Obama is a great presidential candidate!

If you're honestly worried about him taking your guns away above everything else he has done or said, you really need to get your priorities straightened out. I don't see the big deal about abolishing guns or gun control, sure its a waste of money, but why the hell do you need 80 handguns?kayn83

in case obama's ninja assassins come to my house to try and convert me to oprah winfreyism and i can defend myself in a weeklong shootout with just me, 65 ninjas, and my 80 handguns.

see. you never know when your gonna need 80 hand guns

He is NOT pro-second amendment

Ultimate-Playa

he'll ban semi autos, an 'assualt' weapon ban, etc etc

[QUOTE="kayn83"]

according to Yoshi-inex, Obama is pro-2nd ammendment, therefore how can Conservatives hate on him? (on that issue)

Ultimate-Playa

He is NOT pro-second amendment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifEg1aq6Emo

No President is gonna take away your guns Rambo, don't worry.btaylor2404

he will try and pass anygun control on pistols, ccw, semi autos, "assault weapons", im 99% sure of it

No President is gonna take away your guns Rambo, don't worry.btaylor2404

What happens if anti-gun candidate gets into office? He pushes for bills that is inherently anti-gun and would violate our second amendment rights. How would he accomplish his goal? Of course, since he is the president he would appoint anti-gun supreme court justice. There are plenty of anti-gun politicians in washington, however since Bush is not anti-gun, we are lucky.

No nation shall be secure and free if the citizens of a nation are disarmed.

It's happened to U.K., what do you think it won't happen here if we continue to scoff at things like this?

[QUOTE="Ultimate-Playa"]

He is NOT pro-second amendment

Sgt_Randall

he'll ban semi autos, an 'assualt' weapon ban, etc etc

is there any reason why an American citizen needs an assult weapon?

"Pro" 2nd amendment people only see what they want to see in it. Same as "Anti" 2nd Amendment. The 2nd amendment says "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"

I'm not saying "Ban guns" just saying that an average joe isn't a part of a well regulated militia

[QUOTE="Ultimate-Playa"]

He is NOT pro-second amendment

Sgt_Randall

he'll ban semi autos, an 'assualt' weapon ban, etc etc

Banning all guns doesn't solve the problem. The average person won't be able to get one easily while the gang members can still get them illegally from international countries and more Americans will be defenseless.

Imagine a classroom of 50 students. One gun, a lot of ammunition=a lot of deaths. But 50 students and 50 guns means that any crazy guy will know he will die before he can kill 10 people. Guns are already very easy to get, and I'm not saying to arm America, but more people should have guns to scare people.

[QUOTE="btaylor2404"]No President is gonna take away your guns Rambo, don't worry.Ultimate-Playa

What happens if anti-gun candidate gets into office? He pushes for bills that is inherently anti-gun and would violate our second amendment rights. How would he accomplish his goal? Of course, since he is the president he would appoint anti-gun supreme court justice. There are plenty of anti-gun politicians in washington, however since Bush is not anti-gun, we are lucky.

No nation shall be secure and free if the citizens of a nation are disarmed.

It's happened to U.K., what do you think it won't happen here if we continue to scoff at things like this?

He's not going to push anything banning handguns or guns used for hunting, it would never get through congress and would be struck down by the supreme court, the law is so clear on those guns being legal that nobody could ever pass anything like that ever.

Banning all guns doesn't solve the problem. The average person won't be able to get one easily while the gang members can still get them illegally from international countries and more Americans will be defenseless.

Imagine a classroom of 50 students. One gun, a lot of ammunition=a lot of deaths. But 50 students and 50 guns means that any crazy guy will know he will die before he can kill 10 people. Guns are already very easy to get, and I'm not saying to arm America, but more people should have guns to scare people.

RyuHayabusaX

[QUOTE="Sgt_Randall"][QUOTE="Ultimate-Playa"]

He is NOT pro-second amendment

Ring_of_fire

he'll ban semi autos, an 'assualt' weapon ban, etc etc

is there any reason why an American citizen needs an assult weapon?

A so called 'assault weapon' is a gun that looks scary. That's it.... It might have features like an evil cop-killing pistol grip, or a baby murdering teloscoping stock...nothing that makes it any worse than a hunting rifle (infact they are commonly used as) except for the fact it looks militaryish

besides most military rifles are in smaller calibers than hunting rifles anyway

[QUOTE="RyuHayabusaX"]

Banning all guns doesn't solve the problem. The average person won't be able to get one easily while the gang members can still get them illegally from international countries and more Americans will be defenseless.

