Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
Member Login

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 6/2/2002 3:11:40 PM EDT
I don't know why everyone who posts anything about the various firearms laws enacted in the past 15 years makes it out that Clinton is the bad guy and is responsible for all the woes we have.

I'd just like to point out that Reagan signed the 1986 FOPA ban on machineguns and George Sr. made the first assault rifle ban in 1989.  Admittedly, the 1994 law is the one most affecting semi-auto rifles, but Clinton had a lot of company.  And George Jr. has promised to re-up the assault weapons ban in 2 years.
Link Posted: 6/2/2002 3:23:00 PM EDT
but billy boy is such a easy target.
Link Posted: 6/2/2002 3:27:24 PM EDT
Not sound nagging dude, but shouldn't this thread haave been posted in the "General Discussion" forum rather than "General Firearms Discussion" forum.  As far as the topic goes, ALL of the folks you mentioned are sorry bastards, Clinton is just sorrier than the rest.
Link Posted: 6/2/2002 3:54:50 PM EDT
Link Posted: 6/2/2002 4:06:21 PM EDT
I'd like to see how Bush can renew the ban and I'd really be interested in your source of this info on W's intent.  I don't think the issue has ripened yet (2004), so I don't see how you could have correct info on his opinions, especially of a nature that effects half of the American public.  He's not stupid enough to hang himself with that one, especially since he doesn't have the power to renew it.  

Whats your source?
Link Posted: 6/2/2002 4:07:43 PM EDT
Maynard! Thank you for the intelligent and well executed response. Well stated and right there with you. DITTO!
Link Posted: 6/2/2002 4:14:45 PM EDT
I didn't know it was possible to get tired of Clinton bashing.
Link Posted: 6/2/2002 6:00:29 PM EDT
Quoted:
.......Clinton is just sorrier than the rest.
View Quote


Yep !
Link Posted: 6/2/2002 6:21:19 PM EDT
Phil, you need to post something like this on "I camebutshedidn'tswallow.com" to find someone who shares your opinion on Clinton bashing. Presidents Reagan & Bush Sr. are much better deserving of comments such as yours.
Link Posted: 6/2/2002 6:24:49 PM EDT
What Maynard said..... Besides, some dogs ya just can't kick enough.
Link Posted: 6/2/2002 8:32:58 PM EDT
Quoted:
And George Jr. has promised to re-up the assault weapons ban in 2 years.
View Quote
I must have missed that one.  When did he make this promise?  

I'm sorry we are bashing your draft dodging, cowardly, traitorous bastard of a hero.  Actually, I'm not sorry.  That bastard should be in jail for his treasonous actions before and during his administration.
Link Posted: 6/2/2002 8:48:42 PM EDT
Quoted:
That bastard should be in jail for his treasonous actions before and during his administration.
View Quote


Yep that's the point of the bashing, it amazes me people continue to stand up for a liar, cheater, and thief.
Link Posted: 6/3/2002 2:37:59 AM EDT
[b]Here are just a couple of reasons why it's so much fun to bash the toon.[/b]

