NRA
Standing Guard: Vote For The Second Amendment
In just a few days, on November 4, gun owners will be presented with a very clear choice of a pro-Second Amendment versus an anti-Second Amendment Presidential ticket. John McCain and Sarah Palin versus Barack Obama and Joe Biden represents a stark contrast for the future of our freedom.
In that choice, one fact is foremost:
The next president, by filling inevitable vacancies on the U.S. Supreme Court, will determine the continued existence of our Right To Keep and Bear Arms.
The landmark Heller decision by the U.S. Supreme Court--which struck down the D.C. gun ban and its attendant criminalizing of armed self-defense in the home--was decided by a one vote margin, in a 5-4 decision. The court's decision was aided by briefs filed by Congress and states--briefs signed by John McCain and by Palin's state of Alaska.
The next president, by filling inevitable vacancies on the U.S. Supreme Court, will determine the continued existence of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
Barack Obama and Joe Biden refused to sign in support of the Second Amendment. But for President George W. Bush's two high court nominations, it could easily have gone the other way. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Associate Justice Samuel Alito truly made the difference. Keep in mind that Barack Obama and the man who is now his running mate, U.S. Sen. Joseph Biden, voted against confirming both.
And Biden, one-time chairman of the powerful Senate Judiciary Committee, was radically opposed and used every trick in the book including the threat of a filibuster to kill the confirmation process.
Gun owners have U.S. Sen. John McCain to thank for quashing Biden's filibuster moves and brokering the Senate agreement that allowed confirmation. If Biden had his way, the Senate could have stalled indefinitely, leaving two vacancies unfilled, and creating a seven-member court dominated by the very justices who opposed the Second Amendment as protection for a broad, individual right.
Biden told the NAACP during his own losing primary bid for the Democratic presidential nomination:
"The next president is likely to name at least one, if not three new Supreme Court justices. We should start this national debate by recognizing the truth--that Roberts and Alito have turned the court upside down . . I guarantee you that will change."
Turning "the court upside down ." As in upholding the Second Amendment.
Biden's pledge came in an important context. With funding from globalist gun-banner George Soros, the NAACP filed the most onerous litigation de-signed by our enemies to drive America's firearm industry into bankruptcy.
That suit, argued before Brooklyn, N.Y., U.S. District Judge Jack B. Weinstein, claimed that virtually all elements of the federally regulated and lawful firearm industry were collectively responsible for the totally unrelated illegal acts of armed, violent criminals. The suit ultimately was a loser, but cost consumers millions of dollars in legal fees. It was one of a string of serial, punitive lawsuits brought before lifetime-appointee Weinstein.
And on that score, the last such lawsuit before Weinstein was thrown out by the U.S. Court of Appeals, which ruled the litigation violated the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, the NRA-backed 2005 law--a law vehemently opposed by Obama and Biden.
If the Obama and Biden team has its way, the nation will again be flooded with hundreds of such suits creating what one gun-ban lawyer called "death by a thousand cuts." Under an Obama-Biden administration, the lower federal courts would resemble cloned versions of Weinstein's Brooklyn star chamber.
During the remarkable Saddleback forum, Obama attacked the nominations of Associate Justice Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia, author of the brilliant Heller decision. Counted with his "no" votes against Roberts and Alito, that's an Obama thumbs down for four of the five justices who rendered the Supreme Court's definitive decision upholding the Second Amendment as protecting an individual right and recognizing the right to armed self-defense in the home.
In this last column before we go to the polls I must make an additional point. While we have disagreed in the past with Sen. McCain on a few specific issues, these disagreements pale in comparison to what the future would be like for gun owners if an Obama-Biden regime were to control all organs of federal power and land a one-two punch against freedom.
John McCain's running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, is an NRA Life member, life-long gun owner, hunter and staunch Second Amendment supporter. She is an electrifying force for preservation and expansion of all the gains we have made in the past decades.
I found it remarkable that in every story announcing her selection she was described as a "lifetime" member of the NRA. She is indeed proud of her Life membership. Suddenly the phony poses of Obama and Biden wrapping themselves around the Second Amendment are stripped to their essence--a semantic trick designed to fool gun owners. You can't let that happen.
Your vote is a remarkable power that you must wield to preserve the Second Amendment. With all of this, there is a simple message. Vote. Get your friends, family and co-workers to vote. And vote for the only ticket that will uphold our Freedom. Vote for the Second Amendment. Vote for the McCain-Palin ticket!
