26 replies to this topic

[Walter63a]

PhilOhio, I couldn't agree more with you. You are a gentleman and a scholar. Now, I will second the motion, "Crush them!" Regards, Walter

P.S. The best way to do that is with the vote, the pen and $$$'s!!!
P.P.S. "A young man who is not a liberal has no heart, but an old man who is not a conservative has no brain!"-Sir Winston Churchill

[John Jr]

Here is my reply to Mr. Morford:

QUOTE

Mr. Mark Morford, I see that you are a communist for a newspaper there in San Fagcisco.  I happen to be a law-abiding citizen of the United States of America and a lawful gun owner.  Does that make me a terrorist wanna-be or a white supremacist?  I hunt with my rifles and I shoot for recreation with some of the others I have.  I have a license from a division of the IRS called the BATFE to collect old guns.  I also have a license to carry a handgun concealed.  I guess that makes me your enemy.  Why?  You are the closed minded.  We might be best friends if you didn’t know I owned a gun.  Let me explain something about the assault weapons ban of 1994, AKA the Clinton Gun Ban.  It did not ban any “assault rifle” or gun on the list.  It did not ban any magazine size.  It did nothing.  It was a symbolic knee-jerk reaction that was a political move.  Nothing more.  From the very day that the ban went into effect, almost every state in the union still allowed the exact “banned” guns and magazines to be sold.  To this day, I can buy an AK47 for less than $300 and 30 round magazines for less than $7.  I can buy the AK 47 guns that were “banned” for around $800-$1,000.  These have the bayonet lug and flash hider instead of not having them (useless features for civilians anyway.)  None of these guns are machine guns.  You must pull the trigger one time for each shot.  The phrase “Assault Weapon” is a misnomer.  Baseball bats are assault weapons.  So are rocks. All the “BAN” did was raise prices of weapons that were made PRIOR to the ban.  That’s it.  NOTHING MORE.  The day before the ban you could buy an AR15 with a 30 round magazine, the day after the ban you could buy an AR15 with a 30 round magazine, and you still can today almost 10 years later.  I am not talking about one that has been manufactured recently and has been changed cosmetically, but one that was made in 1994 before the ban.  WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE EXACT SAME GUN.  This includes the awful mean devastating UZI and Tec-9 (which are nothing but heavy, large pistols).  It’s NOT my god given right to own a gun Mr. Morford, it’s a right that is constitutionally guaranteed and protected by the Bill of Rights in Amendment II.  Freedom of speech is NOT your God given right, it’s a right that is constitutionally guaranteed and protected by the Bill of Rights in Amendment I. People don’t need guns to kill each other Mr. Morford.  We did that just fine with swords, bows and other weapons prior to the invention of gunpowder.    You may have issues with the right, but leave guns out of it.  You are talking out of your knowledge. John Titsworth, Jr.

Idiots never cease to amaze me.

[Walter63a]

Right on, John! We all need to follow your excellent example and flood this stinking lib. with our well thought-out emails! Best Regards, Walter

[TommyFan]

Brian,

That link was a great insight into the mind of the self-labelled "progressive". Phrases like "knuckle dragging" ,"homophobic", "racist" to refer to anyone who is a member of the NRA just shows what kind of opposition we are up against.

I don' t mind the name calling as much as I mind the ranting of a completely ignorant guy with an ax to grind who has access to the media to influence others.

This is a perfect example of the view of those who prefer to have have their thinking done for them as they have no desire to find out the facts and draw their own conclusions.

"Ignorant and proud of it" ought to be their motto. WAIT A MINUTE! Isn't that how "they" define a redneck???

[hawksnest]

Phil: Even though I agree with your asessment of our RINO Senators, I continue to send them pro gun letters and letters telling them how disappointed I am when support anti-gun legislation or they vote with the Democrates on gun issues. It may do no good, but who knows, if enough voters write them often and if they ever have a taken opponent in an election, it may cause them to rethink their position or neutralize them for that session. Wouldn't it be wonderful if progun groups could find someone electable to run against them.

[Sgt]

I hear what Phil is saying. It used to bother me that I couldn't pursuade my liberal friends, in regards to the AWB. I always came back to the same point, "how does this law get the AKs off the streets?" They act like they didn't even hear me, that you can get the same gun across the counter, only without a bayonet lug.

[TNKen]

My favorite thing in our area is to ask a true blood democrat the following, with the usual answers following:

1. Do you support gun owner rights----Yes
2. Do you support gay rights---No
3. Do you support abortion--No
4. Do you think everyone should work for a living--Yes
5. Do you support welfare programs--No
6. Do you support the ACLU--No (usually hell no)

Then why are you a democrat?