It's About Liberty: A Conservative Forum
Topics => 2nd Amendment/Firearms => Topic started by: Pandora on December 02, 2011, 06:27:03 AM
-
(http://thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/obama-ammo-e1322826941327.jpg)
Trace Williams, director of operations for USAAmmo, defended the ad that was emailed Monday. (http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/12/new-ammo-ad-compares-obama-to-commie-dictators-and-hitler/)
He told CBS Washington that “Obama and his various czars are infringing on the rights of Americans to own guns.”
“He’s anti-gun and he’s obviously a socialist cramming health care down American’s throats,” Williams said. “That is exactly how those people in that ad rose to power.”
-
I think the same thing. I think the only difference - and it's a big difference - is that Obama does not yet possess the power to kill his political adversaries and citizen opposition. But then again, there was a time in the reign of all those men when the same thing could be said of them.
-
Ya know those stupid questions from your doctor about having "guns in your house"? How hard is it to think under ObamaCare to start using that as a means to wrest possession from the people based upon an extremely broad interpretation of "public safety"?!
You know these bastards will try. They never give up, they'll just keep attacking on multiple fronts until the get what they want.
And we won't stop them at the ballot box...not the way these asshats are going...
-
Since the hoplophobes (http://www.reference.com/browse/Hoplophobia) have been dealt setbacks in the courts lately, I look for them to explore other means. I saw something from the NRA-ILA the other day, which I only glanced over, but the gist of it was a new "regulatory" effort to expand the scope of legal infractions that can be used to deny or confound the process of a pre-purchase background check, e.g. traffic offenses, etc.
It's just like with the Commerce Clause, a statist will take something with a plain meaning and within a few legal generations use it to justify the exact opposite of what it says. If a man growing wheat on his own property for his own consumption can be said to fall under the purview of "interstate commerce", then who is to say some bureaucratic edict might not declare with the stroke of a pen that "disqualifying offenses" now includes doing 55 in a 45.
That's where we're at today, we are governed by personalities not laws.
-
Hoplophobes, heh, I like that term. ::thumbsup::
And yes, any and all means are used to destroy our God-given rights. I just don't know what it takes for some people to start pushing back, but I despair the point can be reached before the axe falls...
::gaah::
-
To quote some famous quote from somewhere (X-Files comes to mind...):
"The truth is out there."
...and it looks like this add pretty much exposes it to me!
-
If the shoe fits.
-
"I sense an IRS audit in your future..."
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_6YjsreT1Ru0/SxQZLPIFQkI/AAAAAAAABhs/UC77WtVCQeE/s400/Johnny_Carson_as_Karnak.jpg)