In just a few days, on November 4, gun owners will be presented with a very clear choice of a pro-Second Amendment versus an anti-Second Amendment Presidential ticket. John McCain and Sarah Palin versus Barack Obama and Joe Biden represents a stark contrast for the future of our freedom.
In that choice, one fact is foremost:
The next president, by filling inevitable vacancies on the U.S. Supreme Court, will determine the continued existence of our Right To Keep and Bear Arms.
The landmark Heller decision by the U.S. Supreme Court--which struck down the D.C. gun ban and its attendant criminalizing of armed self-defense in the home--was decided by a one vote margin, in a 5-4 decision. The court's decision was aided by briefs filed by Congress and states--briefs signed by John McCain and by Palin's state of Alaska.
The next president, by filling inevitable vacancies on the U.S. Supreme Court, will determine the continued existence of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
Barack Obama and Joe Biden refused to sign in support of the Second Amendment. But for President George W. Bush's two high court nominations, it could easily have gone the other way. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Associate Justice Samuel Alito truly made the difference. Keep in mind that Barack Obama and the man who is now his running mate, U.S. Sen. Joseph Biden, voted against confirming both.
And Biden, one-time chairman of the powerful Senate Judiciary Committee, was radically opposed and used every trick in the book including the threat of a filibuster to kill the confirmation process.
Gun owners have U.S. Sen. John McCain to thank for quashing Biden's filibuster moves and brokering the Senate agreement that allowed confirmation. If Biden had his way, the Senate could have stalled indefinitely, leaving two vacancies unfilled, and creating a seven-member court dominated by the very justices who opposed the Second Amendment as protection for a broad, individual right.
Biden told the NAACP during his own losing primary bid for the Democratic presidential nomination:
"The next president is likely to name at least one, if not three new Supreme Court justices. We should start this national debate by recognizing the truth--that Roberts and Alito have turned the court upside down . . I guarantee you that will change."
Turning "the court upside down ." As in upholding the Second Amendment.
Biden's pledge came in an important context. With funding from globalist gun-banner George Soros, the NAACP filed the most onerous litigation de-signed by our enemies to drive America's firearm industry into bankruptcy.
That suit, argued before Brooklyn, N.Y., U.S. District Judge Jack B. Weinstein, claimed that virtually all elements of the federally regulated and lawful firearm industry were collectively responsible for the totally unrelated illegal acts of armed, violent criminals. The suit ultimately was a loser, but cost consumers millions of dollars in legal fees. It was one of a string of serial, punitive lawsuits brought before lifetime-appointee Weinstein.
And on that score, the last such lawsuit before Weinstein was thrown out by the U.S. Court of Appeals, which ruled the litigation violated the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, the NRA-backed 2005 law--a law vehemently opposed by Obama and Biden.
If the Obama and Biden team has its way, the nation will again be flooded with hundreds of such suits creating what one gun-ban lawyer called "death by a thousand cuts." Under an Obama-Biden administration, the lower federal courts would resemble cloned versions of Weinstein's Brooklyn star chamber.
During the remarkable Saddleback forum, Obama attacked the nominations of Associate Justice Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia, author of the brilliant Heller decision. Counted with his "no" votes against Roberts and Alito, that's an Obama thumbs down for four of the five justices who rendered the Supreme Court's definitive decision upholding the Second Amendment as protecting an individual right and recognizing the right to armed self-defense in the home.
In this last column before we go to the polls I must make an additional point. While we have disagreed in the past with Sen. McCain on a few specific issues, these disagreements pale in comparison to what the future would be like for gun owners if an Obama-Biden regime were to control all organs of federal power and land a one-two punch against freedom.
John McCain's running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, is an NRA Life member, life-long gun owner, hunter and staunch Second Amendment supporter. She is an electrifying force for preservation and expansion of all the gains we have made in the past decades.
I found it remarkable that in every story announcing her selection she was described as a "lifetime" member of the NRA. She is indeed proud of her Life membership. Suddenly the phony poses of Obama and Biden wrapping themselves around the Second Amendment are stripped to their essence--a semantic trick designed to fool gun owners. You can't let that happen.
Your vote is a remarkable power that you must wield to preserve the Second Amendment. With all of this, there is a simple message. Vote. Get your friends, family and co-workers to vote. And vote for the only ticket that will uphold our Freedom. Vote for the Second Amendment. Vote for the McCain-Palin ticket!
