[Cambo]

Centrists, we haven't seen much of you recently because you are hiding in shame due to the fact your democrat masters are on a gun control roll. You have nothing to say for yourselves and rightly so. Still, I'd like to give you a chance to redeem yourselves and show us how much better democrats are for gun ownership than republicans. So, if you are up to the challenge, here it is - list all of the republican politicians that you can, who have SPONSORED or CO-SPONSORED new gun control bills at the local, state or federal level. Here's the catch, any said bill must have been introduced in the year 2012 or 2013 - there will be no digging up Reagan out of the grave to prove your point. As a pre-emptive strike, Flipper 348, Mitt Romney's name will not be acceptable because he did not sponsor a bill or even mention an assault weapon ban in 2012 or 2013. Challenge On!!!!

P.S. - I would list all democrat politicians who are sponsoring gun control, but glocktalk doesn't have enough bandwidth for that.

[snerd]

They assured us for 4 years that Obama wasn't coming for our guns. Weren't you listening?!

[jay29]

Gubmint' not going to take your guns, Jethro.

[JFrame]

Heh...I haven't seen anyone trying to pull the ol' "centrist" dodge in the past several months...But we seem to have a new one here:

http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/show...1472091&page=2



.

[EnemyOfTheState]

Screw both parties, screw Obama, screw Romney.

Mittens wouldn't veto a magazine capacity ban, or universal background checks, maybe not an AWB, but judging from what he said in the past, it would have been possible.

We were screwed either way back in November, fighting over Obama and Romney now doesn't solve anything. when both Liberals and Conservatives can agree that both candidates and parties were and are complete and utter disasters, then we will be headed in the right direction.

[Gundude]

Originally Posted by Cambo

Centrists, we haven't seen much of you recently because you are hiding in shame due to the fact your democrat masters are on a gun control roll. You have nothing to say for yourselves and rightly so. Still, I'd like to give you a chance to redeem yourselves and show us how much better democrats are for gun ownership than republicans. So, if you are up to the challenge, here it is - list all of the republican politicians that you can, who have SPONSORED or CO-SPONSORED new gun control bills at the local, state or federal level. Here's the catch, any said bill must have been introduced in the year 2012 or 2013 - there will be no digging up Reagan out of the grave to prove your point. As a pre-emptive strike, Flipper 348, Mitt Romney's name will not be acceptable because he did not sponsor a bill or even mention an assault weapon ban in 2012 or 2013. Challenge On!!!!

P.S. - I would list all democrat politicians who are sponsoring gun control, but glocktalk doesn't have enough bandwidth for that.

So since Republicans have the House, there will be no new gun control, correct? What's the problem then?

[TK-421]

[hogfish]

Originally Posted by JFrame

Heh...I haven't seen anyone trying to pull the ol' "centrist" dodge in the past several months...But we seem to have a new one here:

http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/show...1472091&page=2



.

When I first saw that, I immediately thought of the time JBinTx posted that he used to be for Ron Paul (before he was against him).

[Slug71]

Originally Posted by snerd

They assured us for 4 years that Obama wasn't coming for our guns. Weren't you listening?!

We'd be in the same situation right now under Romney!!.... :rolleyes::banghead:

Sandy Hook caused this situation. Still would have happened under Romney....

The way some people here think just blows my mind. You are as blind to facts as the damn liberals....

[Slug71]

Originally Posted by Cambo

Centrists, we haven't seen much of you recently because you are hiding in shame due to the fact your democrat masters are on a gun control roll. You have nothing to say for yourselves and rightly so. Still, I'd like to give you a chance to redeem yourselves and show us how much better democrats are for gun ownership than republicans. So, if you are up to the challenge, here it is - list all of the republican politicians that you can, who have SPONSORED or CO-SPONSORED new gun control bills at the local, state or federal level. Here's the catch, any said bill must have been introduced in the year 2012 or 2013 - there will be no digging up Reagan out of the grave to prove your point. As a pre-emptive strike, Flipper 348, Mitt Romney's name will not be acceptable because he did not sponsor a bill or even mention an assault weapon ban in 2012 or 2013. Challenge On!!!!

P.S. - I would list all democrat politicians who are sponsoring gun control, but glocktalk doesn't have enough bandwidth for that.

Why do you assume all centrists are Democrat?

According to a political compass, i'm a centrist - leaning Libertarian.

[Bren]

[Gundude]

Funny how all the cut-n-paste photoshop comes out when one can't answer a very simple question:

Since Republicans have the House, there will be no new gun control, correct?

[JFrame]

Originally Posted by Slug71

Why do you assume all centrists are Democrat?

According to a political compass, i'm a centrist - leaning Libertarian.

You have to understand that on this forum, there are centrists, and then there are "centrists." The latter are people who introduce themselves by loudly proclaiming to be centrists, "but..." And then go on to spew a litany of leftist talking points. The "centrist" part is just a bit of misdirection -- nothing more.


.

[countrygun]

Originally Posted by Gundude

Funny how all the cut-n-paste photoshop comes out when one can't answer a very simple question:

Since Republicans have the House, there will be no new gun control, correct?

