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

John Kerry and CCW?

Discussion in 'Legal' started by greyhound, May 19, 2005.

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

    greyhound Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2003
    Messages:
    1,665
    Location:
    Birmingham, AL
    I know its old stuff, but it also goes to the heart of party policies....did they ever press John Kerry or the other Democratic primary candidates on their feelings on CCW laws? I know they all spouted the nonsense about "hunters and sportsmen" and I even recall John Edwards mentioning "self defense" but were they ever pressed on CCW? I can't find any evidence of the individual candidates views on CCW; I know it wasn't mentioned on the party platform.

    To be fair, while President Bush signed the CCW law while Governor of Texas, does anyone know if he has addressed the subject while President? I can't recall an example....

    If 35+ states have shall issue (not even counting my AL with its technically "may issue" but in practice "shall issue") this is going to become a national issue if the rank and file population realizes that other citizens are "allowed" to carry (which IMHO most people are not even aware of the massive increase of "shall issue" states since FL in 1987).
     
  2. PromptCritical

    PromptCritical Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2003
    Messages:
    382
    Location:
    The State of the Beaver
    Well, Jeb Bush did sign the Florida law, I would presume that he discussed it with G.W. If not for political advice or tactics, but it probably came up. Just a guess. If the Prez thought it was a bad idea, I'm sure he would say so.
     
  3. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,041
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    Both the Republicrats and Democans are doing everything possible to avoid saying the word "gun" aloud.
     
  4. allen268

    allen268 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2005
    Messages:
    118
    Location:
    Minnesota
    This is what we need...

    Gun Owners of America
    8001 Forbes Place Suite 102
    Springfield VA 22151
    Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408

    Tuesday, March 8, 2005


    Rep. John Hostettler (R-IN) will soon be reintroducing his national reciprocity bill that protects the right of citizens to carry their firearms into other states.

    http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm

    (something more on a national level)
     
  5. 280PLUS

    280PLUS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2003
    Messages:
    3,349
    Location:
    gunnecticut
    Thanks Allen - Done
     
  6. TonkinTwentyMil

    TonkinTwentyMil Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2004
    Messages:
    241
    Location:
    Way past High Noon.
    Photo-op politicians & guns

    Greyhound raises a good question.

    We'll know that Hillary is a serious '08 candidate when we see her trying the same awkward "I'm an old hunter" photo-ops that Kerry tried (to fool the uninformed, easily duped "moderates").

    We'll know that ANY candidate is genuinely serious about 2-A gun rights when we see him/her doing photo-ops with a HANDGUN... practicing self-defense pistol-craft! I'd pay big bucks to see the MSM/Press cover THAT... if the candidate was a Democrat!
     
  7. Rebar

    Rebar member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2003
    Messages:
    1,867
    Never happen. Even with the rediculous Kerry goose hunting nonsense, he wouldn't carry the bird, in fear of offending the animal-rights nuts.

    Look, it's more than obvious, that the democrats are anti-RKBA. Period. They lie and mislead, stating that they're not "against hunting". But then you read about their "anti-sniper" program and realise it would include just about every rifle and shotgun made.
     
  8. pythonguy

    pythonguy Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2004
    Messages:
    234
    Location:
    Long Island, New York
    Last President big on hunting was Bill "slick willy" Clinton. He could hunt and track down a piece of tail like a bloodhound, and for proof of shooting skills, look no further then Monica's black dress. :evil:
     
  9. allen268

    allen268 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2005
    Messages:
    118
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Not only that, but they also talk like the "right to bear arms" was intended to protect the rights of "hunters"??? and not the rights of handguns to be used by citizens for self-protection.
     
  10. NHBB

    NHBB Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2004
    Messages:
    319
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    sent in my letter... not sure how much it will do but any measure we can take to oppose the anti gun BS is worth a few seconds of your time.
     
  11. LadySmith

    LadySmith Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2004
    Messages:
    254
    Pythonguy, that was just nasty...but it was funny, tho'! :D
     
  12. GEM

    GEM Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    4,354
    Location:
    TX
    GWB has not had a high profile on proactively pushing for gun rights. He will say he supports the 2nd but that's about it. He also will say he supports the AWB.

    George doesn't do public shooting anymore. He was burned when in TX, he shot down a forbidden birdie and come some flack for it. Kind of like Kerry's ridiculous goose hunt.

    It is common for a politician to take out a O/U shotgun and claim to be a sportsperson. From both GOP and Dems - on the presidential level this is baloney.

    I would like to see a speech like Condi's recent one or them explicitly supported the 2nd and not birdie shooting.
     
  13. lunaslide

    lunaslide Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2004
    Messages:
    163
    Location:
    Washington
    Until I see one of them out at a target match with an AR or at a defensive handgun course, it's all the same old ????. We all know the 2nd amendment has nothing to do with hunting.

    As far as this whole fight is concerned, both sides are fighting a war of attrition, and the side that is already entrenched ALWAYS wins a war of attrition. We need to start taking this fight to them, introducing legislation like a repeal of the 1989 and 1986 import and machine gun bans. And we win by introducing it every single legislative session until it wins. We slip it onto unrelated, must-pass bills. We take the offensive and we don't stop until we have what we want. This attitude of "that will never pass" needs to go. When the antis first started out, sentiment was very much against them. What changed things for them was persistence.

