MAAnew 162 Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 She fully supports the second amendment. I am so relieved.... haha Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Bean.223 365 Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 Socialist whore... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GearHeadFTW 0 Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 (edited) She fully supports the second amendment. I am so relieved.... haha What a evil eeevil BITCH!. Thats my definition of her. Do anything say anything, even change her view's to get the vote. Edited February 9, 2008 by GearHeadFTW Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MAAnew 162 Posted February 9, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 (edited) She didn't say she didn't support any new gun legislation, but instead said she didn't think any new laws would be passed. She did say she didn't want to take our guns away, which I am sure she sincerely believes, especially with her continued support for HR 1022. Hopefully, the Parker case shuts her up for good. Since, Marbury v. Madison the USCT has been chiseling away at the constitution. I have very little faith in the USCT drafting an opinion in line with the founding fathers original intent. She fully supports the second amendment. I am so relieved.... haha What a evil eeevil BITCH!. Thats my definition of her. Do anything say anything, even change your view's to get the vote. Edited February 9, 2008 by MAA Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GearHeadFTW 0 Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 She didn't say she didn't support any new gun legislation, but instead said she didn't think any new laws would be passed. She did say she didn't want to take our guns away, which I am sure she sincerely believes, especially with her continued support for HR 1022. Hopefully, the Parker case shuts her up for good. Since, Marbury v. Madison the USCT has been chiseling away at the constitution. I have very little faith in the USCT drafting an opinion in line with the founding fathers original intent. She fully supports the second amendment. I am so relieved.... haha What a evil eeevil BITCH!. Thats my definition of her. Do anything say anything, even change your view's to get the vote. Just a note: I edited my post, meant to say "even change HER views to get the vote." I still believe she would strip us of are gun rights if given the chance. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cscharlie 107 Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 I suppose next she'll anounce John Kerry as her running mate. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
patriot 7,197 Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 Suuuure she is... and Ted Nugent is going to be her pick for Attorney General.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
rocinante 100 Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 She didn't bother to put her signature on a friends of court brief from the Congress supporting the individual rights to keep and bear arms part of the second amendment. The brief got more than half the senators and about 2/3rds of the representatives and Cheney. No Senator Clinton. No Senator Obama. No Senator Kennedy. No House Speaker Pelosi. I was surprised to see Murtha sign it. John McCain signed it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GearHeadFTW 0 Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 I suppose next she'll anounce John Kerry as her running mate. Suuuure she is... and Ted Nugent is going to be her pick for Attorney General.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Juggernaut 11,054 Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 I'm SURE once she implements her Socialized Medicine plan. "THEY" can determine who is and who isn't "well" enough to own a firearm. I SURE am glad that there are qualified government people out there who can make these decisions for me...... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
belt fed frog 56 Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 if you belive her, do i have a deal for you !!!!!!!! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Juggernaut 11,054 Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 ^^ Sarcasm BTW....... On the FAR outside chance anyone took my comments to heart..... http://youtube.com/watch?v=wPMslg98r9M&feature=related Quote Link to post Share on other sites
22_Shooter 1,560 Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 In my local newspaper, they ran a chart showing where all the candidates stand on hot-button issues. They too, almost made her to be pro-gun. I should have used that paper for picking up dog crap . Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MAAnew 162 Posted February 10, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 I am sure that is built somewhere into her plans..... I'm SURE once she implements her Socialized Medicine plan. "THEY" can determine who is and who isn't "well" enough to own a firearm. I SURE am glad that there are qualified government people out there who can make these decisions for me...... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Threecard 15 Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 Well, shit! She just removed one of the five hundred and thirty-seven reasons I won't vote for her. I hope she doesn't keep this up! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
buckandaquarterquarterstaff 5 Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 The right of which of these groups to bear arms shall not be infringed upon. Government people, "non-mentally ill" people hunting people collecting people target shooting people the people If the founding fathers could have put AK 47's in every farmers hands, they sure as hell would have. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Twinsen 86 Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 I SURE am glad that there are qualified government people out there who can make these decisions for me...... Some people really think that though. These are the people that went to private colleges and consider themselves 'intellectuals'. They're so friggin ignorant, it is incredible. When I worked at a pharma company, the guy across the hall from me let his politcal beliefs slip once in conversation. I had a desktop image from a game called Fallout on my computer, showing the hero of the game being kicked out of his village into the desert after he saved his village from death. I explained that to my coworker, after he asked what the image was. The idea was that they begged the hero to save them, he did, but they wouldnt' allow him back into their society because of what he had done and what he had "become" to save them. My coworker said, "Yeah, that reminds me of our president." I almost fell out of my chair, knowing there was somebody else with a head on his shoulders in that office. The people were fun, but man hearing them talk politics was worse than torture. If the founding fathers could have put AK 47's in every farmers hands, they sure as hell would have. One for the farmer, one for each of his sons. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Bayoupiper 738 Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 We had a very bad shooting at a vo-tech here on friday. I am just waiting for the anit-gun group to start up........ Quote Link to post Share on other sites
