A Must Do for those that Live in Swing States: OH, VA, FL, NC, MT, ND, SD, CO, NV, NM


PDA






wacki
August 28, 2008, 02:36 AM
Live in a swing state? Here's an extremely powerful way to fight for your gun rights. I just spent last Friday, Saturday and Sunday doing this with tremendous results. Please see my trip report on TheFiringLine (http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=307715).

Step #1) Call the NRA Grass Roots division (1-800-392-8683) and tell them you would like to hand out their Obama pamphlets (http://nraila.org/obama/) at guns shows. Make sure to tell them that you live in a state that has a chance of going blue this election. They will mail you a bundle of pamphlets for free.

Step #2) Print out some supplementary material. Some must haves are:

*Ted Kennedy's 30-30 ban introduction found here (PDF warning (http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2004_record&page=S1634&position=all)) and examined on my blog here (http://obamagun.blogspot.com/2008/08/ban-rifle-ammunition-commonly-used-for.html). People don't like looking at Senate bills that will cause their favorite cartridge to put them in jail for 5 years! Make sure you use a highlighter highlight key sentences.
*A map showing how Indiana (http://www.sportsmenforobama.org/content/view/62/) (or some other city) gets completely hosed by Obama's 5 mile gunstore ban (http://www.sportsmenforobama.org/content/view/53/35/)

Both of those were big hits/shockers that took seconds to explain.

Step #3) Put multiple copies of this text on a word document page (you should be able to fit 4-5 per page):

FACT: Obama voted against the appointment of EVERY pro-2A justice he could^1, ridiculed almost every pro-2A justices judgment^2 and named three of the four anti-individual rights justices as "sensible"^3. IMPORTANT!!!: Heller vs. DC, the first Supreme Court case in history to examine whether the second amendment protected individual rights, was won on a razor thin margin of 5 to 4. This extremely narrow victory has caused lawsuits to spring up around the country. These court cases can either solidify our destroy our rights. Gun owners simply can't afford to let Obama destroy the Supreme Court's already delicate 5 to 4 balance.
1) voted against the appointment of Roberts & Alito, rest were appointed before Obamas time
2) Google for planned parenthood rally and Saddleback church debate
3) Justices Breyer, Ginsburg and David Souter were the dissent in Heller vs. DC, Obama called them "sensible" - Next president will have major impact on direction of Supreme Court,

And cut your printouts with a cutting board/scissors. 10 pages become 50 mini-pamphlets. 20 pages becomes a hundred once cut up.... and so on.

Step #4) Print out two color copies of this sign:
http://img253.imageshack.us/img253/3736/oshownj0am7.jpg

and safety pin one to your back and the other to your chest. It is absolutely critical that you have one pinned/taped on your chest as well as your back. Trust me, it makes a dramatic difference. Make up your own sign if you want. I'd post the photoshop file but it's too big to be an attachment. :-( Suggestions on hosting it?

Step #5) Go to your local gun show and simply walk around. You will get TONS of people asking you about Obama. I burned through pamphlets like they were hot cakes.

If your experience is anything like mine you will quickly discover that nobody knows about the .30-30 ban. Nobody knows just how bad Obama really is. Once people realize how bad Obama is they will become motivated. I met lots of people that don't vote that are going to vote this year. Plenty of people who normally vote 3rd party are now going to "hold their nose and vote for McCain". You will impact people. I had tons of gun dealers at the gun show that begged me for more pamphlets and were actively helping out in my little grass roots operation. It made for some lively discourse at the gun show. This was especially true when someone wearing an Obama t-shirt was trying to purchase a gun from a dealer I had recently given pamphlets to....

Seriously, just do the preparation and go to the gunshow like you normally do. People will approach you. For every 1 person I approached I probably had a 100 approach me.

Please see this for swing state status:
http://www.electoral-vote.com

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Pres/Pngs/Aug27.png


Also familiarize yourself with John McCain:
http://sportsmen.johnmccain.com/Site.aspx
http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/john_mccain.htm#Gun_Control

He supports closing gun show loopholes and is responsible for McCain Feingold but he's still many many times better than Obama. Print those sites out and familiarize yourself with his history. Many people have the wrong impression of McCain. It's also good to familiarize yourself with this Chicago Defender article from 1999 which gives great insight to Obama:
http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=14232.0

Good luck! After last weekend, I'm absolutely convinced that gun owners can be a major player in this election. Very few of them, including gun store owners, currently know just how bad Obama really is or have seen the Obama pamphlet. I'm absolutely convinced that we can inspire a lot of people to vote against Obama if we want to.

