I am voting for Obama

[El Tejon]

old school, Barry wants to ban your guns and then come confiscate them with a federal version of CAGE just as his puppetmaster, Richie Daley, and his Cover Man, Blago, want to do.

[De Selby]

old school, Barry wants to ban your guns and then come confiscate them with a federal version of CAGE just as his puppetmaster, Richie Daley, and his Cover Man, Blago, want to do.

True-but McCain wants to spy on me and make me subject to punishment without any right to challenge the government's claims.  My guns are important, but they won't protect me from an executive branch that doesn't need a reason to detain me for life.

[Scout26]

Old School,

I think you will find that many on this board are so far to the right, politically, that they absolutely cannot see a legitimate reason for someone to vote Obama.  

You say that like it's a bad thing.  

And name one legitimate reason to vote for Obama.

The vast majority (Fistful excluded  ) have taken the time to fully examine the issues and by applying reason and logic have arrived their conclusions.  Which is why the vast majority of people here are dis-satisfied with BOTH candidates.   We expected the Democrats to nominate a communist socialist far-left liberal, and were hopeing for the Republicans to nominate someone closer to Reagan, then Ford or Bush I.  Alas it was not to be......    

(and I do not now support and never was a Ron Paulian....)

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

"(and now I did not support and never was a Ron Paulian....)"

wanna make sure that up front huh  i fully understand

[Pyle]

If you're serious about your gun rights - I don't think a vote for Obama would be very wise.  Obviously, he can't do much on his own but the judges he chooses for the SCOTUS will be a problem. 

[old school]

http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Barack_Obama_Gun_Control.htm

Read and Learn.....

Excellent resource Scout. You are the real deal.
I read Obamas page from top to bottom. Next I will read Mc Cains.

Now tell me about your collection. I don't work for the BATF, I promise.

[Scout26]

old school,

Since I live in Illinios and Mayor Daley still has his CAGE unit, all my guns were lost in a tragic boating accident.   

[old school]

If you're serious about your gun rights - I don't think a vote for Obama would be very wise.  Obviously, he can't do much on his own but the judges he chooses for the SCOTUS will be a problem. 

That is one part of the our system that is unsettling for me. I can see how it is a part of the checks and balances, but I just hate how judges are chosen with an agenda instead of on their experience and merits.

[old school]

old school,

Since I live in Illinios and Mayor Daley still has his CAGE unit, all my guns were lost in a tragic boating accident.   

That happened to me next year too.  Oops! I mean last year.

[Scout26]

old school,

Since I live in Illinios and Mayor Daley still has his CAGE unit, all my guns were lost in a tragic boating accident.   

That happened to me next year too.  Oops! I mean last year.

You think I'm kidding.   A while back my club did a group buy on some 1911 clones.  Some of the people in the group buy live in Chicago.  On the day we picked up the guns these guys (fortunately) gave their guns to other people  who live outside the city of Chicago for storage.   However when they got home, CAGE was waiting for them on their front porches wanting to know "Where's the gun you just bought ??"  But not in a nice, polite, Officer Friendly kinda way....

[De Selby]

Old School,

I think you will find that many on this board are so far to the right, politically, that they absolutely cannot see a legitimate reason for someone to vote Obama.  

You say that like it's a bad thing.  

And name one legitimate reason to vote for Obama.

The vast majority (Fistful excluded  ) have taken the time to fully examine the issues and by applying reason and logic have arrived their conclusions.  Which is why the vast majority of people here are dis-satisfied with BOTH candidates.   We expected the Democrats to nominate a communist socialist far-left liberal, and were hopeing for the Republicans to nominate someone closer to Reagan, then Ford or Bush I.  Alas it was not to be......    

(and I do not now support and never was a Ron Paulian....)

One legitimate reason is that Obama opposes allowing the executive to detain people for life without giving them any chance to appeal their cases.

McCain does not. 

That's a very serious civil liberties issue.  At a minimum, I think we can rely on Obama to abolish this "we'll call you an enemy combatant and you'll never see the light of day again...and we won't have to prove anything to anyone to do it" business. 

