Author Topic: John McCain's Position on Gun Issues  (Read 7387 times)

chrono

  • Forum Member
  • **
  • Posts: 1
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: John McCain's Position on Gun Issues
« Reply #10 on: March 26, 2008, 02:05:07 AM »
Why U.S. Citizens Have Guns
The Saint Bartholomew's Day Massacre.


August 24, 1572, was the date of the infamous St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre in France. On that day, over 400 years ago, began one of the most horrifying holocausts in history. The glorious Reformation, begun in Germany on October 31, 1517, had spread to France—and was joyfully received. A great change had come over the people as industry and learning began to flourish, and so rapidly did the Truth spread that over a third of the population embraced the Reformed Christian Faith.
However, alarm bells began to ring at the Vatican! France was her eldest daughter and main pillar—the chief source of money and power. . . . King Pepin of the Franks (the father of Charlemagne) had given the Papal States to the Pope almost 1000 years earlier. Almost half the real estate in the country was owned by the clergy.
Meanwhile, back in Paris, the King of France and his Court spent their time drinking, reveling and carousing. The Court spiritual adviser—a Jesuit priest— urged them to massacre the Protestants—as penance for their many sins! To catch the Christians off-guard every token of peace, friendship, and ecumenical good will was offered.
Suddenly—and without warning—the devilish work commenced. Beginning at Paris, the French soldiers and the Roman Catholic clergy fell upon the unarmed people, and blood flowed like a river throughout the entire country. Men, women, and children fell in heaps before the mobs and the bloodthirsty troops. In one week, almost 100,100 Protestants perished. The rivers of France were so filled with corpses that for many months no fish were eaten. In the valley of the Loire, wolves came down from the hills to feel upon the decaying bodies of Frenchmen. The list of massacres was as endless as the list of the dead!
Many were imprisoned—many sent as slaves to row the King's ships—and some were able to escape to other countries. . . . The massacres continued for centuries. The best and brightest people fled to Germany, Switzerland, England, Ireland and eventually America and brought their incomparable manufacturing skills with them. . . . France was ruined. . . . Wars, famine, disease and poverty finally led to the French Revolution—the Guillotine—the Reign of Terror—the fall of the Roman Catholic Monarchy—atheism—communism etc., etc.
When news of the Massacre reached the Vatican there was jubilation! Cannons roared—bells rung—and a special commemorative medal was struck—to honor the occasion! The Pope commissioned Italian artist Vasari to paint a mural of the Massacre—which still hangs in the Vatican!

The descendants of the survivors that reached America were determined that this tragedy should not occur here. Many of them were prominent in the founding of the country. They knew that an armed citizenry in France would have prevented this tragedy from ever happening—and as a result—they gave us the First and Second Amendments to the Constitution. They knew that freedom of religion and an armed citizenry go hand in hand:

Amendment 1

Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment 2

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.


The French Protestants were called Huguenots: President George Washington had a Huguenot ancestor, as did at least 5 other Presidents: John Adams, John Quincy Adams, John Tyler, James Garfield, and Theodore Roosevelt. A Huguenot refugee named Apollos de Revoire settled in Boston, and had a son who signed his name Paul Revere! Remember his famous midnight ride? Three members of the Continental Congress - Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and Elias Boudinot were Huguenots. Other great names include Francis Marrion, General George Patton, Clair Chennault, Admiral Dewey, Du Ponts, Henry Thoreau, Longfellow etc., etc.
http://www.reformation.org/bart.html
-------------------------
So, beware of too much registration, background checking, and record keeping. It is a prelude to government grabbing all the guns. Already, an public record background search over the internet can show current phone number, address, address history for 30 years, age, birth dates, household members, relatives, associates, property ownership, lawsuits, marriage, divorce, criminal records check, sex offenders, terrorist watch, bankruptcy, tax liens, and more. It is a little scary how well they can track us. And it is not just the U.S. government that want to disarm American citizens. A very important, openly stated agenda of the UN is to disarm all USA citizens.

