Where does the hatred of guns come from?

[crusader rabbit]

FQ uses a typical progressive debate tactic.
He tries to equate the actions of a few anomalous RINO individuals with the stated intentions of an entire party .
He is not effectively debating anything, he is simply trying to salvage something of value from his years in the socialist world of academia.

Yet, no matter how many times he throws the bucket down the well, it always comes up empty.

Crusader

[fightingquaker13]

FQ uses a typical progressive debate tactic.
He tries to equate the actions of a few anomalous RINO individuals with the stated intentions of an entire party .
He is not effectively debating anything, he is simply trying to salvage something of value from his years in the socialist world of academia.

Really? So Ronald Reagan, George Bush the first and George Bush the second  (who wanted to extend the AWB), all three of which were GOP presidents and a GOP Governor of a major state who is considered to be a front runner for the Presidential nomination of his party are "anomalous individuals"? Give me a break Tom. I'm calling a spade a spade. If it hurts to look in the mirror its not my problem.

[billt]

F.Q.,

Are you honestly going to sit there and try and tell us that the GOP is every bit as much of a threat to gun owners as the Democratic Party is?

[fightingquaker13]

F.Q.,

Are you honestly going to sit there and try and tell us that the GOP is every bit as much of a threat to gun owners as the Democratic Party is?

Nope. But I am trying to tell you they aren't our friends either. The last three GOP Presidents screwed us or tried to, the NY GOP Senate screwed us, and Christie, if he gets the nod will screw us. I'm saying we need to vote for the person, not the party. The platform means diddly and squat. Its the guy that casts the vote that matters.

[Solus]

Have to agree with  FQ. 

Being a Republican doesn't mean the politician will support gun rights...and being a Dem doesn't mean he won't.

Ohio tried for years to get a working concealed carry law and could not get it past the republican gov. 

It was finally passed over his veto but full of 'poison pills'.

He was replaced by a Dem gov. who supported every pro 2A bill that was proposed.  In his term the CC law was cleaned up repeatedly.  Of course he supported ObamaCare and other Dem programs.

[Sponsor]

[billt]

Being a Republican doesn't mean the politician will support gun rights...and being a Dem doesn't mean he won't.

You're not getting the point. It doesn't matter one way or the other about the candidate. You have just 2 political parties in the United States that hold power. One, the Democrats have a solid plank built into their platform that supports and promotes the strictest gun control they can possibly pass. If they could pass an outright ban, they would, and have tried to do just that many times in the past.

The Republicans overall have no such political desire or agenda. Therefore if Romney was "anti gun", which he wasn't, it really wouldn't matter because his party would not support him. So what he wanted really wouldn't matter. With Hussein it is a different story because he's got the backing of his party to push the most oppressive gun control he possibly can. He is going to attempt to do exactly that. The only thing that might save us is the fear of getting voted out if they vote for another ban. In fact it was reported tonight he and Biden are "going on the road" to promote gun control. The Democratic party is rabidly anti gun. The Republicans are not. It's as simple as that.

[fightingquaker13]

Quote from BillT:
The Democratic party is rabidly anti gun. The Republicans are not. It's as simple as that.

Not dowbn South they're not, except in black districts (and why that is defies all logic), and not out West either. It was Baucus and Tester, both Dem Senators from Montana that stopped DOD from shredding used brass and made cases available to the public. You need to understand that the Democrats pitch a pretty big tent. And now the asinine abortion wars seem to be over, some in the GOP seem to be doing the same. You have to judge the candidate. I wouldn't trust Romney (even though I voted for him) to defend my gun rights more than I would trust BO, and I'd sure as hell trust Baucus more than Olympia Snow.

[tombogan03884]

The numbers of Pro gun dems and anti gun Rep are about the same so FQ thinks that proves his point .
He can't comprehend that they are both defying the basis of their respective parties .

With such a fat head you would think he would have more in it .

[fightingquaker13]

The numbers of Pro gun dems and anti gun Rep are about the same so FQ thinks that proves his point .
He can't comprehend that they are both defying the basis of their respective parties .

With such a fat head you would think he would have more in it .

You just can't concede the basic point, and that is that party labels are just that. They are like a a suit of clothes that can be put on and taken off at will. Look at former Republican Michael Bloomberg, who is now the biggest anti-gunner in the US, or former Dems Zell Miller, or Joe Liberman. The Party means little. The vote means everything. If you vote party line you're an idiot.

[tombogan03884]

FQ, your problem is that you actually believe that sh!t they fed you in school.
That's why reality shocks you so .
If you had not lost the ability to think for yourself you would not have voted for Obama the first time .
You've got to be pretty freaking stupid to vote for a guy who says "America is the greatest nation on earth, we aim to change that."
The lowest scurviest Republican to ever live has one thing going for him that will get my vote .
He  isn't a Democrat.