attn: nra members- both democrats & republicans alike

Posted in the Bellefontaine Forum

First Prev
of 4
Next Last

“ I LOVE LIBERALS”

Since: Sep 11

Bellefontaine, OH

#1 Jan 16, 2013
"Enumclaw" Small Time Newspaper-Big Time News
January 11th, 2013 by T. McGee · National News

Flashback: Mitt Romney Warns NRA Against an ‘Unrestrained’ Second-term Obama
January 11th, 2013 by T. McGee · National News
As it turns out, Mitt Romney, during his presidential campaign warned against the “unrestrained” second-term of the Obama administration and the effects it could have on the 2nd Amendment.

“In a second term, he would be unrestrained by the demands of re-election,” Romney told a crowd estimated at 6,000 in the cavernous Edward Jones Dome.“As he told the Russian president last month when he thought no one else was listening, after a re-election he’ll have a lot more, quote,‘flexibility’ to do what he wants. I’m not exactly sure what he meant by that, but looking at his first three years, I have a very good idea.”

Image credit: St. Louis Post Dispatch
Referring specifically to the right to bear arms, Romney said:“If we are going to safeguard our 2nd Amendment, it is time to elect a president who will defend the rights President Obama ignores or minimizes. I will.”

Romney’s speech came at the NRA’s Leadership Forum, which always draws top conservative speakers. Also expected to speak Friday were three of Romney’s former rivals for the GOP nomination, former Sen. Rick Santorum, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Texas Gov. Rick Perry, as well as a panoply of other Republican stars, including House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, Sens. Chuck Grassley and Roy Blunt, and Rep. Darrell Issa.

Most of the other speakers could claim a friendlier history with the NRA than Romney, who supported strict gun control measures as governor of Massachusetts and once said he didn’t “line up” with the gun rights group. But the NRA leadership has thrown its weight behind Romney, whom it sees as preferable to Obama, and Romney received several standing ovations during his speech.

Although Obama has not been responsible for any notable gun control measures, the organization has been sharply critical of some of his appointments, especially that of Eric Holder as attorney general.
Grandpa Jesus

Cardington, OH

#2 Jan 16, 2013
You are crazier than a loon.. Did Romney also foresee Newtown?

“Capable of Chasing Eagles!”

Since: May 09

Soaring on Wings of Spirit

#3 Jan 16, 2013
Ronald Reagan supported the ban on assault weapons.
Antonia Scalia ruled that ban was constitutional, so explain how President Obama iis 'destroying' anyone's 2nd Amendment rights?

Reagan supported both the 1993 Brady Bill ad the 1994 Assault Weapon Ban....and the NRA said nothing about it because he was a white Republican.
Also, the US Supreme Court is the final say on the interpretation of the Constitution, and they determined years ago that the 2nd DOES NOT apply to all guns.

http://articles.latimes.com/1994-05-05/news/m...

“ I LOVE LIBERALS”

Since: Sep 11

Bellefontaine, OH

#4 Jan 16, 2013
Hummingbird 4 Real wrote:
Ronald Reagan supported the ban on assault weapons.
Antonia Scalia ruled that ban was constitutional, so explain how President Obama iis 'destroying' anyone's 2nd Amendment rights?
Reagan supported both the 1993 Brady Bill ad the 1994 Assault Weapon Ban....and the NRA said nothing about it because he was a white Republican.
Also, the US Supreme Court is the final say on the interpretation of the Constitution, and they determined years ago that the 2nd DOES NOT apply to all guns.
http://articles.latimes.com/1994-05-05/news/m...
WOW! A black ill-liberal demo guy quoting Scalia & Reagan. There is hope for the good ole US of A after all.
2nd Amendment: "... the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
That looks pretty clear to me, but i suppose it depends on "your definition of 'is' oops, I mean your definition of "shall not."

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#5 Jan 16, 2013
DON W SOUTH wrote:
<quoted text>
2nd Amendment: "... the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
I think the Founding Fathers meant muskets, not AK-47's.

“ I LOVE LIBERALS”

Since: Sep 11

Bellefontaine, OH

#6 Jan 16, 2013
Ironbutterfly wrote:
<quoted text>
I think the Founding Fathers meant muskets, not AK-47's.
U can "think the Founding Fathers meant muskets, not AK-47's," but that doesn't make it fact. If they meant just "muskets," why did they not write just muskets?

The second amendment according to IB: "...the right of the people to keep and bear 'muskets', shall not be infringed."

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#7 Jan 16, 2013
People don't understand that if you give an inch they will take a mile.

“Capable of Chasing Eagles!”

