How can I vote for Obama if

[elizabeth]

I worry about the Supreme Court Justices changing and then losing my Right to Bear Arms. This is a real concern for me.

 

I've got other issues, too, but this is one I can easily pinpoint (I could start an exact thread about McCain and NAFTA *shudder*).

http://www.ontheissues.org/Domestic/Barack_Obama_Gun_Control.htm Obama does not want to dismantle the Bill of Rights. I am a supporter of the right to bear arms and a democrat....Here is a link to his voting record and public statements on the issue.

[Peek a Boo]

http://www.ontheissues.org/Domestic/Barack_Obama_Gun_Control.htm Obama does not want to dismantle the Bill of Rights. I am a supporter of the right to bear arms and a democrat....Here is a link to his voting record and public statements on the issue.

 

 

elizabeth [or anyone, really], since we have already stated how his record DOES limit and infringe on the second amendment, could you address those concerns and try to explain how each ban and restriction "doesn't" infringe on the second amendment?

[pqr]

http://www.ontheissues.org/Domestic/Barack_Obama_Gun_Control.htm Obama does not want to dismantle the Bill of Rights. I am a supporter of the right to bear arms and a democrat....Here is a link to his voting record and public statements on the issue.

 

Elizabeth, I may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer but when YOUR link has the following statements.

 

Obama's answers to a questionnaire:

 

35. Do you support state legislation to:

a. ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns? Yes.

b. ban assault weapons? Yes.

c. mandatory waiting periods and background checks? Yes.

 

Obama was being misleading when he denied that his handwriting had been on a document endorsing a state ban on the sale and possession of handguns in Illinois

 

• Principles that Obama supports on gun issues:

• Ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.

• Increase state restrictions on the purchase and possession of firearms.

• Require manufacturers to provide child-safety locks with firearms.

He voted against letting people violate local weapons bans in cases of self-defense

 

Are these not simply inconsistent with your statement that Obama does not want to "dismantle" the Bill of Rights. Given the above, again from your link, what would he have do do to persuade you that he does want to dismantle it.

 

I listed 8 examples of weapons that would be banned could you explain how banning them does not "dismantle" the second amendment.

 

Not to be trite, but I simply do not see what your argument is when your link proves mine. The link even calls Obama "misleading"....polite speak for saying that he is a liar.

 

Are handguns not covered by the 2nd Amendment? Surely wanting to ban handguns means wanting to "dismantle" the 2nd Ammendment.

 

Obama has stated that he "respects" the 2nd Amendment, but given the above one would have to ask two questions.

1. Has he ever actually read it? If so...

2. Did he understand it ?

 

It would seem that the answer to one of the above has to be NO.

 

I eagerly await your answer but will be on travel for a week, so will look upon my return.

 

Sincerely pqr

[Academy of Jedi Arts]

I love a line I saw in some documentary once about the right to bear arms. How far does it go? Should I have the right to bear nuclear arms?

 

Actually the gun issue is one of my top 3 not so favorite things about Obama. I feel like I am forced to choose between guns and my daughter's right to make decisions about her reproductive health and to be able to at least have the chance at a civil union with whomever she chooses to love. I feel like I am being forced to choose between banning certain weapons and banning torture.

 

Pqr makes a good point- I mean Bush even took an oath to "Uphold the Constitution" and I can totally understand why sportsman and hunters are worried.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

The fact remains that Obama, and others, rely on the unfortunate truism that many do not understand the definitions used when speaking of firearms as (and I am honestly not trying to be rude here, so please do not take it as such, but it is a truth) many on this thread have aptly demonstrated. I may not know what you agree to, but I do know what many people know when it comes to firearms.

 

Thanks for the good discussion, pqr. I appreciate all the new info. And I strongly apologize for my snarky tone. It's not a good look for me.

[Peek a Boo]

I love a line I saw in some documentary once about the right to bear arms. How far does it go? Should I have the right to bear nuclear arms?

 

Actually the gun issue is one of my top 3 not so favorite things about Obama. I feel like I am forced to choose between guns and my daughter's right to make decisions about her reproductive health and to be able to at least have the chance at a civil union with whomever she chooses to love. I feel like I am being forced to choose between banning certain weapons and banning torture.

 

Pqr makes a good point- I mean Bush even took an oath to "Uphold the Constitution" and I can totally understand why sportsman and hunters are worried.

 

they tackle this at capitalism.org every once in awhile ;)

nuclear bombs?

the short answer would be yes.

If the purpose of the second amendment is to protect yourself for freedom [esp from your own gvt: what the colonists had JUST finished doing!] then it would only seem logical that the individual should have the right to be as well armed AS the gvt. But even conservative me hasn't quite come to a firm decision on that one.....

 

from my own little perspective on your situation, I'd focus on right to bear arms first. Even if some forms of bc are outlawed, you still have "reproductive freedom" --but like the freedom to drive, you don't have a right to kill anyone in the process of exercising that freedom. Abortion and bc won't be overturned anytime soon, i don't think. I do expect civil unions to be recognized w/in the next couple decades.

 

But the right to bear arms is under attack NOW --there are LEGAL BANS in place already, and restrictions are only getting much worse, pretty quickly. The Supreme Court decision was 5-4 --a very. slim. majority. I fully expect Obama would appoint someone to tilt that, and the gun issue will hit that court faster than any abortion/bc issue. Whereas even a conservative court is going to be leery of overturning RvW [much to my chagrin ;)]

[Spy Car]

they tackle this at capitalism.org every once in awhile ;)

nuclear bombs?

the short answer would be yes.

If the purpose of the second amendment is to protect yourself for freedom [esp from your own gvt: what the colonists had JUST finished doing!] then it would only seem logical that the individual should have the right to be as well armed AS the gvt. But even conservative me hasn't quite come to a firm decision on that one.....

 

from my own little perspective on your situation, I'd focus on right to bear arms first. Even if some forms of bc are outlawed, you still have "reproductive freedom" --but like the freedom to drive, you don't have a right to kill anyone in the process of exercising that freedom. Abortion and bc won't be overturned anytime soon, i don't think. I do expect civil unions to be recognized w/in the next couple decades.

 

But the right to bear arms is under attack NOW --there are LEGAL BANS in place already, and restrictions are only getting much worse, pretty quickly. The Supreme Court decision was 5-4 --a very. slim. majority. I fully expect Obama would appoint someone to tilt that, and the gun issue will hit that court faster than any abortion/bc issue. Whereas even a conservative court is going to be leery of overturning RvW [much to my chagrin ;)]

 

So wait...you believe (but are wavering) on whether or not the Second Amendment gives citizens the right to possess nuclear weapons?

 

Am I reading that correctly?

 

Under this definition aren't all the candidates infringers of the Second Amendment?

 

Bill (who does appreciate you :D)

[Peek a Boo]

So wait...you believe (but are wavering) on whether or not the Second Amendment gives citizens the right to possess nuclear weapons?

 

Am I reading that correctly?

 

Under this definition aren't all the candidates infringers of the Second Amendment?

 

Bill (who does appreciate you :D)

 

Yes, Yes, and Yes :D