- Joined
- Nov 15, 2009
- Messages
- 13,156
- Reaction score
- 1,038
- Location
- melbourne florida
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Wiki you got to be kidding. How about a government source
Does creating a watered-down, weak-ass healthcare bill that never considered a single-payer system (a socialist's fantasy) or that gave up on the public option (a liberals' wet dream), and mandates people to buy insurance from PRIVATE insurers sound liberal to you?
Does creating a weak-ass financial regulation bill that barely does anything to prevent a repeat of what happened in 2008 sound liberal to you?
Does continuing the War in Afghanistan sound liberal to you?
Does having conservatives like Robert Gates as your defense secretary sound liberal to you? (Actually I rather like Gates he's doing a fine job given the steaming pile of **** he was handed)
Does keeping Guantanamo bay open sound liberal to you?
Does continuing the use of torture and maintaining the Bush policy of extraordinary rendition sound liberal to you?
Does not supporting gay marriage sound liberal to you?
Does not taking the lead on the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, and instead letting Congress do the heavy lifting sound liberal to you?
Does keeping the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy sound liberal to you?
Obama might be a liberal at heart but he has been anything but a liberal President. The thought of him being a socialist is even more laughable.
Wiki you got to be kidding. How about a government source
So, now Wiki is not reliable?
How about clicking on the source and reviewing the info for yourself.
Too time consuming? Too taxing?
what's this have to do with Obama scheming about gun rights
So, now Wiki is not reliable?
How about clicking on the source and reviewing the info for yourself.
Too time consuming? Too taxing?
Follow the thread.
Here we go Obama playing politics and using a tragedy to forward his agenda
This will cause more disdain toward Obama from conservatives.
Gun-Control Effort Coming Soon From White House - Newsweek
At the beginning of his State of the Union address, President Obama tipped his hat to Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, who’s now recuperating in a Houston medical facility. But throughout the hourlong speech, he never addressed the issue at the core of the Giffords tragedy—gun control—and what lawmakers would, or should, do to reform American firearm-access laws.
That was intentional, according to the White House. An administration official says Obama didn’t mention guns in his speech because of the omnipresent controversy surrounding the Second Amendment and gun control. Tuesday’s speech was designed to be more about the economy and how, as Obama repeated nine times, the U.S. could “win the future.”
But in the next two weeks, the White House will unveil a new gun-control effort in which it will urge Congress to strengthen current laws, which now allow some mentally unstable people, such as alleged Arizona shooter Jared Loughner, to obtain certain assault weapons, in some cases without even a background check.
26 pages in, do we even know what the new 'push' is and why it's good or bad?
26 pages in, do we even know what the new 'push' is and why it's good or bad?
Well, they would all just pull out and kill the offender. This gun craze is tiring. Protect the flag..."To Abort or Not to Abort".....isn't there an economy issue to deal with?
A valid question.
Much of the angst on the Right, and I think I'm correct on this is... Obama is a liberal, he's a big Gov't liberal. We don't trust his past record on guns, and don't trust him moving forward. But you are correct, until we see what he actually proposes, in writing, it's speculation.
A valid question.
Much of the angst on the Right, and I think I'm correct on this is... Obama is a liberal, he's a big Gov't liberal. We don't trust his past record on guns, and don't trust him moving forward. But you are correct, until we see what he actually proposes, in writing, it's speculation.
Answer a question with a question...hmmm. Anyway, it is against the laws for "nuts" to own guns, but the only way to tell is if they check the I am crazy box on the application. Thus if we need new laws there Tex, I am all for it. I realize many right wingers are afraid of this for some of their zeal maybe misinterpreted as crazy.
Distrust is too often found on both sides. But, that shouldn't rule us too much.
Moving forward, I will say this. I have no emotional attachment or fear of guns. They are tool and nothing more. The reasons for the 2nd amendment, as I understand it, had more to do with the need of a citizen army and the need to have them armed, not to mention that having one was much more important to everyday life than it is today. So, if done unemotionally, which I doubt can be done, a serious discussion as to what role weapons play today would be a valid issue to undertake.
Before such a discussion could be undertaken, many liberals (and others) would have to educate themselves on the subject of where guns come from, and how criminals get access to them. The issue is not having too many guns in the U.S. Most of those guns are in the hands of people who are responsible with them and store them properly. The issue is having too many ILLEGAL guns in the U.S.
I've found that a lot of liberals have an almost visceral reaction to the sight of a gun on someone's person. I've run gang training for years, and I've had people attending a conference I planned become very offended because police officers in attendance were visible armed with sidearms. Many jurisdictions have rules about carrying sidearms. Cops don't carry guns like this to offend people from schools and social services. They are required to do so, and they are required to do so in specific ways.
I would say that, in general, conservatives understand the relevant issues in the topic of gun control better than the average liberal, because it's a matter of significant importance to them and they've researched the issue. Sportsmen, hunters, cops, military personnel, people who regularly handle guns are much more likely to be conservative than liberal, and they have reasons for their positions.
I'm not a liberal or a conservative really, I go back and forth depending on the issue. But, based on my exposure to guns/crime/criminals, and based upon the training I've received, I'm very conservative on the 2nd amendment. It's hard to debate and discuss a topic with people who don't have the same basic level of understanding of the subject.
I don't say that to be dismissive, it's just something that often occurs on these boards. Not all opinions are created equal.
However, times have changed, so a real and honest discussion would help us. But only if we could have such a discussion, minus the emotion.
So you think it is bad to stop mentally imbalanced people from obtaining assault rifles?
I agree, completely.
Here we go Obama playing politics and using a tragedy to forward his agenda
This will cause more disdain toward Obama from conservatives.
So I take it you had equal outrage when the previous administration used 9/11 as a cover to attack Iraq?
I doubt this particular issue will change natural events one way or another. Conservative distain for Obama grows each time he wakes up.
Sorry, but had the asualt weapon ban been continued, the shooter would not have been able to obtain the extended ammo clip. If he did not have that clip, he would have done less than half the damage he did. There is no rational reason for those clips to exist. It is reasonable to restrict them. Even Dick Cheney agrees with that.
We all believe in gun control, we just disagree about where the control line should be drawn.
Lets go off topic to argue something different. Completed.Murder is illegal, but people still commit murder, so by your logic, murder should not be illegal. That line of argument is ridiculous.