Imagine a classroom of 50 students. One gun, a lot of ammunition=a lot of deaths. But 50 students and 50 guns means that any crazy guy will know he will die before he can kill 10 people. Guns are already very easy to get, and I'm not saying to arm America, but more people should have guns to scare people.

yoshi-lnex

I feel that most good people should have a gun because it's just not right when some criminal can do anything he wants just because he has some piece of metal in his hand. Obama would be taking guns away from good people, the bad people will still get them, and that's what he needs to realize.

[QUOTE="Ultimate-Playa"]

[QUOTE="btaylor2404"]No President is gonna take away your guns Rambo, don't worry.yoshi-lnex

What happens if anti-gun candidate gets into office? He pushes for bills that is inherently anti-gun and would violate our second amendment rights. How would he accomplish his goal? Of course, since he is the president he would appoint anti-gun supreme court justice. There are plenty of anti-gun politicians in washington, however since Bush is not anti-gun, we are lucky.

No nation shall be secure and free if the citizens of a nation are disarmed.

It's happened to U.K., what do you think it won't happen here if we continue to scoff at things like this?

He's not going to push anything banning handguns or guns used for hunting, it would never get through congress and would be struck down by the supreme court, the law is so clear on those guns being legal that nobody could ever pass anything like that ever.

That argument is full of fallacy, United Kingdoms banned guns and it didn't do anything. In fact, in England their crime rate has soared, not the opposite.

People being disarmed will make easier for criminals to take advantage of the gun ban and commit crimes.

[QUOTE="yoshi-lnex"][QUOTE="Ultimate-Playa"]

[QUOTE="btaylor2404"]No President is gonna take away your guns Rambo, don't worry.Ultimate-Playa

What happens if anti-gun candidate gets into office? He pushes for bills that is inherently anti-gun and would violate our second amendment rights. How would he accomplish his goal? Of course, since he is the president he would appoint anti-gun supreme court justice. There are plenty of anti-gun politicians in washington, however since Bush is not anti-gun, we are lucky.

No nation shall be secure and free if the citizens of a nation are disarmed.

It's happened to U.K., what do you think it won't happen here if we continue to scoff at things like this?

He's not going to push anything banning handguns or guns used for hunting, it would never get through congress and would be struck down by the supreme court, the law is so clear on those guns being legal that nobody could ever pass anything like that ever.

That argument is full of fallacy, United Kingdoms banned guns and it didn't do anything. In fact, in England their crime rate has soared, not the opposite.

People being disarmed equals an easier victim to take advantage of.

But UK isn't the same as the US, such as Japan isn't. What happens in one country doesn't mean another would be affected the same way

[QUOTE="yoshi-lnex"][QUOTE="Ultimate-Playa"]

[QUOTE="btaylor2404"]No President is gonna take away your guns Rambo, don't worry.Ultimate-Playa

What happens if anti-gun candidate gets into office? He pushes for bills that is inherently anti-gun and would violate our second amendment rights. How would he accomplish his goal? Of course, since he is the president he would appoint anti-gun supreme court justice. There are plenty of anti-gun politicians in washington, however since Bush is not anti-gun, we are lucky.

No nation shall be secure and free if the citizens of a nation are disarmed.

It's happened to U.K., what do you think it won't happen here if we continue to scoff at things like this?

He's not going to push anything banning handguns or guns used for hunting, it would never get through congress and would be struck down by the supreme court, the law is so clear on those guns being legal that nobody could ever pass anything like that ever.

That argument is full of fallacy, United Kingdoms banned guns and it didn't do anything. In fact, in England their crime rate has soared, not the opposite.

People being disarmed equals an easier victim to take advantage of.

[QUOTE="Ultimate-Playa"][QUOTE="yoshi-lnex"][QUOTE="Ultimate-Playa"]

[QUOTE="btaylor2404"]No President is gonna take away your guns Rambo, don't worry.Ring_of_fire

What happens if anti-gun candidate gets into office? He pushes for bills that is inherently anti-gun and would violate our second amendment rights. How would he accomplish his goal? Of course, since he is the president he would appoint anti-gun supreme court justice. There are plenty of anti-gun politicians in washington, however since Bush is not anti-gun, we are lucky.

No nation shall be secure and free if the citizens of a nation are disarmed.

It's happened to U.K., what do you think it won't happen here if we continue to scoff at things like this?

He's not going to push anything banning handguns or guns used for hunting, it would never get through congress and would be struck down by the supreme court, the law is so clear on those guns being legal that nobody could ever pass anything like that ever.

That argument is full of fallacy, United Kingdoms banned guns and it didn't do anything. In fact, in England their crime rate has soared, not the opposite.

People being disarmed equals an easier victim to take advantage of.

