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