Since: May 09

Soaring on Wings of Spirit

#8 Jan 16, 2013
DON W SOUTH wrote:
<quoted text> WOW! A black ill-liberal demo guy quoting Scalia & Reagan. There is hope for the good ole US of A after all.
2nd Amendment: "... the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
That looks pretty clear to me, but i suppose it depends on "your definition of 'is' oops, I mean your definition of "shall not."
Right Don S. How did you guess I was a ' black' liberal 'guy." Oh wow, you are so perceptive. Man, can't slip nothing past a former mayor, now can I?

Yep---I guess you are a better authority and know more than your Saint Ronnie or the SUPREME COURT! Wow, how honored are we to have such an authority figure on Topix!?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#9 Jan 16, 2013
DON W SOUTH wrote:
<quoted text>
U can "think the Founding Fathers meant muskets, not AK-47's," but that doesn't make it fact. If they meant just "muskets," why did they not write just muskets?
The second amendment according to IB: "...the right of the people to keep and bear 'muskets', shall not be infringed."
Because there was no such thing as a AK-47 at the time.
They had no such concept of an automatic weapon, much like you have no such concept of reality.
Why didn't they just write muskets???????? Because they didn't think retarded people like you would be asking a question like that, that's why. In those days, people like you only lived until age 8 or 9 max. I think it's called natural selection.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#10 Jan 16, 2013
Ironbutterfly wrote:
<quoted text>
I think the Founding Fathers meant muskets, not AK-47's.
If they were still making the Musket type of gun from 1776 it would be on the Assault Weapons ban to so who cares if they worded it "right to bear a musket".
In A Gadda Da Vida

Mount Gilead, OH

#11 Jan 16, 2013
It's interesting how the Founding Fathers, who just fought a war against tyranny, had the foresight to give us to right to keep muskets.

The other 9 Amendments in the Bill of Rights protect us from government, but the 2nd allows us to keep vintage firearms.

“Capable of Chasing Eagles!”

Since: May 09

Soaring on Wings of Spirit

#12 Jan 16, 2013
The Higher Primate wrote:
<quoted text>
If they were still making the Musket type of gun from 1776 it would be on the Assault Weapons ban to so who cares if they worded it "right to bear a musket".
lol, sure it would, especially if there was a bayonet stuck on the end of it, right??
Pollster

Cardington, OH

#13 Jan 16, 2013
The Higher Primate wrote:
People don't understand that if you give an inch they will take a mile.
People don't understand, majority rules. The 2nd amendment is not without restrictions.

The NRA falsely clings to the notion that the Second Amendment gives one the right to keep and bear arms without restriction.

This notion is incorrect, as historical facts demonstrate that in 1791, four of the states that ratified the Second Amendment (Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina) allowed the keeping of slaves. As slave-holding states, all had strict laws on their books prohibiting slaves from procuring firearms. Along with the free states that voted in favor, these four slave-holding states that also ratified the Second Amendment did so with the knowledge that it would not rescind or override any of the laws restricting the arming of slaves.

It is therefore a matter of fact and not opinion that the Founding Fathers themselves made the Second Amendment the law of the land with the full intent that the government retained the ability to impose restrictions on firearm ownership.

Steve Lempitski

“ I LOVE LIBERALS”

Since: Sep 11

Bellefontaine, OH

#14 Jan 16, 2013
Hummingbird 4 Real wrote:
<quoted text>
Right Don S. How did you guess I was a ' black' liberal 'guy." Oh wow, you are so perceptive. Man, can't slip nothing past a former mayor, now can I?
Yep---I guess you are a better authority and know more than your Saint Ronnie or the SUPREME COURT! Wow, how honored are we to have such an authority figure on Topix!?
You just don't like me 'cause I'm white!

“Capable of Chasing Eagles!”

Since: May 09

Soaring on Wings of Spirit

#15 Jan 16, 2013
DON W SOUTH wrote:
<quoted text>

The second amendment according to IB: "...the right of the people to keep and bear 'muskets', shall not be infringed."
With all the mental illness and the anger in today's society, we can no longer assume every gun owner is a competent and responsible gun owner, or whether every citizen is mentally sound enough to be a gun owner. This isn't a matter of the Dems verses Republicans, it's a matter of keeping our children a safe and cutting down on gun violence.. Just think about it---every month of the yearr, 3000 people lose their lives because of gun violence or accidents. That is equal to 12 9-1-1s a year!!!!

As a responsible gun owner, I do not have any objections to some basic and sound legislation that keeps guns out of the hands of those that guns don't belong in. Why should any of you if you have nothing to hide? What is wrong with back-ground checks? How about bans on magazine capacity? How about closing gun=show loopholes? Making gun buyers register their weapon? Quite frankly, I think it a bit radical to believe you will eventually need to have all the high powered weapons to battle your own government one day. I think some of you pay too much attention to conspiracy theorists, like Alex Jones of Prison Planet. Then you listen too much to all the scare tactics used by the NRA when they try to convince you that Obama is going to take all your guns away.

