Beck on Soros

[Cody Covey]

[QUOTE=sambo;704731]

It gets challenged all the time too, and it has been restricted some too.

I know all the talk (people kill not guns). That is a true statement. Problem though is irresponsible people can buy guns. That is what will cost us all our guns one day. George Soros is not the only person that does not like guns. Probably has something to do with a family member getting killed by a gun. Ask the parents that have lost kids at school shooting, gang wars, etc. Again irresponsible people with guns or irresponsible parents, accidents, whatever.

As gun owners, we should be more responsible and want others to be so, and quit hiding behind the 2nd amendment. There is a real responsibility to gun ownership. We don't need more regulation, we need to regulate ourselves. We need to win our neighbors trust.

Yes and of course the answer is to force law abiding people to not have a means to protect themselves. I know I get so mad that we have nukes, I mean our enemies have nukes so the obvious solution is to get rid of our own!
/sarcasm

Just think if at one of those school shoots just one law abiding gun owner had carried a gun that day...A lot less people would have died I am pretty certain of that.

[road kill]

The progressives are not worried about criminals having guns.

They are worried about free men having guns!!


Get it??



RK

[dnf777]

The progressives are not worried about criminals having guns.

They are worried about free men having guns!!


Get it??

RK

Much like many republicans easing up on anti-gay issues, the progressives seem to be easing up on gun-control issues, with a few notable exceptions. ie Brady Inc.

I think they learned that in America, taking guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens always has been, and always will be a losing political hot potato(e).

[david gibson]

Much like many republicans easing up on anti-gay issues, the progressives seem to be easing up on gun-control issues, with a few notable exceptions. ie Brady Inc.

I think they learned that in America, taking guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens always has been, and always will be a losing political hot potato(e).

fallacy.

if we "conservatives" lose to the gay issue, so what? how does that hurt ME? i really dont care if two guys want to hunker down together, my life is changed none by that. so you are safe dnf.

if we lose to the 2nd amendment - well, different story. My life will be SEVERELY affected.

so reps easing on gay issues is no where near the same as dems easing on gun issues.

[dnf777]

fallacy.

if we "conservatives" lose to the gay issue, so what? how does that hurt ME? i really dont care if two guys want to hunker down together, my life is changed none by that. so you are safe dnf.

if we lose to the 2nd amendment - well, different story. My life will be SEVERELY affected.

so reps easing on gay issues is no where near the same as dems easing on gun issues.

Thank you for saying what progressives have been saying all along! Your side keeps saying things like gay rights are a "threat to the institution of marriage". I have said all along that DIVORCE is a much bigger threat to marriage that whatever two guys or gals do down the block!

But how do you imply that the RIGHT to keep and bear arms is anywhere equivalent to the "right" to deny millions of citizens their civil rights? What are you talking about "losing"?? Only a RWE would think its their right to take away someone's rights because they don't agree with you.

I merely pointed out two issues where I think the parties are both wrong. And that in both cases, the moderate wings of both parties are backing off. I infer GUARANTEEING the rights to both groups, while you support one's rights, and the taking of the other's. Do we live in a free country or not? It has to be free for everyone. Something about equal protection.

[Buzz]

I stopped giving money to the NRA a long time ago. I feel that we are about as likely to lose our 2nd amendment rights as it is that h e double l will freeze over. The NRA is all about fanning the flames of fear to keep those dollars rolling in. We'll keep our rights with or without them. I'll spend my money somewhere more productive.

[dixidawg]

What gun rights organizations do you support if not the NRA?

[dnf777]

I stopped giving money to the NRA a long time ago. I feel that we are about as likely to lose our 2nd amendment rights as it is that h e double l will freeze over. The NRA is all about fanning the flames of fear to keep those dollars rolling in. We'll keep our rights with or without them. I'll spend my money somewhere more productive.

They got my chunk of change in the form of life dues when I thought they really needed it. I won't drop my membership, but they don't get anymore annual contributions from me, except for specific or local issues, on an as-needed basis.

There is a fine line between supporting pro-gun candidates (who are usually, but not always republican) and blatantly supporting a national political party. I think they crossed that line under the current leadership. It was easy to forgive during the assault-weapons ban, and I supported them at that point. Right now however, I think the economy is a bigger threat to gun ownership than legislation. Nobody will be able to afford guns, let alone NRA dues with all our jobs being sold out overseas! I am not a single-issue voter, and have trouble with the ties between LaPierre, Cox, and the NRC.

[BrianW]

We are not at risk in the current political environment or seeing any significant gun control adopted,

I feel that we are about as likely to lose our 2nd amendment rights as it is that h e double l will freeze over.... We'll keep our rights with or without them

I hope your pragmatic definitions of "risk" & "likelihood" don't came back to bite us in our "crisis management driven" state of governance; where no one wants to let one go to waste and there always seems to "just "magically" be a solution already drawn up. Look at the right to privacy and whats happened to it over both the last administrations, with PATRIOT Act & cell phone/internet monitoring. Imo, The main reason people aren't up in arms revolting is because the gov didn't physically take something away like a firearm, just leaving you with the feeling that you've been violated like a TSA pat down.

This Administration's arrogance & ineptitude on so many issues and levels leaves me with no confidence about the crisis on our southern border & terrorism. Let that blow up, in one or more of the possibilities, and it could be "game on" with many of our rights.
Katrina confiscations were just a "temporary restriction" on liberty & security, and besides that was a loooonnng time ago, right Buzz? There were no principles involved?
The NRA didn't have any reason at all to go to court, fight for NOLA gun owners rights and to help get their weapons back, just fanning flames? I'm sure they would have gotten their guns back eventually. I see that as a great reason not to be pragmatic and put anti-gun poli's in office for any reason, much less current political climate.

Sorry, when a wildfire erupts is not when you start putting the fire dept together and buying equipment. But that's ok guys, the gun rights groups have got your backs, even if you don't appreciate it.

[dixidawg]

Great post!

While there may currently be no appetite for new gun control legislation at the national level, the state and local governments have no such delusions. Many are continually pushing their agenda. Not to mention those states that already have onerous and likely unconstitutional laws already on the books.