0
-
National Rifle Association of America
Attn: Wayne LaPierre - Exec. VP
11250 Waples Mill Rd.
Fairfax VA 22030
I have been a member of the NRA since 1991, and a life member since 1998. I have supported the NRA both vocally and monetarily in their efforts, but no more. I have stood idly by for the last few years and watched as more and more restrictions have been signed into law. Meanwhile, the NRA has appeared to do little or nothing to fight these restrictions, and even went as far as supporting the most recent legislation, HR 2640.
It was this support of HR 2640 that was the proverbial "nail in the coffin." I know that any legislation with support from the likes of Sen. Schumer and Rep. McCarthy cannot be good for firearms owners. It doesn't surprise me when they support restrictive legislation, but for the organization, that supposedly represents me and my RTKBA supports it, I find it appalling. HR 2640 was nothing more than the typical "knee-jerk" reaction to a terrible tragedy; ironically, an incident that may have been prevented had it not been for previous legislation declaring school property and college campuses as "gun-free" zones. Do not bother with replying to me singing the praises of this legislation, and touting it as being pro-gun. It's not. When I was a kid, my grandfather used to tell me, "Shane, you can take a hog. You can clean and wash him up. You can put a ribbon around his neck; but you know what? He's still a hog." The NRA fell for this garbage hook, line, and sinker. They bought-in to the argument that HR 2640 was "common-sense" regulation. The NRA believed the government of the United States, and what they were saying. A little study in history will show that is a very risky thing to do. The NRA should also cease its mantra of "enforce, enforce, enforce the existing laws." _ of the existing firearms laws now are unconstitutional. How about "repeal, repeal, repeal?"
I also take issue with the NRA on its action, or lack thereof, in this election year. We have a candidate vying for the Presidency this year that has openly stated his support for the Constitution / RTKBA, and has backed it up with his action in the U.S. House of Representatives. His record leaves no question as to his passionate support of the 2nd Amendment. He has consistently voted for pro-gun legislation and has consistently voted against further restrictions on our RTKBA. I would think that an organization as influential as the NRA would be exhausting all efforts in encouraging support for Rep. Ron Paul. In your literature, you are always using the example of "Lexington Green" and the "shot heard round the world." Well, it is time you take some of you own medicine and follow the example of the famous patriot Paul Revere. You should be "hanging lanterns in the bell tower" and "riding through the night" to inform gun owners about Rep. Paul, and doing everything you can to garner support for him in his bid for the Presidency, but I have witnessed none of this. No email alerts. No mailers. No columns in the American Rifleman. No phone calls. Nothing but the chirping of crickets. Why? I surmise that you have taken the same position as the mainstream media, and believe Rep. Paul is a non-viable candidate, i.e. unelectable. You will choose your "golden-boy" candidate to endorse, even though that candidate will not be as strong a supporter of the Constitution as Rep. Paul. We have started choosing candidates on "electability" or "the lesser of two evils." I have always despised that logic because your conscience should determine whom you support, and voting for "the lesser of two evils" is still a vote for evil. Whatever happened to doing the right thing because it is right? It may not be popular, but it is right, nonetheless.
Because of the two issues I have mentioned, with particular emphasis on the first one, you, the NRA, have alienated gun owners. Many of them are members of your organization. Many of them are former members of your organization. I have been a "hold-out" so far. I believe everyone is subject to making bad decisions, and I believe in giving them a chance to redeem themselves. Many of your former members will disagree, and believe you have established a pattern of the aforementioned behaviors. I am inclined to agree with them. I believe you may be able to save face if:
1) You issue a formal apology to all firearms owners for supporting this most recent legislation (HR2640), as well as the other "common-sense" restrictions you've stood behind.
2) Immediately begin a campaign to not only block further restrictive legislation, but to repeal most of the legislation in place. You should be familiar with it, because you gave your stamp of approval on much of it.
3) Endorse Rep. Ron Paul as your candidate for President of the United States. You know of all the candidates, he is the strongest supporter of the RTKBA, and has the record to prove it.
Do this, and it will show the gun owners in this country that you have some integrity left. However, continue on the path you have been on, and you will leave me with no choice. I will be mailing my membership card back to you, and withdrawing from your organization. I will not give my vocal support to you when I am among other gun owners, and will point them to organizations such as GOA and JFPO. I will give you no monetary support to put in the bag with your "thirty pieces of silver" either. And do not make the mistake of thinking, "He's just one member; it doesn't matter." There are many other of your members that feel just as betrayed as I do. Many have left, and unless there is a change of direction, many more will leave, including myself. Do what is right.