Maybe that isn't deciding for many voters, but it is certainly key.  The hysteria that has come with terrorism is exactly the kind of thing the founding fathers made juries for-and American juries have proven themselves more than willing to acquit when the Government's evidence doesn't prove a crime.  I think that's a big part of the reason that the administration doesn't want these defendants in courtrooms-they don't have enough to convince a jury that a crime occurred. 

[taurusowner]

Old School,

I think you will find that many on this board are so far to the right, politically, that they absolutely cannot see a legitimate reason for someone to vote Obama.

FTFY

[Manedwolf]

Old School,

I think you will find that many on this board are so far to the right, politically, that they absolutely cannot see a legitimate reason for someone to vote Obama. 

You say that like it's a bad thing. 

And name one legitimate reason to vote for Obama.

The vast majority (Fistful excluded  ) have taken the time to fully examine the issues and by applying reason and logic have arrived their conclusions.  Which is why the vast majority of people here are dis-satisfied with BOTH candidates.   We expected the Democrats to nominate a communist socialist far-left liberal, and were hopeing for the Republicans to nominate someone closer to Reagan, then Ford or Bush I.  Alas it was not to be......   

(and I do not now support and never was a Ron Paulian....)

One legitimate reason is that Obama opposes allowing the executive to detain people for life without giving them any chance to appeal their cases.

McCain does not. 

That's a very serious civil liberties issue.  At a minimum, I think we can rely on Obama to abolish this "we'll call you an enemy combatant and you'll never see the light of day again...and we won't have to prove anything to anyone to do it" business. 

Maybe that isn't deciding for many voters, but it is certainly key.  The hysteria that has come with terrorism is exactly the kind of thing the founding fathers made juries for-and American juries have proven themselves more than willing to acquit when the Government's evidence doesn't prove a crime.  I think that's a big part of the reason that the administration doesn't want these defendants in courtrooms-they don't have enough to convince a jury that a crime occurred. 

We know your key issue is getting certain activist groups who make their point with explosives off the hook, yes.

[De Selby]

Old School,

I think you will find that many on this board are so far to the right, politically, that they absolutely cannot see a legitimate reason for someone to vote Obama. 

You say that like it's a bad thing. 

And name one legitimate reason to vote for Obama.

The vast majority (Fistful excluded  ) have taken the time to fully examine the issues and by applying reason and logic have arrived their conclusions.  Which is why the vast majority of people here are dis-satisfied with BOTH candidates.   We expected the Democrats to nominate a communist socialist far-left liberal, and were hopeing for the Republicans to nominate someone closer to Reagan, then Ford or Bush I.  Alas it was not to be......   

(and I do not now support and never was a Ron Paulian....)

One legitimate reason is that Obama opposes allowing the executive to detain people for life without giving them any chance to appeal their cases.

McCain does not. 

That's a very serious civil liberties issue.  At a minimum, I think we can rely on Obama to abolish this "we'll call you an enemy combatant and you'll never see the light of day again...and we won't have to prove anything to anyone to do it" business. 

Maybe that isn't deciding for many voters, but it is certainly key.  The hysteria that has come with terrorism is exactly the kind of thing the founding fathers made juries for-and American juries have proven themselves more than willing to acquit when the Government's evidence doesn't prove a crime.  I think that's a big part of the reason that the administration doesn't want these defendants in courtrooms-they don't have enough to convince a jury that a crime occurred. 

We know your key issue is getting certain activist groups who make their point with explosives off the hook, yes.

My key issue is getting innocent people off the hook, and in having the government prove that individuals are guilty of crimes before throwing them in a dungeon for life.

You should note, by the way, that all the groups you love to hate: CAIR, Al Arian and his co-defendants, have been acquitted on all the most serious charges, and hung their juries 10-2 or close on the few collateral charges that remain.

But I don't expect you to apologize, even though a jury of your peers said the government had no proof they committed crimes.  I just expect that we all uphold the system so that the government is required to prove its case before it jails people for crimes.

And Obama is the most promising candidate in that regard.  McCain is certainly not.  That's important, if you ask me.

[Dntsycnt]

shootinstudent has a good point.

No way in hell am I voting for Obama, but I'd much rather suffer through .gov health care than disappear some day with no trial.

[Manedwolf]

shootinstudent has a good point.

