0
   

GUN OWNERS COURTED BY OBAMA

 
 
Reply Tue 7 Oct, 2008 02:15 am
OBAMA IS THE MOST ANTI-GUN PRESIDENCY CANDIDATE
IN AMERICAN HISTORY.
From his gut, he hates guns and the freedom to own them.

Its easy to tell who your friends are.

In his case,
its easy to see who regards us with abhorrence and repugnance, but wants our votes.

(See the videos at URL below.)

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/10/06/politics/horserace/entry4504207.shtml

Ben Smith points us to a new spot from the Obama campaign, "Life,"
that was not sent out to the press. It features a lifetime National
Rifle Association member who supports the Democratic nominee. The
spot has been seen in Ohio, Pennsylvania and North Carolina.

"I'm a life member of the NRA," Greg West says in the spot. "I hunt,
I fish, I love the outdoors. I love this country, and I support Barack Obama."

An announcer then seeks to reassure skeptics.

"Barack Obama supports gun rights," he says. "Our right to defend
ourselves. The second amendment. That's the truth."

The NRA has been highly critical of Obama in its advertising and
rhetoric, suggesting he would be ""the most anti-gun president in
American history." The Democratic nominee has repeatedly said that
would not be the case, stating that any claim that he would take away
peoples' guns is "just not true."

"Barack Obama is running TV ads about guns without telling
the national media because he knows
they would never pass a credible fact check
,"
RNC spokesman Alex Conant said in a statement.
"Obama is the most anti-gun candidate for President in American history.
He consistently worked to undermine Second Amendment rights,
which is why respected pro-gun groups are harshly critical of him."

http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid1185304443/bctid1825834455

UPDATE: The NRA today announced that it is expanding its
multi-million dollar anti-Obama ad campaign. National Rifle
Association Political Victory Fund ads began airing today Virginia,
North Carolina, Florida, Ohio, Minnesota and Michigan. They were
already airing in Pennsylvania, New Mexico, and Colorado.

"The media spots feature a variety of people from all walks of life,
including war veterans, hunters, families and former law enforcement
officers criticizing the many anti-gun and anti-hunter votes cast by
Obama as a state and as a U.S. Senator," the organization said in a
press release.

[emphasis added by David]
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 2,017 • Replies: 36
No top replies

 
Eorl
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Oct, 2008 06:30 am
@OmSigDAVID,
Yet another reason I hope Obama wins. Maybe eventually you'll get some sensible gun restrictions.
cjhsa
 
  0  
Reply Tue 7 Oct, 2008 06:33 am
@Eorl,
Screw that. You mean loss of freedom.

Idjits.
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Oct, 2008 06:34 am
@OmSigDAVID,
Hunters Against Obama
Doug Giles
Monday, October 06, 2008

You know, I’d love to believe that Obama is cool with guns and hunting, but when the nation’s largest and most radical group that wants to ban hunting thinks he’s peachy, it makes this middle-aged redneck think that maybe Barack is full of B’crap and his “pro gun/hunting” spiel is just another con job spun by the King of Obfuscation. But that’s just me.

This past week Obama added to his rogue gallery of support groups another radical band of anti-American spirit lunatics. No, I’m not talking about an additional endorsement by a new terrorist group or Black Muslim faction, or pro-abortion loon, or another communist cabal, or an extra Castro/Chavez-like dictator but rather the Humane Society (HSUS).

Y’know, opposites might attract in love, according to Paula Abdul (and who are we to question her wisdom?), but that’s not true in elections. Special interest axe-grinders look for sympathetic co-belligerents in their cause, and the Human Society found one in Obama and not in McCain/Palin, chiefly because Sarah puts the bam in Bambi and McCain favors fishing. I can’t live without either.

FYI to all those not in the know: The Humane Society is not a placid gaggle of folks who are just about rescuing flea-bitten puppies and kitties and then cutting their balls off. This society is also rabidly anti-hunting. Yep, if these now official bedfellows of Barack had it their way, hunting"like OJ’s career"would be a thing of the past.

Check out these sentiments from HSUS’s moist-eyed president Wayne Pacelle . . .

“If we could shut down all sport hunting in a moment, we would.” " as quoted by the Associated Press in Impassioned Agitator, December 30, 1991

“Our goal is to get sport hunting in the same category as cock fighting and dog fighting. Our opponents say hunting is a tradition. We say traditions can change.” " Bozeman Daily Chronicle, October 8, 1991

According towww.NRA.org,

“Pacelle knows that he has a proven friend in Obama after his support of Senator Ted Kennedy's legislation that would have banned virtually all rifle ammunition used by America's hunters. If successful, the legislation would have ended the vast majority of all hunting " a fact not lost on HSUS.

In Congress and state legislatures and city councils around the country, HSUS lobbies to defeat every measure that expands hunting opportunities for the country's sportsmen. It says it opposes only the most “barbaric and inhumane” hunting practices. What it doesn't say publicly is that HSUS believes that all sport hunting is ‘”barbaric and inhumane.”

