Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 10/12/2006 11:40:18 AM EST
So...I have decided to cast my vote for Airola! Hearing how Gillespie doesn't seem to have a strong pro-gun stance, he turned me off.

Also, I will be voting almost strictly Republican all the way down the ticket since it looks like the Dems will stand a chance on taking over the majority and then could mount a 2nd amendment attack and reverse all of our good fortunes as of late.

As far as local government goes, I will also do my best to vote against all incumbants since they all seem to be corrupt and never looking out for us!

What do you guys think?
Link Posted: 10/12/2006 12:21:43 PM EST
"Also, I will be voting almost strictly Repuplican"



,and reverse all of our good fortunes as of late."

??? Ehhh ...... Could you list that/them?

Link Posted: 10/12/2006 1:25:17 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/12/2006 6:36:46 PM EST by ishoot2live]
Unfortunately, the Republicans are the lesser of two evils. We have a far better shot at keeping our guns if they are in office than liberal Democrats. Even in non-partisan races such as judges and sheriffs it is important not to support liberals.

Can you possibly imagine this scenario?:

President: Billary Clinton
Vice President: Harry Reid
Attorney General: Dianne Feinstein
Secretary of State: John Kerry
Secretary of Defense: Nancy Pelosi
Head of the BATFE: Chuck Shumer
Ambassador to the U.N.: Bill Clinton

That's enough to put any freedom loving American into cold sweats.

Still think your guns are safe? Read and learn: NRA Blacklist
Link Posted: 10/12/2006 3:16:25 PM EST

Originally Posted By ishoot2live:

Still think your guns are safe? Read and learn: NRA Blacklist



It amazes me how many people on that list made their fame and fortune by "pretending" with guns but gladly lend their support to take away our rights to USE them.

thanks,
Ron
Link Posted: 10/12/2006 3:21:06 PM EST

Originally Posted By diversmith:
What do you guys think?


I am voting for Gillespie... I have a thousand reason$ why I am voting

thanks,
Ron
Link Posted: 10/12/2006 3:43:43 PM EST
Don't get us started on Dem and Republicans. I too will be voting all Republican. Say what you want, but I haven't seen a damn thing worth while from a Democrat in a long time. Just look at how the Dems and Republicans for on gun issues. Enough said.
Link Posted: 10/12/2006 3:50:58 PM EST

Originally Posted By DoctorCheney223:

Originally Posted By diversmith:
What do you guys think?


I am voting for Gillespie... I have a thousand reason$ why I am voting

thanks,
Ron


What did you receive in exchange for your 1,000 reasons?
Link Posted: 10/12/2006 3:54:41 PM EST

Originally Posted By RDP:


What did you receive in exchange for your 1,000 reasons?


Hopefully a good Sheriff .... oh, and Thank You letter

thanks,
Ron
Link Posted: 10/12/2006 4:36:40 PM EST

Originally Posted By DoctorCheney223:

Originally Posted By RDP:


What did you receive in exchange for your 1,000 reasons?


Hopefully a good Sheriff .... oh, and Thank You letter

thanks,
Ron


Ron,

When you wrote your 1K contribution check were you aware of the "F" Grade that Mr. Gillespie received from the NRA?
Link Posted: 10/12/2006 6:16:06 PM EST
I am going to say there is a Democrat running for Public Administrator. His name is John Cahill. He is an NRA member, CCW intstructor and all around nice guy.

As a matter of fact at one of John's support rallys I ran in to Don Turner again, some will remember him from our Mainstreet Station get together, he is opening that shooting range in the NW and he's a local NRA board member.

Not to mention my family has been friends with John Cahill's since as far back as my memory serves, usually people don't pay too much attention to the lower offices during elections, and either vote for the name they see most or for who ever is in their party of choice. Just thought I'd bring the name up so if you wanted to research him a bit before voting strictly republican you can..

Thanks,,

John P..
Link Posted: 10/12/2006 6:32:01 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/12/2006 6:32:33 PM EST by ishoot2live]

Originally Posted By Edicut:
I am going to say there is a Democrat running for Public Administrator. His name is John Cahill. He is an NRA member, CCW intstructor and all around nice guy.

As a matter of fact at one of John's support rallys I ran in to Don Turner again, some will remember him from our Mainstreet Station get together, he is opening that shooting range in the NW and he's a local NRA board member.

Not to mention my family has been friends with John Cahill's since as far back as my memory serves, usually people don't pay too much attention to the lower offices during elections, and either vote for the name they see most or for who ever is in their party of choice. Just thought I'd bring the name up so if you wanted to research him a bit before voting strictly republican you can..

Thanks,,

John P..


+1 on people not paying much attention to the lower office races.

The candidates I speak of are running for offices that can make changes which affect Federal and State law, which directly threaten our firearms rights.

