Yikes, any other conservatives scared out there?.... (Page 4)

I see that as no different than some on the far right wanting to start a revolution.  Like Trump?  could that by why they are buying up the guns?

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20121107002555AALONj7

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/trump-calls-for-revolution-after-obama-win-we-are-in-serious-and-unprecedented-trouble-like-never-before/

What is this dueling linkys?

He changed our position on the UN arms treaty that would seek to control small arms. Luckily nothing happened this year, but in a second term who is to say what would happen.

Then there was the F&F debacle. What could possibly have been the purpose of that mess?

crowny2 - 2012-11-07 3:13 PM

trinnas - 2012-11-07 2:08 PM

crowny2 - 2012-11-07 3:07 PM

TriRSquared - 2012-11-07 2:00 PM

jmk-brooklyn - 2012-11-07 2:56 PM

crowny2 - 2012-11-07 1:46 PM

TriRSquared - 2012-11-07 1:44 PM

crowny2 - 2012-11-07 2:16 PM

TriRSquared - 2012-11-07 1:09 PM The stock market may be down but the gun market is up.  I am watching prices of ARs go up every 20 mins.  And they are selling out of stock quickly.

The gun market has been up the entire Obama presidency.  Seriously.  This is nothing new.

Oh I know. Ruger is up 600% over 4 years ago. S&W like 260%.  But I have been watching prices on a popular gun site that changes them every 20 mins.  This AM they started creeping up and up and up.  And the stock is depleting faster than I've ever seen it.

I expected it.  Just amazing to see it happen in real time. And of course I had to help stimulate the economy by adding a few sales

Which I really can't understand.  Individuals keep claiming "Obama is coming for our guns" and he has done absolutel NOTHING to show that he is.  Talk about paranoia. (And I don't mean you)

It’s not paranoia, it’s marketing.

Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they are not out to get you.

And it's not the government many are afraid of... it's the populous.

http://twitchy.com/2012/11/02/as-election-day-nears-obama-supporters-step-up-riot-threats/

I see that as no different than some on the far right wanting to start a revolution.  Like Trump?  could that by why they are buying up the guns?

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20121107002555AALONj7

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/trump-calls-for-revolution-after-obama-win-we-are-in-serious-and-unprecedented-trouble-like-never-before/

What is this dueling linkys?

Yeah, well I am still waiting for you to whip out the big guns!

Bit more info on your first statement.

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/06/still-no-international-gun-ban-treaty/

http://www.politifact.com/georgia/statements/2012/aug/10/paul-broun/broun-un-treaty-likely-lead-international-gun-regi/

And something that is pretty pro-gun leaning - http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/07/robert-farago/u-n-arms-trade-treaty-still-not-a-u-s-gun-grab/

In other words, much ado about nothing.

Wait, did you just like to a Yahoo Answers page and a Blaze article?  Come on, even I won't stoop that low...

I dislike all people regardless of their political affiliations. I don't want part of a revolution but if one happens I want to be able to make sure I'm in a position of power.  You know, like the Governor in the Walking Dead

LOL!   Hey, if Breitbart can be thrown about without a care in other threads, I'm throwing up The Blaze.   

And trust me, if there is a revolution, I'm well stocked too.  Including silent weaponry (read bow and arrows). 

I thought you meant beans.

That can be ammo too. 

I wonder if either the Romney or Obama had any of their stock in their portfolios.

]

]

Which I really can't understand.  Individuals keep claiming "Obama is coming for our guns" and he has done absolutel NOTHING to show that he is.  Talk about paranoia. (And I don't mean you)

He changed our position on the UN arms treaty that would seek to control small arms. Luckily nothing happened this year, but in a second term who is to say what would happen.

Then there was the F&F debacle. What could possibly have been the purpose of that mess?

The UN arms treaty is very scary, read up people. The next four years will be full of unhappy surprises.

Patsy

woah wait what... I thought we were the only side that got guns...

I agree he hasn't done anything to this point.  My thought is that it's one of those untouchable issues kind of like the right overthrowing Roe v. Wade.  Even if they could they never would due to the political ramifications.

However, if the political climate continues to shift to the point that the political ramifications become less significant then I feel very strongly Obama (and many dems) would ban all guns if they could get away with it.  Much in the way many Republicans would ban Roe v. Wade if they could get away with it politically.

That being said, I wouldn't be shocked to see an assault weapons ban at least try to get tagged onto some legislation as a bargaining chip in the next few years.  So, I'm planning to pick up a few rifles in the near future (just in case) 

Find me one quote from President Obama where he mentions a desire to "ban all guns."  It's incredibly misleading to imply President Obama believes anything close to that idea.  (but your local gunshop owner isn't stupid...repeat that lie enough and he'll be selling product like hotcakes!)  To compare that to Republicans (including their latest presidential nominee) who are on record stating they would be glad to see Roe v. Wade overturned, well, I think everyone can see it's apples and oranges.

btw, how would overturning Roe v. Wade be that difficult?  Step one, win the presidency.  Step two, nominate conservative pro-life justice nominees.  I was reading an article a few weeks back that described the process.  It's not unrealistic.  It can happen with a conservative enough SC.  Thank goodness President Obama won re-election.  We should be getting one, maybe two more new non-conservative justices in the next 4 years.

I end up in touch with a lot of people stocking up on guns and ammo.  Maybe 1 out of 50 (in my experience) talks of being worried about "gun bans".  What I hear overwhelmingly is people wanting to be able to protect themselves during a time of social unrest, which they feel is on the way.  I think that's mostly from people without much experience with "social unrest".  

I suppose we could find ourselves in a period of riots and such, but the people doing the rioting will burn and loot their own neighborhoods, just like always.  Nobody ventures too far from home during those times.

The craziest part of that deal is that the neighborhoods that will burn and fall will be those small patches of Blue you see in each state.....the inner cities with the most population, the ones who carried this election.  How's that for irony?

I'm pro-gun, but I don't see the need for a personal arsenal.

OK.  Step one (relatively easy, but not for Romeny apparently)

Step 2: maybe not so easy.  Gotta wait for them to retire or die...

Step 2.5: Now you have to get your pro-life justices through the vetting process.  You think the left would just allow a President to put a staunch pro-lifer on the court?

Step 3: You missed this one.  You need to have a new case brought up through the court system that would make abortions illegal for reasons OTHER than those in Roe v Wade.  RvW has been settled.  It's done.  You would have to have a different claim.  That case would have to make it's way through all the lower courts and finally up to the SC.  That could EASILY take 4+ years depending on the circumstances.

As for getting a more liberal SC I don't see it.  next to go is Ginsberg (a push).  Then maybe Scalia (that would be a net + for the left).  Then Bryer (again a push).  Kennedy is the swing vote social that a tie as well.

So maybe +1 in this term.  Maybe... Scalia is 4 years younger than Ginsberg anyway.

If anything I could see Ginsberg and Bryer stepping down so Obama can put in two younger liberal judges so they will not get replaced if a Republican wins in 2016.  A net push.

Besides... why the bloody hell do judges have partisan connections?  But that's another topic altogether.

Exactly. I thought the justices were suppose to interpret the constitution,
not use it to legislate.

Abortion ought to be a states' rights issue, just as the death penalty is.

Go read Blackmun's opinion for the court and Rehnquist's dissent in Roe
and tell me which is more well argued and consistent within the context of the constitution. 
Roe is as bad a court opinion as was Dred Scott, and just as divisive. 

Yeah... no one can afford the gas to drive somewhere else to riot.  :/