What's new
By:
TerraForums - Carnivorous Plant Community

Welcome to TerraForums — a long-running carnivorous plant community established in 2001. Register for free to join the conversation, ask questions, and connect with growers from around the world.

NASC Auction will open in...

Read the rules first :)
NASC auction is OPEN!!

Blatantantly political discussion, but...

Share this page

I do NO want anyone owning anything more powerful than a 30-odd-6(don't know the official demarcation, please excuse me) or a 357 magnum
Click to expand...

why? dont know bout you but i would want something a lil more powerful than a 30-06 when going after Alaskan brown bear, not to mention ive got a gun that shoots a cartridge older than the 30-06 by 25 years(and the 30-06 is 102 years old, that 06 stands for 1906) that can crack the engine block of a truck......not to mention if i want to hunt with a handgun the 357 is not considered a good round.....the 44 Mag is generally considered the minimum for hunting big game with a hand gun.....i love it how ppl who know nothing bout firearms think they need to dictate what laws we should have.......

as for the gun laws Obama has tried to get rid of the private ownership of handguns in Illinois, and because another bill was written by someone with less firearms knowledge than you it also banned alot of very common hunting rifles and shotguns, most notably any side by side or over-under shotgun that uses one trigger......every time a piece of gun legislation crossed by Obama in Illinois he made it more strict....

I do NOT want anyone convicted of felonies ever touching a gun. Since many states don't even allow convicted felon to vote, they shouldn't be able to express their opinion with a firearm either
Click to expand...

that is the law, in every state cause it is a federal law...your asking for something that already exists..you do realize we have over 3000 firearms laws on the books, how bout enforcing the ones we have instead of making more?

I do NOT want guns allowed in public spaces unless duly licensed and authorized
Click to expand...
ive got a bit of homework for you......look up Vermonts concealed carry laws than look at their crime rates.......their concealed carry laws are less strict than ANY other state but one(Alaska changed their law a few years ago) that is on equal footing, yet their violent crime rates are lower than California or Illinois or New York that have the strictest gun laws in the nation......law abiding citizens that pack guns do not raise crime, infact they lower crime rates even without firing a single shot.......its the criminals that pay no attention to the laws that cause violent crime.......

as for McCain and the Patriot act.......no i DO NOT like it, have stated before i would love to kick Bush in the nuts for that bit of legislation...... but Obama's views on this sorta Constitutional stuff is far worse......
 
uh he tried to outlaw private handgun ownership in Illinois, something the Supreme Court has said is unconstitutional......in his interest to pandering to other world leaders, especially NATO he supports treaties that would supersede the Constitution, something the Constitution itself says can not be done......he supports the Fairness Doctrine which gives the federal government the power to decide what can be played on public airways such as non-cable/sat TV and AM/FM radio...as in those in DC can get rid of talk show hosts such as say Hannity and Combs, Rush, and ANY other talk show they believe isnt fairly portraying both sides....basically who controls Congress gets to decide what we get to hear or watch because its "public airways", a blatant violation of the 1st Amendment......
 
All things Rep.s have done but in more insidious ways :( Of course we don't hear about it because it's the Rep.s so it's okay.

Don't have any real international examples unless you want the standbys of gitmo and the news coming out about monitoring our own troops phonecalls and such. And of course, the FCC is the ultimate tool for censorship. Which the reps have expanded exponentially since Bush has been in the White house, but whatever.
 
actually the vast majority of reps arent for more gun control....or the fairness doctrine.....and a decent amount of both reps and dems arent terribly impressed with NATO.........

and if yah havent figured it out im far from a Republican........i view McCain vs Obama as the lesser of two evils just like the last two elections.......dont agree with half of what McCain does but i agree with even less of what Obama does......said earlier in this thread, who i wanted didnt make it out of the primaries.......
 
http://www.kmov.com/video/index.html?nvid=285793&shu=1
Click to expand...

Sure, monitor and control what's said. There's our dwindling freedom for ya.

I found this:
http://obamamessiah.blogspot.com/

These people can't be serious? That's about 10 kinds of :crazy: right there. A politician as an object of worship? :-))


The first politician... and they haven't changed any! LOL

FIRST-POLITICIAN.jpg
 
Those people weren't prosecuting anyone, you're reading into something that isn't even there. McCain makes up stuff and these people are independently clearing up blatant misleading information.

I give up.

Too bad public figures can't sue for libel. I feel bad for Obama just far having so much crap flung at him in the name of dirty politics.
 
question for you.......do you want elected officials(im assuming sheriffs in MO are elected like those in MT are elected) deciding for you what is the truth? none of these individuals likely know Obama personally.....how do they know what is the "truth" and what isnt? do you really want elected officials deciding for you what is the truth? we have had county sheriff's here i wouldnt trust left alone in my house for 5 minutes, same with two of the last 3 county attorneys......not to mention some of them have been 100% completely for one party or the other not paying attention to the person....i DO NOT EVER want these ppl deciding for me what is and is not the truth, especially on something like presidential candidates.........

and point of fact public officials can sue for slander and libel.......however most refuse cause it opens them up to suits aswell cause generally what they are running is just as off base.....unless you know your 100% innocent of the same thing to that person you dont sue them for libel cause they can do the same to you
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top