Article

2009-02-28 Home Front: Politix

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Fred 2009-02-28 11:57|| || Front Page|| [9 views ] Top

#1 "I have strong principles, that I will change often"

Posted by Frank G 2009-02-28 13:09|| 2009-02-28 13:09|| Front Page Top

#2 As a representative of an upstate district she 'represented' their position by voting in favor of gun owner rights. Now she is a Senator and 'represents' the whole state, and as a whole the state opposes gun owner rights, so that's how she votes. Is she supposed to vote her personal preferences or to vote representing the preferences of her constituency? It is a fundamental question of how our system works.

Posted by Glenmore">Glenmore 2009-02-28 13:41|| 2009-02-28 13:41|| Front Page Top

#3 She swore an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. THAT is what should guide her in how she votes.

Posted by Gleath Henbane9014 2009-02-28 16:50|| 2009-02-28 16:50|| Front Page Top

#4 as GH9014, either she's reversed her lifelong take on the Constitutional protections of the 2nd amendment, and the slippery slope, or she's an opportunistic political whore. It would be different if she said: "I support gun ownership, but my mind could be changed if polls told me otherwise to get reelected". At least then, she would be truthful. But then she wouldn't be a Democrat, would she?

Posted by Frank G 2009-02-28 17:00|| 2009-02-28 17:00|| Front Page Top

#5 Gun owners as a group cannot be content to hold a static defense on gun rights. The have to be assertive in improving and increasing their rights.

For example, if a group of parents created a gun club for children, I have no doubts that the anti-gunners would accuse them of "child abuse", and try to stop it. This is an outgrowth of schools having a zero tolerance policy to even mentioning guns--which should also be challenged.

Another example would be to encourage judges to *require* training and the carrying of weapons in public by people who are at risk for violence, especially abused women. There is incredible demand for protection for such women, far beyond the ability of the authorities to provide. Therefore, they must protect themselves. A court order to be armed is an effective "nudge" to get them to do this.

Posted by Anonymoose 2009-02-28 17:58|| 2009-02-28 17:58|| Front Page Top

23:58 49 Pan
23:07 Pappy
23:00 whatadeal
22:57 Pappy
22:51 whatadeal
22:48 Pappy
22:41 Pappy
22:25 Procopius2k
22:24 Procopius2k
22:18 Zhang Fei
22:18 Ming the Merciless
22:09 phil_b
21:40 Rex Mundi
21:38 Zhang Fei
21:33 crosspatch
21:00 3dc
20:36 ed
20:27 lotp
20:21 rabid whitetail
19:55 Glenmore
19:45 Nimble Spemble
19:42 Rambler in Virginia
19:36 Eohippus Glugum8056
19:15 Large Snerong7311