This election, users of this site and our gun rights.

Some of you may have noticed a member caught a temporary ban and read the thread that precipitated said ban. If you don't know what I'm talking about, keep reading and you'll get the gist.

PAFOA is an advocacy site for the right to keep and bear arms. You can read about that here so there's no misunderstanding about purpose. As an advocacy site, it would be reasonable to assume that advocating for anything that runs contrary to the purpose of PAFOA would not be welcome here. With that stated, Hillary Clinton is widely regarded as the most dangerous anti-gun candidate to run for POTUS. She has made numerous statements that indicate she's in favor of Australian type confiscation, bans on so called assault weapons, magazine restrictions, universal background checks, expanding criteria for the denial of 2A rights, universal registration, databases, expanded authority of BATFE and EOs to circumvent Congress to further her goals. She also believes SCOTUS was wrong in the Heller decision declaring the 2A an individual right.

As you might imagine, advocacy for HRC is not welcome here--not in the least. If you advocate for HRC you are actively working against the purpose of PAFOA. You're free to do that but not here. Any more than you'd be welcome to advocate for ISIS on a JDL site. Before anyone yells about freedom of speech, understand that only government can curtail your 1st Amendment rights. This isn't a government website, it's a privately owned website with a singular purpose and a fairly robust and freewheeling discussion forum. That doesn't mean anything goes, especially using this site to actively work against this site's mission.

If you're voting for HRC, that's your business. Consider it don't ask, don't tell. Expect derision if you state your alternative voting habits. Expect to be banned if you advocate for your alternative voting habits and try to sell it to others. HRC is in no way an acceptable candidate for those that believe in a strong defense of the right to keep and bear arms.

UJ

Bravo ! I second that emotion !

He's voting for hillary rottenham clinton? How can anybody own a firearm,
let alone have any respect for the constitution, (if he does) and vote for someone like her/it.

Well that's just whacked.

America is a land of diverse viewpoints, but private sites don't have to give equal time to them all, any more than I can call up CBS and demand 30 minutes to rebut their false claims about guns. It's their company, they pretend to be journalists, but they get to exclude opposing views.

We don't even pretend to be journalists here. PAFOA, as noted above, is an advocacy organization with a clearly-articulated pro-gun rights viewpoint, so Hillary propagandists are about as welcome as the NRA at the DNC convention. Hillary will, if given the chance, stack the Court to nullify the 2nd Amendment, and your grandkids will read about private gun ownership the way British kids do today, as a bizarre historical anachronism.

Bout time! Ban the trolls!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arjohnson

Bout time! Ban the trolls!

---

If we ban all the opposition, this site will get awfully dull.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bogey1

If we ban all the opposition, this site will get awfully dull.

---

We have enough disagreements amongst ourselves, don't need Hillary schills adding to the fire.

7.5 years of this BS. I can handle dull. ;)

that user in particular throwing sudden support behind that particular political candidate shocks me to no end

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bogey1

He's voting for hillary rottenham clinton? How can anybody own a firearm,
let alone have any respect for the constitution, (if he does) and vote for someone like her/it.

Well that's just whacked.

---

^^^^^^And that's just a fact. ^^^^^^