If you enjoyed reading about "A Must Do for those that Live in Swing States: OH, VA, FL, NC, MT, ND, SD, CO, NV, NM" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
fletcher
August 28, 2008, 01:27 PM
Obama would likely enter treaties with the U.N. that would override the Second Amendment
I'm pretty sure the constitution trumps treaties, because that would really defeat the purpose of the document.

crushbup
August 28, 2008, 02:40 PM
I'm pretty sure the constitution trumps treaties, because that would really defeat the purpose of the document.

I'm pretty sure the Constitution trumps infringements on the Second Amendm- Oh, that's right, we've been tossing the Constitution aside for years, why stop now?

JImbothefiveth
August 28, 2008, 02:53 PM
Isn't Mccain even more pro-gun than the administration who brought us Heller?(I thought the current administration wouldd sign any assault weapons ban, need NRA ratings for them both guys, for comparison.)

Whose court nominees do you want interpreting the Second Amendment? McCain's, or Obama's?
Would you rather live in Illinois(NO CCW), or Arizona? That might be some food for thought.

I don't think that qualifies as political.

brickeyee
August 28, 2008, 03:39 PM
Treaties are the "law of the land."

The constitution trumps all laws.

NO treaty can alter the constitution.

wacki
August 28, 2008, 04:30 PM
Isn't Mccain even more pro-gun than the administration who brought us Heller?

McCain is even more pro-gun than Bush. If you look at the people that signed the pro-Heller amicus brief you will see John McCain and Cheney but you will not see Bush or Obama:

http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?id=3451

Hmmm...

Who should I vote for? A politician that tramples the 2nd Amendment or the one that tramples it a little less?

Reread my post (and links) and tell me who you want controlling the Supreme Court on the eve of so many landmark gun control cases. I'd would really love to see an answer to this question from all those people that are attacking McCain in this thread. I prefer the person who thinks Thomas is the ideal justice (McCain) over the candidate that believes 3 of the 4 anti-rights justices are the "sensible" ones (Obama). I prefer the man that votes against assault weapons bans (McCain) vs the man that voted to make it a felony to own a .30-30 or similar cartridge. Quite frankly, I don't think McCain and Obama are even remotely similar on the second amendment. So I have quite a hard time understanding the "little less" comment of yours. One would make me a felon (Obama) while the other wouldn't impact me in any shape or form (McCain) because I simply don't buy used guns from strangers at gun shows due to reliability reasons. Your assertion that this is a "little" difference simply boggles my mind. Felony vs. no impact is a very very big difference to me.

Emotionally driven children (especially anti-gunners) cry and pout when they don't get exactly what they feel is best. Rationally thinking adults are able to assess realities and pick the best available option. So lets face the fact that reality isn't perfect and act like men here.

This is a problem with having an activism forum when you can't talk politics. If you would like we can start a thread here:

http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?board=5.0

and continue this conversation.

JImbothefiveth
August 28, 2008, 05:01 PM
McCain is even more pro-gun than Bush
Guys, how much have the cause of gun rights been advanced in the last 8 years?
Imagine that, but even more so. Mccain also probably knows better than to try and close the "gun show loophole", especially if he is planning on running a second time, and according to him, he was trying to save gunshows. I didn't realize how good an NRA "C" really is until now.

wacki
August 28, 2008, 05:08 PM
Guys, how much have the cause of gun rights been advanced in the last 8 years?
Imagine that, but even more so.

Awesome point!

. I didn't realize how good an NRA "C" really is until now.

In all honesty this low rating is probably almost completely due to campaign finance reform. Most of the campaign finance reform laws have been overturned by conservative judges (the kind McCain would appoint). While this is a horribly crafted law, this is a free speech issue. It is also an issue that would become immeasurably worse if Obama's "sensible" liberal judges get appointed to SCOTUS.

guntotinguy
August 28, 2008, 06:14 PM
Would you rather live in Illinois(NO CCW), or Arizona? That might be some food for thought.

A very good point...

Catherine
August 28, 2008, 11:55 PM
I have a question for you gals and guys.