I've spoken to Mr. Cahill over the years and I have heard him on radio talk shows and I have seen him on TV interviews.

John is a good man and definately pro-gun and a staunch NRA supporter.
Link Posted: 10/12/2006 7:16:01 PM EST

Originally Posted By ishoot2live:

Ron,

When you wrote your 1K contribution check were you aware of the "F" Grade that Mr. Gillespie received from the NRA?


I wasn't aware of it but it wouldn't have changed my mind. I don't want some guy with a whopping two years of experience (not even 2 good years) running Metro. That's a HUGE job and impacts over a million lives. I could not in good faith, give money or a vote to guy that has NO experience to run a department as large as Metro.

thanks,
Ron
Link Posted: 10/12/2006 7:18:04 PM EST

Originally Posted By Edicut:
I am going to say there is a Democrat running for Public Administrator. His name is John Cahill. He is an NRA member, CCW intstructor and all around nice guy.



My only problem with Cahill is that he is on Tessa Hafen's website supporting her over John Porter. Hafen's view on immigration seem pretty liberal to me and I couldn't trust her as a LAWMAKER who can actually change or make new gun laws.

thanks,
Ron
Link Posted: 10/13/2006 6:49:28 AM EST

Originally Posted By DoctorCheney223:

Originally Posted By ishoot2live:

Still think your guns are safe? Read and learn: NRA Blacklist



It amazes me how many people on that list made their fame and fortune by "pretending" with guns but gladly lend their support to take away our rights to USE them.

thanks,
Ron


You know, I was thinking the same thing reading the list of celebrities. Not just pretending but glamorizing guns in film. They set role models that include guns(nothing wrong with that) and then say they are against guns. Bunch of fucking hypocrites.
Link Posted: 10/13/2006 8:54:22 AM EST
Ron:

Tessa Hafen is simply Harry Reid - with tits.
(I believe BOTH of them have a vagina, but have not verified this myself)


The sheriff's race was a list of awful choices for me. It is now a choice of a bullshit artist and an empty suit (that may be anti-gun).

I still have not decided the lesser of the two offered evils.


Lem
Link Posted: 10/13/2006 2:44:16 PM EST

Originally Posted By Lem:
Ron:

Tessa Hafen is simply Harry Reid - with tits.
(I believe BOTH of them have a vagina, but have not verified this myself)

Lem


By all means... please verify and report back to us immediately

thanks,
Ron

Link Posted: 10/13/2006 3:47:01 PM EST
I think Hafen screwed herself with the latest commercial where she actually speaks. Could she come across any colder or more of a bitch? My mom is a staunch Democrat and even she said that commercial turned her off just because of the attitde Hafen had.
Link Posted: 10/13/2006 7:08:13 PM EST
As near as I can tell Gillespie stands for things as they are. This is not good. It means business as usuall. High costs, easy target law enforcement.

Ariola -- Uncertain, might shake up the department enough to make it effective in both the meth and cartheft along with maybe better traffic enforcement.


Right now as I see it the sherrifs office is only marginally effective. and the moral is pretty much non existant.
I saw 4 officers at a pedesstrian stop. unless some really important training was going on, a waste of manpower.

My house got burgalarized adn Metro did not want to take a report until I told them that a hand gun was stolen. Then it was a pain for the clerk. EXCUSE ME! We have to register guns with people who know only that the bullets come out somewhere on it. EXCUSE ME!!!

The officer involved shooting that happened on my block at the first of the year drew about 15-20 officers and about as many cars. They had a cadet at the end of the street deflecting traffic. Why?

Metro needs a shake up and a lot of reorganization. Bill Young has screwed us bigtime and as near as I can tell Gelespie is Young Ver 2.

The times they are a changing and we must change with them and maybe Ariola can do that.



Thanks
Tony
Link Posted: 10/14/2006 5:08:17 AM EST
Why would Ariola be bad? A busniessman, imo, would be able to get the latest gear to the streets. A businessman would be able to allocate for and execute training more efficiently. In the short term how could he *&%$ things up? I'm sure Metro is like any organization and has enertia to move along no matter what, where, who, where, or how. He could only do good.
Link Posted: 10/15/2006 8:04:17 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/15/2006 8:12:44 PM EST by ishoot2live]
I saw Mr. Airola on a TV interview today (Sunday, October 15th). He said the reason why Undersheriff Gillespie received an "F" from the NRA is because of one of the answers he gave on the NRA's candidate endorsement questionnaire.

According to Mr. Airola, the question asked if Mr. Gillespie would forcibly confiscate privately owned firearms legally owned by law-abiding citizens during a terrorist attack or other disaster, like what happened in New Orleans, after Hurricane Katrina.

Apparently, when it was disclosed that a judge had declared the act of firearm confiscation during emergencies not only unconstitutional, but illegal, Mr. Gillespie still answered yes as to whether or not he would forcibly confiscate guns. According to Airola that is what earned Gillespie the "F" score.