Sincerely, Shane Draughn
Scathing, but I had to send it to them. They brought it upon themselves.0 -
Go about 1/3 the way down the first page to Pickenup's post on the linked thread. It is a great place to start understand why some of us have issues with the NRA claiming to be the last bastion of the 2nd Amendment in America today.
http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=399841&SearchTerms=nra
Welcome to the forum, BTW.0 -
A couple more, for your reading enlightenment.
The NRA has been exposed.
http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=287342
http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=2637950 -
Rex, the anti-crowd here will give you more advice/opinions than you care to hear about what is wrong and what you should not do or think. Yet the same group of loudmouths will never get around to doing something constructive like saying what is right or what you should do.
In other words, they will always act in a negative manner but never in a constructive manner. If that is the attitude you like you came to the right place.0 -
Rex ;
if compromise,gun control,fear, and government control is your bag...you will find yourself in the company of the NRA, the TRfoxes, and the selectfires of the world.
We that value personal responsibility, freedom, and limited government will look upon you as a foreign agent, however.0 -
Here, let me introduce Wayne LaPeeAir's personal secritary, Trfox. Aka Larry Blart.
Larry is a NRA cheeleader. In his limited opinion, the NRA does no wrong.0 -
Originally posted by Rex Mahan
Im reading some posts and seeing that some are not happy with the NRA. Can someone summarize or show me a previous post that explains some of this.
Thanks
[/quote
Rex I would encourage you to do some thorough research on your own concerning the NRA, and what they say they are providing to us for the millions they get annually. I came here......A staunch supporter of the NRA and while "I still do" I am very disappointed in what they actually do[:(!] They are the only group that has the funds to fight (for our rights) and instead....... half the time they choose to help write the legislation that breeches them.
This is a decision you must make on your own but do not fall pray to the "send us more money we will continue the fight for you"..... ploy.0 -
The NRA is like anything else. Far from perfect but in my opinion still our best bet. Others on this form see them as the enemy. I am not sure who they think will help us more. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by IdahoRedneck
I came here......A staunch supporter of the NRA
So did I IdahoRedneck.....so did I.
I had been supporting/promoting them for YEARS.
Then I was challenged by someone to "do some research" for myself.
The end result is what has been posted in those threads.
I REALLY DO WISH my research would have had a different outcome.
If they are our "best bet" we are in SAD SHAPE.
Just because they are the big dogs, does NOT mean they are the right ones.
People/members are waking up.0 -
quote:Originally posted by pickenup
quote:Originally posted by IdahoRedneck
I came here......A staunch supporter of the NRA
So did I IdahoRedneck.....so did I.
I had been supporting/promoting them for YEARS.
Then I was challenged by someone to "do some research" for myself.
The end result is what has been posted in those threads.
I REALLY DO WISH my research would have had a different outcome.
If they are our "best bet" we are in SAD SHAPE.
Just because they are the big dogs, does NOT mean they are the right ones.
People/members are waking up.
+1 buddy[V] But it is what it is,. They are a far cry from what they were founded on.0 -
quote:Originally posted by slumlord44
The NRA is like anything else. Far from perfect but in my opinion still our best bet. Others on this form see them as the enemy. I am not sure who they think will help us more.
If an organization actively and purposefully takes actions and/or supports actions, or people, who erode and outright oppose the Constitution and its principles, what would 'you' see them as, seriously?
An analogy.....
A woman who is friendly, helps her neighbors and who teaches about and owns a child care business, is a multiple-convicted child molester.
She actively lobbies to weaken laws against child molestation and supports other groups such as NAMBLA, although she loudly and smugly claims to be the 'staunch defender' of children and 'protector of their rights'.
She has molested children younger than she is, in areas other than your neighborhood, since she was an adolescent. She recently was identified as again having molested a child in the next county and that trial is pending.
You gonna call her an asset to child care and then put your kids in her care?
If your kids have been entrusted to her care and you subsequently found out about her sordid past and current activities and then educated yourself to the facts, are you going to say that she has made mistakes, she isn't perfect, but she is all we have in my neighborhood?
Spare me, please...
The RKBA is a fundamental Natural-right, enumerated in Amendment II and absolutely written and intended to bar the government from infringing in a citizens RIGHT to keep and bear arms.
