| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
But... |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gregory Morris, 9/29/08 12:36:37 pm |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bitter points to an article in the Richmond Times-Dispatch which criticizes Obama on his supposed support of the Second Amendment.
The recent NRA ads are big and loud. They are not incorrect, although they do seem somewhat inflated. I understand that is what you do in a political campaign. The NRA has to make sure that the widest group of gun owners understands Obama's gun-control history, and disagrees with it.
On the other hand, those of us who don't need the preaching, as we are part of the choir, can look past the rhetoric of both sides. It is a fact that even if you erased 100% of Obama's anti-gun history and accept his current claims, he is still not a friend of the Second Amendment.
He still supports bans on popular sporting and defensive firearms (he just calls them something else.)
He is still under the false assumption that the Second Amendment has something to do with hunting (the ability to hunt is a happy byproduct of our Right to Keep and Bear Arms.)
He still supports limiting the rights of people based on where they live (the Second Amendment says the same thing in Chicago, IL as it does in Petersburg, WV.)
Finally, and most importantly, he absolutely refuses to support the restoration of rights to those who have been deprived (such as in DC and Chicago.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | [Comments are closed after a month.] |
| | < "U.S. Citizenship" | | "QoTD: Embarrassing VPs" > |
|
|
|
|
