Calling All Gun Guys

[acklac7]

You do realize that the founding Fathers specifically crafted the 2nd Amendment such that some how, some way, someone like Donald Trump end up in Office (and absolutely loose control of the country) we, the people, would have the ability to take it back.

 

For the record Im 100% neutral on the Gun issue. Not against them, not for them. Also don't like either Trump nor Clinton, at this point still Heavily undecided, but Clinton is obviously the worse of two evils (Honestly I'd love to see Kasich get the Nomination).

 

That said, Trump is all over the place, he's an old Money Celebrity TV show host who loves the headlines. He's been Bankrupt numerous times and has zero Political experience. His own party is terrified he's about to get the Nomination.

 

So question: Do you vote against someone who might (and thats a big might, personally I dont think Democrats have the balls to do it) restrict your gun access?

 

Or do you vote for someone whom the founding fathers specifically gave you the rights to bear arms against?

Edited March 7, 2016 by acklac7

[oh8sti]

I thought the same thing when Obama was elected. I was also an idiot and had no knowledge base other than what mainstream media was shoving down my throat. Its the same kind of rhetoric, its just coming from the other side of the aisle.

 

It might be the best thing for this county to start getting away from how we've been doing politics. It hasn't been working. I dont think Trump is the answer, but by him winning it certainly opens the door wide open to forming other parties and breaking up the bush's, Clinton's, etc. The Dems and Reps hate that and are fighting the same person.

 

The worlds changing my friends. We are going to get the President we deserve and I have a feeling it could be Trump.

Edited March 7, 2016 by Panduh

[BStowers023]

Hmmm neither. But if you make me choose, I'll keep my guns. Gun restrictions in a country filled with them won't help anybody.

[acklac7]

I thought the same thing when Obama was elected. I was also an idiot and had no knowledge base other than what mainstream media was shoving down my throat. Its the same kind of rhetoric, its just coming from the other side of the aisle.

 

No. Not the same. This is different. His own party is absolutely terrified he's about to get the Nomination. This has Happened maybe once or twice in the Country's History.

 

 

It might be the best thing for this county to start getting away from how be been doing politics. It hasn't been working. I dont think Trump is the answer, but by him winning it certainly opens the door wide open to forming other parties and breaking up the bush's, Clinton's, etc. The Dems and Reps hate that and are fighting the same person.

 

The worlds changing my friends. We are going to get the President we deserve and I have a feeling it could be Trump.

 

Him winning potentially opens the door to more then you can possibly fathom. History is on my side.

 

Who knows, maybe everything goes fucking peachy. I doubt it.

 

Personally, If he wins the Election, I'll buy a Gun. Count on it.

[acklac7]

Hmmm neither. But if you make me choose, I'll keep my guns. Gun restrictions in a country filled with them won't help anybody.

 

Thats the point, nobody's talking about taking your guns, or even anything close.

 

All you second amendment gun guys are getting so caught up in Gun-Rights Scare that you're oblivious to the fact that the other Candidate is the one whom the founding fathers gave you the rights to use guns against.

[acklac7]

I just keep hearing "ZOMG Clinton gone take or Guns" "OMG, She's talking about Automatic Weapons".

 

I keep hearing that, and I keep picturing the founding Father's vomiting in their Graves, saying "You idiot, we gave you the right to bear arms for the sole purpose of fighting against the other guy in the race"

[williaty]

Sadly, some of the Dem part leadership have openly supported confiscation in the last few months. I'm a (very) liberal gun owner and, yes, that makes voting hard. The GOP's social and economic policies are abhorent. Some of the Dems want to confiscate guns. It means I have to vote over time to try to have the least total harm done by the politicians. When social and economic issues are really heading into the crapper, I vote for a liberal. When it looks like the anti-gunners are gaining some ground, I'll vote for a pro-gunner in a few places.

 

There's going to have to be a shift both in the pro-gun and liberal communities as more and more liberals become gun owners. The NRA-ILN is going to have to realize that they need to get retards like Nugent out of the spotlight and stop demonizing all Democrats or they're going to find themselves obsolete as the country moves to the left. The liberal leadership is going to have to realize that they need to quit demonizing guns and gun owners as more and more liberals become gun owners.

 

It truly boggles my mind that gun rights aren't aligned as a liberal value. The 2nd Amendment defends the 1st, 4th, 5th, and every other thing to do with civil rights. If you're pro free speech, pro religious freedom, pro individual privacy, pro civil rights, pro gay rights, etc, you should also be pro gun rights because, in extremis, the gun rights are how you defend your other rights.

[BStowers023]

I just keep hearing "ZOMG Clinton gone take or Guns" "OMG, She's talking about Automatic Weapons".