Pathfinder

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6425
  • DRTV Ranger -- NRA Life Member
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 83
Re: John McCain's Position on Gun Issues
« Reply #11 on: March 27, 2008, 05:58:43 AM »
Chrono, thanks for a great post. My focus of late has been on US and Scots history, and I had forgotten about the Hugonots. Bloodier I think than the English Civil War with Charles and Cromwell.

Whoever the next president may be, or the one after that, will sell us out to the UN, as well as all of them continuing to sell us out to the national and international economic forces - the key reason, openly at least = behind the databases tracking and identity issues.

One of the lessons from the JFK assassination was to send a clear message to every sitting President from 1963 on - we can get to you and we can get away with it, and there is not one damn thing you can do about it. There is not one president who will ignore that message.

All we can do is prepare for the inevitable, and find ways of supporting each other when it hits the fan. Right now we are scattered, and that is not good.
"I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted, I won't be laid a hand on. I don't do this to others and I require the same from them"

J.B. Books

JeffKnox

  • Forum Member
  • **
  • Posts: 1
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: John McCain's Position on Gun Issues
« Reply #12 on: March 28, 2008, 08:50:04 PM »
The sad fact is that we're not going to have a friend in the White House for the next four years - as we supposedly did for the past seven.
What the gun community needs to be focusing on right now is Congress!
Since there is not going to be a presidential candidate that is going to get a big turnout from GunVoters, the side effect could be that a lot of GunVoters don't show up at all.  That could mean the difference in a number of House and Senate Races. 
We need to quit worrying about the Three Stooges and start paying attention to Congress!
Please share any insights or information you have about candidates or race - federal, state, and local - at our new site, www.GunVoter.org.  We're trying hard to get all of that information in one easy to access location.  Please stop by and share your knowledge.  Also please help us spread the word about GunVoter.org.
Thanks,

Jeff Knox
The Firearms Coalition
GunVoter.org

Hazcat

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10457
  • DRTV Ranger
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: John McCain's Position on Gun Issues
« Reply #13 on: March 28, 2008, 08:52:40 PM »
The sad fact is that we're not going to have a friend in the White House for the next four years - as we supposedly did for the past seven.
What the gun community needs to be focusing on right now is Congress!
Since there is not going to be a presidential candidate that is going to get a big turnout from GunVoters, the side effect could be that a lot of GunVoters don't show up at all.  That could mean the difference in a number of House and Senate Races. 
We need to quit worrying about the Three Stooges and start paying attention to Congress!
Please share any insights or information you have about candidates or race - federal, state, and local - at our new site, www.GunVoter.org.  We're trying hard to get all of that information in one easy to access location.  Please stop by and share your knowledge.  Also please help us spread the word about GunVoter.org.
Thanks,

Jeff Knox
The Firearms Coalition
GunVoter.org

BIG plus 1 on this!!
All tipoes and misspelings are copi-righted.  Pleeze do not reuse without ritten persimmons  :D

vincewarde

  • Very Active Forum Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 126
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: John McCain's Position on Gun Issues
« Reply #14 on: March 29, 2008, 01:55:30 PM »
OK, let's get real here......

1) We are about to get a favorable ruling from the high court - which will for the first time establish in case law a personal right to at least keep arms.  At a minimum there are 5 votes to affirm the appeals court - which for the first time will establish a personal right.  The only question is the level of scrutiny used to protect that right.  No matter what level is applied, we are going to get a "firewall" beyond which the government will not be able to regulate.  Brady, et al are going to have a fit.

2) Nationally, the Dems have decided that they cannot win if they take liberal positions on all the three "G's" (God, guns and gays).  They have clearly decided that they will gain the most by backing off on the gun issue (amazing what losing a sitting speaker of the house will do).  If this was 1988 in stead of 2008, Virgina Tech would have resulted in further gun restrictions - after all the Dems hold both houses.  If only my home state (Kalifornia) were as sane!

3) We have been able to push through disaster protection in many states and even nationally.  The Brady waiting period was allowed to sunset, likewise the AWB.

4) All rights have some restrictions attached (can't yell fire in a crowded theater, can't libel, etc.).  I think the real question for the pro-gun rights movement is what is reasonable.  I doubt that many of us would argue for convicted felons to have the right to own guns, likewise the severely mentally ill.  The next question is: How do you enforce the preceding?  Instant check, or no instant check?  Include private party purchases or not?