There's never been a hunting ban or restriction that HSUS hasn't actively supported. It routinely lobbies to:

- Prohibit the use of traditional lead bullets and shot for all hunting;

- Prohibit urban and suburban archery deer hunting programs;

- Prohibit bear hunting in a number of states including New Jersey, Colorado and Alaska;

- Replace traditional hunting as a wildlife management tool, with expensive and unproven contraception programs;

- Retain Sunday hunting bans in states like Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia;

- Ban the hunting of doves, the most widely hunted game bird in America; and

- Ensure that emotion, not science, dictates wildlife management practices

In addition to its anti-hunting efforts in the public policy realm, HSUS uses its enormous financial resources to regularly file lawsuits to stop hunting and the scientific wildlife management practices that recognize hunting as an essential tool. A recent example of this came when HSUS filed lawsuits that successfully closed millions of acres of wildlife refuges to hunting. This is despite the fact that Congress has determined that hunting is one of the traditional activities that should specifically be encouraged in refuges.”


0 Replies
 
Eorl
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Oct, 2008 06:44 am
@cjhsa,
I think many Americans have a twisted view of freedom, like the American brand is somehow "true" freedom, when they don't have the freedom to walk the streets at night without fear of guns.

Owning guns = Freedom. Such a deeply ingrained falsehood.
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Oct, 2008 06:46 am
@Eorl,
Would you prefere to walk the streets in fear of criminals?

Your fear of guns is completely unfounded and just boggles my mind. Law abiding gun owners don't want to hurt you. Criminals want to hurt you. You are confusing an object with a behaviour. Silly and sad.

I own over 20 guns and not one of them ever hurt anyone (except for maybe a shoulder or two).
Woiyo9
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Oct, 2008 06:48 am
@Eorl,
Where do you live?

What about the "farmer" in the vast lands who needs his gun to protect their livestock or crop?

What should that person do? How naive you must be.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Oct, 2008 07:17 am
@Eorl,
Quote:
Yet another reason I hope Obama wins.
Maybe eventually you'll get some sensible gun restrictions.

Thanks for your contribution, Eorl.
Perhaps u 'll let us know your opinion
of how the Jews PROBABLY felt about the German "gun restrictions"
when thay were fighting in the Warsaw Ghetto ?

What 's your best estimate
of how the Armenians probably felt
about their genocide after the Turks disarmed them ?

( Of course, I have no way of knowing which side u favored. )





David
0 Replies
 
Eorl
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Oct, 2008 07:26 am
@Woiyo9,
I don't think I am, although it's possible. I live in a Australia, a country with sensible gun laws, not complete prohibition of firearms.

QUOTE:
The percentage of the U.S. population victimized in 2000 by crimes like assault, car theft, burglary, robbery, and sexual incidents is about average for 17 industrialized countries, and lower on many indices than Canada, Australia, or New Zealand.

"The only thing that jumps out is lethal violence," Hemenway says. Violence, pace H. Rap Brown, is not "as American as cherry pie," but American violence does tend to end in death. The reason, plain and simple, is guns.

Source; http://harvardmagazine.com/2004/09/death-by-the-barrel.html
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Oct, 2008 07:27 am
@Eorl,
Quote:

I think many Americans have a twisted view of freedom,
like the American brand is somehow "true" freedom,

There is no such thing as a "brand" of freedom.
Freedom means that government has no jurisdiction to interfere;
for instance, it has no jurisdiction to make u get to church on time,
so u have freedom insofar as that is concerned.

Government was granted EXISTENCE
on condition that it have no jurisdiction
to interfere with freedom of every citizen to bear whatever personal armament he chose.

Quote:

when they don't have the freedom to walk the streets at night without fear of guns.


As far as I know,
no one is in fear of walking the streets because of fear of guns
(altho many may be afraid to do so because of the crime rate).
The future crime victims need to instill a fear of defensive guns
into predatory criminals.

Helpless crime victims
are very good for predatory criminals, who don 't wish to get hurt on-the-job.






David
Eorl
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Oct, 2008 07:35 am
@cjhsa,
cjhsa wrote:

Would you prefere to walk the streets in fear of criminals?

Your fear of guns is completely unfounded and just boggles my mind. Law abiding gun owners don't want to hurt you. Criminals want to hurt you. You are confusing an object with a behaviour. Silly and sad.

I own over 20 guns and not one of them ever hurt anyone (except for maybe a shoulder or two).


Yet.

Quote: "According to the CDC, the rate of firearm deaths among children under age 15 is almost 12 times higher in the United States than in 25 other industrialized countries combined. American children are 16 times more likely to be murdered with a gun, 11 times more likely to commit suicide with a gun, and nine times more likely to die in a firearm accident than children in these other countries"

You guys seem so passionate, almost religious about gun ownership. You seem unaware of how bizarre it seems to the rest of the world.