Period.
Sanctions for whatever the specific 'bad-act', may be, is the answer to ANY misuse of a firearm; not regulation, control, prohibition, categorization and other government machinations.
Frankly, whether anyone desires that the government intervene, or not, it is simply and absolutely prohibited by the text of the Constitution, of Amendment II and is dirt simple to support by viewing the arguments and writings of the founders who constructed the Constitution and BOR's.
It truly is that simple and those who try to squirm, wiggle, bluster, bluff, read into it and other methods of achieving their individual liberty squashing desires, well, those people are standing opposite to this Republic, to our Constitution and specifically to Amendment II.
It is what it is...0 -
I no longer contribute to the NRA, even though I am an Endowment Member.
The NRA does have a use.
It is great for organizing shooting matches, Eddie Eagle, stuff like that.
It sucks as a gun rights group.
I guess you could say the NRA-ILA is the real culprit.0 -
Thank you, PBJ ;
Another box of cartridges, another rifle, or a case of beans is a FAR better use of the money formerly sent to advance gun control thru the NRA.
In the end, no amount of discussion or arguing will sway the hard-core gun controllers.
Every one of us needs to face this fact.
They are your brothers, fathers, neighbors and politicians. They will have to handled exactly as the Founders handled them.
Eventually, they will go too far..and men will have to make that final decision...'NO MORE'.0 -
quote:It is great for organizing shooting matches, Eddie Eagle, stuff like that.
They do a good job in this realm. They should stick to it exclusively. Training, competition, certification, only redeeming qualitites.
Too bad they are an organization too large to be affected by the likes of thier members. Oh, wait. Large portion of the members support what they do.0 -
quote:Originally posted by tr fox
Rex, the anti-crowd here will give you more advice/opinions than you care to hear about what is wrong and what you should not do or think. Yet the same group of loudmouths will never get around to doing something constrictive like saying what is right or what you should do.
In other words, they will always act in a negative manner but never in a constructive manner. If that is the attitude you like you came to the right place.
Rex, the anti-crowd here will give you more facts than you care to hear about what is wrong and what you should not do or think. Yet the other person, a complete head in the sand dumbass, will never get around to doing something constrictive (sp) like dropping the organization that is merely a front for the gun-controllers/government and has a vested interest in not supporting RKBA. If they succeed in what they claim to be attempting, they are out of business
In other words, he will always act in an unrealistic, almost liberal like in his stupidity, manner but never in a constructive manner. If that is the attitude you like you came to the wrong place.0 -
quote:Originally posted by slumlord44
The NRA is like anything else. Far from perfect but in my opinion still our best bet. Others on this form see them as the enemy. I am not sure who they think will help us more.
Well let's see, NRA or Gun Control Inc. (Brady) Stated goals opposite. Results same. Appears one is lying.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Highball
Thank you, PBJ ;
Another box of cartridges, another rifle, or a case of beans is a FAR better use of the money formerly sent to advance gun control thru the NRA.
In the end, no amount of discussion or arguing will sway the hard-core gun controllers.
Every one of us needs to face this fact.
They are your brothers, fathers, neighbors and politicians. They will have to handled exactly as the Founders handled them.
Eventually, they will go too far..and men will have to make that final decision...'NO MORE'.
It's is a hard thing, after spending years running off at the mouth about how good something is, to go back to friends,family, acquaintances and say "Ummm, I was wrong." Especially by the new version of american, the feminized male. (trfox)0 -
gun control, gun control. wait, i think i heard something about this. 0 -
Gun control on this forum means any restrictions on any firearms at all. Example: Jose, the illegal gang members 16 year old brother should be able to go to the gun shop and buy (with no ID or background check)a pair of m-60 belt fed machine guns, 50 full auto AK-47's and a mortar tube and 100 rds of HE and white phosphorus, throw it in the gangs M-1 Abrams tank and roll home. If Jose and his homeys misuse this equipment then of course they should be arrested. 0 -
Hmm, does lying to justify your gun control position, usually impress your young friends? Jose is here, illegally. That is where your lame analogy ends. What?
Next, have someone read the 2nd amendment to you. Although it is as clear as water, and easily understood by anyone over the age of 9 or 10, get some help deciphering it's cryptic meaning.0 -
Some here, use ridiculous attempts to justify government authority to infringe on a citizens RKBA, where, clearly, there is none and where none was ever intended.
Sad, really.
