Are Democrats finally starting to get it...?

[bd]

Originally Posted by Captain Ray

I just don't buy it... and neither will the Democrats base. The loony left are smart enough to know their candidates don't mean it, and the middle of the roaders (at least some) will be gullible enough to think that they do.

It's just a trick.

Raymond

Sounds like what happened in the last 2 elections.

bd

[NewXD40fun]

Originally Posted by retired

bd, what type of gun laws are "necessary" for a citizen of NYC compared to one living in Montana?

Wow, at least some of you recognized bd’s liberalspeak.

Liberals always talk of ‘moving toward the middle’, why? Because it sounds sooooo gooood to the ignorant. The Liberal/Democrats ALWAYS pretends to compromise their liberal, gun-control roots as election time rolls around. They do the fake right; run left routine at every single election.

Notice how bd say’s that he decides what gun laws are good for you depending on where you live, does anyone want a liberal to tell us what the right to bear arms means, or what is “necessary” gun control, or you can own what depending on where you live?

Remember how John Kerry pretended he was a friend of hunters? Liberals like to appeal to hunters so they appear to be gun rights advocates to the country hicks of the Midwest and west while still passing gun control laws in cities to control evil handguns and assault rifles.

Do you want a liberal telling us what “common sense” is like bd said? We will all end up like San Francisco if we start believing that Democrats will change their liberal, anti-gun rights policy.



Tom

[SLCDave]

IT'S A TRAP!!!

[NewXD40fun]

The Liberals/Democrats think we are stupid and beneath them. They prove it everytime they speak.





Tom

[bd]

Originally Posted by NewXD40fun

Tom

Why don't you answer the question retired posed then??????

Let's hear the answer from your point of view instead of ranting about my answer.

You answer the question.


NewXD40fun,

What type of gun laws are "necessary" for a citizen of NYC compared to one living in Montana?



bd

[bd]

Originally Posted by NewXD40fun

The Liberals/Democrats think we are stupid and beneath them. They prove it everytime they speak.


Tom

No , not all, but yes you prove it when you speak.

bd

[mgeoffriau]

Seems to me the answer is rather self-evident:

Guns should not be sold to felons or to the mentally disturbed. Anyone else has a right to own and carry a firearm. NYC or Montana.

Maybe NYC's crime rate wouldn't have gotten so bad in the first place if a few more citizens were open-carrying, and a lot more carrying concealed.

[NewXD40fun]

Originally Posted by bd

Why don't you answer the question retired posed then??????
Let's hear the answer from your point of view instead of ranting about my answer.
You answer the question.
NewXD40fun,

What type of gun laws are "necessary" for a citizen of NYC compared to one living in Montana?

I thought you were the holier-than-thou, almighty defender of the Constitution?
You keep using the words of the Constitution to justify your false attacks on the President.

And now you want to run away from your liberalspeak, anti-Second Amendment rights statement:

Originally Posted by bd

Do you think it would be appropriate for New York City in this day and age to approve open carry?

Do you think open carry should be restricted in Montana because it's illegal in NYC?

Like I said it's just practical common sense. It's a big old country we have. There are just some things that are not a "one size fits all" with the diverse population in the United States.

Which part of our "DIVERSE POPULATION" do you and your fellow Liberals feel should have restricted gun rights?


The truth has exposed your anti-gun rights liberalsim again bd, straight out of your own mouth.




Tom

[bd]

Originally Posted by mgeoffriau

Seems to me the answer is rather self-evident:

Guns should not be sold to felons or to the mentally disturbed. Anyone else has a right to own and carry a firearm. NYC or Montana.

Maybe NYC's crime rate wouldn't have gotten so bad in the first place if a few more citizens were open-carrying, and a lot more carrying concealed.

So it would be OK with you if the "Bloods", the "Crips", MS-13 and any other of the innumerable gang members in New York City had the same right to open carry as a rancher in Montana? Just strap their shotguns across their backs and head out down the street for a bagel?

..........

bd

[bd]

Originally Posted by NewXD40fun

I thought you were the holier-than-thou, almighty defender of the Constitution?
You keep using the words of the Constitution to justify your false attacks on the President.

And now you want to run away from your liberalspeak, anti-Second Amendment rights statement:

Which part of our "DIVERSE POPULATION" do you and your fellow Liberals feel should have restricted gun rights?


The truth has exposed your anti-gun rights liberalsim again bd, straight out of your own mouth.




Tom

I knew you wouldn't/couldn't answer the question.

The Yellow Elephant is proud of you.

bd