But UK isn't the same as the US, such as Japan isn't. What happens in one country doesn't mean another would be affected the same way

I'm sorry but UK and US demographics are awfully similar. I think there would be similar results.

[QUOTE="Ring_of_fire"][QUOTE="Ultimate-Playa"][QUOTE="yoshi-lnex"][QUOTE="Ultimate-Playa"]

[QUOTE="btaylor2404"]No President is gonna take away your guns Rambo, don't worry.Ultimate-Playa

What happens if anti-gun candidate gets into office? He pushes for bills that is inherently anti-gun and would violate our second amendment rights. How would he accomplish his goal? Of course, since he is the president he would appoint anti-gun supreme court justice. There are plenty of anti-gun politicians in washington, however since Bush is not anti-gun, we are lucky.

No nation shall be secure and free if the citizens of a nation are disarmed.

It's happened to U.K., what do you think it won't happen here if we continue to scoff at things like this?

He's not going to push anything banning handguns or guns used for hunting, it would never get through congress and would be struck down by the supreme court, the law is so clear on those guns being legal that nobody could ever pass anything like that ever.

That argument is full of fallacy, United Kingdoms banned guns and it didn't do anything. In fact, in England their crime rate has soared, not the opposite.

People being disarmed equals an easier victim to take advantage of.

But UK isn't the same as the US, such as Japan isn't. What happens in one country doesn't mean another would be affected the same way

I'm sorry but UK and US demographics are awfully similar. I think there would be similar results.

Similar=/=same. And beiing similar demographically does not mean has same results

actually a few countries that have banned guns like japan have some of the lowest crime rates in the world.

He's not going to push anything banning handguns or guns used for hunting, it would never get through congress and would be struck down by the supreme court, the law is so clear on those guns being legal that nobody could ever pass anything like that ever.

yoshi-lnex

I don't think Japan's low crime rate has anything to do with the gun laws...........

Didn't the handgun law that was ruled on in the SC only get overturned by 1 vote?

And for the record, while Obama doesn't want to outlaw handguns, he does not support the right to carry a concealed weapon.

Obama is the best candidate I have seen in decades. It really piss me off seeing peoples pushing McCain campaign because they are closed to the democratic party.

I hate that crap, peoples are sticking to their customs instead of actually giving one of the biggest hope ofamerican politic a chance. These peoples are the trash that make politic fail.

Like I said before, peoples don't have a clue for who they vote for, but politicians know who vote for them.

Redgarl

[QUOTE="Ultimate-Playa"][QUOTE="Ring_of_fire"][QUOTE="Ultimate-Playa"][QUOTE="yoshi-lnex"][QUOTE="Ultimate-Playa"]

[QUOTE="btaylor2404"]No President is gonna take away your guns Rambo, don't worry.Ring_of_fire

What happens if anti-gun candidate gets into office? He pushes for bills that is inherently anti-gun and would violate our second amendment rights. How would he accomplish his goal? Of course, since he is the president he would appoint anti-gun supreme court justice. There are plenty of anti-gun politicians in washington, however since Bush is not anti-gun, we are lucky.

No nation shall be secure and free if the citizens of a nation are disarmed.

It's happened to U.K., what do you think it won't happen here if we continue to scoff at things like this?

He's not going to push anything banning handguns or guns used for hunting, it would never get through congress and would be struck down by the supreme court, the law is so clear on those guns being legal that nobody could ever pass anything like that ever.

That argument is full of fallacy, United Kingdoms banned guns and it didn't do anything. In fact, in England their crime rate has soared, not the opposite.

People being disarmed equals an easier victim to take advantage of.

But UK isn't the same as the US, such as Japan isn't. What happens in one country doesn't mean another would be affected the same way

I'm sorry but UK and US demographics are awfully similar. I think there would be similar results.

Similar=/=same. And beiing similar demographically does not mean has same results

True, but the US has a history of being pro-gun. It's written in the gosh darn consitution. To me, that says that if we banned guns there would already be many gun nuts (not the good kind, the psycho kind) with guns ready to unload upon the now defenseless citizens. Also, gun control puts too much power in the hands of the government. I don't get why people don't understand that government having power is BAD.

No, I support presidential candidates based on experience and political views. Obama has no experience, thats a fact, and his views are radical.

bungie93

So what have experience and strong conservative views brought us over the past 8 years? The worst presidental adminitration in American history.

[QUOTE="bungie93"]

No, I support presidential candidates based on experience and political views. Obama has no experience, thats a fact, and his views are radical.

laughingman42

So what have experience and strong conservative views brought us over the past 8 years? The worst presidental adminitration in American history.

