what would you do if they really came to take away our firearms?

[Mark]

Then you are no doubt familiar with:

and it goes on to say
Reader's digest condensed version: congress picks out next president, not popular vote. What leads you to think that a Democratic-controlled congress will elect anyone other than a Democrat president in 2008?

Don't read me wrong. I think Ron Paul is an excellent alternative to our queen-apparent Hillary. But I seriously doubt he (or Fred Thompson, much less any independent) has a greater chance at the white house than a sparrow trying to fly to the moon while tied to a cinder block.

It's been my observation that presidential elections generally follow party lines in congress. After all, that's one issue the primaries are supposed to resolve. Until government officials are elected by popular vote, we're all spectators.

Sad but true. Yet MOST states (not all tho) have laws on the books that say that their electors must vote the way that the people of there state voted.

[gf45acp]

A good part of the problem is that there is no way to make the parties put forth candidates that are for the people and the constitution. To get into almost any office you have to have already sold your soul to the established powers. There are no viable candidates that have not done this. The rest have no chance of winning, and voting for them is not going to do anything. As long as the sitting politicians can buy votes with so called entitlement programs the people that they buy off will continue to put them in office. And most people don't care as long as they are taken care of and entertained by the nanny state.

[Shawn.L]

A good part of the problem is that there is no way to make the parties put forth candidates that are for the people and the constitution. To get into almost any office you have to have already sold your soul to the established powers. There are no viable candidates that have not done this. The rest have no chance of winning, and voting for them is not going to do anything. As long as the sitting politicians can buy votes with so called entitlement programs the people that they buy off will continue to put them in office. And most people don't care as long as they are taken care of and entertained by the nanny state.

This is a self-fulfilling prophecy. As long as people perpetuate the lie that a vote can be wasted we will have awful representation. No vote that sits well with my concience is wasted. The "nanny state" cannot take care of people forever, to give to some they must take from many and you can only step on people for so long. I vote my concience.

[gf45acp]

It begs the question of "can the system be changed from within the system?" And for good measure, how many votes end up counted as they are voted when done on machines with no way to verify how a vote registers? People who use computers know that they will spit out anything they are programmed to. Everyone should always do as their mind and soul tells them. Let us hope that this will turn out well, and things do not end up in the handbasket.

[Broomhandle]

A good part of the problem is that there is no way to make the parties put forth candidates that are for the people and the constitution. To get into almost any office you have to have already sold your soul to the established powers. There are no viable candidates that have not done this. The rest have no chance of winning, and voting for them is not going to do anything. As long as the sitting politicians can buy votes with so called entitlement programs the people that they buy off will continue to put them in office. And most people don't care as long as they are taken care of and entertained by the nanny state.

I disagree. I posted why I think Ron Paul can win the general election, especially against Clinton:
http://www.pafoa.org/forum/national-...tml#post109792

If you agree with even 10 percent of my reasoning then please consider getting in on the Nov 5 (Guy Fawkes Day) mass donation. Consider spending the price of a case of ammo to try and head off the unthinkable...

[Guns4Fun]

I would never say in an open forum what "I" would do. I don't see it happening any time soon but then again, i never thought we'd have politicians that would want to give drivers licencse to illegals. When they go to issue them the drivers licence, they should have a bus waiting to take them back home.

You never know though, it is amazing the rights we are ready to give up in the name of terror these days. If you have any doubts about how things could / might go down read Matthew Bracken's Enemies Foreign and Domestic. For me, it was pretty amazing and caused me to think a great deal more about things. I know, the sky is falling and tinfoil hat and all that but it did make me think.

[45reloader]

I would go on a long trip to the mountains and relax.

[jahwarrior72]

guns? what guns? i thought this was an airsoft forum....

[archangel689]

OK, so D-Fens has this link on his signature line:

. http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07119/781629-374.stm

It is a scary proposal, I want to know, really, what would you do?

FIRSTLY this has already been done once before that I know of. BY ADOLF HITLER. Why does he leave out shooting us with our own weapons? Hitler did that too.

Some one should point that out to this numbnuts.

The mere debate of such a thing in the house or senate would be a huge red flag. By the time it was a executed I would already be gone.

[Shawn.L]

wow, holy old-thread batman

once I was n00b enough to ask a question like this on teh enternets......lol.....