Once we have secured a constitutional right, I personally don't have a problem with some kind of instant check - provided it does not result in defacto registration. 

I do think that there is a big difference between McCain and the Dems - and I agree that we need to PUSH HARD for a good turn out.  More than this, if we want to avoid another AWB, and perhaps more - we need to GIVE - to pro-gun groups and pro-gun candidates - even if they are not perfect.  That - as a pro-gun evangelical - is why I am supporting McCain.

Just my .02 worth - at least it will encourage debate!


Sponsor

  • Guest
Re: John McCain's Position on Gun Issues
« Reply #15 on: Today at 03:02:00 PM »

tombogan03884

  • Guest
Re: John McCain's Position on Gun Issues
« Reply #15 on: March 29, 2008, 03:25:20 PM »
OK, let's get real here......

1) We are about to get a favorable ruling from the high court - which will for the first time establish in case law a personal right to at least keep arms.  At a minimum there are 5 votes to affirm the appeals court - which for the first time will establish a personal right.  The only question is the level of scrutiny used to protect that right.  No matter what level is applied, we are going to get a "firewall" beyond which the government will not be able to regulate.  Brady, et al are going to have a fit.
Quote

2) Nationally, the Dems have decided that they cannot win if they take liberal positions on all the three "G's" (God, guns and gays).  They have clearly decided that they will gain the most by backing off on the gun issue (amazing what losing a sitting speaker of the house will do).  If this was 1988 in stead of 2008, Virgina Tech would have resulted in further gun restrictions - after all the Dems hold both houses.  If only my home state (Kalifornia) were as sane!

3) We have been able to push through disaster protection in many states and even nationally.  The Brady waiting period was allowed to sunset, likewise the AWB.[qoute]

I agree, so far, ;D

Quote
4) All rights have some restrictions attached (can't yell fire in a crowded theater, can't libel, etc.).  I think the real question for the pro-gun rights movement is what is reasonable.  I doubt that many of us would argue for convicted felons to have the right to own guns, likewise the severely mentally ill.  The next question is: How do you enforce the preceding?  Instant check, or no instant check?  Include private party purchases or not?
Quote

I agree that felons and the mentally unfit should not have guns, so I guess that reluctantly I would not bi#&h TO loudly about "instant checks at gun stores, ABSOLUTELY NOT for private sales, thats an idiotic law Ca. came up with to maintain its DOJ registry.

Quote
Once we have secured a constitutional right, I personally don't have a problem with some kind of instant check - provided it does not result in defacto registration. 

I do think that there is a big difference between McCain and the Dems - and I agree that we need to PUSH HARD for a good turn out.  More than this, if we want to avoid another AWB, and perhaps more - we need to GIVE - to pro-gun groups and pro-gun candidates - even if they are not perfect.  That - as a pro-gun evangelical - is why I am supporting McCain.

Just my .02 worth - at least it will encourage debate!

I will not give anything to the gun grabbers, "Reasonable restrictions" are enhanced penalties for use of a gun in a crime, and penalties for violating common sense safety practices. Nothing else, We need to repeal the "GCA of 68", institute National CCW, institute Federal pre emption and Katrina legislation. and begin legal cases against politicians who have supported gun control legislation, and "gun free zones", These politicians, beginning with B. Boxer, D. Fienstien, and N. Pelosi, should be charged as acsessories to every gun related violent crime injury that has occured in a "gun free zone".
As for John McCain, the ONLY reason I would vote for him is because he isn't Clinton or Obama, While he has good positions on the Iraq war, and Veterans Benifits, his 2nd amendment record could be MUCH better, He let down the families of POW/MIA's when he served on that commitee, his deal with Feingold is a violation of the first amendment, (What is the connection between muzzling dissent and campaign finance reform ?) and his attempted deal with Kennedy to amnesty illegal aliens is a violation of his oath of office that verges on treason. In short, He is a POS, He just is less a POS than either Dem. I still may write in Ron Paul for that reason, you can only hold your nose just so tight.
If you wanted to start a debate you could have just said something like  .40 cal. stinks, or taurus is junk !  ;D