We know the anti gun stand of the O man. Cough, gag and vomit time!

I could not believe, well maybe, the speech that Governor S. (MT) gave to the convention and NOT once did he mention his own pro gun stance versus the ANTI GUN - NWO globalist anti gun view of the O man! Geesh! I am sure that this will come back and bite him in his butt. Kind of like what I told TESTER via telephone and emails. What a joke! Too long and too political here on what TESTER was for. The other 2 MT political men are sell outs in the R and D parties. B and R. Boo hiss. When O was out here in MT - he could not even get the WORDS out of his mouth about gun rights or even the Second. It was the same old bs about hunting. Hey O man! The SECOND is not about 'hunting'!!!

We know the anti gun stands, gun show deals and other NWO control freak issues regarding M.

Didn't JOHN M. say in one of the 'debates' (If you want to call them that. Ha ha!) that he did NOT own any guns? Something about that he USED to own and perhaps shoot guns but at this point he did not actually "own" any?

Does anyone have a transcript of that Cspan or ? DEBATE where he stated that LIVE and I was like... whoa baby when I heard that?!?

Yes, I know about the rest of his record as I do about the other neo con artists and the other side.

I did admire and still respect him for his USN service way back when. So did my late husband, a fellow Vietnam Veteran who would be 63 years old if he was still alive. We did not agree with JM and others on how much JOHN M. changed and his views as other so called 'candidates' changed along with their 'parties'!

Catherine

JImbothefiveth
August 29, 2008, 12:05 AM
Didn't JOHN M. say in one of the 'debates' (If you want to call them that. Ha ha!) that he did NOT own any guns? Something about that he USED to own and perhaps shoot guns but at this point he did not actually "own" any? He is pro-gun, yet has no personal stake in the matter?
Now THAT'S pro-gun!
That's what I want! A candidate who respects our gun rights, even if he doesn't use them himself!

Catherine
August 29, 2008, 12:17 AM
Yes, I agree with you on any candidate who respects our gun rights even if he does NOT use guns (?!?) anymore or never did 'may be on our side'.

There is still a bunch of what M has said/done including the gun show deal, etc. where I still do not think that he is as PRO GUN or even pro liberty as some 'think' he is.

I do know that the O man is NOT pro gun or pro liberty.

BOTH of them are NWO globalist control freaks though.

They are war mongers too. They can pick and choose their country/countries. They do NOT put America First but I will end it there so this does not get shut down.

That is on their record.

So very sad.

I just wanted that quote or transcript.

I will not vote for either one of them.

Catherine

bobbarker
August 29, 2008, 01:07 AM
Even if I knew NOTHING about McCain, I still know enough about Obama's views on Guns, that it makes the choice for me. Obama would be the worst thing to happen to gun Rights, since, I don't know when. Since even before the AWB. And I wouldn't count on the Constitution trumping a UN Treaty. With Obama, anything is possible.

Catherine
August 29, 2008, 02:16 AM
http://www.gunowners.org/mccaintb.htm

John McCain: Conservative or Gun-Grabber?



GOA Ratings For John McCain

2000


C--

2002


C--

2004


F--

2006


F--



John McCain's Liberal Record
John McCain Is A Liberal Gun Grabber
John McCain Funded By Soros Since 2001
John McCain's Top 10 Class-Warfare Arguments Against Tax Cuts
The Geraldo Rivera Republican
Democrats Say McCain Nearly Abandoned GOP
America's Foolish European Wannabes
Refutation Of "A Day At The Beach" Charge
Andy Card -- I Have Seen McCain's Anger
McCain's Character -- A Disaster Waiting To Happen
Sen. McCain: I Don't Have A Temper
John McCain: Liberal In Disguise
Friendly Fire: McCain Has Some Explaining To Do
John McCain: Liberal In Disguise
McCain's Constitution
Softening The Skeptics
McCain's War On Political Speech
Lobbying Reforms Unconstitutional
McCain: Major League Hypocrite
McCain's Gun Control Ad


John McCain's Voting Record On Gun-Related Issues
109th Congress: Lock Up Your Safety
108th Congress: McCain Puts Gun Shows In Peril
107th Congress: Incumbent Protection Muzzles Gun Owners
106th Congress: Anti-gun Amendments Abound


GOA Alerts Mentioning John McCain

April 2006


Limiting Speech Of 527 Organizations

March 2006


Shutting Down Websites Prior To Elections

March 2006


Will Congress Ditch John McCain's Internet Regulations?

