Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums

(This is the forums archive - If you want to get back to the main site simply click the banner above and you will be taken to our homepage.)

Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums is the Ultimate Online Resource for Owners and Enthusiasts of American Luxury Cars. Feel free to browse through our archive - but make sure you make it back to our main site - Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums

Cadillac XLR : Cadillac CTS : Cadillac : 2005 Cadillac STS : Cadillac Forums : 2000 Lincoln LS : Lincoln Mark VIII : Lincoln Mark VII : Car Wax
Lincoln Town Car : Lincoln Air Suspension : Lincoln Continental : Lemon Law : Do It Yourself Car Repair : Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums : Mesothelioma

Back to the Archive Main Page

Pages: 1

Duncan Hunter... He is the candidate

(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: MonsterMark

Come on guys. I have been talking about Duncan Hunter. I told you I volunteered for his campaign.

He is the conservative REPUBLICAN and is very Presidential and very likeable and electable.

As soon as the public finds out about him and he gets some airplay, watch out Romney and Guliani.

Hunter is what the Republicans are looking for.

Posted by: fossten

Where is he on gun control?

Posted by: MonsterMark

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

Where is he on gun control?

Duncan Hunter on Gun Control

Voted YES on prohibiting product misuse lawsuits on gun manufacturers.

A bill to prohibit civil liability actions from being brought or continued against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms or ammunition for damages, injunctive or other relief resulting from the misuse of their products by others. A YES vote would:
· Prohibit individuals from filing a qualified civil liability action
· Exempt lawsuits brought against individuals who knowingly transfer a firearm that will be used to commit a violent or drug-trafficking crime
· Exempt lawsuits against actions that result in death, physical injury or property damage due solely to a product defect
· Dismiss of all civil liability actions pending on the date of enactment
· Prohibit the manufacture, import, sale or delivery of armor piercing ammunition
Reference: Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act; Bill S 397 ; vote number 2005-534 on Oct 20, 2005

Voted YES on prohibiting suing gunmakers & sellers for gun misuse.

Vote to pass a bill that would prohibit liability lawsuits from being brought against gun manufacturers and dealers based on the criminal misuse of firearms. The bill would also block these actions from being brought up against gun trade organizations and against ammunition makers and sellers. The measure would apply immediately to any pending cases. Several specific exceptions to the ban exist. This includes civil suits would be allowed against a maker or dealer who "knowingly and willfully violated" state or federal laws in the selling or marketing of a weapon. Design and manufacturing defect lawsuits are also permitted when weapons are "used as intended.
Reference: Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act; Bill HR 1036 ; vote number 2003-124 on Apr 9, 2003

Voted YES on decreasing gun waiting period from 3 days to 1.

Vote to pass a bill requiring anyone who purchases a gun at a gun show to go through an instant background check which must be completed within 24 hours [instead of 72 hours].

Reference: Bill introduced by McCollum, R-FL; Bill HR 2122 ; vote number 1999-244 on Jun 18, 1999
Rated A+ by the NRA, indicating a pro-gun rights voting record.

Hunter scores A+ by NRA on pro-gun rights policies
While widely recognized today as a major political force and as America's foremost defender of Second Amendment rights, the National Rifle Association (NRA) has, since its inception, been the premier firearms education organization in the world. But our successes would not be possible without the tireless efforts and countless hours of service our nearly three million members have given to champion Second Amendment rights and support NRA programs.

While widely recognized today as a major political force and as America's foremost defender of Second Amendment rights, the National Rifle Association (NRA) has, since its inception, been the premier firearms education organization in the world. But our successes would not be possible without the tireless efforts and countless hours of service our nearly three million members have given to champion Second Amendment rights and support NRA programs.

The following ratings are based on lifetime voting records on gun issues and the results of a questionaire sent to all Congressional candidates; the NRA assigned a letter grade (with A+ being the highest and F being the lowest).
Source: NRA website 02n-NRA on Dec 31, 2003

Posted by: TheDude

Reminds me a little bit of Robert Blake; no, I am not saying people shouldn't vote for him because of that.

Posted by: MonsterMark

March 3rd, 2007
South Carolina straw poll

Spartanburg, SC – With John McCain, Rudy Giuliani and Duncan Hunter all finishing in a statistical tie for first place at 24% each in the Spartanburg County, South Carolina straw poll, the big story is that of the surprise top finish by Duncan Hunter.

Mike Dixon, longtime GOP activist and former South Carolina 4th District Party Chairman, said “However you stack and restack the top three, the results are clear, Duncan Hunter has emerged as the conservative alternative South Carolina Republicans have been looking for.”

