2nd amendment ron paul email

[geronimotwo]

this is an emal i received from the ron paul campaign.  i thought i would share as it covers some of the 2a highlights of his platform.

Dear geronimotwo,

Did you hear Rick Santorum defending his anti-Second Amendment record in last night's debate?

He proudly stated he supported - and worked to create - anti-gun legislation to avoid something worse coming along.

Rick just doesn't seem to get it.

If our country is being driven to the edge at 80 miles an hour, you don't slow down to 75 once you get control of the car.

You slam on the brakes and turn around!

Ron, I've never been afraid to stand against EVERY gun grab, EVERY bailout, and EVERY attempt to undermine our national sovereignty.

Although Rick Santorum tried to deflect attention by attacking my Second Amendment record, I'm proud of my hard work on behalf of gun owners.

In fact, in 2011, I was given the "Defender of the Second Amendment Award" by Gun Owners of America.  GOA's Executive Director, Larry Pratt, described me as "a leader in the fight to defend and restore the Second Amendment."



I've introduced legislation to:
***     Repeal the Brady Bill, which sets up virtually all the infrastructure the government needs to implement national gun registration;

***     Repeal the so-called "Assault Weapons" Ban, which banned an entire class of firearms based on little more than looking scary;

***     End U.S. membership in the anti-gun United Nations to ensure American tax dollars are not used to fund global gun control schemes like the so-called "Small Arms Treaty";

***     Repeal the dangerous "Gun-Free School Zone Act," which virtually guarantees that bloodthirsty criminals will face no opposition should they choose to go on a rampage.

And I'm not just the only remaining candidate to answer the National Association for Gun Rights' Presidential Survey 100% - I'm the only remaining candidate proud enough of my record to respond at all.

As President, you have my word that I'll lead the charge to repeal every single unconstitutional gun-grab currently on the books.

Last night's debate provided just the latest example of why my campaign achieved historic success in states as diverse as Iowa and New Hampshire and is now surging in South Carolina, while counterfeit conservatives like Rick Santorum struggle to find momentum.



Voters don't want Big Government invading their lives one step at a time.

They don't want someone who thinks you fight unconstitutional legislation by creating your own.

They want a proven leader who will keep government off their backs, away from their wallets, and out of their everyday lives - period!

They want a candidate who will:

***     CUT $1 trillion in federal spending his first year in office;

***     ELIMINATE five federal departments and return power to the states;

***     BALANCE our out-of-control budget in only three years;

***     FIGHT gun grabbers, Big Labor, and the reckless spenders at the Federal Reserve each time they try to ram through another powergrab;

***     MAINTAIN a fighting force that is second-to-none while refusing to surrender our national sovereignty to carry out the UN's decrees.

I will lead on principle in the White House just like I've stood firm for liberty, limited government, and the Constitution in Congress.

If you're ready for a President who will reject any scheme that strips away more of your freedoms...

If you're sick and tired of the status quo and business-as-usual...

And if you're ready to take back your God-given rights...

... then I ask for your support today to help me get my consistent conservative message out to the voters in South Carolina.

I ask for your help to contact as many people as I can to let them know they don't have to settle for a candidate who will have to spend the entire general election campaign apologizing for endorsing the same disastrous policies as Barack Obama.

Many South Carolinians are just now making their final decision on who to support, and I want to make sure their last impression of my campaign is the truth - not the establishment media's distortions.

Please, donate whatever you are able right away to help me reach these voters today and secure another historic finish this weekend in South Carolina.

For Liberty,


Ron Paul

[MicroBalrog]

Ron Paul is pro-gun? Who would have thought it?

[TommyGunn]

Ron Paul is so progun he even thinks Iran should have a nuke.   

[CNYCacher]

Ron Paul is so progun he even thinks Iran should have a nuke.   

Actually, he thinks Iran doesn't have a nuke, and that it would be ill-advised to go after another chase for fictional WMD's like we did in Iraq.  Facepalm indeed.

[Blakenzy]

That debate Monday night made me feel  . Too much BS. Too much BS spouted by the clowns. Too much BS swallowed and applauded by the audience.

[Jamisjockey]

Ron Paul is so progun he even thinks Iran should have a nuke.   

Who are we to meddle in thier national soveriegnty?

[Fitz]

Who are we to meddle in thier national soveriegnty?

This


Getting real tired of the "We can have hundreds of nukes, but we'll invade anyone else who does" bullshit.

[TommyGunn]

Who are we to meddle in thier national soveriegnty?

Who do we have to be?  Besides, it's too late; we started doing that during the Cold War.


I get it.  Let's be neutral.  We'll leave Israel to take care of itself.  They have nukes.  We'll sit back and let Israel defend itself, even if they have to nuke Iran.  Oh, then we'll probably rebuke Israel ......

I hope to God America will always be able to take care of itself because God knows no one else ever will come to our aid, should we need it.


And BTW, you spelled "their" and "sovereignty" wrong.

[Fitz]

You're right. We should tell our elected officials to invade, so we can spend more American lives (other than voters/congresscritters, of course) being the world's policemen!

