Not voting for Bush or Gore, a dagger in the heart of gun owners.

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mjsarge

New member
I seen a few posts from members about not voting for Bush or Gore and I have a few thoughts on the subject. Being a Texas citizen of course I'm going to vote for Bush, but there's more to it then that. Bush is a very good man and has alot of good, fresh ideas for this country. He's not the smartest man in the world, but since when did that stop someone from becoming president. My problem with voting third-party this year(side note: I voted for Perot in 96') is that every third party vote hurts Bush, not Gore. Yes, I know Bush has said a couple of things that have p*ssed-off gun owners, the mag ban, the assault weapon ban, etc. But this is way I see it, if that his truly his position on those topics and Gore stays true to form on his positions, which would you rather lose, the right to own an assault weapon or some high-cap mags or the right to own any gun, period? Because like it or not, that is what we are facing and we are going to have to give a little in the short term to keep our rights long-term. To me, not being able to get my hands on a full-auto AK-47 is a small price to pay to make sure I can still legally carry my Glock 30 in the great state of Texas(one of Gore's plans is to make C.C. a violation of federal law, even if your state allows it.), or even own a gun for that matter. Yes, I know that the banning of one thing can lead to the banning all of things, but banning all guns from the hands of private citizens is Gore's only intent(which will make us all criminals cause I'm not turning in my gun to anyone and neither is any other gun owner I know). Even if you don't agree with Bush's stand on high-cap mags, and assault weapons(and for the record I don't) we need to stand behind Bush and vote for him in November. The bottom line is there is much more at stake here then just mags and assault rifles, and we can't afford to lose sight of that. Bush is the best "real" hope we have in helping us retain our gun rights for years to come. The next president will have the opporunity to nominate 3-4 new Supreme Court justices, we need the person with that power on our side. Bush is more that man then Gore will ever be. So please think long and hard before you decide to vote third-party, all of our rights depend on it.

------------------
NRA Life Member
GOA Member
GSSF Member
 
Remember, he can't just "ban high-cap mags". He has to be sent the bill.

Bill Clinton was sent such a bill because he hollered and supported it. Ever hear Bush holler and scream for gun control? Yeah, he'll say now that he'd sign such a bill; but the real question is who is going to jump out of nowhere and push for such a bill? Who's going to sit in the executive chair and holler for a new A/W ban and beat up on Repubs who don't send him one?

His silence will be golden.

No, get Bush in there and a good congress.


Battler.
 
Bush, Bush, Bush. He's nothing but a mouth piece for the Party, just like all Oligarch candidates are. But. If Gore gets in there, he'll combine with the neo-socialists in the House and Senate and the Second could vanish in one term.
Therefore I'll be supporting Bush. Gore is simply too dangerous at this point to push third party in this election.
However; I strongly urge TFL and anyone else, to become active on the local level for the Libertarian Party. Get out and help.
If we could just get some Libertarians in the House, they would be the fulcrum we need.
Once they have a few seats in the House, they can better aid the ascension of Libertarian Senators. That is where the power lies!
In the meantime, we're idiots if we don't stay active in the counter-socialist fight. Keep writing Senators and Congressmen. Support Pro-RKBA orgs.
 
I have voted for 3rd party candidates in the past, this election has to go to Bush. Three supreme court appointments - Do you want Gore making these?
 
I will be voting for Bush aswell. My mom said the same thing all of you are saying. I am so glad you'll confirmed my thoughts on the subject. Can't wait for November so we can send our voting messege.
By the way, does anyone wonder if some of these shootings lately have been a plan from the top to paint a bad picture for guns??????? I might just post a thread. Let me know what you think.
CW
 
Did anyone watch Bush on Hardball last night?

I thought he did very well. Although i consider 2nd Amendment issues my primary concern in this election, i like what he is saying about other stuff. I think Bush will be sufficiently friendly to the 2nd Amendment.

Gore will cause this nation to draw it's own blood again.