 

I keep hearing that, and I keep picturing the founding Father's vomiting in their Graves, saying "You idiot, we gave you the right to bear arms for the sole purpose of fighting against the other guy in the race"

 

So just anybody can buy a fully automatic weapon? Hmmm interesting. I thought you had to have something like a class 3 weapons license or something. You may trust the government, but I don't. I worked for them for 4 years, too.

[acklac7]

Sadly, some of the Dem part leadership have openly supported confiscation in the last few months. I'm a (very) liberal gun owner and, yes, that makes voting hard. The GOP's social and economic policies are abhorent. Some of the Dems want to confiscate guns. It means I have to vote over time to try to have the least total harm done by the politicians. When social and economic issues are really heading into the crapper, I vote for a liberal. When it looks like the anti-gunners are gaining some ground, I'll vote for a pro-gunner in a few places.

 

There's going to have to be a shift both in the pro-gun and liberal communities as more and more liberals become gun owners. The NRA-ILN is going to have to realize that they need to get retards like Nugent out of the spotlight and stop demonizing all Democrats or they're going to find themselves obsolete as the country moves to the left. The liberal leadership is going to have to realize that they need to quit demonizing guns and gun owners as more and more liberals become gun owners.

 

It truly boggles my mind that gun rights aren't aligned as a liberal value. The 2nd Amendment defends the 1st, 4th, 5th, and every other thing to do with civil rights. If you're pro free speech, pro religious freedom, pro individual privacy, pro civil rights, pro gay rights, etc, you should also be pro gun rights because, in extremis, the gun rights are how you defend your other rights.

 

Last but not least, Guns are the way you defend your country. I think alot of guys have lost sight of that fact.

[acklac7]

So just anybody can buy a fully automatic weapon? Hmmm interesting. I thought you had to have something like a class 3 weapons license or something. You may trust the government, but I don't. I worked for them for 4 years, too.

 

So there's limitations. Yes, im sure thats cause for a bit of unrest.

 

Seems like all you Gun guys think you're going to loose every last gun you own because of Clinton. It isn't going to happen.

 

The day the Government comes knocking on every law-abiding citizens door demanding their guns is the day I buy one to help you out.

 

The odds of you needing a Gun to defend yourself against a failed Trump-run Government are exponentially greater then the odds of Clinton successfully getting any significant restrictive gun legislation passed. I think alot of you have lost sight of that.

[williaty]

Seems like all you Gun guys think you're going to loose every last gun you own because of Clinton. It isn't going to happen.

Clinton has made several speeches now where she's stated outright that she supports British- or Australian-style gun control and both countries had involuntary confiscation.

 

The odds of you needing a Gun to defend yourself against a failed Trump-run Government are exponentially greater then the odds of Clinton successfully getting any significant restrictive gun legislation passed. I think alot of you have lost sight of that.

So long as she faces a Republican-dominated congress, I agree. If, however, the election throws in a Democratic majority, all bets are off.

[acklac7]

Clinton has made several speeches now where she's stated outright that she supports British- or Australian-style gun control and both countries had involuntary confiscation.

 

I don't believe it. It will set off an absolute shit-storm nobody (including myself) in the Democratic party wants. It isn't worth it and they know it.

 

Democrats are all about peace, love and hippy bullshit. Significant Gun restrictions literally have the chance to cause war. Democrats hate war, let alone Civil War.

Edited March 7, 2016 by acklac7

[acklac7]

Clinton has made several speeches now where she's stated outright that she supports British- or Australian-style gun control and both countries had involuntary confiscation.

 

Show me.

 

If you can prove what you say is true I wont vote for her. And I mean that.

 

An American Presidential Nominee that supports British Gun-Control Policies. Founding Fathers would be Nauseous. We're getting close to Trump level insanity. Not quite there, but close.

 

Again, if what you say is true please provide proof.

[acklac7]

Clinton has made several speeches now where she's stated outright that she supports British- or Australian-style gun control and both countries had involuntary confiscation.

 

http://dailycaller.com/2015/10/22/hillary-clinton-is-wrong-about-gun-laws-in-australia-and-the-uk/

 

"On Friday, Clinton made fun of those worried about confiscation. She said people get scared into thinking that “a black helicopter is going to land in the front yard and somebody is going to take your guns."

 

You know why Clinton made fun of it? Because it's never, ever going to happen. She knows just as well as I do any attempt to forcibly take guns from law abiding citizens is going to result in war. The idea of taking peoples guns is fucking luzly. Take it from a Democrat, we aren't going there. Thats the last thing the Democratic party wants nor needs is an all-out war. We hate war.

 

The leader for the Democratic party isn't stupid, crazy nor incompetent.

 

I firmly believe the leader for the other party is. Like seriously, no Political Rhetoric here, Donald Trump as a President is downright Scary.

 

Please note, that while I think Obama hasn't been a half-bad President (lets face it, he's done a pretty damn good job) I voted for Mccain the first time around.

[williaty]

I don't believe it. It will set off an absolute shit-storm nobody (including myself) in the Democratic party wants. It isn't worth it and they know it.

