Ron Paul Wins Alabama and New Hampshire Straw Polls

ROFLMAO!!!! Ron Paul has no shot at getting the nomination of the GOP. He's a loon! Anyone who suggest that 9/11 wouldn't have happened had the passengers been able to exercise their constitional right to "pack heaters" aboard commercial airliners is definitely not playin with a full deck!

Care to post a link where Ron Paul said that passengers on planes should carry guns? He supports pilots being armed, and if they were, 9/11 could have probably been avoided.

It's funny how almost no MSM has reported this, and the ones that did played up the other nominees, and none of them mention that fact that Thompson, Giuliani, and McCain are coming in pretty much dead last. Funny that Ron Paul loses to all the MSM "frontrunners" in every poll the MSM controls, and rapes them in everyone they don't.

I would also like to see a link to such a comment. Maybe we do need someone in office that will rock the boat. That has a different view point then the left and the right.

Sure, here ya go! He says it 5:10 into the speech. Keep in mind the 2nd Amendment states: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. The people meaning America as a whole, not simply and exclusively "pilots."
YouTube - Ron Paul's Speech at Iowa Straw Poll

HAHAHA, wow, you're really grasping at straws huh? He SPECIFICALLY said that bureaucratic government created a situation where the airlines weren't permitted to protect their passengers.

And yes, we have a right to keep and bear arms, are you against the Consitution of the United States? Are you against the right to keep and bear arms? Maybe you're a democratic jedi.

I guess the question is are the passengers rights being "infringed"?

When you travel on an airplane do you have the right to be protected? Or should the airlines not be resonsible for your safety?

You should be safe on any civilian plane, to me that is different the being protected.

How is being safe on an airline not the same as being protected? So you should just "be safe" without the airline having to make that happen? What a wonderful little world you live in.

You are being chauffeured from point A to point B. You should have a reasonable chance of getting there safe and sound. IMO it does not include armed escort. When in a terminal, you provide the first responce to your own safety in a security situation, what ever it may be.
An example of riding in a cab, you expect them to get you to your destination safely and within the confines of the law, but you do not expect him to provide him to provide you with your personal safety do you? No body takes charge of that except me!
Or another example would be, if a friend riding shot gun with you should expect you to provide him with personal safety?

So, you support being able to defend ones self, in the absence of authority, so you support being armed on an airplane?

Me personally, yes. But we can't say that for everyone which is why they don't allow them. Also as it stands you don't need a gun to protect yourself either.

No, you don't nescessarily, but I like the old saying "don't bring a knife to a gun fight". Armed marshalls + armed pilots > hijackers with boxcutters.

THATS NOT WHAT HE SAID!!!!! Your the one "grasping at straws" whilst trying to discredit me. . .But you do so at your peril because anyone can go to the link and see "exactly" what he said!

But I'll save everyone that trouble!

Ron Paul said and I quote: " I think 9/11, quite frankly, could have been prevented if we had had alot more respect to the 2nd Amendment. (Idiots go wild with applause!) Freedom means self-responsibility and self-reliance it also means you get to keep the fruits of your labor. But on 9/11the responsibility for protecting passengers had been diverted to centralized beaurocratic government. The government told us that we would be safe, that we wouldn't be allowed to resist highjackers, and there was a prevention for having guns on the airlines. The airlines weren't even permitted to protect their passenger and their equipment. So respect for the 2nd Amendment certainly would go along way."

Now with that said, are you still suggesting that he isn't suggesting that 9/11 could've been prevented if the masses had been "packing"???

Thanks for the transcription, now everyone can see that no where in there did he say people should take guns on planes. The prevention is pilots with handguns stowed in the cockpit, something you'd know if you followed his commentaries as opposed to making blind statements without knowing what you are talking about.

Are you being obtuse on purpose or is it accidental. . .I wonder? Anyone with a brain in their head can clearly understand that he is suggesting that if the passengers (not the pilots) had been granted their 2nd amendment rights, 9/11 wouldn't have happened!

Obtuse is only bolding part of your supporting statement to fit your assumption....



Don't stop bolding the statements just because you are defeating your own argument with the whole quote.


You can try to argue what he "meant" to say or was "trying to imply" all day, next time come up wth an actual quote, instead of you analysis of a partial quote.


