1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

from Dillon's Blue Press

Discussion in 'Legal' started by alan, Oct 27, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. alan

    alan Member

    Dec 24, 2002
    sowest pa.
    Before the "meat" of the matter, note that I'm less than entirely happy with President Bush, either as incumbent or as the potential president electee. I do believe however, even though I have somewhat less than an abiding faith in/trust for President Bush, that the following bears thinking on. Lest I forget, if you can get hold of the November 2004 issure of The Blue Press, take a look at Who Can You Trust, found in the We Get Letters section.


    (Note: Four years ago, prior to the 2000 presidential election, I wrote a cautionary Blue Press article, the very title of which offended a number of our gentle readers. This year, I have resolved to avoid using "potty language" in describing the anti-gun candidate, his adherents and those gun owners who may unwittingly contribute to his victory. I can only hope that this exercise in forbearance will be as effective as my earlier, less compassionate approach.)

    I've talked to a number of gun owners recently, all intelligent gentlemen who should know better, who said they were either not going to vote in the upcoming presidential election, or would vote for some protest candidate. Their reason? Apparently, George W. Bush had taken a position they didn't like…be it on immigration, Iraq or whatever, and they were going to teach him a lesson.

    This is a wonderful example of cutting off the old schnozzola in order to spite one's face. Let's make this very simple: any vote that does not go to Bush, automatically is a vote for John Kerry. And a vote for John Kerry is, whether you like it or not, a vote to flush our Second Amendment rights down the toilet. Yes, I know that Kerry made a big deal out of having himself photographed hunting upland game. But, that photo op aside, let's look at the record. John Kerry's record on gun rights is, unlike the rest of his voting record, amazingly consistent. He has received a 100% rating from the Brady Campaign (HCI) and from the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. He has voted against protecting firearms manufacturers against junk lawsuits. He has proclaimed his support for the renewal of the Brady Act, the hi-cap magazine ban and a ban on so-called assault weapons. Is Kerry pro-hunting? He has received a 100% rating from both the Humane Society of the United States and the Fund for Animals. Neither of these organizations consider hunting as a worthwhile, legal or moral pursuit. Kerry has even managed to surpass his mentor, Ted Kennedy, in anti-gun votes. In fact, when he was on the campaign trail, he made the effort to return to Washington just to cast votes inimical to American gun owners and firearms manufacturers.

    So, what's the big deal if Kerry actually does become President? Many say that he could easily be over-ridden by a Republican-dominated Senate and/or House. That is, assuming that the Republicans will have control of either or both bodies after this election. But most important, as President, Kerry would have the opportunity to put up his favorite people for Supreme Court positions… vacancies that might likely occur soon, since several Justices are getting on in years or failing in health. And who might Kerry's choices be? Well, one name that immediately comes to mind is that of Hillary Clinton aka The Smartest Woman in the World. Another likely choice is the other Senator from New York, Charles Schumer. Want more delightful possibilities? How about Dianne Feinstein and Mr. Wonderful himself, Ted Kennedy? Imagine a Supreme Court vote on Second Amendment rights with one or several of those deep thinkers on the high bench. How long do you suppose it would be before your Remington 870 is banned as an "assault weapon," or your scoped Ruger M77 MKII Varmint/Target as a "sniper rifle?" As for your handguns..really now, why would you want to endanger your family and neighbors by owning one of those?

    Having observed the defeat that American gun owners handed to Al Gore in 2000, today's anti-gun politicians are taking a different line. They insist that they will stand up for your rights under the Second Amendment. This of course refers to their interpretation of your rights under the Second Amendment, which means whatever bones the lawmakers are disposed to throw to you. They will claim, as does Senator Kerry, to be hunters. The question is, are they hunters when the cameras aren't rolling? Liberal politicians do not believe that lying is in itself a bad thing, as long as the ultimate end is what they perceive as good.

    For the American gun owner who wants to remain a gun owner, there is one, and only one criterion for judging a candidate, presidential or other. That is, "Will this candidate stand up for my right to self-defense?" If the candidate does not trust you with the tools of self-defense, be it a so-called assault rifle, handgun, rifle, shotgun or whatever, that candidate essentially does not acknowledge your right to live. Without the unencumbered right to keep and bear arms, you are not truly a free person or a citizen; you are a subject, serf or slave.

    America's freedom was won with guns. Today, America's gun owners are the last bastion of freedom in a ever more regulated, monitored and repressive world order. We have seen the chaos that the United Nations' world view has brought to this suffering planet. John Kerry sees nothing wrong with an America under U.N. rule. It is only our inactivity that will allow him to succeed.

    Contents | Home | Technical Help | Shopping Cart


    Dillon Precision Products, Inc.
    8009 E. Dillons Way
    Scottsdale, AZ 85260
    (480) 948-8009

    Questions? E-Mail sales@dillonprecision.com

    Comments or suggestions? E-Mail SiteManager@dillonprecision.com

    Last Modified: Wednesday, October 27, 2004.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page