Commenting on Hunter’s strong showing, Spartanburg Republican Gerald Emory said, “Now we have a true Ronald Reagan conservative that we can support...”

Posted by: MonsterMark

Movin on up....to the top....

Duncan Hunter Wins Townhall.com Texas Republican Straw Poll; Fred Thompson Second

41.1% Duncan Hunter (534 votes)
20.5% Fred Thompson (266 votes)
16.17% Ron Paul (217 votes)
6.4% Mike Huckabee (83 votes)
6% Rudy Giuliani (78 votes)
4.7% Mitt Romney (61 votes)
2.2% Ray McKinney (28 votes)
.77% John Cox (10 votes)
.62% John McCain (8 votes)
.46% Sam Brownback (6 votes)
.46% Tom Tancredo (6 votes)
.23% Hugh Cort (3 votes)

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonsterMark

Movin on up....to the top....

Duncan Hunter Wins Townhall.com Texas Republican Straw Poll; Fred Thompson Second

41.1% Duncan Hunter (534 votes)
20.5% Fred Thompson (266 votes)
16.17% Ron Paul (217 votes)
6.4% Mike Huckabee (83 votes)
6% Rudy Giuliani (78 votes)
4.7% Mitt Romney (61 votes)
2.2% Ray McKinney (28 votes)
.77% John Cox (10 votes)
.62% John McCain (8 votes)
.46% Sam Brownback (6 votes)
.46% Tom Tancredo (6 votes)
.23% Hugh Cort (3 votes)

Makes sense; he's one of the most conservative candidates we've got, and townhall.com is all about conservs.

I don't know if he'd be electable enough to defeat Hillary. I still think she's the key to unlocking RevWar II.

Posted by: Joeychgo

At first glance, what I see is someone who supports the 2nd amenedment and could really care less about the rest of the bill of rights, except in how he can amend it to make it his way. Sorry Bryan. Not my kind of guy whatsoever. I value things such as the right to privacy and the right to free speech.

Interesting thing though, it looks like he wants to get rid of alot of the brady bill. Should be nice to see Reagan conservatives fight it out with this guy. Yup, I think he's right. Its quite urgent that people be able to get a gun next day instead of 3 days. I mean, when the urge to go hunting with an assult rifle strikes, you shouldnt have to wait a whole weekend to get your shiny new gun. <sarcasm>

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joeychgo

I mean, when the urge to go hunting with an assult rifle strikes, you shouldnt have to wait a whole weekend to get your shiny new gun. <sarcasm>

Typical ignorant, anti-gunner statement. And full of false implications.

I'll bet you don't even know why people buy so-called "assault rifles." That's a pejorative, anti-gun talking point phrase anyway. Fewer violent gun crimes are committed by these "assault rifles" than by handguns.

It's common knowledge that stupid laws like the Brady Law don't actually stop crime. Gun registration doesn't work as most criminals don't leave their guns at the scene of the crime, and criminals typically do not register their guns. So the registration law is only to hinder law abiding citizens.

Fact: In 1994, before the Federal "assault weapons ban", you were eleven (11) times more likely to be beaten to death than to be killed by an “assault weapon”.155 In the first year since the ban was lifted, murders declined 3.6%, and violent crime 1.7%.156

Fact: Nationally, “assault weapons” were used in 1.4% of crimes involving firearms and 0.25% of all violent crime before the enactment of any national or state “assault weapons” ban. In many major urban areas (San Antonio, Mobile, Nashville, etc.) and some entire states (Maryland, New Jersey, etc.) the rate is less than 0.1%157

Fact: Even weapons misclassified as “assault weapons” (common in the former Federal and
California "assault weapons" confiscations) are used in less than 1% of all homicides.158

Fact: Police reports show that “assault weapons” are a non-problem:
For California:
• Los Angeles: In 1998, of 538 documented gun incidents, only one (0.2%) involved
an "assault weapon".
• San Francisco: In 1998, only 2.2% of confiscated weapons were "assault weapons".
• San Diego: Between 1988 and 1990, only 0.3% of confiscated weapons were "assault
weapons".
• “I surveyed the firearms used in violent crimes...assault-type firearms were the least
of our worries.”159

For the rest of the nation:
• Between 1980 and 1994, only 2% of confiscated guns were "assault weapons".160
• Just under 2% of criminals that commit violent crimes used “assault weapons”.161

