sense is that knowledge of the GOAL report may allow some pro-gun voters, who may have been hesitant to go "All In," to feel much better about voting for the only man who stands a chance at defeating Barack Obama. Mr Romney, for whatever it's worth, I apologize.

Romney has already been politically tested on the RKBA against a congress that was 85% anti-2A and his record is all pro-2A which is very encouraging for gun owners.

It is understandable that Obama supporters are going to come to gun forums and try to persuade us to avoid supporting and voting for Romney. The liberal mainstream media and politicians are using the same strategy to desperately misrepresent and revise Romney's record in all arenas and distract us from Obama's record and agenda. Expect to see a lot more leading up to the election.

Here's President Obama's record:
Fast and Furious and the subsequent cover-up (the biggest criminal political scandal in American history), which lead to orders registering gun purchases in the four southern border states, using the ATF to harass gun shops out of business and promoting the UN Gun Ban Treaty. He also appointed two anti-RKBA Supreme Court Justices and 125 anti-RKBA liberals to federal judgeships, including 25 to appellate courts.

Under an expansion of the civil forfeiture doctrine, Obama has just given the ATF the power to seize your firearms if they choose to, without due process, and even if you are not under investigation. Under Obama’s new decree, if the ATF says they are going to confiscate your firearms, they can.

Imagine what he'll do if he gets a second term. In the very least, more regulations and executive orders governing every aspect of gun and ammo ownership and commerce, lots more proposed gun control legislation and anti-gun judges and up to four more anti-gun Supreme Court justices. Obama and the Democrats are campaigning on making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, making guns “childproof”, banning private gun transfers and sales, and regulating ammo purchases.

http://change.gov/agenda/urbanpolicy_agenda

Romney is not "the same as Obama", the "lesser of evils" or "Obama-lite". In 2008 he was rated "B" by the NRA and Obama was rated "F". Since then, Romney has only become more pro-2A and Obama more anti-2A. The NRA is endorsing the Romney/ Ryan ticket for this election. Romney would be a much better President for gun-owners than Obama.

Romney is campaigning on dismantling Obama's anti-gun actions in the UN and on the Southern border, appointing a new Attorney General and make sure Fast and Furious is actually investigated and prosecuted, stop the abuses of the ATF, and appointing up to four more pro-RKBA Supreme Court Justices.

It's up to individual gun-owners to to get the facts and make sure we're not scammed into giving Obama another term.

Romney‘s positions:
http://washingtonexaminer.com/gop-set-to-ok-most-pro-gun-platform-ever/article/2506043
http://www.mittromney.com/issues/gun-rights
http://www.mittromney.com/issues/courts-constitution

SpectreRider
10-18-2012, 06:26
Recently discovered report forces the question: Do I owe Mitt Romney an apology?
by Chad D. Baus
http://www.ammoland.com/2012/10/02/gun-owners-do-you-owe-mitt-romney-an-apology-for-your-doubts-must-read-report/#ixzz28AyBR021
- it appears that the central "fact" that most gun owners "know" about Mitt Romney - namely that he signed a new assault weapons ban in Massachusetts in 2004 - isn't a fact at all. My sense is that knowledge of the GOAL report may allow some pro-gun voters, who may have been hesitant to go "All In," to feel much better about voting for the only man who stands a chance at defeating Barack Obama. Mr Romney, for whatever it's worth, I apologize.


Thank you for posting all of the good info and especially that link. I wish every poster that repeated the "only one candidate ever signed an assault weapons ban" statement would read that link, then come back and apologize.

Psychman
10-18-2012, 07:36
Thank you for posting all of the good info and especially that link. I wish every poster that repeated the "only one candidate ever signed an assault weapons ban" statement would read that link, then come back and apologize.

Nope. They won't. At least one of the posters here thinks we are all "mouth breathers" and not worthy to be in the same thread as him.

mgs
10-18-2012, 09:13
I'll go with the new polls out.....51% Romney....45% Barry Obummer. Mitt has made a huge leap in the womens vote at this point.

wjv
10-18-2012, 14:44
Nobody listened, apparently. Romney was too busy losing the debate to bring his points up. More performances like last night, and he certainly won't be president.

52%-45%
206 - 201 electoral vote

Guess the majority disagrees with your assessment. . .

ChuteTheMall
10-18-2012, 17:00
Actually, Romney was not yet in office and so did not sign the permanent 1998 MA AWB into law.

If you actually examine his record it is clear Romney signed no anti-2A bills while he was Gov. of MA 2002-2006. Romney only reduced gun control, removed gun control from bills or signed pro-2A bills into law....{snip}


:goodpost:
Best info I've ever seen on this subject, thanks for posting it.

:number1:

concretefuzzynuts
10-18-2012, 17:41
:goodpost:
Best info I've ever seen on this subject, thanks for posting it.

:number1:

He is consistently correct, in his posts.

selogic
10-18-2012, 19:21
For God's sake people , stop paying attention to polls .

Scott3670
10-18-2012, 19:38
Here's President Obama's record:
Fast and Furious and the subsequent cover-up (the biggest criminal political scandal in American history), which lead to orders registering gun purchases in the four southern border states, using the ATF to harass gun shops out of business and promoting the UN Gun Ban Treaty. He also appointed two anti-RKBA Supreme Court Justices and 125 anti-RKBA liberals to federal judgeships, including 25 to appellate courts.

Under an expansion of the civil forfeiture doctrine, Obama has just given the ATF the power to seize your firearms if they choose to, without due process, and even if you are not under investigation. Under Obama’s new decree, if the ATF says they are going to confiscate your firearms, they can.