Right back to the old argument of following the Constitution as required, or using the collectivist method of rationalizing and justifying that we not follow it, we unlawfully pervert it, or that we simply ignore it.
There are those who simply can't grasp that concept and they never will.0 -
quote:Originally posted by lt496
Some here, use ridiculous attempts to justify government authority to infringe on a citizens RKBA, where, clearly, there is none and where none was ever intended.
Sad, really.
Right back to the old argument of following the Constitution as required, or using the collectivist method of rationalizing and justifying that we not follow it, we unlawfully pervert it, or that we simply ignore it.
There are those who simply can't grasp that concept and they never will.
It requires one to be responsible. Truly scary, indeed.0 -
quote:Jose, the illegal gang members 16 year old brother should be able to go to the gun shop and buy (with no ID
You were some sort of guard, or some such...if my memory doesn't fail me.
That means that YOU...or your brother officer, your police chief, your masters the politicians have failed in YOUR jobs...and should be run out of town on a rail, complete with tar and feathers.
YOU are the failure in this case...not the seller of the weapons.
YOU DON'T GET TO BALME ME because YOU are incompetent in your job.
Sorry, charley...this is a NEW world you are living in...one that no longer allows you to shift blame onto somebody else for YOUR neglect of duty.0 -
Correct me if I'm wrong but your position is when buying a firearm there should be NO ID checks at all. No background no nothing NADA. If Jose speaks broken english who are we to check him out? According to your views we have to sell him a firearm, mortar tube , machine gun or whatever he wants. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by steve45
Correct me if I'm wrong but your position is when buying a firearm there should be NO ID checks at all. No background no nothing NADA. If Jose speaks broken english who are we to check him out? According to your views we have to sell him a firearm, mortar tube , machine gun or whatever he wants.
If he is an US citizen then yes absoutely. Who are you to trash a citizen's constitution?0 -
quote:Originally posted by buffalobo
quote:It is great for organizing shooting matches, Eddie Eagle, stuff like that.
They do a good job in this realm. They should stick to it exclusively. Training, competition, certification, only redeeming qualitites.
Too bad they are an organization too large to be affected by the likes of thier members. Oh, wait. Large portion of the members support what they do.
+ infinity.
I have had NRA members here in PA tell me I don't need an "assault rifle", since we cannot hunt with semi-auto rifles here in PA.
They think the 2nd and the RTKBA is about hunting.
they send their annual $35 in and subscribe to the "American Hunter" and think they are protecting their gun rights.
But I'm the bad guy, since I own and shoot those nasty, evil "assault rifles".
They have sight, yet they are SO blind.0 -
If you arent allowed to ask for ID or anything else (for fear of registration) how would anybody know?quote:Originally posted by Horse Plains Drifter
quote:Originally posted by steve45
Correct me if I'm wrong but your position is when buying a firearm there should be NO ID checks at all. No background no nothing NADA. If Jose speaks broken english who are we to check him out? According to your views we have to sell him a firearm, mortar tube , machine gun or whatever he wants.
If he is an US citizen then yes absoutely. Who are you to trash a citizen's constitution?0 -
Highball, if true I did'nt miss them all by myself. There are 13 million illegals in the US. Unofficially, I would say there are 30 million here. If we dont have to show citizenship or any ID to buy a firearm. Are'nt a lot of illegals and criminals going to be able to buy guns?quote:Originally posted by Highball
quote:Jose, the illegal gang members 16 year old brother should be able to go to the gun shop and buy (with no ID
You were some sort of guard, or some such...if my memory doesn't fail me.
That means that YOU...or your brother officer, your police chief, your masters the politicians have failed in YOUR jobs...and should be run out of town on a rail, complete with tar and feathers.
YOU are the failure in this case...not the seller of the weapons.
YOU DON'T GET TO BALME ME because YOU are incompetent in your job.
Sorry, charley...this is a NEW world you are living in...one that no longer allows you to shift blame onto somebody else for YOUR neglect of duty.0 -
What you do as a private citizen is YOUR business.
In other words...if you are uncomfortable selling to Jose'who can't speak English...DON'T SELL TO HIM.
Too bad you folks don't mind infringing upon MY Rights..so you do not have to use your OWN brain to decide who you sell a weapon to.0 -
But Highball, Jose's brother speaks perfect english even though he's not a US citizen. If I have no right to check for ID how would I know his brother is a illegal gang member? 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
53 comments