Lying Under Oath as President - 2 times
Lying Under Oath as Governor - 5 times
Lying Under Oath as Attorney General
Lying Under Oath in a Deposition
Lying Under Oath to a Grand Jury
Lying Under Oath as a Lawyer
Abuse of Power
Obstruction of Justice
Deriliction of Duty
Bribe Solicitation
Taking Bribes
Bribery of Cabinent Members
Bribery of State Officials
Treason
Corruption
Coersion
Graft
False Swearing
Malfeasance of Office
Perjury
Subornation of Perjury
Criminal Trespass
Witness Intimidation
Witness Tampering
Jury Tampering
Ethics Violations
Intentional Interference in the Administration of Justice
Misrepresentation
Civil Contempt of Court
Criminal Contempt of Court
Contempt of Congress
Contempt of the American People
High Crimes
Misdemeanors
Deception
False Testimony
Factually False Testimony
Misconduct
Serious Misconduct
Professional Misconduct
Notorious Misconduct
Obstruction of the Judicial Process
Recklessness
Grand Larceny
Extortion
Blackmail
Substance Abuse
Evidence Suppression
Illegal Foriegn Campaign Funding
Aiding and Abetting Espionage
Improper Exports of Sensitve Technology
Attempted Intimidation of Prosecutors
Destruction of Business Records with Intent to Defraud
Failure to Investigate Drug Trafficking
Real Estate Fraud
Criminalizing Frauds on Financial Institutions
Use of State Police for Personal Purposes
Illegal Loan Extraction
False Reports by Medical Examiners and Others Investigating Suspicious Deaths
Improper Futures Trading
Illegal Use of the Executive Branch
Character Defamation
Voter Fraud
Racketeering
Destruction of Evidence
Political Espionage
Money Laundering
Criminal Negligence
RICO Conspiracy
Misuse of Government Files
Desecration of Federal Ethics Laws
Judicial Intimidation
Conflict of Interests
Illegal Campaign Activity
Misuse of Corporate Assets
Ordering Politically Motivated Audits
Ordering Politically Motivated Investigations
Timing of War Influenced by Political Considerations
Misapplying Funds
Conspiracy to Defraud the Federal Government
Criminal Violation of the Privacy Act
Conspiracy to Conceal
Evisceration of the Right to Habeas Corpus
Misuse of Taxpayer Funds
Interfering with a Court Order
Theft of Government Property
Abuse of Taxpayer Financed Travel
Anti-American Espionage
Jeopardizing National Security
Aiding and Abetting Drug Traffic
Aiding and Abetting Organized Crime
Murder by Accessory by Witness Tampering
Murder by Accessory by Forgery
Foreign Influence Peddling
Regular Influence Peddling
Corrupting Public Discourse
Providing False and Misleading Testimony
Interferring with a Custody Case
Kidnapping by Accessory
Child Endangerment
Sexual Harassment
Indecent Exposure
Sexual Abuse of Employees
Lewd and Lascivious Conduct
Exchange of Promotions or Benefits for Sexual Favors
Sexual Assault
Statutory Rape
Contributing to the Delinquincy of a Minor
Unfit to hold a law license
Conduct Unbecoming a President
Squandering the Public Trust
Link Posted: 6/3/2002 4:36:44 AM EDT
Reagan brought us all the imports in the late 80's and early 90's. That is when all the Chinese AK's and Bluesky carbines and Garands came in. That is when you could buy new Colts in any flavor for $600.00. The Clinton influence has had little to do with anything. Been to a gun show lately? There is more large capacity stuff now than ever. The Post ban stuff is missing a bayonet lug. The flash suppresor is still out there on almost everything. So what Bush renews the ban, what ban? Clinton was a great used car salesman. But he really didn't do anything to gun ownership. He just put his definition of sex to it.
Link Posted: 6/3/2002 8:53:38 AM EDT
Quoted:
Reagan brought us all the imports in the late 80's and early 90's. That is when all the Chinese AK's and Bluesky carbines and Garands came in. That is when you could buy new Colts in any flavor for $600.00. The Clinton influence has had little to do with anything. Been to a gun show lately? There is more large capacity stuff now than ever. The Post ban stuff is missing a bayonet lug. The flash suppresor is still out there on almost everything. So what Bush renews the ban, what ban? Clinton was a great used car salesman. But he really didn't do anything to gun ownership. He just put his definition of sex to it.
View Quote
You say the Clinton influence has little to do with anything right after saying that you could buy Colt's for $600.  Are you blind????   Look at the price of a preban now, after Clinton's ban and tell me the Clinton influence had little to do with anything.  Look at the price of hicap mags.  They are also been getting more rare.  As for flash hiders being on everything, again, only on prebans, which cost twice as much as a postban.  You say 'what ban'?  Get a clue!  You haven't been to a gun show as everything you say sounds like the Democraps vision of the gunshow as a 'tupperware party for criminals'.  The question is, are YOU blind??????  I know that before September of 1994, what is now called a preban you could get for $500-$600 NIB and now a NIB preban will cost upwards of $1400.  Clinton sure affected how much one has to pay for certain features.

Phil_A_Steen, I am still waiting for you to tell me when GW said he would re-up the ban.
Link Posted: 6/3/2002 10:14:41 AM EDT
Bush expressed support for some gun control measures, including the ban on assault weapons.
View Quote
[url=http://www.issues2000.org/George_W__Bush_Gun_Control.htm]Source of the Quote[/url]

There are numerous sources out there (do a search on Yahoo) that George Jr. intends to reup the 94 ban.