No way in hell am I voting for Obama, but I'd much rather suffer through .gov health care than disappear some day with no trial.

So you'd trust someone who is beholden to the Chicago corruption machine, where they don't just put people in prison, they do far, far worse to them, and nobody saw anything.

Okay.

[Dntsycnt]

I don't trust him at all.  But when it comes to the "lesser of two evils" I'm not so sure McCain is it.

[Manedwolf]

I don't trust him at all.  But when it comes to the "lesser of two evils" I'm not so sure McCain is it.

Study Chicago politics more. Daley makes Boss Tweed look like a shoplifter. Very nasty things happen to people who speak up about it. And Obama, with his involvement with aforementioned mob bagman Tony Resko, is involved in it up to his fake grin.

[Balog]

You know oldschool, you still haven't answered any of my questions. You state you want to discuss how Obama makes us feel, yet you refuse to disclose your feelings about some serious issues in his past.

Obama acknowledges being friends with an unrepentant terrorist, William Ayers. Are you ok with that?

Obama sat for over 20 years under the leadership of Jeremiah Wright, a racist who thinks the fed.gov invented AIDS to kill blacks and that 9/11 was just America's "chickens coming home to roost." He even named his book after a speech this man gave. Are you ok with that?

Obama says he will be a uniter, yet his voting record shows him as the most far-left Senator we had during his brief tenure. Do you find that inconsistent?

When Obama is giving a private speech he thinks no one will know about, he calls the very people he's been trying to convince to vote for him in PA ignorant xenophobes bitterly clinging to their guns and religion. How does that make you feel?

Obama has publicly stated he supports reasonable restrictions on the 2nd; he cites the DC gun ban as a good example of the restrictions he has in mind. How does that make you feel?

We've done a very good job of politely answering your questions. You have yet to address our concerns in a meaningful way. All of the above statements are verifiably true. If you really want to have a discussion about our feelings, maybe you could start by telling your feelings about the above true statements.

[O.F.Fascist]

Old School,

I think you will find that many on this board are so far to the right, politically, that they absolutely cannot see a legitimate reason for someone to vote Obama.  That's why you are having people question whether or not you are a secret agent of the campaign, etc.  Obviously the polls make it likely that some people on this forum will support Obama-he wouldn't have the numbers he does if that weren't the case.

Of course there would be a few people on here and any other gun forum that would support Obama, but unless they were extremely ignorant of his positions they wouldnt be doing so because they think the supports their gun rights.

Unfortunately not all gun owners are place the RKBA at the top of their most important list. Apparently to some of them care about things universal healthcare, and other social programs, or they would rather see us withdraw from Iraq and think those kinds of things are more important.

Personally I'm almost completely a single issue voter when it comes to guns, and McCain has been pretty staunch supporter of the 2nd amendment. He voted against the assault weapon ban when it first came up, and he voted against its renewal. So thats good enough for me. As an added I'm against most social programs so I wouldnt vote for Obama anyways.

[O.F.Fascist]

old school, Barry wants to ban your guns and then come confiscate them with a federal version of CAGE just as his puppetmaster, Richie Daley, and his Cover Man, Blago, want to do.

True-but McCain wants to spy on me and make me subject to punishment without any right to challenge the government's claims.  My guns are important, but they won't protect me from an executive branch that doesn't need a reason to detain me for life.

Thats why you have your guns, so you can decide when its time for you to fight.

But I guess you would rather have Obama with a democrat congress come in and pass more bans, so that later when they decide that spying and detaining people for thought crimes is a good idea you would have to worry about having to make that tough decision to fight or not because you wont have anything to fight with anyways so why fight.

[old school]

True-but McCain wants to spy on me and make me subject to punishment without any right to challenge the government's claims.  My guns are important, but they won't protect me from an executive branch that doesn't need a reason to detain me for life.

This is a very real concern. This is not only just as important as the right to bear arms, it is more important. Here is why:

Imagine the day when some doesn't like what you said about politics or someone decides that you have bought too many guns and suddenly you are in jail as a terrorist. No one is contacted to let them know that you have been taken, no one will admit you have been taken, no phone call, no attorney, no rights - you are just gone for good and completely at the governments mercy and completely helpless.

