See anything interesting at the polling place?
- Thread starter myp
- Start date
-
- Tags
- interesting place polling
In Texas (this is odd) it is illegal to mention a position on a candidate or a proposition. it is referred to as voter intimidation. So, there is no discussing of who and why you should vote for people in polling places. The campaign people have to be a certain distance from the polling place. (not sure if that is federal our state law) they hand out these very professional looking campaign ads, they look like they cost a fortune and they are littered all over the parking lot. I heard a guy turn down a campaign add and the joker handing them out insisted he take one. The fellow then said "I don't want to through that away for you" I thought that was hilarious
I wonder what inspires folks to "Worry" about the 2nd amendment after this election whn the actual facts are examined:
"
Fear of what Obama might do is being fed by NRA leaders like Wayne LaPierre, who warned in February that Obama's plan is to "get re-elected and, with no more elections to worry about, get busy dismantling and destroying our firearms freedom."
The organization's 2008 website, gunbanobama.com, is up and running with its headline, "Obama Would Be The Most Anti-Gun President in History" and a link touting, "If Obama Is Pro-Gun, Why Are Leading Anti-Gun and Anti-Hunting Groups Endorsing Him?"
One might just as easily ask, if Obama is so anti-gun, why did one of those endorsers, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, give Obama an "F" for his gun record the following year? The Brady Campaign and other gun-control advocates continue to express frustration over actions and inaction by Obama that should bring the NRA delight.
Obama has signed a law that permits Amtrak passengers to carry guns in their checked baggage and another that allows visitors to national parks and wildlife refuges to possess concealed guns. He has not pushed for actions he supported in his 2008 campaign, including closing the so-called "gun show loophole" that allows unlicensed private firearm sellers to sell weapons at gun shows without conducting the background checks and reporting requirements that registered gun dealers must conduct."
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/...i-gun-president-gun-show-loophole-nra-leaders
I question the motives of the NRA, this as a gun owner.
"
Fear of what Obama might do is being fed by NRA leaders like Wayne LaPierre, who warned in February that Obama's plan is to "get re-elected and, with no more elections to worry about, get busy dismantling and destroying our firearms freedom."
The organization's 2008 website, gunbanobama.com, is up and running with its headline, "Obama Would Be The Most Anti-Gun President in History" and a link touting, "If Obama Is Pro-Gun, Why Are Leading Anti-Gun and Anti-Hunting Groups Endorsing Him?"
One might just as easily ask, if Obama is so anti-gun, why did one of those endorsers, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, give Obama an "F" for his gun record the following year? The Brady Campaign and other gun-control advocates continue to express frustration over actions and inaction by Obama that should bring the NRA delight.
Obama has signed a law that permits Amtrak passengers to carry guns in their checked baggage and another that allows visitors to national parks and wildlife refuges to possess concealed guns. He has not pushed for actions he supported in his 2008 campaign, including closing the so-called "gun show loophole" that allows unlicensed private firearm sellers to sell weapons at gun shows without conducting the background checks and reporting requirements that registered gun dealers must conduct."
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/...i-gun-president-gun-show-loophole-nra-leaders
I question the motives of the NRA, this as a gun owner.
I really think the Brady group gives him an F over fast and furious. Even if it wasn't his order, he gets the blame. That and not asking Eric holder to step down was a bad move
I share your concern Wendy ( speaking from the other side of the isle lol ) ... may "reasonable" people prevail!
There is "no other side of the isle", or aisle where our Constitution & BOR are concerned, IMO.
I believe that each administration takes their regulations & laws just a wee bit further. It's kinda like "what, when did that law/regulation go into effect?".
As I said in my intro, I'm an old woman, I attended a country school way back when. The boys used to bring their rifles & fishing poles & set them in the corner of the room....now a kid draws a picture of a gun & he/she can be, & sometimes is suspended.
Now I don't believe that guns should be allowed in school....it's just a way of saying "how far we have come"....or maybe fallen.
Guess I'll have to call you PF's "old lady" from now on!
Such is the nature of extremism in any form. Society changes as population density increases. Laws need to change accordingly. The 2nd Amendment guarantees the right to bear arms in order to give the governed the ultimate power to protect all the other rights within. With or without that right, I think the notion that a shotgun or any other small armed weapon really accomplishes that goal is ludicrous. I can just see one of these "militias" marching on Washington demanding concessions LOL.....
So today's gun laws should reflect common sense, and social needs rather than some vague pretense that gun ownership protects our freedom. It does not. (mho!)
"old lady's" good, I wear it proudly.
I absolutely agree with some gun laws, my fear is the camels nose under the tent. Our gov't doesn't seem to know what limits they can put on freedoms. Do you know, for instance, how many regulations a day come out of this gov't?
Check this out, it averages 68 regulations a day. Sometimes just changing a line in an existing regulation is all it is, mostly they're new regulations.
http://www.regulations.gov/#!home;tab=search
Last edited:
"old lady's" good, I wear it proudly.
I absolutely agree with some gun laws, my fear is the camels nose under the tent. Our gov't doesn't seem to know what limits they can put on freedoms. Do you know, for instance, how many regulations a day come out of this gov't?
No, I don't pay attention to that data. And I don't particularly understand the significance of "how many". More interested in what they are, and why they are (or are not) needed.
If you're alluding to Obama's shackling business with what you perceive as "over-regulation", I would remind you that virtually EVERY serious downturn in our economy throughout US history has been the direct result of "under-regulation", not over.... Hoover's great depression, etc.
Yes, Reagan did revive a stagnant economy (I was there too! I know you're waaaaay older than I am hehehehe .... 60ish). But that period did NOT represent a near collapse of the entire system the way it did when the housing market collapsed from under-regulated investment instruments, or when the stock market collapsed from "under-regulation" in 1929.
Are there unnecessary regulations? Probably. Are there regulations that exist that shouldn't? Of course~ and we can debate which are which. The point is, under-regulation is far more dangerous (mho) than over-regulation (or at the very least "just as dangerous").
"Waaaaay older", now hold on there bub.... :stomp: Well, maybe "waay", but not "waaaaay". I mean, I am still above the dirt & mobile. lol
I am not talking about just business regulations (although I believe they're being strangled as well) but every regulation effects us, all of us, maybe not the ones making the regulations, but us normal people are certainly effected....infected probably.
I just want to get rid of, or not have unnecessary regulations imposed, not only are many of them useless, they cost lots of $$$. I don't think businesses incur those costs, they pass them on to you & me.
I wasn't talking about just this admin, all administrations have had the same sickness, it's called, "power/control".
Agreed. We "want" the same things. We just disagree on the solution(s). Personally, I believe the day "news" became a for-profit industry is the same day we began becoming "indoctrinated". And further, I believe that "bad dream" is unfolding before our eyes with the advent of the Internet.
Of course you're right....now where do I go?
I think it's an excellent topic. And we should start a new thread "Now where do "we" go or something like that. This thread I think is no longer relevant. Myp?
Similar threads