------------------
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

~USP

"... I rejoice that America has resisted [The Stamp Act]. Three millions of people, so dead to all feelings of liberty as to voluntarily submit to being slaves, would have been fit instruments to make slaves of the rest of us." -- William Pitt, British Parliament, December 1765
 
Agreed. If Gore wins my family will have to move to Texas so as to be a part of a free republic once again. Since I don't want o live in a hot climate if I can help it, Bush is the way to go.
 
I've said this on many other threads, but it looks like it's time to say it again.

Bush's web site says very clearly that he supports more gun control laws, so if you vote for Bush, don't be surprised when he gives them to us. The fact that he wants slightly fewer additional laws than The Evil Al Gore is hardly a commendation for him. We've had incrementally stricter gun control laws in this country ever since Reconstruction, with the pace of legislation getting quicker after 1968. Those who support Bush or Gore aren't doing anything to combat that trend, they're just disagreeing about how much stricter the next gun-grabbing laws might be.

And mjsarge, you are mistaken if you believe that giving up parts of our right to keep and bear arms will dissuade the anti-gun forces in this country. It just encourages them for the next round of legislation, during which someone like you will say "Let's give this up so they won't take everything."

Why not try voting for a candidate who believes the Constitution actually means what it says?

[This message has been edited by David Roberson (edited June 01, 2000).]
 
I don’t think I could actually go through with it, however I find myself so frustrated with politicians and the path we are on lately that I want to vote for Gore just to "push us over the edge". It seems to me that’s the only way we can get anyone to wake up. Bush may be the best of what we have but if he wins we are still on the same path. I can’t help but think that a Gore win would cause such a backlash we might come out ahead in the long term.
 
Rotorhead, there won't be any mass pushing over the edge. It will be done one-by-one, and nobody will do anything. Yours is wishful thinking. And there won't be any Supreme Court clarifications on the 2nd to help us because the SC will be loaded with Ruth Bader Ginsburg clones. So think carefully about who you're going to vote for.

USP45, I saw the show. Not only do I think that Bush did well, especially with some tough questions from Matthews, but I found that I really _like_ the guy. He was very personable, and had charm and dignity. I think he may have almost as much charisma as Clinton, but without the phoniness.

As for his gun-control positions, we just have to keep the pressure on.

Dick
 
David,
You are missing my point. Which is yes, there are people out there that are more in tune to the rights of gun owners. But the problem is, this is not the year to waste our votes on them, they don't have a snowball chance in hell of winning so yes it is a waste of a vote. Wasting that vote hurts the person who is more on our side. You said, "Why not try voting for a candidate who believes the Constitution actually means what it says?" I'm all for that 100%, but in this voting year who is that candidate? No one. But which is our best hope, it's not Gore. I'll repeat my statement again, "which would you rather lose, the right to own an assault weapon or some high-cap mags or the right to own any gun, period?" I go by the premise of "what have you done for me lately?" Bush has given me the opporunity to legally carry a handgun in my state, Gore is trying to take away that right and the right to own a weapon. Bush wins that match, no contest.

------------------
NRA Life Member
GOA Member
GSSF Member
 
I want my vote to keep Al "Little Willie" Gore out of the White House. Also, to kick out the Democrat anti-gunners who infest the top ranks of the executive branch.

No More Gore!

Bush may not be 100% on gun rights. But he's absolutely head and shoulders above the opposition.

I vote for Bush!
 
I agree with you, Sarge.

You either "revolt" (peaceably, Thoreau-style or non-peaceably, minuteman-style) or you go with the system. And W is by far the best option within the system.

What you don't do, especially in the crucial 2000 election, is to:

1) Tinker around with 3rd-party experiments, which we all know do not stand a sliver of a chance and will just syphon votes away from Bush;

2) Vote for Gore in the hope that "the people will wake up". In this case, I think it is the proponent of such strategy that has to wake up - to the fact that strategies like that make as much sense as chopping off your own arm in order to remind yourself to get your yearly check-up.....