Just to be clear on the thread:  I'm no Clinton lover; I just think we need to blame our last three presidents and the current one for the laws we suffer under.  It's unfair to heap all the blame on Clinton.  I hold all politicians to account.

Skipper J -- what is Clinton's kidnapping by accessory about?
Link Posted: 6/3/2002 10:28:19 AM EDT
...Been to a gun show lately? There is more large capacity stuff now than ever. The Post ban stuff is missing a bayonet lug. The flash suppresor is still out there on almost everything. So what Bush renews the ban, what ban? Clinton was a great used car salesman. But he really didn't do anything to gun ownership. He just put his definition of sex to it.
View Quote


Why go easy on the guy?  I can think of a bunch of dead, innocent civilians that were taken out by the BATF on his watch.  And then he and Feinstein et al. have the nerve to blame the legal gun owners like us?

[\rant off]

[stick]
Link Posted: 6/3/2002 10:43:32 AM EDT
Quoted:
Quoted:
And George Jr. has promised to re-up the assault weapons ban in 2 years.
View Quote
I must have missed that one.  When did he make this promise?  

I'm sorry we are bashing your draft dodging, cowardly, traitorous bastard of a hero.  Actually, I'm not sorry.  That bastard should be in jail for his treasonous actions before and during his administration.
View Quote



To coin a phrase: WORD!!!!!! AB
Link Posted: 6/3/2002 11:15:56 AM EDT
So what is the difference between a Pre and Post ban gun? Why are Post ban AR's costing as much as they do? They would have went up anyway. It is called inflation. Mags, they would cost this much anyway. In fact, AK mags have never been cheaper. The ban stopped Chinese importation. So what, the European stuff is a lot better anyway. Did the ban stop some good stuff from coming in? Yes, the carbines and Garands. The largest effect is in pistols, but there are still large caps available. My point, mostly cosmetic. Are there new guns available? Yes, DSA, Armalite, and the CMP has never made it so easy to buy history. The real Armalite went out of business in 1964.
Link Posted: 6/3/2002 11:21:57 AM EDT
Quoted:
I didn't know it was possible to get tired of Clinton bashing.
View Quote


I agree.

[smoke]
Link Posted: 6/3/2002 11:47:03 AM EDT
Link Posted: 6/3/2002 12:27:23 PM EDT
Regardless of Bush Sr, Bush Jr, or anyone else for that matter, Clinton is still a P.O.S., and will always be labled accordingly
Link Posted: 6/3/2002 1:08:58 PM EDT
Link Posted: 6/3/2002 1:19:48 PM EDT
You got that right...It was on a radio station hear in St. Louis that Gore made a comment about his anti-gun stance could have cost him the election...I think Bush is smarker than that...Trucker


Quoted:
I'd like to see how Bush can renew the ban and I'd really be interested in your source of this info on W's intent.  I don't think the issue has ripened yet (2004), so I don't see how you could have correct info on his opinions, especially of a nature that effects half of the American public.  He's not stupid enough to hang himself with that one, especially since he doesn't have the power to renew it.  

Whats your source?
View Quote
Link Posted: 6/3/2002 1:48:52 PM EDT
Quoted:
So what is the difference between a Pre and Post ban gun? Why are Post ban AR's costing as much as they do? They would have went up anyway. It is called inflation.....

Yes, DSA, Armalite, and the CMP has never made it so easy to buy history. The real Armalite went out of business in 1964.
View Quote


Your reading comprehension skills need some tweaking.  I did not talk about the cost of postban rifles, as they have not risen that much.  However, preban rifles are outrageous now as a result of the 1994 Crime Bill.  In that bill, they basically outlawed (it's more complicated than this, but simply put) bayonet lugs (to counter all the drive-by bayonetings that were happening---NOT), telescoping buttstocks (you know, all those people hiding them under their coats for bank robberies---NOT), and flash hiders (to stop all the night snipers that were wreaking havoc---NOT).  If one wants those features, one now pays about twice as much for a rifle that can have them.  Granted a bayonet lug is no big deal, but if you like to do any night shooting, especially with a night vision scope, a flash hider is necessary, and the telescoping buttstock does make for a more compact rifle for home defense.  We will not get into a debate on spending more money for a preban as those that have the money will buy them and those that either don't want them or don't have the money won't buy them.  It's because of your boy Bill that we have to pay such ridiculous prices for these features that were banned.  They weren't banned for public safety reasons, they are just the first step in more bans.  AR15 type rifles have never been the choice of criminals, with very few exceptions, due to their cost mainly.  Criminals would rather use shotguns or handguns for robberies, assasinations, etc.  

Oh yeah, in reference to your remark about ArmaLite going out of business years ago, very few firearms manufacturers are as they originally were.  ArmaLite never went out of business, they have just had several owners, as has Colt, S&W, Winchester, etc.
Link Posted: 6/4/2002 6:13:55 AM EDT
You know, as long as Slick Willie continues to act like a buffoon in the public eye, we will continue to point out the obvious.  

Link Posted: 6/4/2002 6:59:09 AM EDT
[size=6]KLINTON isnt a piece of shit. he is the whole TURD.[/size=6]

i havent seen a more despised commander in chief when i was active duty. there was not one military memeber who had respect for this jerk. the SecNav thru SecDef had to give us all a direct order to stop bashing the idiot, and respect him for his position. the rest of the vets and active guys on the board can tell you how far that went.
Link Posted: 6/4/2002 7:33:17 AM EDT
I have one thing to say...

[img]http://quarterbore.com/images/clinton_arafat.jpg[/img]

I have additional Clinton Memories at:

[url]http://quarterbore.com/hangout/clinton[/url]

[b]WARNING:  There are a few Graphic Photos on there![/b]

You know what, I almost want to hear about Billy some more!
Link Posted: 6/4/2002 10:33:12 AM EDT
Here is another great site:  [url]http://www.clinton-legacy.org/[/url]
Link Posted: 6/4/2002 12:23:26 PM EDT
I am not a fan of Clinton. But he sold the anti-gun crowd a bill of goods with the assualt rifle ban. Ban a few features. So what. Now you don't look like the guy on a movie or TV. You better hope George renews the ban. Because if he doesn't, who knows what will come next. It might be the real deal this time. Armalite never went out of business? Is that why you had to buy a Sterling or Howa made AR180. Eagle Arms bought a name.
Link Posted: 6/4/2002 1:45:53 PM EDT
Quoted:
Maybe it has to do with the lawsuits filed by HUD and his courting of various anti-gun freaks who fear citizens being in charge of their own destiny instead of relying on the nanny state for their proection.

Maybe it has to do with the fact we now have both the brady bill and the 1994 AWB from his time in office.
View Quote


The Clinton administration also stopped the importation of firearms from China, and the importation of ammo manufactured using US government sourced equipment (can't get that Greek .30-06 ball anymore!). And they reclassified several shotguns as destructive devices.

We also shouldn't forget that Clinton wanted to put trace elements in gun powder. And he wanted to shut down gun shows . . .

But the Clinton efforts at using lawsuits against gun manufacturers was truely slimy . . .

Link Posted: 6/4/2002 1:52:52 PM EDT
Quoted:
I'd just like to point out that Reagan signed the 1986 FOPA ban on machineguns
View Quote


At least that piece of legislation was a compromise--it allowed us to buy ammo via mail order again. It also liberalized the importation of ammo, hence we started seeing large quantities of cheap surplus ammo after '86. Since Reagan was dealing with a Democrat congress, he had to cut a deal somewhere. Reagan's compromise was the best deal for the vast majority of shooters.
Link Posted: 6/4/2002 2:04:02 PM EDT
Quoted:

Just to be clear on the thread:  I'm no Clinton lover; I just think we need to blame our last three presidents and the current one for the laws we suffer under.  It's unfair to heap all the blame on Clinton.  I hold all politicians to account.

View Quote


The laws we suffer under are:

The 1934 National Firearms Act (FDR).

The 1968 Gun Control Act (LBJ).

The 1994 AW ban (Clinton).

The Brady Bill (Clinton).

We will have to judge the current president by what he does, not by what he said to get elected. The previous president Bush simply wrote an executive order extending the 1968 Gun Control Act, which Clinton also did on several occasions. Reagan's '86 "gun control law" was a compromise which helped gun owners more than it hurt.
Link Posted: 6/4/2002 2:12:43 PM EDT
Quoted:
You better hope George renews the ban.........

Armalite never went out of business? Is that why you had to buy a Sterling or Howa made AR180. Eagle Arms bought a name.
View Quote
Your first statement is totally ludicrous.  What are you, a refugee from DU?

As for your Armalite comment, go ahead, show your ignorance some more.  Those were made under contract to the original Armalite by those companies.  It did not mean that Armalite was out of business.  I have a Sterling, a Howa, and a Costa Mesa (made by Armalite themselves in their factory).

Eagle Arms not only bought a name, but an existing company that had been moved to the Phillippines.  Check your history.
Link Posted: 6/4/2002 2:18:38 PM EDT
Clinton is the whole pile of shit PERIOD... end of discussion please drive on thru [:D]
Link Posted: 6/4/2002 2:23:18 PM EDT
Quoted:
Bush expressed support for some gun control measures, including the ban on assault weapons.
View Quote
[url=http://www.issues2000.org/George_W__Bush_Gun_Control.htm]Source of the Quote[/url]

There are numerous sources out there (do a search on Yahoo) that George Jr. intends to reup the 94 ban.

Just to be clear on the thread:  I'm no Clinton lover; I just think we need to blame our last three presidents and the current one for the laws we suffer under.  It's unfair to heap all the blame on Clinton.  I hold all politicians to account.

Skipper J -- what is Clinton's kidnapping by accessory about?
View Quote


Ya know I read everything in "The source" and I didn't find one reference to GW re-upping the '94 ban.  Any other "sources"?
Link Posted: 6/4/2002 2:31:39 PM EDT
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 9:27:40 AM EDT
Regarding responses that Reagan or Bush Sr. were not responsible for any anti-2nd amendment acts: [url=http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/gunlaws/awb.asp]this straight from the craw of the Brady campaign:[/url]

[b]Q:  What action had been taken on assault weapons prior to 1994?

A:  Prior to passage of the federal assault weapons ban, the importation of certain types of assault weapons from overseas had been banned during the Reagan and George H.W. Bush Administrations. Such bans were ordered by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) under the 1968 Gun Control Act, which grants the ATF the power to prevent the importation of guns which are not "particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes."

Under the Reagan Administration, the ATF blocked the importation of certain models of shotguns that were not suitable for sporting purposes. In 1989, during the George H.W. Bush Administration, the ATF expanded this list to permanently ban the importation of 43 types of semiautomatic assault rifles that were also determined not to have a sporting purpose.[/b]


That doesn't even count the end of the registration of automatic weapons under Reagan.  The assertion that we are better off under the 1986 FOPA amendments is ludicrous.  Have you seen the price of an M16 lately?  

A consistent theme I've seen in this thread is vitriolic hatred of Clinton unrelated and disproportional to his contributions to anti-gun legislation.
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 11:06:52 AM EDT
Quoted:
Quoted:
So what is the difference between a Pre and Post ban gun? Why are Post ban AR's costing as much as they do? .
View Quote


I see you have become comfortable with an  governement who can arbitrarily determine what once was legal yesterday is illegal today.

"Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you.
May your chains rest lightly upon you and may
posterity forget that you were our countrymen."
                     - Samuel Adams
View Quote


I loe that quote!!!!!  LICK IT, dirfire. [}:D]

I wouldn't call a %100 percent increase in the price of certain items inflation either.


View Quote


Actually, had there been no Marxist gov't price controls (via ban legislation) and had free market forces been allowed to control, we'd prolly be paying LESS THAN $600 today for an AR with ALL pre-ban features.

At the time, Armalite and Colt were about the only manufacturers of the AR-style firearm. Today, there are over a dozen.

Its made of aluminum and plastic. CHeap and plentiful supply.

Ban legislation crates the APPEARANCE of scarcity. Sellers / manufacturers realize this, and price their products accordingly.



Link Posted: 6/5/2002 11:21:05 AM EDT
Quoted:

We also shouldn't forget that Clinton wanted to put trace elements in gun powder. And he wanted to shut down gun shows . . .

But the Clinton efforts at using lawsuits against gun manufacturers was truely slimy . . .

View Quote


EXCELLENT POINT, Don.

The main reason I consider Bill Clinton the WORST US president EVER is NOT (only) in what he actually accomplished....

...but in what he TRIED BUT FAILED to accomplish.

He tried to END US manufacture of firearms using the "Justice" system. That is indeed slimy.

I don't have it readily handy, but look back at what he and his ilk TRIED to pass legislation to do.

What you'll find is a concerted effort for evil.

Like was said, Clinton ain't a POS. He's the whole friggen sewerage plant.

This topic actually came up on talk radio this week -

"Will 'you guys' EVER quit bashing Clinton?"

The answer to that is this  - "Those who forget their history are doomed to repeat it."

Long as I'm breathing, Bill Clinton will get bashed by me. May we NEVER forget.....



Link Posted: 6/5/2002 11:32:35 AM EDT
I still think everyone is missing the point.  Hate Clinton by all means!!!  But also hate George Sr. and Ronnie too.

Personally, in the grand scheme of things, I think Bush's little gafffe in 91 (not hosing saddam) outweighs all of Bill's sins, but, all our politicians stink.
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 11:50:30 AM EDT
Quoted:
this straight from the craw of the Brady campaign:
View Quote


As we know, the Brady campaign is always the first place to go for accurate information.

Quoted:
Q:  What action had been taken on assault weapons prior to 1994?

A:  Prior to passage of the federal assault weapons ban, the importation of certain types of assault weapons from overseas had been banned during the Reagan and George H.W. Bush Administrations.  . . .

Under the Reagan Administration, the ATF blocked the importation of certain models of shotguns that were not suitable for sporting purposes.
View Quote


To my knowledge, no such action took place under Reagan. Methinks what they are talking about is Clinton's action banning the streetsweeper and USAS-12 shotguns.

Quoted:
In 1989, during the George H.W. Bush Administration, the ATF expanded this list to permanently ban the importation of 43 types of semiautomatic assault rifles that were also determined not to have a sporting purpose.
View Quote


It is true that Bush used an executive order to ban import of semi-auto military rifles. However, this was based upon the 1968 law. The point is, the real damage was done in '68. This isn't a defense of Bush Sr., but if we had a Democrat in office at the time, we would have had much worse . . .

Quoted:
That doesn't even count the end of the registration of automatic weapons under Reagan.  The assertion that we are better off under the 1986 FOPA amendments is ludicrous.  Have you seen the price of an M16 lately?  
View Quote


The majority of shooters are better off due to the easy access to cheap, yet reliable, ammo, and cheap surplus forign rifles and handguns. A small minority who are into MGs are worse off. It's called a compromise. As far as I am aware, it is the only piece of compromise legislation that shooters have ever seen.

Further, our right to own MGs was taken away by NFA '34. Reagan couldn't take away a right we lost 52 years earlier.

Quoted:
A consistent theme I've seen in this thread is vitriolic hatred of Clinton unrelated and disproportional to his contributions to anti-gun legislation.
View Quote


The presidents who made the most contribution to anti gun legislation were FDR, LBJ, and Clinton.

Clinton also gave federal support to antigun lawsuits, in an attempt to cow the big gun companies and destroy the small ones. Frankly, this is what really shows the nature of the man. This was a vile, fascist, and mean attempt to circumvent the democratic process. And it was typical Clinton.
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 12:01:27 PM EDT
Quoted:
I still think everyone is missing the point.  Hate Clinton by all means!!!  But also hate George Sr. and Ronnie too.
View Quote


Reagan was an excellent president. The best one in my lifetime (going back to JFK). George Sr. was more in line with Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, and JFK--middle of the road.

Quoted:
Personally, in the grand scheme of things, I think Bush's little gafffe in 91 (not hosing saddam) outweighs all of Bill's sins, but, all our politicians stink.
View Quote


Does it outweigh Clinton's little "gaffe" in '96 when the Sudan offered him Bin Laden and he turned them down?

In Bush's defense, a large measure of the fault in not taking down Saddam belongs to Powell. Powell basically lied to Bush to end the war, when he knew damn well that the Republican Guard wasn't finished. He was also one of the guys who decided to let the Iraqis fly helecopter gunships in Southern Iraq--against the uprising there. These two actions by Powell pretty much ensured that Saddam would solve his domestic problems.
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 12:29:16 PM EDT
Quoted:
I still think everyone is missing the point.  Hate Clinton by all means!!!  But also hate George Sr. and Ronnie too.

Personally, in the grand scheme of things, I think Bush's little gafffe in 91 (not hosing saddam) outweighs all of Bill's sins, but, all our politicians stink.
View Quote


Before you attack Bush senior about 91, there are couple points you need to know.

1. He regrets not doing it.

2. He really had no choice. He was mandated by the UN and congress only to liberate Kuwait.

3. Had he attacked and tried to oust Saddam from Iraq, the alliance with the Arab coalition most likely would have collapsed.

Now you say this sin far outweighs any thing Clinton had did. Lets list a few of his sins:

The world trade center in 93.

The US embassies that were attacked.

The barracks in Saudi Arabia.

The USS Cole.

These are a few attacks that were ordered by Osama Bin Laden (Ladin, Which ever it is).

Oh I am sorry I forgot 9/11. Maybe if slick Willy had nuke the SOB after the first attack on the world trade center, maybe the second would not have happened.

I guess he was more worried about getting a nob job in the oval office, than protecting this country.

One more, and I am just paraphrasing:

I did not have sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky.

then he said, I indeed had relations with Ms. Lewinsky, they were wrong. something like that.

Now I am not saying Nixon was a good president, he lied to the public and lost his job.

Willy lied to the public and is considered a hero.

What a married man does with other women is between him and his wife. If he is asked by the press make that statement, also tell the truth. My .02.
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 3:18:17 PM EDT
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 7:55:17 PM EDT
Guys, Dirfire is clearly kidding.  To take his point of view seriously would be to insult his intelligence.

But just in case:

Dirfire, it is your position that an AR-15 manufactured in 1992 would be worth twice as much as one manufactured in 1995 whether there were a ban or not?

It is your position that Glock magazines would have tripled, quadrupled and quintupled in price within ten years if there had been no ban?  That's some inflation; by your logic a Chevy Camaro should cost over a million dollars today.  (I'm not kidding--assume the price quintuples every ten years and do the math yourself, starting in 1967.)

It is your position that if there were no ban, the exact same 17-round Glock magazine would still cost $20 for a cop and around $100 for me?  

Are you SURE you want to claim all that?
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 9:11:11 PM EDT
Moved from GFD to GD.

Eric/Tyler
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 9:19:04 PM EDT
Your a damn fool if you think any thing Reagan did is as bad as Clinton.

This a nation of laws and  Reagan knew that but Clinton used them as weapons.

Not the same.




Link Posted: 6/5/2002 9:31:44 PM EDT
Quoted:
I don't know why everyone who posts anything about the various firearms laws enacted in the past 15 years makes it out that Clinton is the bad guy and is responsible for all the woes we have.

I'd just like to point out that Reagan signed the 1986 FOPA ban on machineguns and George Sr. made the first assault rifle ban in 1989.  Admittedly, the 1994 law is the one most affecting semi-auto rifles, but Clinton had a lot of company.  And George Jr. has promised to re-up the assault weapons ban in 2 years.
View Quote
It might be noted that Reagan's support of the Volkmer Act, although it negatively affected machineguns, helped to weaken LBJ's(demo-trader) GCA-68 law.
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 9:38:16 PM EDT
Quoted:
[img]http://www.mcrgo.org/photos/s_stockup.jpg[/img]

[img]http://www.mcrgo.org/photos/s_stockupf.jpg[/img]

[img]http://www.mcrgo.org/photos/s_clinton.jpg[/img]
View Quote
No other gun law cause my hi-cap mags to become so expensive, FUCK THAT CLINTON POS
Link Posted: 6/5/2002 10:55:36 PM EDT
In defense of Reagan and the 86' MG ban, he did not have a line item veto and that bill protected amny rights for gun owners.

It was lose-lose. If he didn't sign it we would have got hosed from the other end. MG owners being a minority in the overall firearm community got the short end of the stick.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top