I can't vote yet, So I don't care...DJ_Novakain

[QUOTE="laughingman42"][QUOTE="bungie93"]

No, I support presidential candidates based on experience and political views. Obama has no experience, thats a fact, and his views are radical.

k04sm02

So what have experience and strong conservative views brought us over the past 8 years? The worst presidental adminitration in American history.

I dont know about the worst possible but he would probably be pretty freaking terrible. just cant beleive a workd thathe says because he seems to change his views on things when it favors him.

On a note about off shore drilling. It would take years (like 15 plus) to have any significant impact on oil prices, it isnt even really nessisary because of the haynesville shale in northern louisiana which is one of the largest natural gas field finds in history. It is estimated to contain anywhere from 7.5 to 20 TRILLION cubic feet of natural gas. The country would be set for a while (we would still have to have oil for cars but besides that we would be fine)

[QUOTE="DJ_Novakain"]I can't vote yet, So I don't care...DivergeUnify

[QUOTE="DivergeUnify"][QUOTE="DJ_Novakain"]I can't vote yet, So I don't care...DJ_Novakain

[QUOTE="DJ_Novakain"][QUOTE="DivergeUnify"][QUOTE="DJ_Novakain"]I can't vote yet, So I don't care...DivergeUnify

Yes, it does. There isnt anything I can do to change the outcome of an election I can't vote in, and it certainly won't affect my ability to vote in the next election. Grades do affect your ability to get into a good college, though. Your analogy sucks...DJ_Novakain

[QUOTE="DJ_Novakain"]Yes, it does. There isnt anything I can do to change the outcome of an election I can't vote in, and it certainly won't affect my ability to vote in the next election. Grades do affect your ability to get into a good college, though. Your analogy sucks...DivergeUnify

[QUOTE="DivergeUnify"][QUOTE="DJ_Novakain"]Yes, it does. There isnt anything I can do to change the outcome of an election I can't vote in, and it certainly won't affect my ability to vote in the next election. Grades do affect your ability to get into a good college, though. Your analogy sucks...DJ_Novakain

If A, then B

If ( can't get into college right away) then ( it's not worth studying)

If ( I'm not old enough to vote) then ( it's not worth learning about politics)

I did not say If A and B, then C

If (I'm not old enough to vote, so I don't care then it is still possible for me to learn in the future)

If (I can't get into College now) and (I don't vote) then (I can never get into college)

[QUOTE="DJ_Novakain"][QUOTE="DivergeUnify"][QUOTE="DJ_Novakain"]Yes, it does. There isnt anything I can do to change the outcome of an election I can't vote in, and it certainly won't affect my ability to vote in the next election. Grades do affect your ability to get into a good college, though. Your analogy sucks...DivergeUnify

But studying will have a later effect on my ability to do well on college. I don't need to follow an election I can't vote in to vote in the next one...DJ_Novakain

[QUOTE="DJ_Novakain"]But studying will have a later effect on my ability to do well on college. I don't need to follow an election I can't vote in to vote in the next one...DivergeUnify

[QUOTE="DivergeUnify"][QUOTE="DJ_Novakain"]But studying will have a later effect on my ability to do well on college. I don't need to follow an election I can't vote in to vote in the next one...DJ_Novakain

[QUOTE="DJ_Novakain"][QUOTE="DivergeUnify"][QUOTE="DJ_Novakain"]But studying will have a later effect on my ability to do well on college. I don't need to follow an election I can't vote in to vote in the next one...DivergeUnify

quit fighting like little 4th graders

[QUOTE="DivergeUnify"][QUOTE="DJ_Novakain"][QUOTE="DivergeUnify"][QUOTE="DJ_Novakain"]But studying will have a later effect on my ability to do well on college. I don't need to follow an election I can't vote in to vote in the next one...lilburtonboy748

quit fighting like little 4th graders

Sounds good, I hate guns. Canadians don't understand why Americans are so gun liberated. Toriko42

I agree.

quit fighting like little 4th graders

DJ_Novakain

And McCain has agreed with Bush's policies over 95% of the time. Maverick? No. Straight Talk Express? Please. The man is dishonest, negative, and unfit to be President. The lower and middle class voters that choose McCain will be voting against their own self interest. Flip Flop/lies/confusion on : Bush tax cuts Troop withdrawal timeline Offshore oil drilling affirmative action GI Bill public speaking outside the US during the campaign not to mention he's against equal pay for women, doesn't know that the surge was after the anbar awakening, thinks czechoslovakia exists, and believes there to be a border between iraq and pakistan. i could go all day on how McCain would be the worst possible President we could have. k04sm02

While half the stuff you said didn't make any sense, can you please explain this one:

He's against equal pay for women.

Have any link(s) to unfair wages?

Link(s) to what McCain said?