Thank you Senator McCain for killing Obamacare repeal.

[caojyn]

You've said this a couple times now that I've seen. Care to give examples for us blind followers?

The 1986 FOPA he signed (with support of the NRA) prohibited the manufacture of civilian FA's coupled with the existing 1968 gun control act (no importation of civilian FA's) he essentially priced the average individual out of owning a FA. One can still be purchased, just with an extra $10k or so. Definitely doesn't seem pro2A or pro average joe.

 

[sanjuro893]

I only answered one because I understood what you were getting at, as it's the status quo for the cheap seats around here. You cheap seat boys need to put on your thinking caps from time to time. Now if neither party cares about gun rights then why is there such a variance of rights between let's say.... Chicago and Tulsa?

Gosh, I dunno, could it be because of STATE LAWS? But I'm just a "cheap seat", so wtf do I know?

It's impossible to deny that on a national level, Democrats are FAR more likely to implement laws against self-determination, which includes gun rights. Anyone trying to assert some sort of false equivalency between the two major parties is disingenuous at best.

Agree with the first part but if you think the GOP is still the party of small gov't and they don't cause major road blocks to self-determination, you're flat out high. Increased background checks for 2A purchases, no-fly lists without due process, imminent domain, etc, the 94 AWB would've never passed if not for republicans who voted for it... Do you only draw a line when there's a D next to their name?

I remember not so long ago when the worst insult on this forum was being called a "neo-con". It's amazing how fast and how low we hold republicans to the standard we used to in just a few years. I don't give two craps if they're "better" than the dems on a national level, they still sell-outs and they're pissing on your rights while they expand the scope and intrusion of government. You're comparing democrats and RINOs is what's disingenuous.

 

[Ace_on_the_Turn]

Now how about you post some of those links to video's you're talking about. I just posted two that you said didn't exist.
You have a habit of making comments without back up, just like someone else I know that posts on this forum.
What's the deal?

I do like when you post links that prove I'm right.

No new legislation. No EO's limiting legal gun ownership. All you can come up with is a small change in who's considered a dealer.

Wow, do you enjoy being wrong? It's like you bask in it.

 

[JD8]

Gosh, I dunno, could it be because of STATE LAWS? But I'm just a "cheap seat", so wtf do I know?

Ah... so help me if I'm wrong here. There are Republicans and Democrats at the State level last I checked?

 

[Glocktogo]

Gosh, I dunno, could it be because of STATE LAWS? But I'm just a "cheap seat", so wtf do I know?

Agree with the first part but if you think the GOP is still the party of small gov't and they don't cause major road blocks to self-determination, you're flat out high. Increased background checks for 2A purchases, no-fly lists without due process, imminent domain, etc, the 94 AWB would've never passed if not for republicans who voted for it... Do you only draw a line when there's a D next to their name?

I remember not so long ago when the worst insult on this forum was being called a "neo-con". It's amazing how fast and how low we hold republicans to the standard we used to in just a few years. I don't give two craps if they're "better" than the dems on a national level, they still sell-outs and they're pissing on your rights while they expand the scope and intrusion of government. You're comparing democrats and RINOs is what's disingenuous.

LOL, that's funny, who do you think passed all those pro-gun Oklahoma laws? As for the comparisons, I draw a line on all but those who PROVE that they vote to increase self-determination, I just use a bolder font to draw that line on those with a D next to their unproven name. Harry Reid was a complete dirtbag that still managed to vote pro-2A most of the time. That didn't negate the other 99.9% of his nanny state BS. I'll throw R's Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski in with that sorry lot, and McCain half the time too! Most of our Oklahoma delegation isn't all that great either (Bridenstine is the rare bright spot), but I remember when my Rep was Mike Synar, and that dude voted for every anti-gun law he could! He was so sucked up to the liberal Democrat gravy train that none other than UC Berkeley still awards annual scholarships in his name! So don't you try to tell me that things aren't better now than they were back when he was "representing" Oklahoma!

I'm not some slavish GOP drone. I have nearly a decade of OSA posts that defy that illogical assertion.

 

[Shadowrider]

The 1986 FOPA he signed (with support of the NRA) prohibited the manufacture of civilian FA's coupled with the existing 1968 gun control act (no importation of civilian FA's) he essentially priced the average individual out of owning a FA. One can still be purchased, just with an extra $10k or so. Definitely doesn't seem pro2A or pro average joe.

Are you aware of what FOPA is an acronym for? Let me help you out. "Firearm Owners Protection Act".

You choose to overlook the fact that it helped far more gun owners that it trampled. It largely gutted GCA '68. I'd like to be able to afford a machine gun too, but it's just a fact that FOPA was a big help to most of us regular folk. To say Reagan did more damage to the 2A than any other is just laughable.

Edit: I'll also add that it was a flaming dim that got this attached as an amendment at the last minute before passage. I believe the fella's name was Hughes?

 

[caojyn]

Are you aware of what FOPA is an acronym for? Let me help you out. "Firearm Owners Protection Act".

You choose to overlook the fact that it helped far more gun owners that it trampled. It largely gutted GCA '68. I'd like to be able to afford a machine gun too, but it's just a fact that FOPA was a big help to most of us regular folk. To say Reagan did more damage to the 2A than any other is just laughable.

Edit: I'll also add that it was a flaming dim that got this attached as an amendment at the last minute before passage. I believe the fella's name was Hughes?

So it's okay to infringe on some parts of the 2A in order to loosen restrictions on other parts as long as it's got a positive name? He's not to blame because he only signed it, but didn't write it? Lol okay you've convinced me it as a good thing and he's a hero of the 2A.

 

[Shadowrider]

So it's okay to infringe on some parts of the 2A in order to loosen restrictions on other parts as long as it's got a positive name? He's not to blame because he only signed it, but didn't write it? Lol okay keep spinning it as a good thing

Well I guess if it were up to you we'd still have to sign the book for .22 ammo and could only dream about buying online then huh? But at least you'd be on your high ground. Positive name? No man, it actually did good stuff. Sorry you can't allow yourself to see that. Had the Hughes Amendment not got on you'd probably still gripe since it was Reagan that signed it. Jeesh....

 

[caojyn]

Had the Hughes Amendment not got on you'd probably still gripe since it was Reagan that signed it. Jeesh....

Why? Other than infringing on our rights I liked Reagan, and still vote republican. It's just that whole "don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining," thing.

 

[Glocktogo]

Well I guess if it were up to you we'd still have to sign the book for .22 ammo and could only dream about buying online then huh? But at least you'd be on your high ground. Positive name? No man, it actually did good stuff. Sorry you can't allow yourself to see that. Had the Hughes Amendment not got on you'd probably still gripe since it was Reagan that signed it. Jeesh....

I actually remember those days, but like I said elsewhere, revisionist history will always fool some people!