February 2006


McCain Still Trying To Gag Gun Owner Criticism Of His Anti-gun Record

February 2006


McCain Moves To Punish Grassroots Groups For Congress' Controversy

May 2002


McCain Looks To Cripple Gun Shows

Mar 2002


Incumbent Protection Could Come Up At Any Time

May 2001


Senators McCain & Lieberman Introduce Anti-gun Monstrosity

May 2001


Senate Could Soon Ban Private Sales

April 2001


Senate Passes Incumbent Protection

March 2001


Senate OK's Free Speech Restrictions

March 2001


McCain-Feingold Up In The Senate This Week

March 2001


Incumbent Protection Threatens GOA's Existence

February 2001


McCain Wants More Gun Control

February 2000


Presidential Campaign Advisory




Home
Copyright, Contact and Credits

Catherine
August 29, 2008, 02:46 AM
http://gunowners.org/pres08/

http://www.nra.org/

http://www.jpfo.org/

We know about the Obama man and his anti gun views.

How many of you think that just because the 'NRA' or any other gun organization that supports McCain just because he is the R nominee makes HIM the man to vote for? Scratch that - not allowed!

Of ALL of the candidates... WHO supports REAL PRO FIREARM and PRO FREEDOM RIGHTS no matter what 'party' that they belong to?

That should be the question that you should ask yourselves and spread the word. Unfortunately too many times - your so called 'party' is not REALLY pro firearm, pro freedom or PRO Constitution in ALL issues.

People will never learn. Most gun people are their own worst enemies because they drink the Kool Aid from the R as much as the L drinks it on the OTHER side!

You guys had your chance this year. You had a chance in the past - 8 years ago with some conservative candidates, NOT 100% Constitutionalists, as in PRIOR years - you and some gun groups endorsed some 'winners'. Now what the blazes do you get, eh? Same old - same old. Gggrrrrr.

You want activism? VOTE third party since you refused to vote for Ron Paul and other real conservatives in the past.

STOP the insanity. If some guy says he is pro gun and yet will SCREW YOU by not being PRO freedom, shy of a revolution, what the H will that do for you or your country by NOT having a real man who wants to PUT this Republic back on track according to what our Founding Fathers wanted, wrote about, fought for and died for?!?

Why NOT vote for a PRO FIREARM - put America FIRST for a change in ALL ways CANDIDATE and stop the same old - same old bs? Just because someone has a R or a D before their name sure does NOT make them anymore of a Republican - think RINO or a Dem. THINK SELL OUT of YOU, your firearms, your freedoms and your Republic!

Lesser of the evils is still evil. Real Americans are tired of the same old excuses and LIES along with the SELL OUT of freedom, firearm and America FIRST issues.

What else has McCain stood for and voted for including amnesty for criminals = illegal aliens/companies that HIRE them, NOT legal immigrants and tons more! UGH!

You deserve what you get. Can you actually LOOK at yourself in the mirror if you vote for HIM just because he had an R behind his name? Well, gee whiz, I could call myself a movie star and put that behind my name but that sure as H does not make me one.

You guys/gals whine about other records and past history... well McCain was NO more of an angel - true to his wife than others in the REP and DEM parties and yet you go on about the Dems. THINK about all of these past GUN issues and add the rest up too. While you are at that... think of our economy and the state of the UNION as we know it. It does not take a rocket scientist to see what has become of THIS country. YOU want more of a police state? HUH?!? Wake up!

Yours in liberty,

Catherine

Catherine
August 29, 2008, 02:52 AM
Quote:


Quote:
The one that tramples a little less. Obama would likely enter treaties with the U.N. that would override the Second Amendment.