We need to make it harder to obtain such weapons as the AK-47, or the AR-15, and the high capacity Ammo magazines. Ban the manufacturers from making more of these military style weapons . The NRA represents the gun manufacturers and they want to sell weapons such as these, but don't want to perform due diligence, so they are partially responsible for the carnage these weapons cause.

“Capable of Chasing Eagles!”

Since: May 09

Soaring on Wings of Spirit

#16 Jan 16, 2013
DON W SOUTH wrote:
<quoted text>You just don't like me 'cause I'm white!
Honey, I don't care what color you are. It's not you as a person I don't like, but I don't agree with much of your comments so don't like what you basically believe. Sorry, just being honest.

“ I LOVE LIBERALS”

Since: Sep 11

Bellefontaine, OH

#17 Jan 16, 2013
Hummingbird 4 Real wrote:
<quoted text>
Honey, I don't care what color you are. It's not you as a person I don't like, but I don't agree with much of your comments so don't like what you basically believe. Sorry, just being honest.
Well that's what you say, but your posts take it to a personal level. By the way, who were you before you became "Hummingbird 4 Real?

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#18 Jan 16, 2013
Pollster wrote:
<quoted text> People don't understand, majority rules. The 2nd amendment is not without restrictions.
The NRA falsely clings to the notion that the Second Amendment gives one the right to keep and bear arms without restriction.
This notion is incorrect, as historical facts demonstrate that in 1791, four of the states that ratified the Second Amendment (Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina) allowed the keeping of slaves. As slave-holding states, all had strict laws on their books prohibiting slaves from procuring firearms. Along with the free states that voted in favor, these four slave-holding states that also ratified the Second Amendment did so with the knowledge that it would not rescind or override any of the laws restricting the arming of slaves.
It is therefore a matter of fact and not opinion that the Founding Fathers themselves made the Second Amendment the law of the land with the full intent that the government retained the ability to impose restrictions on firearm ownership.
Steve Lempitski
You shouldn't quote others people words without researching it first. On December 15, 1791, the Bill of Rights (the first ten amendments to the Constitution) was adopted, having been ratified by three-fourths of the States. The only change that was adopted in the 2nd amendment was "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person" to "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". I don't see much of a change except from "country" to "state".

“Capable of Chasing Eagles!”

Since: May 09

Soaring on Wings of Spirit

#19 Jan 16, 2013
DON W SOUTH wrote:
<quoted text>
Well that's what you say, but your posts take it to a personal level. By the way, who were you before you became "Hummingbird 4 Real?
I've always been Hummingbird. I divorced Topix for a few years, and during that time, you must have started posting. I was posting back in 08 during the democrat primary and until 2010, I believe.

I am only basing my opinions on what I see you write. You seem to hate liberals very much, so to me that is personal, because I am a Denmocrat and liberal in many views.

“Capable of Chasing Eagles!”

Since: May 09

Soaring on Wings of Spirit

#20 Jan 16, 2013
The Higher Primate wrote:
<quoted text>
You shouldn't quote others people words without researching it first. On December 15, 1791, the Bill of Rights (the first ten amendments to the Constitution) was adopted, having been ratified by three-fourths of the States. The only change that was adopted in the 2nd amendment was "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person" to "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". I don't see much of a change except from "country" to "state".
"a well regulated militia being the best security of a free country "

Every Tom, Dick, and Harry owning guns is not a well regulated militia, wouldn't you agree......or not?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Bellefontaine Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Fox News more wrong than ever 5 min thud333 17
The Fallacy Of Homosexual Arguments Unmasked! 22 min RIGHTEOUS JUDGEMENT 207
We are still loyal to our party's founder . . . 30 min leave bellefontaine 12
I Am Not A Liberal But I Play One On Topix 31 min green maters 9
Former Adriel employees speak out about concern... 45 min rodeTOAD 1
Forcing A Privilege Class Upon You 1 hr Flip Flopper 74
Obama Bone Head Decision Boners [Results Matter] 1 hr DON W SOUTH 94
Which Topix Posters Are Hiding In The Closet? 2 hr USN Atheist 126
Bellefontaine Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Bellefontaine People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 8:43 am PST

NFL 8:43AM
Jimmy Haslam: Browns have to get a QB in 2015
Bleacher Report 9:17 AM
Jimmy Haslam Speaks on Browns' 2015 QB Situation
Bleacher Report12:23 PM
Manziel's Teammates Discuss QB's Rookie Season
Yahoo! Sports12:24 PM
Report: Cleveland Browns 'wrecked' by Johnny Manziel's rookie season
NBC Sports12:46 PM
Teammate: Manziel was a "100 percent joke" as a rookie