[Perd Hapley]

Who are we to meddle in thier national soveriegnty?

The job of the President is to defend our nation, not wring his hands over some other nation's sovereignty. Screw their sovereignty. No nukes for them.

[TommyGunn]

You're right. We should tell our elected officials to invade, so we can spend more American lives (other than voters/congresscritters, of course) being the world's policemen!

Since when did I say invade?  Why is it people read things in my posts I never put there?  

Hey I gotz an idea!!! Why don't we just friggin' GIVE IRAN a few of our nukes?!??!?!??!?


A lot of time will be saved.  Plus, Israel will KNOW where we stand!

[Fitz]

The job of the President is to defend our nation, not wring his hands over some other nation's sovereignty. Screw their sovereignty. No nukes for them.

But nukes for us... because we can be trusted, right?

[TommyGunn]

But nukes for us... because we can be trusted, right?

Absoposilutly!!!!!....   

[Jamie B]

But nukes for us... because we can be trusted, right?

Better yet, 'I can have a gun for HD, but you cannot because I don't like your politics'.

[Jamie B]

Is Ron Paul truly against gun control, or just Federal gun control?

[Ron]

So in the future if some nation surpasses us economically and militarily and demands we get rid of our WMD's we should acquiesce? Might makes right, right?

With our conditional commitment to others national sovereignty we are setting the pattern for future powers in how they deal with us should we become weak enough.

Loss of moral authority in other words.  

[TommyGunn]

So in the future if some nation surpasses us economically and militarily and demands we get rid of our WMD's we should acquiesce? Might makes right, right?
With our conditional commitment to others national sovereignty we are setting the pattern for future powers in how they deal with us should we become weak enough.

Loss of moral authority in other words.  

We could send them to the nation making the demand ~~~ air mail of course.

[Jamie B]

So in the future if some nation surpasses us economically and militarily and demands we get rid of our WMD's we should acquiesce? Might makes right, right?

With our conditional commitment to others national sovereignty we are setting the pattern for future powers in how they deal with us should we become weak enough.

Loss of moral authority in other words.  

If the US loses economic and military power, our 'old friends' will not give us the time of day.
Might does make right - that is what the US have been doing all of these years.

[TommyGunn]

If the US loses economic and military power, our 'old friends' will not give us the time of day.
Might does make right - that is what the US  whole world (has) ... been doing all of these years.

FIFY

[makattak]

Better yet, 'I can have a gun for HD, but you cannot because I don't like your politics'.

If your "politics" is: "You're an evil bastard and I will wipe you and your family from the face of the earth", then, yes, if it is in my power to deny you a gun, I will do so because of your "politics."

[Ron]

Might does not make right.

Despite all the internet blustering to the contrary.

Sometimes might and (morally)right are in alignment, happy are the people then.  

The Constitution goes to great lengths to keep those who are strong from lording over those who are weak.

I guess only those of us in the USA are born with inalienable rights bestowed upon us from the Creator. Only those of us in the USA should have the expectation that our national sovereignty will be respected.

The USA didn't inherent the empire solely on the basis of military might. We were looked upon as a beacon of freedom for the western world to emulate. We had moral authority and squandered it.

We've squandered moral authority by pursuing selfish gains and not applying the principles of freedom uniformly across the globe. Some we respected, others we lorded over with the implied threat of our overwhelming economy and military.  

[TommyGunn]

Might does not make right.

Despite all the internet blustering to the contrary.

Sometimes might and (morally)right are in alignment, happy are the people then.  

The Constitution goes to great lengths to keep those who are strong from lording over those who are weak.

I guess only those of us in the USA are born with inalienable rights bestowed upon us from the Creator. Only those of us in the USA should have the expectation that our national sovereignty will be respected.

The USA didn't inherent the empire solely on the basis of military might. We were looked upon as a beacon of freedom for the western world to emulate. We had moral authority and squandered it.

We've squandered moral authority by pursuing selfish gains and not applying the principles of freedom uniformly across the globe. Some we respected, others we lorded over with the implied threat of our overwhelming economy and military.  

We applied the principle of freedom in Iraq .... look what THAT got us.

[Perd Hapley]

If your "politics" is: "You're an evil bastard and I will wipe you and your family from the face of the earth", then, yes, if it is in my power to deny you a gun, I will do so because of your "politics."

Between nations, yes, it does work something like that. We can't put Iran in prison, but we can take certain measures to keep them from having nuclear weapons. Doesn't mean we invade, necessarily.

[makattak]

Between nations, yes, it does work something like that. We can't put Iran in prison, but we can take certain measures to keep them from having nuclear weapons. Doesn't mean we invade, necessarily.

Is that in disagreement with me? Because I don't disagree with your statement.

[KD5NRH]

The job of the President is to defend our nation,

Then be ready to shoot down anything they launch, then blow them off the map.  That's how defense works.

Or do you think it's appropriate to just beat the crap out of guys who might have the ability to harm you, and call it first-strike self defense?