The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Down Range Cafe => Topic started by: kmitch200 on August 13, 2014, 08:23:28 PM
-
I got an email from Gabby Giffords today,
K -
If we're going to win against the gun lobby in this election, we all need to come together and support candidates who will stand up for commonsense gun policies.
According to our records, you haven't donated to Americans for Responsible Solutions yet this year.
DAMN! Did I mail a check to the NRA by mistake again?
*Pinky swear* I'll get it right next year.
Monitoring enemy frequencies can be entertaining sometimes.
-
I ran across a news story the other day that many Dems find the gun issue so toxic that they are requesting Gabby and Hubby stay out of their states so the voters won't be reminded of their anti gun votes.
-
For once, the 2nd Amendment Rights might actually be the top issue in an election.
-
We have to MAKE IT a big issue, because the liberals have taken such an asswhoopin' on it they won't talk about it.
http://news.yahoo.com/massachusetts-governor-signs-law-tightening-state-gun-rules-135146176.html
Massachusetts governor signs law tightening state gun rules
BOSTON (Reuters) - Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick has signed into law a measure giving police chiefs authority to turn down a resident's requests to buy a rifle or shotgun if they believe the person may be a danger.
The measure broadens the authority of police, who were already allowed to deny sales of handguns to people who failed background checks. The new measure gives a police chief 90 days to petition a court to deny a firearms identification card to someone the chief believes to be unfit.
"Our communities and our families are safer when irresponsible gun sales and use are reduced," Patrick said after signing the bill on Wednesday. "This legislation moves us in that direction."
House lawmakers passed the measure two weeks ago, overriding objections from gun-rights advocates in the state Senate who had opposed the measure, worrying that police chiefs could abuse the authority to deny firearms to law-abiding citizens.
The measure allows people with restrictions on their gun licenses to seek judicial review and also declassifies self-defense spray as ammunition.
-
We have to MAKE IT a big issue, because the liberals have taken such an asswhoopin' on it they won't talk about it.
http://news.yahoo.com/massachusetts-governor-signs-law-tightening-state-gun-rules-135146176.html
Massachusetts governor signs law tightening state gun rules
BOSTON (Reuters) - Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick has signed into law a measure giving police chiefs authority to turn down a resident's requests to buy a rifle or shotgun if they believe the person may be a danger.
The measure broadens the authority of police, who were already allowed to deny sales of handguns to people who failed background checks. The new measure gives a police chief 90 days to petition a court to deny a firearms identification card to someone the chief believes to be unfit.
"Our communities and our families are safer when irresponsible gun sales and use are reduced," Patrick said after signing the bill on Wednesday. "This legislation moves us in that direction."
House lawmakers passed the measure two weeks ago, overriding objections from gun-rights advocates in the state Senate who had opposed the measure, worrying that police chiefs could abuse the authority to deny firearms to law-abiding citizens.
The measure allows people with restrictions on their gun licenses to seek judicial review and also declassifies self-defense spray as ammunition.
"if he believes"
These three little words and what they mean have been used to strip millions of their Constitutional protections in recent decades. There must be a mail order course that teaches Police Chiefs and Sheriffs how to write "pose a danger to self or others" on every firearms related application that comes to their office.
-
re: monitoring enemy's frequency .... The Art of War, Sun Tzu circa 500BC... "Therefore, determine the enemy's plans and you will know which strategy will be successful and which will not"
1970 Goodfellow, AFB graduate
-
Hey Les, He also wrote that a General who wins all his battles is good, but a General who defeats his enemy with out fighting is better.
He then went on to talk about how defeating an army is basically a waste of time if you can defeat the enemies strategy.
The only analogy I can think of is, "if you knock over the board it doesn't matter where the pieces were.
That is the best way to deal with the anti's, keep hitting them out of left field with questions they can't or don't want to answer.
-
Another analogy for defeating the strategy, in politics, might be:
If your enemy's strategy is to go all out to insure their candidate wins the Presidential election, set up events so that the election does not take place.
-
Another analogy for defeating the strategy, in politics, might be:
If your enemy's strategy is to go all out to insure their candidate wins the Presidential election, set up events so that the election does not take place.
The problem with that is that it depends on the reaction of the notoriously fickle mob.
Look at the French Revolution as an example, the people who started it, like Robespierre ended up getting the chop they intended for others, while their intended "democracy" became Bonaparte's Imperial dictatorship.
-
The problem with that is that it depends on the reaction of the notoriously fickle mob.
Look at the French Revolution as an example, the people who started it, like Robespierre ended up getting the chop they intended for others, while their intended "democracy" became Bonaparte's Imperial dictatorship.
True, but if "their" goal is not to stay in power, but to destroy the country, it could work.
If we don't resist the power grab of canceling the elections, they win.
If it is contested, they throw the country into civil war (depending upon how the armed services fall out) that could be prolonged. The curent admin can pack it in and go back home if it looks bad.
Unlike the French Revolution enemies who want to see the country destroyed can come assist from around the globe...and they wouldn't really care if they won as long as enough damage was being done and the conflict was prolonged.
-
<snip>
He then went on to talk about how defeating an army is basically a waste of time if you can defeat the enemies strategy.
<snip>
You can also waste their resources.....
And yes please keep sending me that anti-gun information so I can be better informed and you can waste a buck or two of your money on me instead of possibly getting it in the hands of some weak-minded person who would send money back to you.....