# Obama Begins Covert Attack on Second Amendment



## ShineRunner (Sep 11, 2002)

Here is and article that I read this morning. Although the guy says he is not 100% on this, it did come from a reliable source and you know the old addage "if there is smoke". Don't think for a minute that this adminasstration doesn't have plans to get your/our guns!!! :******:

http://americanvision.org/2010/post/obama-begins-covert-attack-on-second-amendment/


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

When our old (young in age) partisan liberal friend said we need not worry anymore because of the decision made by the Supreme Court he severely lacked imagination. Perhaps it was simply an inability to think realistically ie. non partisan, non socialist, non Marxist. Unfortunately Obama does not lack imagination. 
Last election proved that our forefathers who thought the right to vote should include ownership of property were right. Also, after the last election I would seriously consider a voting age requirement of 50 years old (tongue in cheek).   OK, let spears be thrown.


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

A person should have to pass a test to vote and have proof of paying taxes, or proof of a steady job. Keep the voting age where it's at, because if you can die for your country you should have a say in who is running it.


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

It is rather ironic that all the so called conservatives on this site rave up and down about how Obama is a socialist, yet you two advocate eliminaiting certain groups from voting......or to put it another way, to make our elected officials be chosen by fewer people. Or to narrow it down even further....less democracy.

Again, quite ironic.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Gooseguy10 said:


> It is rather ironic that all the so called conservatives on this site rave up and down about how Obama is a socialist, yet you two advocate eliminaiting certain groups from voting......or to put it another way, to make our elected officials be chosen by fewer people. Or to narrow it down even further....less democracy.
> 
> Again, quite ironic.


Good for you. You were able to figure out who the freeloaders are. You see the framers of this nation debated a long time if everyone should vote or if only property owners should vote. You can still go back and find records of those debates. The ones in favor of only property owners voting were worried that politicians with no principles would vote wealth to those who contributed nothing to gain power. Abra cadabra and we have liberals. They were right. The liberals started trying to have the "big tent". The problem is that tent now houses the odd balls, the perverts, and the lazy. It's not the democrat party that I associated myself with in the 1970's, but I seen it going down the drain and abandon ship. 
As for the age group and since you are evidently liberal I'll give you a second chance to try understand this: 


> 50 years old (tongue in cheek).


----------



## blhunter3 (May 5, 2007)

So what's wrong with making someone prove that they have knowledge to vote? Or to prove that they are tax paying citizens?


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

well now, for one thing, that would not be "fair" to all the illegal aliens waiting for their status to change... :eyeroll: :eyeroll: 
just think, soon the ballots will have a Spanish section for those that can't speak or read English....think not? i will make a wager, it is coming down to a precinct near you soon!........next, traffic signs in Spanish!


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

Plainsman said:


> Also, after the last election I would seriously consider a voting age requirement of 50 years old (tongue in cheek).   OK, let spears be thrown.


How 'bout just an IQ of at least 50! 

Plenty of "not to bright" 50somethings out there too.

Thats right gooseguy, im discriminating against dumb people.


----------



## MossyMO (Feb 12, 2004)

"It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliance with any portion of the foreign world." 
- George Washington, From his Farewell Address to the People of the United States



Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law in St. Paul, Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning last November's Presidential election: 
•	Number of States won by: Obama: 19 McCain: 29 
•	Square miles of land won by: Obama: 580,000 McCain: 2,427,000 
•	Population of counties won by: Obama: 127 million McCain: 143 million 
•	Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Obama: 13.2 McCain: 2.1

Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory McCain won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of the country.

Obama territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in low income tenements and living off various forms of government welfare..."

Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase.

If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million criminal invaders called illegals - and they vote - then we can say goodbye to the USA in fewer than five years.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Mossy, that suggests the liberals are appealing to the freeloading parasites doesn't it? 

BBJ, I agree with you on the IQ test and that's not prejudice. I am all for the handicap, mental and physical, but we don't send 50 IQ to the moon do we. Is that prejudice, or common sense? I suppose every idiot out there will be offended, but that's just to bad. :eyeroll:


----------



## huntin1 (Nov 14, 2003)

Personally, I see nothing wrong with requiring property ownership to be able to vote, or at least prove that you are a citizen, have a job and contribute to society.

This nation is in deep..........................










huntin1


----------



## Robert A. Langager (Feb 22, 2002)

Hmm, that is strange. I thought those stats from Dr. Olson of Hamline were made up about the 2000 election.

http://law.hamline.edu/node/784



> DISCLAIMER: There are a series of e-mails floating around the internet dealing with the 2008 Obama/McCain election and the 2000 Bush/Gore election, remarks of a Scottish philosopher named Alexander Tyler, suicide rates, or ANYTHING ELSE. I did not author any part of either email. I've been trying to kill this falacy for nearly 10 years. I didn't have any part of it in 2000 and I still have no part of the email in regards to the 2008 election. For details see: http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/tyler.asp.


http://www.snopes.com/politics/ballot/athenian.asp


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

That could be, but lets not forget that treaty Obama and Hillary wanted to make with Mexico. They have also tried to give our rights away to the United Nations. It's best to keep our eyes on these people, because they truly do want our firearms, and that's not just imagination or paranoia. That is their track record. It's also why many things that are not fact resemble truth and suck people in. Two three more of these non factual articles and people will begin to pay less attention. That is also dangerous. 
Those bricks that were getting thrown through democrat congressman's windows turned out to be fellow democrats trying to make the Tea Party look bad. I wouldn't put it past liberals to start rumors on firearms. All these things work like the story of the little boy crying wolf that our mothers told us to teach us not to lie.


----------



## zogman (Mar 20, 2002)

Robert, still drinking the snopes :koolaid: 
:rollin:

Glad to see you still check in on us oke: There is hope for you yet :thumb:


----------