DDMac

  • Proudly Bald On
  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1297
  • DRTV Ranger
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: John McCain's Position on Gun Issues
« Reply #16 on: March 29, 2008, 04:56:06 PM »
I'll wait on the debate until we have a published decision. That will be the clear starting point, and speculation requires more research and knowledge than I possess. I do know that I'll make Tom mad, but any legit importer, manufacturer or dealer who has a genuine business relies on the restrictions and protections afforded by GCA '68. Without the unlicensed dealer/mfg/import restrictions, the industry would collapse. Not just reasonable, but necessary. And the folks described in the Q&A section of the ATF F 4473, yellow form, who are prohibited from purchase and possession of guns and ammo, I'm pretty much fine with that. All in GCA '68.
Should it be amended? Hell yes. I'll volunteer to highlite what to pitch and what to keep.  But you know it is going to remain the framework for what we will hopefully regard as "reasonable regulation".
I agree with Vince's Firewall analogy, but the eggs ain't hatched, yet.
I'm with Tom on enhancing the penalties on gun crimes, but why not enhance the crime itself? Murder by knife should be looked upon no differently than murder by gun. We already have plenty of laws, but the States have chosen to make nice with the criminals. I do not get that.
Mac.
Standing up for your Right to lay down suppressive fire since 1948!

tombogan03884

  • Guest
Re: John McCain's Position on Gun Issues
« Reply #17 on: March 29, 2008, 05:57:45 PM »
I'll wait on the debate until we have a published decision. That will be the clear starting point, and speculation requires more research and knowledge than I possess. I do know that I'll make Tom mad, but any legit importer, manufacturer or dealer who has a genuine business relies on the restrictions and protections afforded by GCA '68. Without the unlicensed dealer/mfg/import restrictions, the industry would collapse. Not just reasonable, but necessary. And the folks described in the Q&A section of the ATF F 4473, yellow form, who are prohibited from purchase and possession of guns and ammo, I'm pretty much fine with that. All in GCA '68.
Should it be amended? Hell yes. I'll volunteer to highlite what to pitch and what to keep.  But you know it is going tol remain the framework for what we will hopefully regard as "reasonable regulation".
I agree with Vince's Firewall analogy, but the eggs ain't hatched, yet.
I'm with Tom on enhancing the penalties on gun crimes, but why not enhance the crime itself? Murder by knife should be looked upon no differently than murder by gun. We already have plenty of laws, but the States have chosen to make nice with the criminals. I do not get that.
Mac.

This one won't make me mad Mac, When I wrote that about GCA I was not thinking about imports, I'm not well informed on the business side of the subject, but will add two things, I can see where regulation protects licensed importers and allows them to make a profit, and the constitution allows the Federal Govt. to regulate foriegn trade.
As for the rest of the GCA, I think we should make the effort to do away with the whole thing, go back to the 1967 rules, 10 year olds buying guns mail order. My reasoning is this, we did not have the problems then that we do now with school shootings etc. I do NOT think that letting 10 year olds buy guns mail order will solve that problem, thats an education and responsibility issue. Best adressed by holding ALL citizens accountable for thier actions. Most ADD/ ADHD could be better treated with a kick in the ass , than with personality changing drugs like "Ritilin". I do not even beleive we will ever see those days again, but what WOULD be acomplished is to undermine the legal precedents that were set by GCA, According to JFPO the Gun Control Act of '68 was the Nazi gun control laws translated into English, These legal precedents are what the gun grabbers have been using ever since to justify further encroachment on civil liberties. It would be awfully difficult for them to push a law if the very precedents they use to justify it are themselves under attack. As for the "Yellow form", How hard is it to lie on that and with an instant check what purpose does it serve ?
As for the rest, I was thinking about reasonable restrictions  would not complain about ;D  Murder, Robbery and Rape are already illegal, how do you make them more illegal ? We used to have an EFFECTIVE death penalty, The ONLY person I know of who was executed within 20 years of his offence was Tim McVeigh, the Unibomber is still living off our tax money as is Ramzi Yusef. Both of them commited their crimes prior to '92, more than 16 years ago.

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk