Fred Thompson’s Anti-Gun Senate Record

Discussion in 'Legal and Activism' started by Chuck, Sep 29, 2007.

  1. Chuck

    Chuck New Member

    286
    0
    0
    Fred Thompson’s Anti-Gun Senate Record


    Full details at http://conservativesagainstfred.wordpress.com/2007/06/11/fred-thompsons-anti-gun-senate-record/

    The Conservatives Against Fred Thompson volunteers have compiled a list of proposals supported by Fred Dalton Thompson in the senate that include Gun Bans, confiscations and limitations to the free speech of Gun Rights Advocates. Dates and bill numbers are provided so this information can be easily verified. Summary:

    1. Anti-gun terror bill (S. 735 )
    2. Anti-gun terror bill — final passage
    3. Taggants in gunpowder
    4. Lautenberg Domestic Confiscation gun ban
    5. Free Speech restrictions
    6. Smith “Anti-Brady” Amendment
    7. Anti-gun Clinton judge appointment
    8. Anti-gun Surgeon General
    9. Ending the filibuster of a major anti-gun crime bill
    10. Young adult gun ban
    11. Adopting the “Gun Control Lite” strategy
    12. McCain’s Incumbent Protection (2000 version)
    13. Incumbent Protection (2002 failed filibuster)
     
  2. notdku

    notdku Administrator Staff Member

    6,288
    9
    38
    Nice find. I was always curious on Thompson's 2nd Amendment stance since he never addressed it in any of his speeches.
     

  3. Pounce

    Pounce New Member

    405
    0
    0
    Don't forget his voting record on illegals.

    One way and one way only. Abide by the Constitution. Ron Paul is the ONLY one whose voting record proves he belongs in the Oval Office.
     
  4. Chuck

    Chuck New Member

    286
    0
    0
    Correct on both points.
     
  5. Pounce

    Pounce New Member

    405
    0
    0
    Yeper! It would be good to see a good debate here to see (voteting records etc.) WHY, each one here backs a perticular canidate. A poll perhaps.

    Time is short.
     
  6. Pounce

    Pounce New Member

    405
    0
    0
    Yeper! It would be good to see a good debate here to see (voteting records etc.) WHY, each one here backs a perticular canidate. A poll perhaps.

    Time is short.

    (A little bs here.)
     
  7. Pounce

    Pounce New Member

    405
    0
    0
    Sorry about the double,above. I had typed more in my original post,but.. for some reason it went South.
     
  8. Dgunsmith

    Dgunsmith New Member

    426
    0
    0
    BS Detector going off

    :eek: Hillary thanks the whining from the gun crowd for continued attacks on Republican Candidates !

    IF you don't want the Clintons BACK in the White House, you had better register AND vote in the upcoming election season.

    The Republican Candidate MUST be electable by the Voters. Without VOTES from so-called moderates and thinking Democrats, you WILL get a Democrat in the White House.

    Ron Pauls positions may be good but he cannot get elected President.

    Newt is the brightest...but out.

    Either Guliani or Thompson.....We MUST retain the White House or under go another attack on gun ownership and MORE Taxes.

    Reagan was correct on the 11th commandment....speak no evil of fellow Republicans !
     
  9. Duck

    Duck New Member

    140
    0
    0
    Ron Paul absolutely has a chance, but that chance is out of the window if everyone thinks the way you do.

    And yeah, Giuliani is the person we want for president! [sarcasm] He really does stand up for the Constitution.[/sarcasm] Give me a break. He may as well be a Democrat.
     
  10. Chuck

    Chuck New Member

    286
    0
    0
    Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil. The GOP and the DNC are, for all intents and purposes, one and the same. Do some research on the other candidates' records.
     
  11. pioneer461

    pioneer461 New Member

    938
    0
    0
    Yup, stand up for a sure loser, and we all lose.

    Bill Clinton was elected TWICE, with just 43% of the vote. Why? Because a bunch of whiney republicans who didn't get their way, voted for Perot, on "principle." Perot (from Texas) was a ringer by the Clinton machine, who had no chance to win and disappered between elections. Are we now seeing another conservative Texas ringer by the Clinton machine? I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the Clinton machine is actually supporting Ron Paul.

    I'd rather forgive Giuliani for his wayward past, than live under the so******t regime of another Klinton.

    The Democrats just love it when we fight among ourselves.
     
  12. Chuck

    Chuck New Member

    286
    0
    0
    You need to stop watching Faux News. If ANYbody gets elected other than RP, we are going to have more marxism.
     
  13. cnorman18

    cnorman18 New Member

    457
    0
    0
    no chance

    Get out of the Ron Paul handbasket and take a good look at Mike Huckabee. Best candidate in the field.

    I'm not opposed to Paul because he has no chance; I'm opposed to his stand on the issues. I believe in the Constitution, but I believe in other things too--like common sense.

    Other than gun control, many of his other positions might as well come from MoveOn.org. Forget it.
     
  14. Pounce

    Pounce New Member

    405
    0
    0
    To each his own. Hand basket or whatever ya call it.. Ron Paul is the best out of the field.
     
  15. cnorman18

    cnorman18 New Member

    457
    0
    0
    we disagree

    We disagree there, and that's OK. But I'll tell you this, and you can take it to the bank: If he runs a 3rd-party campaign, he'll put Hillary in the White House, and if she gets to pick a couple of justices for the Supreme Court, you can kiss your guns goodbye.

    And I'll tell you something else: if he does run, the Clintons will be funneling money to him through their backers. Remember Perot? Watch and see.
     
  16. Pounce

    Pounce New Member

    405
    0
    0
    As you stated in the past, we disagree "STRONGLY".
    Outside of the best voting record and (yhr only one) abiding buy the Constitution,( his voting record proves it) Just where would you say Mr. Paul is wrong?

    I voted for Perot,went to see him talk. He did 'screw' it up. Perhaps on perpose. As far as the Clintons funneling Ron Paul money...well, what does one say to such nonsense? :rolleyes:
     
  17. cnorman18

    cnorman18 New Member

    457
    0
    0
    "As you stated in the past, we disagree "STRONGLY".
    Outside of the best voting record and (yhr only one) abiding buy the Constitution,( his voting record proves it) Just where would you say Mr. Paul is wrong?"

    See new thread.


    "I voted for Perot,went to see him talk. He did 'screw' it up. Perhaps on perpose. As far as the Clintons funneling Ron Paul money...well, what does one say to such nonsense?"

    A 3rd-party campaign, a la Perot's, would be very much in the Clintons' interest. If you don't think they'd pull a few strings to make that happen, you haven't been paying attention. They have.
     
  18. Pounce

    Pounce New Member

    405
    0
    0
    Not paying attention, or not pulling "facts" off the wall. Nonsense is the 'key' word. Mr. Paul and the Clintons? You are not paying attention.
     
  19. cnorman18

    cnorman18 New Member

    457
    0
    0
    ?

    So you don't think Hillary is ruthless enough to do it? Or maybe you think she's too dedicated to her "principles"...

    The only "principle" to which the Clintons have any allegiance is power. I admit the idea seems far-fetched; but you can bet they're thinking about it.

    I look forward to seeing you on the other thread.

    (Still don't have my Saiga, BTW, but I'm working on it. Too bad they don't make .22 Saiga clones...)
     
  20. Pounce

    Pounce New Member

    405
    0
    0
    Yup, much cheaper to shoot.