Quote:
Originally Posted by Derwood
the NRA chose to go far right (politically) with an all-or-nothing approach to gun rights, and now that the presidency (and much of the populace) is veering away from that stance, the NRA will suffer.
|
perhaps you'll take the time to explain the A rated democrats from the last two election cycles then?
-----Added 9/12/2008 at 01 : 34 : 44-----
Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_dux
Most objective interpretations of Obama's record in IL that I have seen would express it differently...that Obama has consistently supported local/state autonomy to enact their own measures that can withstand a constitutional test...and reasonable federal restrictions.
Positions held by a majority of Americans.
-----Added 9/12/2008 at 01 : 22 : 34-----
|
This is not possible given the State of Illinois constitution and home rule authority. No village/town, or city can have ANY gun law that is less strict than state law, but a locality can implement a gun law that is more strict than state law. If a state senator votes to implement strict gun laws which would prevent localities from having looser laws, he is not supporting local autonomy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_dux
You're right to some extent...I am more afraid of a kid accidentally shooting a friend while playing with a gun in his house or a spouse shooting his/her partner after an emotional confrontation because a gun is handy than I am of a criminal entering the house and shooting someone.
But on the other hand, your conclusion is an ignorant generalization.
|
given your statement directly above, how in the hell is that ignorant then?
__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."
Last edited by dksuddeth; 12-09-2008 at 10:34 AM..
Reason: Automerged Doublepost
|