God willing. Let's just settle this thing once and for all.

~~~~~

If you had a REAL candidate for pro freedom/pro firearms... he would get us the H out of the United Nations and tell them to take a HIKE!

They would take their anti gun statue of the TWISTED GUN - look at their website along with their 'issues' as they make their HQ in some other Marxist country!

Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition.

http://www.lneilsmith.org/whyguns.html
Why Did it Have to be ... Guns?

by L. Neil Smith
lneil@lneilsmith.org

Over the past 30 years, I've been paid to write almost two million words, every one of which, sooner or later, came back to the issue of guns and gun-ownership. Naturally, I've thought about the issue a lot, and it has always determined the way I vote.

People accuse me of being a single-issue writer, a single- issue thinker, and a single- issue voter, but it isn't true. What I've chosen, in a world where there's never enough time and energy, is to focus on the one political issue which most clearly and unmistakably demonstrates what any politician -- or political philosophy -- is made of, right down to the creamy liquid center.

Make no mistake: all politicians -- even those ostensibly on the side of guns and gun ownership -- hate the issue and anyone, like me, who insists on bringing it up. They hate it because it's an X-ray machine. It's a Vulcan mind-meld. It's the ultimate test to which any politician -- or political philosophy -- can be put.

If a politician isn't perfectly comfortable with the idea of his average constituent, any man, woman, or responsible child, walking into a hardware store and paying cash -- for any rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- without producing ID or signing one scrap of paper, he isn't your friend no matter what he tells you.

If he isn't genuinely enthusiastic about his average constituent stuffing that weapon into a purse or pocket or tucking it under a coat and walking home without asking anybody's permission, he's a four-flusher, no matter what he claims.

What his attitude -- toward your ownership and use of weapons -- conveys is his real attitude about you. And if he doesn't trust you, then why in the name of John Moses Browning should you trust him?

If he doesn't want you to have the means of defending your life, do you want him in a position to control it?

If he makes excuses about obeying a law he's sworn to uphold and defend -- the highest law of the land, the Bill of Rights -- do you want to entrust him with anything?

If he ignores you, sneers at you, complains about you, or defames you, if he calls you names only he thinks are evil -- like "Constitutionalist" -- when you insist that he account for himself, hasn't he betrayed his oath, isn't he unfit to hold office, and doesn't he really belong in jail?

Sure, these are all leading questions. They're the questions that led me to the issue of guns and gun ownership as the clearest and most unmistakable demonstration of what any given politician -- or political philosophy -- is really made of.

He may lecture you about the dangerous weirdos out there who shouldn't have a gun -- but what does that have to do with you? Why in the name of John Moses Browning should you be made to suffer for the misdeeds of others? Didn't you lay aside the infantile notion of group punishment when you left public school -- or the military? Isn't it an essentially European notion, anyway -- Prussian, maybe -- and certainly not what America was supposed to be all about?

And if there are dangerous weirdos out there, does it make sense to deprive you of the means of protecting yourself from them? Forget about those other people, those dangerous weirdos, this is about you, and it has been, all along.

Try it yourself: if a politician won't trust you, why should you trust him? If he's a man -- and you're not -- what does his lack of trust tell you about his real attitude toward women? If "he" happens to be a woman, what makes her so perverse that she's eager to render her fellow women helpless on the mean and seedy streets her policies helped create? Should you believe her when she says she wants to help you by imposing some infantile group health care program on you at the point of the kind of gun she doesn't want you to have?

On the other hand -- or the other party -- should you believe anything politicians say who claim they stand for freedom, but drag their feet and make excuses about repealing limits on your right to own and carry weapons? What does this tell you about their real motives for ignoring voters and ramming through one infantile group trade agreement after another with other countries?

Makes voting simpler, doesn't it? You don't have to study every issue -- health care, international trade -- all you have to do is use this X-ray machine, this Vulcan mind-meld, to get beyond their empty words and find out how politicians really feel. About you. And that, of course, is why they hate it.

And that's why I'm accused of being a single-issue writer, thinker, and voter.

But it isn't true, is it?

Permission to redistribute this article is herewith granted by the author -- provided that it is reproduced unedited, in its entirety, and appropriate credit given.

You are here: Webley Page > Lever Action > Why Did it Have to be ... Guns?

Yours in liberty,

Catherine

Duke Junior
August 29, 2008, 03:47 AM
Catherine,please try some decafe.You are really wound up and upset.