People, this year is for real. We have too much to lose, all at one time if Gore gets elected. This is not "fear", "whining", or "doom-and-glooming". Just turn on the TV and see how many direct attacks (and of what magnitude) are being brought to the table by the Democrats and by Gore in particular.

Open your eyes.
 
Gore: A car slamming into a cement wall at 100 MPH;
Bush: A car slamming into a cement wall at 95 MPH.

I'll not take a ride in either one, thank you.
 
I cannot understand it. It just boggles my mind.

If you folks will continue to support and vote for substandard candidates (and make no mistake about it, Bush is just that), then how do you propose to ever force anyone to present you with better options? Answer: you cannot.

Voting for Bush because you are afraid of Gore will accomplish one thing, and one thing only: demonstrating to the Republican Party that it can scare you into accepting whatever candidate it presents due to your fear of "the other guy".

Unless you happen to be fairly wealthy, you have one avenue of influence available to you: your vote. Do not squander it. And voting for Bush would be just that. If you can be frightened into voting for Bush this election, then you can be forced into a similar situation down the road.

Don't be a coward.

------------------
TFL End of Summer Meet, August 12th & 13th, 2000
 
This is a horrible catch22 we have on our hands. Now I don't thinks anyone's vote choice will display cowardness. Cowards wouldn't bother to vote.

I must advise again; All of us must become more active. No more buying another $1200 super snooty custom 1911 and then donating nothing to those fighting the good fight.
I am not trying to offend, but come on!
 
RMc and BobLocke,
What do you think you will accomplish by voting for a third party or not voting at all? Will it make the two major parties change? If Gore gets elected will you feel good about your vote of dissent when more anti gun laws are passed and liberal Supreme Court Justices are appointed? What will you have accomplished? If there were a third party candidate that I could support such as an Alan Keyes or a Bob Smith I would vote for him. However, I find too many things wrong with the Libertarians in the moral areas. I am afraid we will in general always have to vote for the best of the worst. Your vote for anyone except Bush won't matter a whit as to changing things for the better, but it will help Gore get in the White House and maybe the Dems to win one or both houses on his coattails. A bad trade. Regards, Jerry
 
Jerry,

I have one real means of affecting change: my vote. If I can be frightened into casting a ballot for a candidate who is not up to snuff simply to avoid the election of another candidate who is absolutely awful.

What I advocate is a long-term winning strategy, not the short-term "Vote for Bush so Gore won't win" garbage that I have been hearing since last summer. Unless we demonstrate, through the withholding of our votes, that we will not accept less than the best, then we will continue to get just that.

------------------
TFL End of Summer Meet, August 12th & 13th, 2000
 
Not that I'll convince anybody, but here's my $0.02:

Bush: supported and signed original Texas concealed handgun law, and two years later signed another law improving and expanding same.
Gore: rants against concealed handguns and wants to stop additional states from enacting shall-issue carry laws.

Bush: against the advice of his own staff during the Columbine reaction, signed bill protecting gunmakers from junk lawsuits.
Gore: is part of the Clinton campaign to suppress the manufacture of firearms in this country though unethical litigation and other extra-legislative means.

Bush: treats NRA with respect although obviously not with total agreement.
Gore: uses any opportunity to jump on the leftist NRA-bashing bandwagon.

Bush: emphasizes enforcement of existing gun laws and downplays new gun law proposals.
Gore: favors additional gun control laws and makes anti-gun rhetoric a focus of his campaign.

Bush: hysterically opposed by anti-gunners.
Gore: praised by anti-gun groups.

Bush: supports Project Exile, to hit criminals rather than honest gunowners with the force of the law.
Gore: supports Clinton administration which originally opposed Project Exile.

Bush: is supported unequivocally by the Texas State Rifle Association, which probably knows his position and good faith on gun issues better than anyone else does.
Gore: is strongly opposed by the TSRA.

And yet some pro-gun folks perceive these two very different candidates as almost equally anti-gun!

At least for me, the gun rights choice is clear: Bush for President.



[This message has been edited by elector (edited June 02, 2000).]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top