It's like your view of "freedom" is the definitive one, and it can't be questioned. Here, we have the "freedom" to walk down the street without fear of firearms, and because so few people have them, so few people feel to need to.
0 Replies
 
Woiyo9
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Oct, 2008 07:37 am
@Eorl,
Well, the US does have "sensible" gun laws. The only problem is no one enforces them.

We do not need new laws here. We need to have them enforced vigorously.
Eorl
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Oct, 2008 07:46 am
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:

Quote:

I think many Americans have a twisted view of freedom,
like the American brand is somehow "true" freedom,

There is no such thing as a "brand" of freedom.
Freedom means that government has no jurisdiction to interfere;
for instance, it has no jurisdiction to make u get to church on time,
so u have freedom insofar as that is concerned.

Government was granted EXISTENCE
on condition that it have no jurisdiction
to interfere with freedom of every citizen to bear whatever personal armament he chose.


Your government was, not mine. I think it probably started there, along with your violent civil history, and just spiraled into a personal arms race with the neighbours.

You, of all people, know that freedom is a relative thing. You want me to write a list of the things you don't have the freedom to say, let alone do, in public?
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Oct, 2008 08:00 am
@Eorl,
Quote:

I don't think I am, although it's possible.
I live in a Australia, a country with sensible gun laws,
not complete prohibition of firearms.

Well, the idea is for future victims of crime to be armed well enuf
for the criminals or animals who prey upon them to be killed in flagrante delictu.

Quote:
"The only thing that jumps out is lethal violence," Hemenway says.

Since the Cambrian Explosion, predatory violence has been the natural order of events;
that includes VICTIMS DEFENDING THEMSELVES.



Quote:

Violence, pace [ ?? ] H. Rap Brown, is not "as American as cherry pie," but
American violence does tend to end in death.
The reason, plain and simple, is guns.

Hopefully, this results in the death of the CRIMINAL.

I reject the notion as being asinine
that the best way to treat crime is to disarm future victims.

A few years ago, I was enfeebled by the effects of surgery
to the extent that I coud not walk. [That shoud be Wauk; I don 't hear any L in that word.]
If I had been unarmed (gunless)
I can conceive of no way of defending myself from the violence of man or beast.
(Fortunately, no need to defend myself arose.)


Tell us, Eorl:
what gun laws do u have in Austrailia that are sensible enuf
to enable a victim of violent and unexpected predatory crime to fight back,
to defend his life and other property
with the urgency that this emergency requires ?

May I assume that the laws in Austrailia require
all fire extinguishers in civilian possession to be safely stored,
concealed under lock and key ?





David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Oct, 2008 08:23 am
@Eorl,
Quote:
Government was granted EXISTENCE
on condition that it have no jurisdiction
to interfere with freedom of every citizen to bear whatever personal armament he chose.

Quote:

Quote:
Your government was, not mine.

Yes.
I implied the government that we created
after we threw out the representatives of the King of England.
I shoud have said that explicitly.
I have very little information qua the filosofical origins
government in Austrailia. (maybe something about a penal colony ? I dunno.)


Quote:

I think it probably started there, along with your violent civil history,
and just spiraled into a personal arms race with the neighbours.

I don t believe that has ever happened.
We may well have had marksmanship competitions,
but I 've never raced any of my neighbors
qua the swift development of my gun collection.
I 've never heard of such a thing.

I am an old man; a retired trial attorney.
When I add another gun to my collection,
it is not out of concerns for additional security.
I took care of that well over half a century ago,
when I won a .38 revolver in a poker game
(whose owner used it to cover a raise) when I was 8.
Now, when I add a gun to my collection, it is out of appreciation
for its esthetics or as an artifact of history; (I love history).





David













0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Oct, 2008 08:37 am
@Eorl,
Those who would attempt to disarm me might as well try to take away my right to free speech as well.

To disarm yourself and expose yourself to criminals and psychopaths is the definition of soullessness.

Eorl says he/she can walk down the street without "fear of guns". What, are guns hiding in the shadows waiting to jump and and shoot you?

Misplaced fear.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Oct, 2008 08:42 am
@cjhsa,
It's clear who is afraid here - those who seek to arm themselves to the highest degree. It's a symptom of their fear that they do so.

How is it, that the rest of us keep walking down the street, unmolested, without guns, for years?

I guess we are just braver, is all.

Cycloptichorn
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Oct, 2008 09:38 am
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
[emphasis added by David]


Probably an unnecessary annotation.
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Oct, 2008 09:48 am
@Cycloptichorn,
No, you just never go off the beaten path, stay in the light, and hope for the best. You are a pussifed city dweller to the extreme. You also probably haven't done enough with your life to piss anyone off.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Tue 7 Oct, 2008 09:50 am
@blatham,
Agreed,
but I thought it best to obviate allegations of misrepresentation or distortion.





David
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » GUN OWNERS COURTED BY OBAMA
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 11/14/2024 at 07:39:57