We have 2 choices in November:the anti-gun,anti-life,tax the rich,distribute the wealth,let the U.N. and Europe make the decisions,get out of Iraq and Afghanistan,universal health care,nanny state gov rules all,Obama.
Or John McCain who is pro-gun(with a few quirkies)pro life,pro winning in Iraq on the War on Terror in general, pro lowering taxes and a real Republican with a few flaws like CPFR.
Now between these 2 radically different approaches who do you really want to be POTUS on the morning of November 5.2008?
That should not be a very difficult decision for any freedom loving American.

JImbothefiveth
August 29, 2008, 09:29 AM
GOA Ratings For John McCain

How many of you think that just because the 'NRA' or any other gun organization that supports McCain just because he is the R nominee makes HIM the man to vote for?

When is the last time the GOA has gotten any major bill passed? When is he last time the NRA has?

The NRA knows what they are doing, have an excellent track record of protecting our freedoms and getting pro-gun people in to office.
They GET STUFF DONE, compromise when they have to, and are more concerned about gun rights than being able to say they are about being able to say they "never compromise". If you try for all or nothing, you get nothing.
How has the brady campaign been so succesfull? They take away our guns one small step at a time. I'm willing to fight to get them back one small step at a time. Mccain might not take us anywhere, but at least he won't take us backwards!


you guys had your chance this year. You had a chance in the past - 8 years ago with some conservative candidates, NOT 100% Constitutionalists, as in PRIOR years - you and some gun groups endorsed some 'winners'. Now what the blazes do you get, eh? Same old - same old. Gggrrrrr.
Yes, the heller decision is the same old same old.
If the NRA backed bill to actually enforce it succeeds, it's a huge victory, if not, it's still huge that we have it on record as being an individual right!


VOTE third party since you refused to vote for Ron Paul and other real conservatives in the past.
I voted for him in the primaries, he lost, and I'm not going to just throw away my guns because it didn't go my way.
Voting third party will not do anything, and will allow some of the most dedicated antis in america to rule.
Would you rather live in Illinois or Arizona? Illinois is more restrictive than California for crying out loud.
You ARE going to live in one or the other by 2009.


I'm pretty sure the constitution trumps treaties, because that would really defeat the purpose of the document.

It's also supposed to trump the mayors of chicago and D.C..




Mccain isn't perfect, but he's the best and only chance to keep our guns. I'll vote third party when so much isn't at stake.
I'd rather get background checked at a gunshow (Which Mccain probably won't support if he wants to get elected again) than get 5 years for possession of 30-30 and 17 HMR.

JImbothefiveth
August 30, 2008, 11:20 PM
Big, I doubt you are going to win a shootout with the police, many people are a (no longer) living testament to that.

Said testaments include Bonny and Clyde and the north hollywood robbers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Hollywood_shootout), as well as many other various punks.


If it's between McCain and the .308's in my safe, I'll take my .308's.
No, the government will take your .308s, after they kill you for opening fire on their agents.
I greatly respect Mr. Heston, and I can't say enough good stuff about the NRA(Check my posts),
but the government is quite capable of Taking them from YOUR cold dead hands.
And frankly, I wouldn't feel too good about myself having taken a life for nothing, as I rot in prison.

wacki
August 31, 2008, 02:12 AM
IBTL.

I can't believe this one is still going on.

This is why we need politics discussion. It's impossible to motivate people to actively and effectively protect our rights from hostile politicians without talking about the actual politicians. In all honesty I don't know why TheHighRoad doesn't have a side by side comparison of John McCain vs. Obama as a sticky in the General forum. My three day experience at the gun show made it obvious that the average gun store owner does not know about the NRA-obama fact sheet. Think about this. These are the people that put food on the table by selling guns. Sometimes I can't help but think gun owners are their own worst enemy.

Is anyone going to actually try and do this? It's extremely effective and you really don't have to do much. You just wear a sign and carry a bag of pamphlets. You don't have to be obnoxious. You don't have to be loud. You don't have to be one of those guys standing on the corner with a microphone chanting their beliefs. Just go to the gun show like you normally do but wear a sign this time.

Given how critical this election is, how critical the Supreme Court is and how critical the upcoming court cases are.... I'm considering driving a rather long distance to my neighboring state of Ohio and wearing a sign at one of these gun shows:

http://www.gunshows-usa.com/ohio_gun_shows.htm

That is how firmly I believe in this technique and how much of a threat I believe Obama is. Hopefully other pro-rights advocates in/near the other swing states will pick up the cause.

p2000sk
August 31, 2008, 07:58 AM
This is why we need politics discussion. It's impossible to motivate people