Ron Paul on Gun Control
Republican Representative (TX-14)




Ease procedures on the purchase and registration of firearms
Indicate which principles you support concerning gun issues.
Ease procedures on the purchase and registration of firearms.
Repeal all bans and measures that restrict law-abiding citizens from owning legally-obtained firearms.
Source: Congressional 1996 National Political Awareness Test Nov 1, 1996

Allow law-abiding citizens to carry concealed firearms
Indicate which principles you support concerning gun issues.
Allow law-abiding citizens to carry concealed firearms that are legally owned and registered.
Repeal all bans and measures that restrict law-abiding citizens from owning legally-obtained firearms.
Source: Congressional 1996 National Political Awareness Test Nov 1, 1996

Voted NO on prohibiting product misuse lawsuits on gun manufacturers.
A bill to prohibit civil liability actions from being brought or continued against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms or ammunition for damages, injunctive or other relief resulting from the misuse of their products by others. A YES vote would:
Prohibit individuals from filing a qualified civil liability action
Exempt lawsuits brought against individuals who knowingly transfer a firearm that will be used to commit a violent or drug-trafficking crime
Exempt lawsuits against actions that result in death, physical injury or property damage due solely to a product defect
Dismiss of all civil liability actions pending on the date of enactment
Prohibit the manufacture, import, sale or delivery of armor piercing ammunition
Reference: Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act; Bill S 397 ; vote number 2005-534 on Oct 20, 2005

Voted NO on prohibiting suing gunmakers & sellers for gun misuse.
Vote to pass a bill that would prohibit liability lawsuits from being brought against gun manufacturers and dealers based on the criminal misuse of firearms. The bill would also block these actions from being brought up against gun trade organizations and against ammunition makers and sellers. The measure would apply immediately to any pending cases. Several specific exceptions to the ban exist. This includes civil suits would be allowed against a maker or dealer who "knowingly and willfully violated" state or federal laws in the selling or marketing of a weapon. Design and manufacturing defect lawsuits are also permitted when weapons are "used as intended.
Reference: Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act; Bill HR 1036 ; vote number 2003-124 on Apr 9, 2003

Voted NO on decreasing gun waiting period from 3 days to 1.
Vote to pass a bill requiring anyone who purchases a gun at a gun show to go through an instant background check which must be completed within 24 hours [instead of 72 hours].
Reference: Bill introduced by McCollum, R-FL; Bill HR 2122 ; vote number 1999-244 on Jun 18, 1999

Support the Second Amendment .
Paul adopted the Republican Liberty Caucus Position Statement:

As adopted by the General Membership of the Republican Liberty Caucus at its Biannual Meeting held December 8, 2000.
WHEREAS libertarian Republicans believe in limited government, individual freedom and personal responsibility;
WHEREAS we believe that government has no money nor power not derived from the consent of the people;
WHEREAS we believe that people have the right to keep the fruits of their labor; and
WHEREAS we believe in upholding the US Constitution as the supreme law of the land;

BE IT RESOLVED that the Republican Liberty Caucus endorses the following [among its] principles:
Every American has the right to keep and bear arms. We affirm our support for the second amendment of the US Constitution.
All people, regardless of position in the public or private sector, should be held equally accountable under the law.
The *only* litmus test for Supreme Court or other judges should be their determination to accurately interpret, not amend, the Constitution. Judges have *no* authority to make new law.


Nope, no where in there is anything about people carrying guns on planes either, hmmmmm....

Voted YES on permitting commercial airline pilots to carry guns.
Armed Airline Pilots Bill: Vote to pass a bill that would create a program where commercial pilots would be deputized as federal law enforcement officers and would then be permitted to carry guns aboard airlines. To participate in the program, commercial pilots would have to undergo specialized training. At least 250 commercial pilots would undergo the training. Within two months of the bill's enactment, the Transportation Security Agency or TSA, would then be required to begin weapons training for pilots who had volunteered for the program. Airlines and pilots will not be held legally accountable when defending planes from terrorist acts except in cases of willful misconduct or gross negligence The TSA could temporarily put the program on hold if a pilot's gun unintentionally discharges and causes injury to a crew member or passanger. The bill also would entail flight attendants to undergo self-defense training. Also study training all federal law enforcement officers on aviation anti-terrorism.

If all you got is a knife, i guess that is what comes out.