Draft of Dem Party Platform for convention

possum

New member
I would say that if you like owning guns at all, and you vote for Democrats this fall, you still don't get it.




http://blog.nysrpa.org/?p=1541

Firearms

We recognize that the right to bear arms is an important part of the American tradition, and we will preserve Americans’ continued Second Amendment right to own and use firearms. We believe that the right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation, but we know that what works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne. We can work together to enact and enforce common-sense laws and improvements, like closing the gun show loophole, improving our background check system and reinstating the assault weapons ban, so that guns do not fall into the hands of terrorists or criminals. Acting responsibly and with respect for differing views on this issue, we can both protect the constitutional right to bear arms and keep our communities and our children safe.
 
OK, If Obama is ...

... True to form he'll disavow any previous knowledge of the DNC platform on gun control and change the wording to some sort of code speak. That way Obama can flip flop to gain votes depending on which way the wind blows that day.

This could be a brilliant plan conceived to appease (sarcasm) both the Obamaist and the Undecideds.

Actually, it is a draft and will probably be re-worded before the Socialist Convention for general public consumption.
 
Did the Brady Campaign write that? It is right out of their playbook and almost word for word off their website.

You know, my current voting view is that I will refuse to vote for either McCain or Obama. This is the type of crap that might force me to vote for the lessor of the two evils. Don't want to do it, but I might have to re-consider my view on voting for McCain.
 
I would say that if you like owning guns at all, and you vote for Democrats this fall, you still don't get it.
Adding to that if you vote for a third party presidential candidate you're really voting for a Democrat and you still don't get it.
 
...and that is exactly why both parties remain in power without representing our views! WE accept the "lesser of two evils" instead of taking action against those who do not represent us (aka voting for someone else).
 
...and that is exactly why both parties remain in power without representing our views!
Pardon, but the Republican candidate represents my views. The third party candidate, who is endorsed by David Duke, does not represent my views.
 
Then you should vote for him!

He does not represent my views very well, and from the reported backlash against McCain, I question just how many people's views he adaquately represents. Even if you only consider the initial Republican field (or Democratic field), there were candidates that better fit my views.

So, why are you telling people to vote for someone who does not well-represent the people voting for them? I say it is because you are content with a two-party system where neither party really cares because they can scare people into voting for them.
 
Juan McAmnesty will not get my vote: Neither will Obama. Read about the Lieberman-McCain "gun show loophole bill."

http://www.gunlaws.com/McCainLieberman.htm

1
. Unprecedented federal control over gun shows nationwide -- perfectly legal gun shows become strictly outlawed without prior federal approval, licensing and registration of each show;

2. Centralized federal licensing and registration of every gun-show promoter in the nation;

3. Centralized federal registration of every vendor -- including non-gun vendors -- at any gun show in the country. In order for me to sell my BOOKS at a gun show I'll have to pre-register and prove who I am, or face arrest; a private individual looking to sell a single gun would be treated as a vendor under this law and must be registered even if the gun isn't sold;

4. Centralized federal registration of EVERY PERSON who attends a gun show in America, whether or not they make purchases of anything at all -- you won't be allowed in without registering;

5. Centralized collection of "any other information" on gun-show attendees, as determined solely by the Secretary of the Treasury;

6. Imprisonment for attending a gun show and failing to give up any information required by regulations of the Secretary of the Treasury;

7. Imprisonment of any gun-show promoter who fails to register a single vendor;

8. Imprisonment of gun-show promoters who cannot prove they notified every person attending a gun show of the new rules, and obtained from attendees any information the Secretary of the Treasury mandates by regulation;

9. Centralized collection of "any other information" the Secretary of the Treasury decides, by regulation, is necessary on vendors, attendees, and the gun show itself;

10. Submission by gun-show promoters of vendor registration logs a) 30 days before any gun show, and b) additional submission of updated vendor registration logs 72 hours before any gun show, and c) additional submission of vendor registration logs within five days of the close of any gun show, under penalty of arrest and imprisonment for non-compliance;

11. Identification of vendors only by use of federally approved photo ID that may include use of a social security number, electronically encoded data, or "biometric identifiers" such as fingerprint, voice print, retina scan, iris scan, or similar (as defined under 18 USC 1028(d)(2));

12. Creation of a new license (in addition to a gun-show-promoter license), similar to FFLs, for individuals who want access to the NICS national background check system for facilitating gun-show sales for private citizens;

13. Regulations to be issued by the Secretary of the Treasury on the procedures, data collections, methods and implementation of the entire process to federally control gun shows, in addition to the requirements made by the proposed statute; such regulations will not be known, drafted or even suggested, until after the McCain-Lieberman law is enacted;

14. The proposed bill also puts pressure on state governments to make at least 95% of their law enforcement records for the past 30 years openly available to the federal government; and

-- makes unlimited funds available for the states to comply with these federal goals;

-- requires annual federal review of states' compliance;

-- increases penalties (up to ten years imprisonment) for record-keeping violations;

-- grants states permission to make even more restrictive requirements without being out of compliance with these new federal laws (and by implication, puts states that resist these rules in federal trouble);

-- provides hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars for more law enforcement under numerous programs including project Exile and others;

-- hires 200 more Federal BATF Agents;

-- provides $10 million to the National Institute for Justice to give out for research on "technologies that limit the use of a gun to the owner"; and

-- provides for annual reports (in great detail) by the Attorney General to Congress on whether the Brady law is working;

15. Enlargement of the federal bureaucracy and appropriation from taxpayers of "such funds as are necessary" to license, register and monitor an estimated ten million non-criminals who attend the thousands of gun shows held annually in America; and

16. Oh yes, I almost forgot about the so-called "loophole" part the media is so excited about -- the McCain-Lieberman bill will make an honest private citizen a criminal for transferring a gun to another honest private citizen, without first registering the transfer with, and getting permission from, the federal government (represented by the FBI at its data complex in Clarksburg, West Virginia).

Transfer or possession of a firearm to or by a criminal (a "federally prohibited possessor") is completely unaffected by the McCain-Lieberman "loophole" bill, so I guess it's accurate to characterize it as a loophole bill.

To sum up: Perfectly legal gun sales -- with no victims or criminal activity of any kind -- are outlawed at gun shows by the McCain-Lieberman bill, unless the sale is pre-registered with the federal government; real crimes are totally unaffected; and your friends in the federal government take over full control of gun shows -- which have been previously free of government infringement for more than 200 years.

Please write your local news outlet and politely request a correction.

Permission to circulate or use any or all of this report is granted, provided my credit and contact information is included.

Alan Korwin, Author Gun Laws of America
 
So, why are you telling people to vote for someone who does not well-represent the people voting for them?

I've got to call BS on that. According to the American Conservative Union Mr. McCain's scores seldom dip below 70% while his Americans For Democratic Action scores generally hover around 10%.

As I've mentioned before the third party candidate happens to be endorsed by the neonazi David Duke. Going back to the original post and it's LINK, I don't want Mr. Obama to win. So to answer to the non BS part of your question, I guess its a case of preferring the middle of the road to the gutters on the left and right.
 
I'm not part of the American Conservative Union. Considering he is a moderate-conservative, I'm not surprised the ADA doesn't like him that much.

I've been hearing a lot of people saying things like "I don't want Obama to win, but I don't like McCain either." Almost immediately, someone will say what you did. But how can we, as a nation, ever get a government that accurately represent the population when people commonly vote for people who they do not feel accurately represent their views?
 
Back
Top