We have politics discussion, right over here
http://www.armedpolitesociety.com (http://www.armedpolitesociety.org)

Also you may find the "APS" at the top right of this page.

JImbothefiveth
August 31, 2008, 09:46 AM
Well, I intend to distribute it, or some other anti-Obama material(Looking for the right one, and that seems pretty good.)

Happiness Is A Warm Gun
September 1, 2008, 02:35 AM
Another +1 for Palin.

I am getting the horse ahead of the cart BUT....

IMHO McCain will only run for 1 term. He will be 76 in 2012. If he has any health issues this term and/or a major scare (being rushed to hospital) the public will be against a second term.

I think McCain is looking to set Palin up for a run away victory in 2012. Possibly start a "reformist republican" movement.

McCain +2 terms of Palin = 12 years to appoint Justices. SCOTUS likely will be moved to the right 2, 3 or maybe even 4 justices. The court will be much younger and likely stay that way for 10-20 years.

Now that is a lasting contribution.
McCain in 2008. A vote for ANYONE else is a vote for Obama. Vote 3rd party, don't vote, or write in but when Obama is pushing a RKBA holocuast (bans, ammo limits, microstamping, outlawing rifle ammo, ballistic databases, national registrations) for the next 8 years you will have nobody to blame but yourself.

3pairs12
September 1, 2008, 12:24 PM
For me it comes down to, Do I want more laws, more government intervention and "sensible" gun control? Or do I want to tolerate the laws that are inplace, tolerate some government intervention, and tolerate the gun laws that are in place with the hopes of gaining the ground in the right direction. I'll take the later, the lesser of to evils and vote for McCain.

ArfinGreebly
September 1, 2008, 09:48 PM
We were off to a pretty good start here.

Thanks, wacki, for the concept and for pushing actual activism.

Now, then.

Holy fish.

I'm gonna have to go back through this thread and excise the more absurd and offensive posts, but I don't think this one will return to the rails.

Once upon a time, THR had a Round Table (http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/) forum. A place where the range of permitted topics was pretty wide.

It got pretty unruly, and it distracted from the primary mission of the board, which was, and is, the discussion and dissemination of information having to do with responsible ownership and use of firearms.

Given that it was eventually unmanageable, in the context of a gun forum, it was moved (http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/). The new site lives on the same server, is hosted by the same guy, is owned by the same guy, and is -- or was originally -- populated by the same folks that frequented THR.

There was a certain amount of hand wringing and teeth gnashing about it, but the noise quotient dropped significantly here at THR.

THR did, however, continue to host a Legal & Political (http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?board=5.0) forum. Which, as politics became increasingly nasty, became increasingly unmanageable, as an aspect of a gun forum.

So, in time, it, too, was moved (http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?board=5.0). It, too, is now on the same server as the material that used to be The Round Table (http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/) here.

However.

Because of the continuing assault on gun ownership, it was deemed appropriate to create a VERY NARROWLY FOCUSED sub-forum to handle the business of Second Amendment Activism.

Not the discussion of the politics and principles (http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?board=5.0) of gun ownership: ON THR, IT IS TAKEN AS READ THAT GUN OWNERSHIP IS A RIGHT AND PART OF THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT OF SELF DEFENSE.

Think about it. We, here at THR, don't WONDER if gun ownership is a right, we KNOW it, we apprehend and comprehend it, we assume it as fundamental to THR's existence.

THR is for people who already get that, or who are willing to learn about it, or who want to get better at it, or who want to brag a little about how well they're doing at it, or who want to show off a little.

Activism is a place where we plan and promote ACTION for preserving that right.

It's hard for even rational people to engage in a dispassionate discussion of the crime of depriving citizens of their rights, in fact, ESPECIALLY hard for a rational person to avoid anger in the face of the dishonesty required to disarm and enslave a population.

And we really, really understand that.

Thing is, that passion and anger and frustration . . . leads to a reduction of civility here. People start calling each other names and threatening each other.

How do I know? I have a key to the archive vaults. There's some very corrosive stuff stored there.

However. Knowing that these these WILL be discussed and, actually, MUST be discussed, the forum's founders, in their wisdom, provided a place (http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?board=5.0) for just that.

So, wacki, if you want to start another thread on this, please do.

Rest of you . . . take it outside (http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?board=5.0).

I'll be close this one now.

Expect to see a few posts disappear.

If you enjoyed reading about "A Must Do for those that Live in Swing States: OH, VA, FL, NC, MT, ND, SD, CO, NV, NM" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!