Romney will sign an assault weapons ban. - Page 8

countrygun · 10-19-2012, 16:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ruble Noon

Tune in next week when Acujeff explains how Mitt foiled the evil Scary Reed and the dastardly Fancy Pants Pelosi by bringing socialized medicine to America, dangling it like a carrot in front of their noses, knowing that they couldn't resist the poison treat and would adopt a nearly identical plan which would bring about the downfall of their wonder boy messiah, Barack Obama. [/COLOR][/COLOR]

That's what we are voting for, laughing boy.

onebigelf · 10-19-2012, 17:00

Romney, might or might not sign any gun legislation passed by both houses of congress (think that'll happen during a Republican administration)?

Obama stood on stage during the second debate and announced in no uncertain terms that he intends to seek a new Assault Weapon Ban. You can bet it won't be time limited this time. He also suggested that he thinks handguns are a major problem.

John

Providence · 10-19-2012, 17:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by onebigelf

Obama stood on stage during the second debate and announced in no uncertain terms that he intends to seek a new Assault Weapon Ban. You can bet it won't be time limited this time. He also suggested that he thinks handguns are a major problem.

he did even more than that. He said cheap handguns were the problem in Chicago. I wonder what he intends to do about that?

porschedog · 10-19-2012, 17:15

Anyone on this forum that believes that O'Bama is still worth considering over Romney is seriously deluded. Wake up and smell the tapioca, guys - O'Bama is a freaking socialist, nutbag, foodstamp-giving, gun-grabber who WILL change the Supreme Court in such a way that we will never recover from.

Mittens is the ONLY choice we have, so stop whining about how it'd be better to have another choice. There isn't one.

Acujeff · 10-19-2012, 18:41

Obama and the Democrats are the only party campaigning for more gun control.

Here is Obama in his own words from the second Presidential Debate Tuesday night:

... 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.

So there it is. Obama has at long last told you his plans for a second term. And not only is the President saying this, the Democratic Platform says clearly that they want more gun control:

We believe that the right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation. We understand the terrible consequences of gun violence; it serves as a reminder that life is fragile, and our time here is limited and precious. We believe in an honest, open national conversation about firearms. We can focus on effective enforcement of existing laws, especially strengthening our background check system, and we can work together to enact commonsense improvements - like reinstating the assault weapons ban and closing the gun show loophole - so that guns do not fall into the hands of those irresponsible, law-breaking few.

If you weren't sure before, you are now. An Obama win will provide 4 years of more oppressive gun control. Even without legislation and congressional authority Obama has shown he freely uses executive orders and regulations to institute his agenda. It won’t be just rifles and large cap magazines but he’ll also target handguns - that just about covers it all.

That means 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. One more gives the anti-2A Justices a majority and we‘ll never see a pro-2A decision again in our lifetime and previous decisions can be overruled or reversed. Obama and the Democrats are not only campaigning on making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, but also making guns “childproof”, banning private gun transfers and sales, and regulating ammo purchases.

If that’s OK with you vote for Obama. Or split your vote for a third party which improves the chances Obama will be re-elected. But if it’s not OK - vote for Romney/Ryan and Republican legislators and let’s get rid of the democrats.

concretefuzzynuts · 10-19-2012, 20:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Providence

he did even more than that. He said cheap handguns were the problem in Chicago. I wonder what he intends to do about that?

The UN Small Arms Treaty

jbailey8 · 10-19-2012, 20:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by mac702

so every four years you can vote for a liberal of one flavor or another, or you can help support a third party, showing the republicans why they deserve to lose, and actually start making a difference in the long term.

^this

countrygun · 10-19-2012, 20:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by jbailey8

^this

You guys continue to crack me up.

You think a third party is something that was invented since you started voting?

Yah, they have really changed the face of American politics in the last 100 years

"In the long term" The only thing that is going to change the Republican party is...well....changing the Republican Party.

There are a lot of people here who have a lot of actual experience at voting third party and many of them say they would do it again in the future, but you folks are insisting on ignoring their experience when they tell you Obama is too dangerous with a second term. Nobody "sold" them that opinion, experience has given it to them.

remember they HAVE voted third before and most of them have said they would again, so just how do you justify sticking your fingers in your ears and ignoring that advice?

jakebrake · 10-20-2012, 11:01

^^^^actually, country, they did. they changed the face of politics for 8 years. the nightmare commonly called the clinton era.

thank you ross perot.

i learned that lesson a little too late.

TheExplorer · 10-20-2012, 11:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Providence

he did even more than that. He said cheap handguns were the problem in Chicago. I wonder what he intends to do about that?

Force Glock to improve their quality.

jakebrake · 10-20-2012, 11:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheExplorer

Force Glock to improve their quality.

gaston would pound the snot out of him, and he knows it, so that one's out.