154 Department of Defense Small Arms Identification and Operations Guide
155 FBI Uniform Crime Statistics, 1994
156 FBI Uniform Crime Statistics, Preliminary Summary, 2004
157 Gary Kleck, “Targeting Guns”, 1997, compilation of 48 metropolitan police departments from 1980-1994
158 FBI Uniform Crime Statistics, 1993
159 S.C. Helsley, Assistant Director DOJ Investigation and Enforcement Branch, California, October 31, 1988
160 Gary Kleck, “Targeting Guns”, 1997, compilation of 48 metropolitan police departments from 1980-1994
161 Gary Kleck, “Targeting Guns”, 1997, calculated from Bureau of Justice Statistics, assault weapon recovery rates
Gun Facts Version 4.2 Page 29
Copyright 2007, Guy Smith www.GunFacts.info All Rights Reserved

Fact: Only 1.4% of recovered crime weapons are
models covered under the 1994 "assault weapons"
ban.162

Fact: In Virginia, no surveyed inmates had carried an
"assault weapon" during the commission of their last
crime, despite 20% admitting that they had previously
owned such weapons.163

Fact: Most “assault weapons” have no more firepower
or killing capacity than the average hunting rifle and
“play a small role in overall violent crime”.164

Fact: Even the government agrees. “... the weapons
banned by this legislation [1994 Federal Assault
Weapons ban - since repealed] were used only rarely in gun crimes”165

162 From statewide recovery report from Connecticut (1988-1993) and Pennsylvania (1989-1994)
163 Criminal Justice Research Center, Department of Criminal Justice Services, 1994
164 Philip McGuire, Handgun Control, Inc., April 7, 1989, Mohr C. "House Panel Issue: Can Gun Ban Work." New
York Times. April 7, 1989. P. A-15
165 “Impacts of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban: 1994-96.”, National Institute of Justice, March 1999

Posted by: Joeychgo

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

Typical ignorant, anti-gunner statement. And full of false implications.

Actually, no. Im not anti-gunner by any means. I am actually in favor of more gun availability. But when I go to buy a gun, I dont really care if I have to wait 3 days, I dont need it with such urgency.

The fact that he wants to reduce the wait time tells me he's just playing BS politics since it really is a meaningless issue.

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joeychgo

It's not BS politics. We have 20,000 gun laws on the books. Which ones would you choose to abolish? The Brady Law is a very high profile, symbolic law that chafes at the 2nd Amendment and should be abolished. It is a waste of tax dollars and doesn't accomplish anything. If you're in favor of more availability of guns, I would expect you to be more sensitive to these kinds of laws.

The anti-gun crowd doesn't think it's a meaningless issue. It's all about control. By being apathetic toward a blatant breach of the 2nd Amendment, you buy into the totalitarian agenda that they push.

And BTW, the 3-day wait isn't universal. The last two battle ("assault" is an ugly, incorrect term) rifles I've purchased I walked out with on the same day.

Posted by: Joeychgo

then why does he bother to mention it? Thats my point. Read his platform on guns. Really read it. He isnt interested in anything of value to the individual citizen. Do you really find it a hardship to wat 3 days instead of 1? The rest of his platform protects manufacturers, not expands the 2nd amendment rights of individuals.

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joeychgo

then why does he bother to mention it? Thats my point. Read his platform on guns. Really read it. He isnt interested in anything of value to the individual citizen. Do you really find it a hardship to wat 3 days instead of 1? The rest of his platform protects manufacturers, not expands the 2nd amendment rights of individuals.

You're absolutely incorrect, and it's because you are thinking in a linear fashion instead of looking at the big picture. Positions in his platform protect the rights of individuals, just not in the way you think.

You don't consider a gun dealer an individual? Protecting gun dealers from frivolous politically-driven lawsuits because of someone else's crime is an important thing. It protects against the very thing Mayor Bloomberg of New York has been doing to Virginia gun dealers. It looks out for the little guy who doesn't have millions to spend on legal defense, and it encourages entry into the business. Allowing those guys to stay in business, and also protecting manufacturers, keeps prices reasonable so that Americans can still obtain firearms. That brings quite a bit of value to me, an individual citizen.

Posted by: Joeychgo

So should we extend that protection to drug companies and medical professionals too? After all, wouldnt that make medical care cheaper?

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joeychgo

So should we extend that protection to drug companies and medical professionals too? After all, wouldnt that make medical care cheaper?

That's a non sequitur, Joey. Didn't even need a segue for that sudden, blatant change of subject. I guess you can't answer the question so you try to flash and distract.

Actually we're having this discussion about medical professionals in another thread.