    Most of the politicians in DC, Republican as well as Democrat, do not want the people to be able to own weapons that are comparable to the military. They are exactly the type of people Jefferson warned us about. The concession the founders made in allowing Congress to raise an Army was that the militia be armed just as well as that Army to check their power.

    There are only a very few people in Congress who understand the full implications of the 2nd amendment and are willing to fight for it. We have to make sure that they know they are supported in their efforts and that when they do introduce these bills consistently until they pass, that they will not loose their jobs in doing so.
     
  14. gunsmith

    gunsmith member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2003
    Messages:
    5,906
    Location:
    Reno, Nevada
    lunaslide!

    100% Correct!
     
  15. allen268

    allen268 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2005
    Messages:
    118
    Location:
    Minnesota
    The truth is that the government should not be able to regulate or change our 2nd amendment in any way whatsoever given Its actual intent. Why on earth should those who the 2nd amendment was intended to protect us against be able to regulate or restrict it in any fashion?
     
  16. gunsmith

    gunsmith member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2003
    Messages:
    5,906
    Location:
    Reno, Nevada
    Pythonguy

    yeah,that was funny :cool:
     
  17. TonkinTwentyMil

    TonkinTwentyMil Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2004
    Messages:
    241
    Location:
    Way past High Noon.
    Alright, then. The litmus test is settled...

    For the next elections, we'll demand ANY political candidate claiming to "support gunrights" ALSO:

    1. State that they explicitly support armed self defense against criminal attack.

    2. Allow themselves to be photographed while actually shooting a handgun (not just posing with it, holding it upside-down, or -- like Dianne Feinstein -- with a finger on the trigger).

    3. Specifically reject any bleats of protest from Sheeple, Soccer Moms, and the MainStreamMedia/Hollywood wing of the Dem-Donkey party.

    Further, we'll press the NRA and other pro-gun orgs to push this litmus test hard -- real hard -- in rating and supporting candidates for office.

    The Second Amendment ain't about duck-hunting. Those who believe it is must be publicized, marginalized, and punished -- exactly what they've been trying to do to us for years.

    No compromising "for the common good", sniveling or equivocating. Period.
     
  18. Vernal45

    Vernal45 member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2005
    Messages:
    729
    Location:
    USA, I travel alot.


    Isn't that an OXYMORON.



    pythonguy,

    Right on target about slick willy. :D
     
  19. TonkinTwentyMil

    TonkinTwentyMil Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2004
    Messages:
    241
    Location:
    Way past High Noon.
    Cheers...

    Lunaslide:

    Bravo! Not bad for a New Guy.

    You got my vote, man.
     
  20. I read Kerry was going to sign the UN international handgun ban treaty, so if that's true, I'd say that states his position on ccw.
     
  21. pythonguy

    pythonguy Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2004
    Messages:
    234
    Location:
    Long Island, New York
    Quote:
    "John Kerry and CCW? Isn't that an OXYMORON."

    I don't know about the oxy part, but moron sure applies. Same old democrats, do or say anything to get into power, even if its not true. I think they call that a Clintonian democrat
     
  22. Rebar

    Rebar member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2003
    Messages:
    1,867
    Actually, lunaslide is wrong.

    The real fight isn't legislation, it's where that legislation is interpreted - the courts. It was the liberal activist courts that have restricted the RKBA, and it's the courts where it will either be restored, or taken away forever.

    Bush is appointing the right kind of judges, strict constructionalist who will rule based on the clear meaning of the 2nd amendment. That's why the left wing is going berzerk over Bush's judges right now. They know it's the courts where the real power is. The two judges he appoints to the supreme court will have a million times more impact on the RKBA then any legislation.

    Kerry would have, without a doubt, appointed the wrong judges, who would have deep-sixed the RKBA. Those who are nitpicking Bush's gun stance need to take this into account.
     
  23. lunaslide

    lunaslide Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2004
    Messages:
    163
    Location:
    Washington
    Actually, I'm not wrong. The power of the federal government resides in three branches. While we must pay attention to all three, our influence is most strongly felt in the legislative branch. My post was only addressing the legislative branch. As the representative branch, this is where our wishes are supposedly advanced by the people there who represent us. If we're not doing everything we can to push our own cause aggressively, we aren't doing enough.

    In fact, these are the same people we should be pushing to stop obstructing judicial nominations for the reasons that you mention in your post. We cannot directly affect the choices of who will be on the Supreme Court, nor can we choose which cases they will decide to hear. Our power resides in electing a President who will choose strict constructionists and talking to our elected officials to make sure they know where we stand on judicial nominations.

    But really, you just wanted to provoke an argument with that sentence, didn't you. We have to stop fighting amongst ourselves if we're going to get the RKBA agenda advanced in a meaningful way.
     
  24. MichaelEzekiel

    MichaelEzekiel member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2004
    Messages:
    11
    The right to keep and bear arms will be decided on the battle field...and no where else.
     
  25. Rebar

    Rebar member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2003
    Messages:
    1,867
    No. Your statement stated there's no real difference between the democrats and republicans, when there is a stark and drastic difference. There are three branches, yes, but the judicial branch has become the more powerful one, certainly where the 2nd amendment is concerned.

    The real fight is in the courts, in order to win the fight, the republicans need to have the presidency and the senate. If putting off our gun legislation for the time being allows for this majority, then that's a sacrifice we should be willing to make. The judges Bush is pushing through, and the eventual Supreme Court nominations, will be well worth the wait. A single unambiguous RKBA ruling from the Supreme Court would be worth a 100 years of legislation.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page