Good Legislation, Win for Gun Makers

[Panman]

I vote Ted Kennedy for life guard:rofl

[Seagoon]

Originally posted by ygsmilo
We never would have had to worry about stuff like this if women had never been give the right to vote.

YG, while I dislike anecdotal arguments, I feel compelled to note that my wife is an excellent shot who beats me at trap and skeet all the time, researches the candidates and then votes for solidly conservative politicians (and on one occasion this has involved voting for a conservative Democrat over a liberal Republican).

On the other hand, both her brothers are pro-gun control types with definite socialist leanings. This is not an X or Y chromosome issue, it is a worldview issue.

To give another example, while the media doesn't trumpet this statistic, more males than females are pro-abortion, with the most staunchly pro-abortion demographic being unmarried males ages 18-30 and the most staunchly anti-abortion demo being married females.

The largest women's political group in the USA (CWA) is also conservative not liberal.

I bring this up merely to note that Conservative and Liberal is seldom merely a result of gender. It has far more to do with factors like culture, life experience, religion and above all, providence*.

There is no "set political preference" for the fair sex, no matter what the demagogues would like us to believe.

- SEAGOON

* For instance, in conversation over dinner last night (she took me out for my birthday) we noted that both she and I were "programmed" to be liberals, but ended up becoming conservative anyway. Our old friends, teachers, professors, neighbors, and most of our relatives are 180 degrees removed from our worldview.

[Hangtime]

Originally posted by Seagoon
.. we noted that both she and I were "programmed" to be liberals, but ended up becoming conservative anyway. Our old friends, teachers, professors, neighbors, and most of our relatives are 180 degrees removed from our worldview.

By 'providence' you are refering to religious influence? I ask because what you seem to suggest is that there's more than a passing correlation between 'conservative right' and 'religious right'?

If not that, then a 'liberal/unsaved' connection?

enh.. still not getting it right. Umm... is it possible there's no religious liberals?

Ruff concepts to get a handle on... interesting food for thought tho.

[lazs2]

seagoon... I admit to the oddidties in both men and women but in general... women seek security and know nothing of crime or violence.. their are exceptions but the prisons aren't overflowing with violent women criminals... You can indeed generalize and say we would be better off if women didn't have the vote.

I would vote for a democrat if he believed all or most of the things I do and.... this is the impossible one... And, I could be sure that he would not cave in like a cheap card table under a fat lady every time his fellow democrats needed his vote to ban something new or add new restrictions on my life.

I also aplaud the few democrats that voted with the people on this one but still don't trust em..

This episode tends to underline the rift in my opinion... it points out that you can't justify voting for democrats because this is what they want for you as a group... total control nanny socialism..  No private property except for decedant  royals like kennedys or kerries.

The second point is.....

If you want to have someone on your side in this stuff you better join the friggin NRA... they are one of the few organizations fighting the good fight on this that is effective.

Add 10 million new NRA members and you might even get democrat candidates that are worth voting for... if they are NRA sponsored they might even vote like those few democrats that voted for the people on this one..

Vote democrats in power next time and watch em work to undo all this good work.

It is that simple.

lazs

[ygsmilo]

While my initial response was s psudo troll (spank me moderator) if you look at when the federal government became more involved with issues that were states rights was around the turn of the century when sufferage act took place.

The example I like to use is hurricanes, before the federal govenment felt like it had to get involved ie Congressmen from those states seeking that oh so wonderful government check and or insurance companies who are willing to write insurance on property that is in a coastal flood zone that will lose their bellybutton casue the good ol US gov will now write subsidiesed insurance those areas,  

before then the States took care of things, if there was a hurricane the local folks took care of themselves thus a long segway from the right of women to vote.

My wife really is  proud of me when I use the argument also.

[lazs2]

this and the one that protected private aircraft industry are just good starts..

We need an all encompassing law that protects the rights of all manufacturers from frivolous lawsuits.

lazs

[GtoRA2]

A good day for all gun owners!

[Flit]

Originally posted by Panman
I vote Ted Kennedy for life guard:rofl

 How about a cell at Leavenworth.
  He can share it with that traitor Kerry:aok

[parker00]

Although this is a good bill that needed to be passed you have to wonder how many of those republicans have a little fatter wallet today.

[lazs2]

Do you wonder the same when some protectionist teachers union (or any union) bill is passed with 90% of the democrats lockstep in line?


lazs

[parker00]

actually yeah, it seems anymore that any bill passed in congress is either "of the moment" or some lobbyist threw enough money towards the right congressman


I try not to pick sides as both the republicans and democrats are corrupt. Very few of them are actually there for you and me in my opinion, except maybe for their first term.

[Xargos]

Originally posted by lazs2
my guns have killed less people than ted kennedys car.

lazs

I love that.    

[Gunslinger]

Originally posted by lazs2
Do you wonder the same when some protectionist teachers union (or any union) bill is passed with 90% of the democrats lockstep in line?


lazs

maybe because Unions contribute MILLIONS of $$$$$$ to the democrats.  This is what caused the huge rift recently between several large organized labor unions.  Rather than use money for recruiting they contribute Union dues to those that members may or may not support and that have done very little for.

[lazs2]

parker... I agree that it seems odd that lobbyists have so much power at first glance but in a way it is "representitive government"

I pay the NRA to support my gun views.   I am voting with my cash and being represented on a national level.   The teachers, and all unions do the same... with one tiny and very important difference...

the NRA is not mandatory and lets me vote every year on what I want them to lobby for...  they thrive by catering to the wishes  of their members.

The unions extort money from a huge percentage of unwilling members and then use the money to support candidates that those members would wish to not support.  they thrive by extorting their members who they feel are too stupid to know what is good for them or how to spend their own money.

A good start at lobbyist reform would be I think that, if a union is mandatory then a member would have a right to withold the portion that went to political contributions.

Another good reform would be a cap on the amount that each regestered member of a lobby group could contribute.

lazs

[Masherbrum]

Originally posted by Hangtime
Or a Republican for that matter. Gun legislation shouldn't be a partisan issue.  

But sadly, it is.

Karaya