Forget about your cowboy fantasies of fighting them off with you arsenal of guns too. It won't go like a western shootout where the sherriff calls you out at high noon. You won't see them coming and when you realize what is happening it will be too late. Your gone.

Forget the idea of your fellow gun owners rising up to save you too. They won't even know your gone and what has happened to you for months. And once they do, the details of your arrest will be filled with terrorist rhetoric that they might even believe.

Even in the rare chance that they do believe in you and think that your arrest is an injustice, money back gaurentee that none of them will actually physically do anything to help you. Their closet full of semi autos and high capacity mags is not much of a match for our police, fbi, cia or military is it? Not to mention the fear they will feel about their association with you getting them taken away themselves.

Now lets be clear. I want both due process and the right to bear arms. So, that begs the question, how do we get both? I think the answer lies not just in being politically active on gun rights, but on due process too. That is why I am willing to have Obama in the whitehouse. I truly believe we will gain far more on due process and other issues than we will loose on gun rights.

[Nick1911]

Now lets be clear. I want both due process and the right to bear arms. So, that begs the question, how do we get both? I think the answer lies not just in being politically active on gun rights, but on due process too. That is why I am willing to have Obama in the whitehouse. I truly believe we will gain far more on due process and other issues than we will loose on gun rights.

I'm afraid that this is where we differ.  I don't believe Obama will do jack-squat for civil rights.  I believe what politicians do, not what they say.  Why should I believe that the man who voted for the patriot act would be all for protecting civil liberties?

The real party to have your cake and eat it too is the libertarians.  Unfortunately, they are not a viable party on the national level.

[agricola]

True-but McCain wants to spy on me and make me subject to punishment without any right to challenge the government's claims.  My guns are important, but they won't protect me from an executive branch that doesn't need a reason to detain me for life.

This is a very real concern. This is not only just as important as the right to bear arms, it is more important. Here is why:

Imagine the day when some doesn't like what you said about politics or someone decides that you have bought too many guns and suddenly you are in jail as a terrorist. No one is contacted to let them know that you have been taken, no one will admit you have been taken, no phone call, no attorney, no rights - you are just gone for good and completely at the governments mercy and completely helpless.

Forget about your cowboy fantasies of fighting them off with you arsenal of guns too. It won't go like a western shootout where the sherriff calls you out at high noon. You won't see them coming and when you realize what is happening it will be too late. Your gone.

Forget the idea of your fellow gun owners rising up to save you too. They won't even know your gone and what has happened to you for months. And once they do, the details of your arrest will be filled with terrorist rhetoric that they might even believe.

Even in the rare chance that they do believe in you and think that your arrest is an injustice, money back gaurentee that none of them will actually physically do anything to help you. Their closet full of semi autos and high capacity mags is not much of a match for our police, fbi, cia or military is it? Not to mention the fear they will feel about their association with you getting them taken away themselves.

Now lets be clear. I want both due process and the right to bear arms. So, that begs the question, how do we get both? I think the answer lies not just in being politically active on gun rights, but on due process too. That is why I am willing to have Obama in the whitehouse. I truly believe we will gain far more on due process and other issues than we will loose on gun rights.

This is nonsense - what will happen is that you will lose gun rights, then lose civil liberties should there be a terrorist attack / rumours of a terrorist attack.  One seems to recall Jefferson had an appropriate quote.

On the subject of unlawful combatants, this is of course something that some of us on THR pointed out when Gitmo was first in the news.  There was a relatively easy way of detaining for as long as necessary those people who were fighting against US and Coalition forces, which the Bush administration (as part of its early mismanagement of both wars) declined to do - recognize those detained as POW (which allows them to be detained for as long as the conflict lasts) and prosecute in a civilian court those POW who had committed crimes.  They decided not to do this in favour of a hodgepodge of a system which the Supreme Court has (rightly) thrown out. 

[old school]

This is nonsense - what will happen is that you will lose gun rights, then lose civil liberties should there be a terrorist attack / rumours of a terrorist attack.

You are talking about the order in which you think things "will" happen.
What you have missed is that the loss of due process has already happened.
Not to mention loss of privacy and the rest of the Patriot Act concessions.