patriot 7,197 Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 Well, shit! She just removed one of the five hundred and thirty-seven reasons I won't vote for her. I hope she doesn't keep this up! ..and she'll NEVER remove the most important reason: SHE LIES. Pathologically.That bi...woman has serious psychological problems. She should be in a hospital somewhere staring out the window wearing a drool bib. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
THE_HUNTER 2 Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 Damn crazy bitch goes "FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP I'm on the fence and everyone loves me because I am a socialistic whore!" Yep,she has us all fooled,just like her husband had the country and his sperm stained girlfriend. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
6x6pinz 4 Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 The whole argument is based on what type of "arms" are we allowed to bear? Her type of people don't see a need for "assault" weapons. Of course they did not exist when the 2nd was written so there is no way of knowing if they would have considered them. If you look at the intent of the 2nd, it was to protect ones self and family from harm. Now forward to today and what better type of "arm" is there than an assault weapon to do just that. I have a few hunting buddies who don't see a need for the assault rifle with so many other types of rifles and handguns out there. I keep explaining it is not the gun but the idiot behind the gun. No matter how many laws are written a lawbreaker is not going to follow them. I think we are up to something like 23 thousand laws concerning guns and ownership thereof. What difference is another one going to make to a crazy individual bent on killing people. Just my opinion but then who am I? just a taxpaying American citizen, nobody an elected official cares about. I for one use all of my weapons for hunting. I have been given a hard time by game and fish for carrying my saiga 410 plugged mags to 2 rds (with slugs) for javelina during a general rifle hunt. The officer did not think it appropriate. After explaining the 410 slug was more effecient at 50yds than a 22 mag he let me go. I have in the past taken javelina with my sks in 7.62x39. I am still waiting for the opportunity to take a javelina or deer with my ak47 7.62x39. I do have and use a wasr 22 for small game, gets lots of looks. Of course this year I started hunting ducks and coyotes(four legged type) with my s12 and doing very well. I am waiting on the arrival of two more s12's and an s20, should be here this week. I will then start using the s20 for dove and quail, can't wait till they arrive. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
G O B 3,516 Posted February 11, 2008 Report Share Posted February 11, 2008 Hillary is beneath contempt and a political whore.. She will say anything if it get's another moron to vote for her. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Juggernaut 11,054 Posted February 11, 2008 Report Share Posted February 11, 2008 I fear things do not look much better with Capt. (McCain) Amnesty and his buddy Ted Kennedy at the helm. I fear that without someone with a pro firearm stance like R. Paul, or Huckabee, Were screwed. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Bvamp 604 Posted February 11, 2008 Report Share Posted February 11, 2008 thats funny, because she told a battered women's group in NY, prior to being elected, that she wants every gun out of civilian hands or something along those lines....then after they helped vote her in, they never heard from her again. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MAAnew 162 Posted February 11, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 11, 2008 I believe her more on that statement than the statement that she doesn't want our guns. thats funny, because she told a battered women's group in NY, prior to being elected, that she wants every gun out of civilian hands or something along those lines....then after they helped vote her in, they never heard from her again. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
6x6pinz 4 Posted February 11, 2008 Report Share Posted February 11, 2008 I beleive her quote was " I don't want to take guns away from law abiding citizens" Of course she doesn't, who would. I know it would be a difficult task to take away any of our Saigas let alone the rest of the collection. Might get a little messy and you know she does not want any part of that. Well in person anyway. That is why people like her have henchmen. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Azrial 1,090 Posted February 11, 2008 Report Share Posted February 11, 2008 I fully believe here. I expect her to remain pro-gun, until after the election anyway. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Zoub 0 Posted February 11, 2008 Report Share Posted February 11, 2008 I'm SURE once she implements her Socialized Medicine plan. "THEY" can determine who is and who isn't "well" enough to own a firearm. I SURE am glad that there are qualified government people out there who can make these decisions for me...... I honestly believe that will stop people from seeking help they may need. There is a database here that Doctors can use to look up ALL your current meds from all Doctors. At first it sounds OK but the Doc was showing us how he used it. While he was ethical in his use, it can be abused easily. My GF is a former Pharmacist and she did not like it much either. When we all sit in judgement of each other we are heading for trouble. Communisim proved that already. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Zoub 0 Posted February 11, 2008 Report Share Posted February 11, 2008 Her type of people don't see a need for "assault" weapons. Of course they did not exist when the 2nd was written so there is no way of knowing if they would have considered them. Yes they did. All through history it is recorded that citizen soldiers often spent their own money to buy the best weapon they could get. A man in the civil war with a lever gun and two revolvers was well armed and at his own expense. If I took one in the brain pan back in 1776 from a guy who owned the best muzzle loader rifle money could buy, I would have felt "assaulted" just before I died. They were patriots, we are just part of some imaginery thug army. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Gaddis 1,689 Posted February 12, 2008 Report Share Posted February 12, 2008 I believe her more on that statement than the statement that she doesn't want our guns. thats funny, because she told a battered women's group in NY, prior to being elected, that she wants every gun out of civilian hands or something along those lines....then after they helped vote her in, they never heard from her again. I thought her Husband's statement (when campaigning for her in NJ) was quite interesting (& enlightening): "Hillary believes there are only two things that matter in a president," Clinton said. "Number one, are people better off when you stopped than when you started? And, number two, do our children and grandchildren have a brighter, more peaceful and more secure future?" WTF do you think he meant by statement #2 there. "Brighter, more peaceful, and secure future for our children and grandchildren?" Anybody see more gun bans in our future (like I do) interpreting that statement of his? Since we all truly know how the Clinton's feel about lawful firearms ownership. Like my old Psych. professor said, sometimes it's not all that hard to read between the lines. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.