Bob Barr for President?

That's fine, zukiphile. However, the seriousness of your claim deserves at least passing skepticism on the part of others and deserves to be backed up with some proof provided by you since you made the claim. If you cannot back it up, then that is fine.

As for me, until your post, I have not come across anyone who ever mentioned a bad thing about the GOA in regard to their lack of support for conceal carry rights. If I found such a situation to be true, then I could not support such an organization. However, I have not found such a thing to be true and I continue to support Gun Owners of America. We need as many organizations as possible to support our 2nd amendment rights and it is fine to be members of more than one pro-2nd amendment organization.
 
That's fine, zukiphile. However, the seriousness of your claim deserves at least passing skepticism on the part of others and deserves to be backed up with some proof provided by you since you made the claim. If you cannot back it up, then that is fine.

As for me, until your post, I have not come across anyone who ever mentioned a bad thing about the GOA in regard to their lack of support for conceal carry rights. If I found such a situation to be true, then I could not support such an organization.
Click to expand...

Firemax, let me suggest that before you purport to evaluate a statement, you first try to understand it.

At no point did I claim that the GOA is against concealed carry rights. I merely advised you that GOA opposed the concealed carry law that eventually passed in Ohio. Advising you of this is not "blowing hot air". Look for Ohio HB 274 and you should have little trouble finding news coverage.
 
Bob Barr running for President would just pull votes from McCain.
Click to expand...

As would almost any libertarian running against almost any repub.

I have pretty high regard for Bob Barr. I found it ironically endearing that he didn't worry much about being liked while he held office. He is quite smart with a strong personality.

I hope that he is above such an act of vanity.
 
zukiphile
Firemax, let me suggest that before you purport to evaluate a statement, you first try to understand it.

At no point did I claim that the GOA is against concealed carry rights. I merely advised you that GOA opposed the concealed carry law that eventually passed in Ohio. Advising you of this is not "blowing hot air". Look for Ohio HB 274 and you should have little trouble finding news coverage.
Click to expand...

Ummm.... okay. But, you did post the following just previously.

zukiphile
GOA has a history of opposing concealed carry legislation.
Click to expand...

I don't want to dicker over small details, but, yes, you did say they oppose concealed carry legislation and your statement was very broad. I asked you to provide some links to back it up and now you are talking about some obscure case in Ohio.

Dang, zukiphile, don't dig yourself any deeper... I'm embarrassed for you.
 
Quote:
Things today are not as our founding fathers had intended.
And what did they intend?
Click to expand...
Unfettered access to weapons and no molestation against the citizen who chooses to keep and bear arms. Pretty straight forward stuff in that constitution.
 
That sure makes a whole lot of sense. Or not.

Guess you'd rather have Clinton or Obama than McCain.
Click to expand...

I'd rather have a Conservative to vote for. I will not vote for a liberal just because he happens to have an (R) next to his name.
 
Firemax, let me suggest that before you purport to evaluate a statement, you first try to understand it.

At no point did I claim that the GOA is against concealed carry rights. I merely advised you that GOA opposed the concealed carry law that eventually passed in Ohio. Advising you of this is not "blowing hot air". Look for Ohio HB 274 and you should have little trouble finding news coverage.
Click to expand...

Ummm.... okay. But, you did post the following just previously.

GOA has a history of opposing concealed carry legislation.
Click to expand...

I don't want to dicker over small details, but, yes, you did say they oppose concealed carry legislation and your statement was very broad. I asked you to provide some links to back it up and now you are talking about some obscure case in Ohio.
Click to expand...

Now? I had previously explained that to you, before your last commnets about providing links. To state that I only now bring up Ohio, when anyone who actually read the posts would have noticed the reference to Ohio, is not forthright.

In Ohio, the GOA conspicuously opposed the concealed carry law that passed because it considered the law an unacceptable restriction of the right.
Click to expand...

You conflated the concealed carry rights and specific concealed carry legislation. Rather than ask about what you did not know, you decided to lead with some "Hot air" rubbish.

Your youth is beyond your control. Your poor manners are not.
 
Really? Unfettered huh...

Ok show us...
Click to expand...

What, are you an anti? Who would have thunk it.

There is this thing called the 2nd amendment. It is in the constitution. Read it for yourself. I'll sum it up for you....

... the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

It doesn't say "may not". It says "shall not".
 
Last edited:
What, are you an anti?
Click to expand...

So everyone who seeks an explanation of how the founding fathers believed in an UNFETTERED right to keep and bear arms is an anti?:rolleyes:

Possibly you went to public school..
Click to expand...

Yep. Class of '73...Got my BA in 1979.....

but in my school, we learned about this thing called the 2nd amendment.
Click to expand...

Yep me too...in law school

It is in the constitution.
Click to expand...