LarryNC · 10-20-2012, 14:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by frank4570

It will always be "THE MOST IMPORTANT ELECTION OF ALL TIME." Every time.

I've noticed that too

The same old lies from the same old liars. I used to vote a straight republican ticket, but the last election I voted for Ron Paul as a write in candidate and I plan on doing the exact same thing this time. Ronald Reagan used to say that he never left the democrat party, but the democrat party left him. That is exactly how I feel about todays republican party. All the lies, the cheating, and the vote tampering that took place in this years republican primary and convention were enough to make me say that I cannot vote for Mitt Romney. Come election day I will either write in Ron Paul or just not even bother to vote at all. It is ALL so crooked and corrupt. Both the GOP and DNC are liars, murderers and thieves. This two-party system will be what destroys our once great Republic.

countrygun · 10-20-2012, 14:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by LarryNC

I've noticed that too

The same old lies from the same old liars. I used to vote a straight republican ticket, but the last election I voted for Ron Paul as a write in candidate and I plan on doing the exact same thing this time. Ronald Reagan used to say that he never left the democrat party, but the democrat party left him. That is exactly how I feel about todays republican party. All the lies, the cheating, and the vote tampering that took place in this years republican primary and convention were enough to make me say that I cannot vote for Mitt Romney. Come election day I will either write in Ron Paul or just not even bother to vote at all. It is ALL so crooked and corrupt. Both the GOP and DNC are liars, murderers and thieves. This two-party system will be what destroys our once great Republic.

MOST people who have paid attention will have noticed that there are many here who have voted for a "libertarian' candidate before, some many times, some even voted for Paul in the primaries. Many say they would do so again BUT their actual EXPERIENCE in this world has convinced then that getting Obama out of office RIGHT NOW is more important than "Making a statement" or making themselves feel all warm and fuzzy.

Again, this isn't because they are prone to "panic" "Most important election" influence, or they never would have voted libertarian in the first place.

They have suspended long held beliefs to deal with a real threat in the White House based on what they have learned over the years.

That should make you sit up and take notice.

aspartz · 10-20-2012, 14:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by jakebrake

^^^^actually, country, they did. they changed the face of politics for 8 years. the nightmare commonly called the clinton era.

thank you ross perot.

i learned that lesson a little too late.

Too bad the GOP learned nothing from the lesson either.

ARS

countrygun · 10-20-2012, 16:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by aspartz

Too bad the GOP learned nothing from the lesson either.

ARS

To bad the libertarians haven't learned.

"Insanity": "repeatedly doing the same thing and expecting a different result"

Snowman92D · 10-20-2012, 16:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by porschedog

Anyone on this forum that believes that O'Bama is still worth considering over Romney is seriously deluded. Wake up and smell the tapioca, guys - O'Bama is a freaking socialist, nutbag, foodstamp-giving, gun-grabber who WILL change the Supreme Court in such a way that we will never recover from.

Mittens is the ONLY choice we have, so stop whining about how it'd be better to have another choice. There isn't one.

If I had a son...he'd talk like porshedog.

Providence · 10-20-2012, 19:27

Getting rid of o. Is too important. With o. we moved to a new level of corruption. A new level of govt. control. A new level of crap! We've got to get rid of O.!

G19G20 · 10-22-2012, 18:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Providence

Getting rid of o. Is too important. With o. we moved to a new level of corruption. A new level of govt. control. A new level of crap! We've got to get rid of O.!

How exactly is it a new level of corruption? Obama has been doing EXACTLY what both Republican and Democrat administrations have been doing for a long time.

No one can convince me that replacing Obama's administration with GWB administration retreads with Romney as the figurehead is the answer.

countrygun · 10-22-2012, 18:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by G19G20

How exactly is it a new level of corruption? Obama has been doing EXACTLY what both Republican and Democrat administrations have been doing for a long time.

No one can convince me that replacing Obama's administration with GWB administration retreads with Romney as the figurehead is the answer.

If you don't see a difference between Romney and Obama, you can't see to the end of your own nose.

jdavionic · 10-22-2012, 18:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by G19G20

How exactly is it a new level of corruption? Obama has been doing EXACTLY what both Republican and Democrat administrations have been doing for a long time.

No one can convince me that replacing Obama's administration with GWB administration retreads with Romney as the figurehead is the answer.

Here's a simple question. Can you take Obama's platform and show item-by-item how it lines up with Romney's? If so, please do so.

G19G20 · 10-22-2012, 18:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by countrygun

If you don't see a difference between Romney and Obama, you can't see to the end of your own nose.

Oh I "see" a difference alright. It's when I turn the tv off and just listen to what they both say and what their records are that I don't "see" any difference. I don't care what my eyes can "see" since I don't vote based on how someone looks.