Posted on 01/22/2007 6:06:44 PM PST by proudofthesouth
Congress Shafts Second Amendment ... Again
The NRA IS NOT the property of any political party, it supports candidates most likely to defend the 2nd amendment. If there are republican candidates more likely to water down the 2nd amendment, than are opposing democrat candidates, shame on the republicans, not the NRA.
Why are we letting ANY republican candidate get away with
this crap in the first place?
You may not personally care about RKBA, but millions of us do, and we have supported the GOP loyally, for decades. Now, you want to pull the rug out, tellyawhat, things don't work that way in Mayberry!
Keep Your Shot Groups In The Bullseye!
"Will you hold the Mussies off from your roof top"?
Should read $$$$$$$$$$$ groups.
Thanks for the ping.
Of course there's always cause to be vigilant and keep the grabbers at bay. What I was talking about with the statement "there's nobody coming for our guns... and that's a good thing" was within the context of upcoming election issues.
In the ebb and flow of politics, there are certain hot-button issues that have been frequent-fliers on the election scene: abortion, death penalty, health care, yadda yadda... and of course gun control. Some election cycles various issues stand more front and center than others. As we all know, in the 90's there was much more focus on guns as a central issue. But much of the steam is gone from those days and those movements (like the million moron march, etc.).
I think gun control is just not going to be on the table this time around, as a significant plank item on anybody's (even the liberals) platform. And yes, I think 9/11 is part of the reason that this is the case. When terrorists can strike anywhere or anytime, disarming good citizens just doesn't get much traction. And rightfully so.
It doesn't mean it isn't important or that there isn't some sneaky stuff that might happen around the edges. We need to be vigilant for those things. But as far as there being any candidate that makes a big deal about gun control as a major focus of their campaign... I just don't see that happening.
This is indeed a good thing, too.
PING!
I respectfully disagree. It has never left the platofrm of the democrats and the moment they think they can sneak something thru THEY WILL. Terrorism has never figured in the thinking of the gun-grabbers. They have never connected the need for self defense (from anything) to firearm ownership. They do understand completely the concept that gun control is never about GUNS, rather it IS all about CONTROL. They know that to be the case, why can't our side understand a similar paradigm? Those who seek to unilaterally disarm the population of the United States do so without the first hint of altruism, but rather with a specific goal and a specific timetable in mind. There is no other viable argument. Gun grabbers toil in support of a one world government under the U.N. Chief obstacle to this is a heavily armed freedom loving population in the USA. Get rid of the arms and break the morale (well underway since the liberals infiltrated the public schools in the 1960's) of the Americans and the world becomes your oyster.
I understand how you all feel and respect it. But to support a group and then have them tell you to vote for an alleged crook like Mollohan is very frustrating. The republican opposing him was also a gun rights candidate. The NRA could have stayed out of it
I cancelled my membership in the NRA when they supported Bud Cramer - Demorat Alabama (aka - Bud the Dud) for the House of Representatives AFTER he voted FOR THE Brady Bill!
Optimism is good.
This is absolute insanity. But what do we expect, from a congress infested with RATS.
Rats AND COWARDLY Repubs!
Just d*amn. I'm away traveling for two days and return to FR and see this nightmare thread.
Well, I'm actually glad the dems are pushing all these bills. Better now so that they destroy all of their blue dog credibility before the 2008 elections. A dem president with a dem congress is the worst case scenario. At least we have a chance to defeat some of these bills now. Let's go ahead and get this over with so we can beat them over the head with it in '08. Of course, my above statements assume that there are some conservatives in Congress.
However, I plan to keep buying as much as I can just in case.
I can't afford to buy but I'm going to keep the few that I have.
I include those both as RATS!
I agree with much that has been said here, especially in the case of RINOs such as Rudy. How any gun owner could possibly think of supporting someone with his record of NYC gun control is laughable.
But the whole situation discussed in this thread brings up two important questions:
1. Can Liberals make the history of the early 90's (i.e. AWB) repeat itself? and
2. Do Liberals learn from history? (even recent history?)
Let's take the second question first, because it is a lot easier to answer than the first question.
Do liberals learn from history? The answer is an easy NO! Between Jan. '92 and Nov. '94, the liberals thought they ruled the world (much the same way Nancy Pelosi thinks today). With a liberal house and senate sweeping in on Clinton's coat tail, the bills coming out of D.C. were just plain stupid. The democrats did not care. They seemed to think that their majority would never end. Well we all know it did end, in just two short years.
Nov. '94 saw the biggest landslide election in history (yes, even bigger than this past november). The democrats were beaten very badly, everywhere. But what were the main issues that caused such a turn-around in D.C? Between '92 and '94, two main issues brought the libs down. We still know both of them well today. The first was of course the AWB. But the other may have been the main issue for the general public: socialized medicine. (Or "Hillary's Healthcare" as some dubbed it when Clinton decided that his unelected wife should be put in charge of nearly 1/6th of the U.S. economy).
But do these liberals learn from history? No way. Both issues (Socialized medicine and AWB-2) would come up for votes in congress tomorrow if the libs thought they had the remotest chance of passing either. They are obviously waiting to see how things shake down in the '08 election first. Which brings us to question number 2, Can Liberals make the history of the early 90's repeat itself?
That truely depends on the '08 election. If there are democrat majorities in both houses and a democrat president (or even a RINO such as Rudy) goodbye guns. Don't expect the 2A to prevent the gun grabbers from passing all kinds of new regulations (such as regustration then confiscation). Remember, to the liberals, the 2A only means that the National Guard has the right to bear arms!
If the liberals have the white house (looks more certain every day) plus both houses of congress (more uncertain) the gun bills we are talking about here today will look like childs play compared to those that will be brought out then. Of course, then in Nov. 2010, the democrats will be summarily thrown out of congress again (and like nov. '94 have absolutely no clue why) but by then the damage will be done (just like the original AWB that lasted for 10 years!).
How to prevent all this? The only answers I can give are the ones that have already been given here. Work hard to elect "true" 2A supporters (and not one's that simply have a "R" or "GOP" after their name). I think that our best bet is to work hard on congress in '08 (particularly the senate). And, obviously, take as many non-shooters out shooting as you can. Show them that target shooting is a responsible undertaking, and that most shooters are responsible gun owners. Explain to all who will listen that new gun laws only hurt law abiding citizens. Stress that gang members and murders don't abide by gun laws. (Of couse WE know all this. But it is amazing how many people are downright scared of guns and think that if new gun laws are passed that criminals will suddenly be disarmed.)
I am what is called a "single issue voter". I vote the 2A - PERIOD. Although there are other compelling campaign issues, I can think of none that are more important to the survival of the republic.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.