Does that mean that Obama isn't coming after guns?

Didn't Republicans say he would?

Didn't Democrats on this Forum say he wouldn't?

Why don't you answer those questions?

[Gundude]

Originally Posted by countrygun

Does that mean that Obama isn't coming after guns?

Yes, it does, because he can't.

Originally Posted by countrygun

Didn't Republicans say he would?

Yup. For some reason they refuse to differentiate between what Obama wants and what Obama can do.

Originally Posted by countrygun

Didn't Democrats on this Forum say he wouldn't?

I don't see many Democrats on this forum. Most members who are called Democrats regardless of their political affiliation said he couldn't, not that he wouldn't.

Originally Posted by countrygun

Why don't you answer those questions?

I just did. Now you. How can new gun control possibly become law if Republicans won't pass it?

[DWARREN123]

Politicians, all parties, are liars and damn liars.
Don't believe what a politician tells you!

[Slug71]

Originally Posted by countrygun

Does that mean that Obama isn't coming after guns?

Didn't Republicans say he would?

Didn't Democrats on this Forum say he wouldn't?

Why don't you answer those questions?

No

Yes

Yes.

Question is, would Obama be coming after our guns right now if Sandy Hook didn't happen?

Sandy Hook happened. Thats what brought this on. We'd still be in this situation right now under Romney because of Sandy Hook.

Stop dodging the questions and the facts.

[Slug71]

Originally Posted by DWARREN123

Politicians, all parties, are liars and damn liars.
Don't believe what a politician tells you!

Exactly.

[hogship]

Originally Posted by Gundude

I just did. Now you. How can new gun control possibly become law if Republicans won't pass it?

New gun control may simply be a matter of how much Obama, and/or Democrats are willing to offer for votes.

Is there anyone here at all, who can say that corruption in politics doesn't exist?

If not, then the premise that since the house is controlled by Republicans, therefore the assumption that new gun control legislation cannot be passed into law........ is blatantly false........

Eh.......wrong, gundude.

ooc

[countrygun]

Originally Posted by Gundude

Yes, it does, because he can't.


God are you in denial. He specifically said he was. Now my Grandfther had a saying "Just because mule "can't" doesn't mean he doesn't try"

Yup. For some reason they refuse to differentiate between what Obama wants and what Obama can do.

The question again, isn't whether he CAN, the liars that supported him here said he wouldn't TRY

I don't see many Democrats on this forum. Most members who are called Democrats regardless of their political affiliation said he couldn't, not that he wouldn't.

Are you going to pretend you were asleep before the election? Or are you leading ignorance, or are you just lying?

I just did. Now you. How can new gun control possibly become law if Republicans won't pass it?

The facts won't stand for your twisting.

Before the election, Obama supporters on this Forum said, "He won't try to come after any guns"

He has said he is going to try.

That is all there is to it. Obama and his supporters were lying before the election, we knew it and called them out on it and he is proving we were right.

We need no more Obamafellators making more excuses.

[JBnTX]

Originally Posted by hogfish

When I first saw that, I immediately thought of the time JBinTx posted that he used to be for Ron Paul (before he was against him).

I tried to support Ron Paul, but his foreign policy ineptness and his liberal drug legalization ideas were deal breakers for me.

At least I had the good sense to cast a vote for Romney and not sit home whining about corrupt politicians and everything that's wrong in America.

At least I tried to change things instead of denying the republicans a much needed vote, thus ensuring Obama the win.

..

[ArtyGuy]

I suppose those in NY are far more concerned about Gov Cuomo than President Obama. From a national perspective, far reaching gun restrictions don't have a chance. Notice the President's words during the SOU? He kept repeating, ".....deserves a vote." Interesting choice of words. If the President knew an AWB had a chance, he would have used much stronger language.

But back to my initial statement. I'd be far more concerned about what legislation states pass than what the President and Congress want to pass.

[EnemyOfTheState]

This is all for the sake of argument and the Democrat vs Republican pradigm. The biggest assaults and infringements on the 2A are coming at the state level, not the Feds. The Federal Bills are distractions while they get their agendas passed in states that they have the support. I think thats where the front lines are and where the anti-gunners look to do the most damage.

If Romney were POTUS, Feinswine would still have her AWB, the Mag. capacity ban would still be on the table, and it's possible Romney would sign one if not both of them, given what he said in the past and the anti-gun state from which he hails. Mittens only acted pro-gun to pander to the GOP voting base, he was no more pro gun than Obama.

Slamming the left leaning GTers isn't the right way, I think all of you made a bad choice back in November.

[Cambo]

Originally Posted by Gundude

So since Republicans have the House, there will be no new gun control, correct? What's the problem then?

You miss the very obvious point, that only democrats are introducing gun control legislation. The thread is about WHO is sponsoring such legislation. Do you not get that???

[countrygun]

Originally Posted by Cambo

You miss the very obvious point, that only democrats are introducing gun control legislation. The thread is about WHO is sponsoring such legislation. Do you not get that???

Give it up. You are talking about "Principles" and liberals have no frame of reference for such a discussion.