Really? Wow!:rolleyes:

the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

It doesn't say "may not". It says "shall not".
Click to expand...

Aw, isnt that special...500 years of jurisprudence reduced to a two bit netnoise soundbite.....

O , sorry, how could I have expected otherwise, you have a GOA blurb in your signature....:cool:

Perhaps you need to read the Heller thread here and the briefs.....

So in other words and to sum up, you CAN'T answer my question

WildwhatpartindeedAlaska TM
 
wildalaska
Perhaps you need to read the Heller thread here and the briefs.....

So in other words and to sum up, you CAN'T answer my question
Click to expand...

I did answer your question. The answer is in the 2nd amendment which is very clear. Now, if your problem is that you read more into those 27 words than was intended by the founders, well, that is your dysfunction... not mine.

I said that the 2nd amendment gives us unfettered access to arms in this country. If you read it differently, then please share with the rest of the community what "restrictions" you think our benevolent government are allowed to pose on "the citizens" according to the 2nd amendment.

I suspect you will remain silent on the issue as you already have been, except to blast me for being a member of a pro-2nd amendment organization. That tells me a lot about you, wildalaska.

Yep me too...in law school
Click to expand...
Bill Clinton is a lawyer. So is Hillary Clinton. What is your point?
 
The answer is in the 2nd amendment which is very clear. Now, if your problem is that you read more into those 27 words than was intended by the founders, well, that is your dysfunction... not mine.
Click to expand...

Golly, so I reckon SCOTUS is dysfunctional too, ja?

If you read it differently, then please share with the rest of the community what "restrictions" you think our benevolent government are allowed to pose on according to the 2nd amendment.
Click to expand...

I'll save ya the trouble of a search...as I have said before umpteem times and will say again the 2nd is an individual right subject to any restriction that will pass the strict scrutiny test. Thus the prohibition vis a vis felons is constitutional. The Brady Bill is constitutional. Laws that govern the methods and means of CCW are constitutional. Complete bans whether de jure or de facto are not

I believe the bulk of gun owners on this Board agree with my analysis in whole or in part. There are very few folks here who beleive in the "unfettered" theory.

I suspect you will remain silent on the issue as you have been, except to blast me for being a member of a pro-2nd amendment organization. That tells me a lot about you, wildalaska.
Click to expand...

Well you were proved wrong on the first count. On the second count, the GOA is a far right radical organization allied with hate groups that has an incorrect view of the second amendment. What does that tell you about me, sport?

Bill Clinton is a lawyer. So is Hillary Clinton. What is your point?
Click to expand...

Whats yours?

WildicantfindmyseecampAlaska TM
 
wildalaska
I'll save ya the trouble of a search...as I have said before umpteem times and will say again the 2nd is an individual right subject to any restriction that will pass the strict scrutiny test. Thus the prohibition vis a vis felons is constitutional. The Brady Bill is constitutional. Laws that govern the methods and means of CCW are constitutional. Complete bans whether de jure or de facto are not

I believe the bulk of gun owners on this Board agree with my analysis in whole or in part. There are very few folks here who beleive in the "unfettered" theory.
Click to expand...

In other words, you believe in the politically liberal interpretation of the 2nd amendment which is intended to disarm the citizenry little by little. Yes, I guessed this was the case.

firemax
I suspect you will remain silent on the issue as you have been, except to blast me for being a member of a pro-2nd amendment organization. That tells me a lot about you, wildalaska.
Click to expand...
wildalaska
Well you were proved wrong on the first count.
Click to expand...
Not even close, wildalaska. Your logic (sic) wouldn't work in a court of law. Hell, it won't even work on this gun forum. :)

wildalaska
On the second count, the GOA is a far right radical organization allied with hate groups that has an incorrect view of the second amendment. What does that tell you about me, sport?
Click to expand...

I am a member of the GOA. So, if one is to use your reasoning, then I too am allied with these so-called hate groups. I think I am coming to understand you now. You can't seem to make a valid, or even a lucid arguement based on facts to support your position, so you attempt to sling insults.

Nice try, but again, you missed the mark.... terribly.
 
In other words, you believe in the politically liberal interpretation of the 2nd amendment which is intended to disarm the citizenry little by little. Yes, I guessed this was the case.
Click to expand...

Well I guess in a few months one of us will be proved wrong :)

O I forgot, in the GOA the only valid decision that SCOTUS makes is the one they agree with :rolleyes:

Hell, it won't even work on this gun forum.
Click to expand...

Dunno, seems to have kept me going for a while here.

I am a member of the GOA. So, if one is to use your reasoning, then I too am allied with these so-called hate groups.
Click to expand...

That small piece of illogic has been tried already in conjunction with other members of fringe organizations....

WildseecampmagsgoneAlaska ™
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top