Please don't shoot the messenger on this, I am only reporting what was said by Mr. Airola.

I will say this: If the NRA questionnaire thing is true, we are in for a very bumpy ride when it comes to our guns if a disaster strikes.
Link Posted: 10/15/2006 9:41:31 PM EST
Well.. I say we all email him and ask him if this is true. I really hope it's not

doug@gillespie2006.com

thanks,
Ron
Link Posted: 10/15/2006 10:15:25 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/15/2006 10:21:03 PM EST by ishoot2live]
I think you can request the answers to the questionnaire given by the candidates from the NRA Political Victory Fund (Nevada)

Although Mr. Airola garnered an "A" and Undersheriff Gillespie earned an "F", I would still like to see the answers from both candidates.

What the ratings mean:

"A" Solidly pro-gun candidate. An “A” incumbent who has supported NRA positions on key votes. May also describe a non-incumbent “A” candidate (one not represented with an *) who has previously held other office and cast consistent pro-gun votes, or an “A” candidate who hasn’t held office but has expressed strong support for NRA positions on Second Amendment issues. It should be noted that a “non-incumbent” candidate may have been awarded the “A” rating due solely to their responses on the NRA-PVF candidate survey.

"F" True enemy of gun owners’ rights. A vehement anti-gun candidate who always opposes gun owners’ rights and/or actively leads anti-gun legislative efforts, or sponsors anti-gun legislation.



Link Posted: 10/15/2006 10:38:34 PM EST
Eh, Airola is a scumbag scientologist.
Link Posted: 10/16/2006 6:27:56 PM EST
Did you see this news article? Weird...

Ex-Sheriff Candidate Alleges Conversation Secretly Taped
Link Posted: 10/16/2006 8:03:16 PM EST

Originally Posted By ishoot2live:
According to Mr. Airola, the question asked if Mr. Gillespie would forcibly confiscate privately owned firearms legally owned by law-abiding citizens during a terrorist attack or other disaster, like what happened in New Orleans, after Hurricane Katrina.

Apparently, when it was disclosed that a judge had declared the act of firearm confiscation during emergencies not only unconstitutional, but illegal, Mr. Gillespie still answered yes as to whether or not he would forcibly confiscate guns. According to Airola that is what earned Gillespie the "F" score.


Well.... looks like Bush eliminated this topic for debate

www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=508161

thanks,
Ron
Link Posted: 10/16/2006 8:16:13 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/16/2006 8:59:55 PM EST by ishoot2live]

Originally Posted By DoctorCheney223:

Originally Posted By ishoot2live:
According to Mr. Airola, the question asked if Mr. Gillespie would forcibly confiscate privately owned firearms legally owned by law-abiding citizens during a terrorist attack or other disaster, like what happened in New Orleans, after Hurricane Katrina.

Apparently, when it was disclosed that a judge had declared the act of firearm confiscation during emergencies not only unconstitutional, but illegal, Mr. Gillespie still answered yes as to whether or not he would forcibly confiscate guns. According to Airola that is what earned Gillespie the "F" score.


Well.... looks like Bush eliminated this topic for debate

www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=508161

thanks,
Ron


I agree.

But Mr. Gillespie allegedly said that he would forcibly confiscate privately owned firearms legally owned by law-abiding citizens during a terrorist attack or other disaster BEFORE President Bush signed the bill into law.
Link Posted: 10/16/2006 9:56:00 PM EST
She was heard fairly clearly trashing Gill... Now instead of addressing her comments, she is going after whoever taped it as being against some law. What a bunch of horseshit. I guess that's politics. Lie, no problem. Sidestep. Shuffle. Mumble. Integrity down the toilet.


Ex-Sheriff Candidate Alleges Conversation Secretly Taped
Link Posted: 10/17/2006 1:41:00 AM EST
No legal violation..... just a policy violation.

Link Posted: 10/17/2006 12:11:02 PM EST
Scientology. Hollywood liberals tried to banish tom cruise because of his affiliation. They haven't and won't succeed. Whatever those california fruitcakes are against, more than likely I'll feel the opposite. Thus, I see that as a plus for Ariola.


Originally Posted By Silesius:
Eh, Airola is a scumbag scientologist.
Link Posted: 10/17/2006 2:54:12 PM EST

Originally Posted By f2:
Scientology. Hollywood liberals tried to banish tom cruise because of his affiliation. They haven't and won't succeed. Whatever those california fruitcakes are against, more than likely I'll feel the opposite.


I think they were against HIM acting like a fool. Jumping around on couches and spouting his "vast medical knowledge" about post partum depression. He went on tirade about Brooke Shields not really suffering from post-partum depression and mocking the medical system.. because he knows more than doctors

thanks,
Ron
Link Posted: 10/17/2006 6:37:04 PM EST
pot and kettle.