Not quite. All FFL's in the four states that border Mexico are now required to report multiple rifle sales, which is just like the law that is already in place (and has been so for decades) for multiple handgun sales. Bear in mind that this doesn't apply to receivers or 22 caliber rifles, only those guns that are larger in caliber and accept a large-capacity magazine. Also, these guns aren't registered, and no such registration exists. And finally, the multiple-sale records are destroyed after a year according to Federal law.

With all due respect, I won't go into how or why I know this but trust me, check it out if you think I am wrong.

camelotkid
10-18-2012, 19:54
I'll go with the new polls out.....51% Romney....45% Barry Obummer. Mitt has made a huge leap in the womens vote at this point.
well actually that was A poll, not pollS and that poll was conducted before the second debate, I'm sure his answers lost him a few women voters. Perhaps even binders full of them. :rofl:

Little Joe
10-18-2012, 20:10
If this odds maker is correct again, turn out the lights...

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/10/09/romney-will-win-in-landslide-las-vegas-oddsmaker-doubles-down-on-prediction/?intcmp=obnetwork

Acujeff
10-18-2012, 20:48
Not quite. All FFL's in the four states that border Mexico are now required to report multiple rifle sales, which is just like the law that is already in place (and has been so for decades) for multiple handgun sales. Bear in mind that this doesn't apply to receivers or 22 caliber rifles, only those guns that are larger in caliber and accept a large-capacity magazine. Also, these guns aren't registered, and no such registration exists. And finally, the multiple-sale records are destroyed after a year according to Federal law.

With all due respect, I won't go into how or why I know this but trust me, check it out if you think I am wrong.


In the early days of the Obama Administration, President Obama claimed that almost all the criminal guns in the hands of violent Mexican drug cartels came from the US. His goal was to stop the illegal trafficking of guns from the United States into Mexico. He claimed legitimate gun dealers in the United States were responsible for sending guns illegally to Mexico. All of his claims were lies.

In order to push his lies and policies built around them, with a goal of implementing harsher gun control laws and reinstating the assault weapons ban, President Obama packed his administration full of anti-Second Amendment zealots. Then the Obama administration did exactly what Democrats had been falsely accusing American gun sellers of doing: They put thousands of untrackable American guns in the hands of Mexican drug cartels.

This was Obama's Fast and Furious and it directly lead to his issuing orders for registering multiple rifle sales in the four Southern border states. How many rifles are "multiple'? Two? Because it applies to only those guns that are larger than 22 caliber and accept a large-capacity magazine does that makes it OK for gun owners? Would you like this being implemented in every state?

You may call it "recording" but it is still a registration and there is no guarantee records will be destroyed in a year. Obama, or his cronies, can just add new orders and regs.

Fast and Furious has already caused the reported deaths of two US Agents (Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry and I.C.E. Agent Jaime Zapata) and 300 Mexican citizens. As most of the guns are still out there, it is expected there will be more deaths as they become known.

This entire scandal alone would bring President Obama down in November, if the American people knew its details. Unfortunately, only the Republicans and US gunowners seem to care about the criminal actions of the Obama administration.

If Obama wins a 2nd term, neither the Attorney General or the DOJ office are not going to investigate F&F, Holder, or Obama or prosecute the House contempt vote and it may be years before the civil contempt enforcement will find any resolution in the Federal courts. It also strongly indicates Obama's gun control agenda, more abusive orders and regulations, in his 2nd term.

Romney officially made Fast and Furious a general election issue, directly pointing to the scandal as an example of how the Obama Administration used in its first term to “provide cover for potential efforts to restrict Second Amendment rights."

Romney is campaigning on appointing a new Attorney General, release all the Fast and Furious records to the House, and make sure it is successfully investigated and prosecuted, dismantle Obama's anti-gun actions in the UN and on the Southern border, and stop the abuses of the ATF.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/gop-set-to-ok-most-pro-gun-platform-ever/article/2506043

If gun owners don't care about Fast and Furious enough to fire Obama and vote for Romney - why should the rest of the American voters?

mac66
10-18-2012, 21:09
Feels very much like 1980 to me. As much as the media wanted Carter to be reelected most people were biting their tongues and finally came out for Reagan. I am getting the same vibe as I did back then.

I forget that many of you weren't around or old enough to remember. Believe me, it is the same. I only hope that Romney will turn the country around like Reagan did. His 8 years were the best of times.

Drjones
10-20-2012, 09:54
Nope. They won't. At least one of the posters here thinks we are all "mouth breathers" and not worthy to be in the same thread as him.


I think you are referring to my comment, which was sarcastic.

It was in response to one of the democrat/commie trolls that have infested this forum that are trying to make the case that it's Romney who is some sort of socialist/leftist, and that obama is not actually the out-and-out communist that he's proven himself to be.

I mean; there are actually people on this forum trying to make the case that ROMNEY would be a bigger threat to gun owners, or at least as big a threat to us, as obama.

If that's not stupidity, then they're just a bunch of leftist plants.

Glad to see the left is so desperate that they have to infiltrate gun forums to try to sway votes. Wouldn't it be easier to go search the cemeteries for more dead people to roll over to the polls?

vikingsoftpaw
10-20-2012, 10:35
The only poll that counts is the one on election day.

Everybody needs to get over the Groupthink that comes from associating with like minded individuals.

I know a number of people that still worship the ground The One walks on, when he's not walking on water, of course.

That said, I do think Romney has picked up support from the swing voters. They are the 7-10% of the electorate that swings an election.