There's a large and growing disconnect between what the average Democratic voter wants and what the party leadership, as bought and paid for by commercial interests, wants.

 

Show me.

If you can prove what you say is true I wont vote for her. And I mean that.

In her town hall speech on 10/16/2015:

Australia is a good example, Canada is a good example, the U.K. is a good example. Why? Because each of them have had mass killings. Australia had a huge mass killing about 20, 25 years ago, Canada did as well, so did the U.K. And, in reaction, they passed much stricter gun laws.

 

Later on the same night:

The Australian government, as part of trying to clamp down on the availability of automatic weapons, offered a good price for buying hundreds of thousands of guns

 

Note that those "buybacks" weren't optional. Confiscation is still confiscation if you're forcing the person to choose between selling and prison. Finally, in reference to a followup about confiscation:

Would be worth considering Federally if that could be arranged

[acklac7]

Link to speech please. If she said something about Gun Confiscation I need to hear it. Sorry but thats borderline treason. She knows that.

[acklac7]

There's a large and growing disconnect between what the average Democratic voter wants and what the party leadership, as bought and paid for by commercial interests, wants.

 

Name a significant Commercial interest that will significantly benefit from a Gun Ban / Confiscation. The rubber-bullet/Mace industry? Yeah, their the ones pushing it

 

The truth is nobody is pushing it (save the families of of Mass Shootings victims) because nobody benefits. It's a loose-loose. It isn't going to happen.

 

Again, the likely hood of you needing a Gun to protect yourself from a failed Trump-run Government are far more greater then the likely hood of any sort of restriction put in place by Clinton. Man you guys need to wake up.

[williaty]

Link to speech please. If she said something about Gun Confiscation I need to hear it. Sorry but thats borderline treason. She knows that.

I only found print references to it. I don't follow video news. I'm sure with that date you could contact the campaign and get a transcript of the event or possibly even the video of it.

 

Name a significant Commercial interest that will significantly benefit from a Gun Ban / Confiscation. The rubber-bullet/Mace industry? Yeah, their the ones pushing it

Bloomberg is dumping millions into gun control.

 

Again, the likely hood of you needing a Gun to protect yourself from a failed Trump-run Government are far more greater then the likely hood of any sort of restriction put in place by Clinton. Man you guys need to wake up.

I think you've failed to read my earlier posts where I made it clear I'm not a Drumpf supporter. I'm not a Hillary supporter. Hell, even Bernie is a little too conservative for me but at least I'd be willing to vote for him until someone even more liberal shows up.

[acklac7]

I think you've failed to read my earlier posts where I made it clear I'm not a Drumpf supporter. I'm not a Hillary supporter. Hell, even Bernie is a little too conservative for me but at least I'd be willing to vote for him until someone even more liberal shows up.

 

Comment wasn't directed towards you.

[acklac7]

I only found print references to it

 

That doesn't surprise me.

[williaty]

That doesn't surprise me.

 

Doesn't surprise me either since I avoided looking for video about it because I hate watching these idiots blather on. However, I get the feeling that you're saying print media isn't trustworthy, which is actually kind of funny given that most people have more respect for print media than TV news.

 

You're obviously not going to trust anything any of us turn up. Contact the campaign, get the transcript for the town hall meeting on 10/16/2015. If you are so sure you're right, prove us wrong.

[acklac7]

Doesn't surprise me either since I avoided looking for video about it because I hate watching these idiots blather on. However, I get the feeling that you're saying print media isn't trustworthy, which is actually kind of funny given that most people have more respect for print media than TV news.

 

You're obviously not going to trust anything any of us turn up. Contact the campaign, get the transcript for the town hall meeting on 10/16/2015. If you are so sure you're right, prove us wrong.

 

 

When it comes to something that is going to alter whom I vote for as President, in what could be one of the most important Elections in the History of this Country, I want to hear it from the horses mouth.

 

I know better then to trust the media, any media. Others do not. Thats what scares me.

[williaty]

NM, I'm done here.

[oh8sti]

No. Not the same. This is different. His own party is absolutely terrified he's about to get the Nomination. This has Happened maybe once or twice in the Country's History.

 

 

 

 

Him winning potentially opens the door to more then you can possibly fathom. History is on my side.

 

Who knows, maybe everything goes fucking peachy. I doubt it.

 

Personally, If he wins the Election, I'll buy a Gun. Count on it.

 

 

 

It absolutely is 100% the same rhetoric. If you can't see that, I can not continue this conversation.

 

Here's an answer to your original question --- in our lifetime we will never have to worry about our guns being taken away. As stated before, there would be a bloodbath of a war before that happened. Take that to the bank.

[oh8sti]

Just for the record - As an Indy I have not leaned one way or another. I won't do so until I see who wins the primary. At that point the debates become relevant IMO.