Originally Posted By DoctorCheney223:

Originally Posted By f2:
Scientology. Hollywood liberals tried to banish tom cruise because of his affiliation. They haven't and won't succeed. Whatever those california fruitcakes are against, more than likely I'll feel the opposite.


I think they were against HIM acting like a fool. Jumping around on couches and spouting his "vast medical knowledge" about post partum depression. He went on tirade about Brooke Shields not really suffering from post-partum depression and mocking the medical system.. because he knows more than doctors

thanks,
Ron
Link Posted: 10/18/2006 5:48:51 PM EST
I found this in my mailbox today.

Link Posted: 10/18/2006 8:22:34 PM EST

Me too, Joe; got the same........
Link Posted: 10/18/2006 9:05:30 PM EST
Got my card today, too. Guess I'm voting for Jerry Nipple.
Link Posted: 10/19/2006 2:52:27 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/19/2006 2:57:51 AM EST by f2]
Thanks for posting that Joe.


Originally Posted By ishoot2live:
I found this in my mailbox today.

img183.imageshack.us/img183/7032/nraalertkh0.jpg


eta: I'm taking it to work today. Though I'd probably get in trouble by posting it, I can hand it around or leave it laying about.

Link Posted: 10/28/2006 4:00:15 AM EST
The liberal rag LV Sun is endorsing Gill... Kiss of death?
Link Posted: 10/28/2006 8:03:59 AM EST
I was hardcore for Gillespie until recently... now I cant make up my mind...

The big reason I didnt like Airola was because he's never been a cop and the answer he gave in the debates about the TASER deaths.

I'm seeing more and more about Gillespie and really dont like him either...


does anybody know if they're having another debate before the election?
Link Posted: 10/28/2006 9:25:53 AM EST
[Last Edit: 10/28/2006 2:29:37 PM EST by ishoot2live]

Originally Posted By Blazin413:
I was hardcore for Gillespie until recently... now I cant make up my mind...

The big reason I didnt like Airola was because he's never been a cop and the answer he gave in the debates about the TASER deaths.

I'm seeing more and more about Gillespie and really dont like him either...


does anybody know if they're having another debate before the election?


Where have you been?

Airola was a commissioned police officer in Los Banos, California for three years. He was elected the head of his police union and he was fired for going after a crooked police chief.

He sued his Department and the City and won his job back along with over $360,000.00 in back pay and punitive damages. When he won his job back in court he didn't want it anymore, so he moved here to Las Vegas to start a private business. He was also a Reserve Deputy in Merced County, but he wasn't able to keep that status because of a residency requirement.

Now he wants to do the same thing here that he did in Los Banos: Shake up the Department and clear out all the good ol' boys.
Link Posted: 10/30/2006 1:57:57 PM EST
As my first post, I think I will harp in on this subject.

I have seen in the past, in a rural county in California back in the '80's where an unknown was challenging the old time Sheriff, who'd been in office for 25 years; who had hooks into the vice area of the county, and had a undersheriff also as one of the "good ole boys" syndrome.

Along comes a Cowboy, wanting to be the next Sheriff. This cowboy's claim to fame was that he was past National Champion Calf Roper for several years (Bob Wiley), and also was a Reserve Sheriff on the same department.

The jist of the story is, the Cowboy won.. People were ready for a change, especially after all the crap the old Sheriff (Sandy Robinson) had pulled over the years, and the morale in the department was way down, and also their training wasnt up to par.

When the new guy got in, he started new training courses and the morale improved. Under his administration, a new jail was built, along with better radio communications to cars, which was very lacking in the previous administration. Under his administration, this department became one of the better ones in the state, which it still is.

In essence, I believe this county is due for a change and shakeup in the departments. Being that Metro is such a large department, I think it really needs to be ran like a business, and that is where Jerry can help. You dont need to be a 25 years cop to run this organization. Have an undersheriff that has that experience and others command their sections. The Sheriff needs to be the CEO/COO/CFO of the department to get it back on line.

I think with ole Gill, we'll just have a "mini-me" of the now Sheriff; or in other words; the same old thing. I could be wrong, but that is my .02 cents worth.

John
Link Posted: 10/30/2006 7:01:33 PM EST
Getting ready to go to the polls and early vote.

I am definitely going nearly all republican. And definitely Airola for sheriff.

Also, voting no on Question 4 and a big frickin' YES on question 5! I am tired of walking thru a cloud of smoke going into the grocery store and having an allergy attack when I'm out spending good money on a really nice dinner.

They predicted the end of the earth when they had the same thing going up for passage in California and guess what???? Life went on and now people just go outside the bars and restaurants and have their smokes and then come back in. People will still be able to booze and smoke it up in the casinos so I don't see a drawback to question 5.

YMMV
Top Top