On the gun thing, it only reads confusing because gun lingo is kinda specialized like any other serious way of life. The background is that Clinton's administration started calling semi-automatic weapons (one round fired per trigger pull) "assault weapons. Assault weapons are fully automatic weapons ("machine guns") used by military all over the world. They tend to be the medium sized calibers in rifle form. The 2A guarantees us the right to have military weapons, but the traitors in Washington know that the average citizen can be duped into thinking these are dangerous tools in and of themselves. They know they can get laws passed on semi-autos if they convince people they are really passing laws about fully autos. New ownership of fully autos have been almost outlawed since '69 and practically outlawed since '89. The door has closed, unless you are a cop. Since registration started, there have only been TWO crimes committed with legally owned fully autos - and both of those were done by cops who are exempt from registration and tax procedures. Legal fully autos are not contributing to crime.
Anyway, what the "assault weapon ban" did was ban SEMI-AUTOS (on round per trigger pull), but called them assault weapons so people THOUGHT they had just banned "dangerous" machine guns. In fact, they didn't ban anything except rifles with certain features. An AR was still legal - you just could have more than one of the following: an adjustable stock, a grip for the right hand, a threaded barrel, or a lug for attachment of "toys." The guns themselves (except a few pointed exceptions) still functioned and fired the same. In essence, they tried to ban scary LOOKING guns by making people think they were real "scary guns."
That clear up some of the confusion, I hope. Obama wants to re-instate that silly ban that did NOTHING to reduce crime, increase it, and put the ban umbrella over every possible gun in Amerika than he can. Like any good socialist, he wants his serfs unarmed so that they can't resist what he decides to do TO them. Doing something FOR them (even the token lip service he gives now) will stop as soon as he disarms them.
I mean, the only one I know of currently is the health care bill and that was part of Obama's platform.
Actually, his platform was something along the lines of National HealthCare would be "extreme." I don't remember the exact words, but his platform was that he would NOT consider doing exactly what he is doing now. Either way, he's still a lying conman.
Nova is fine. It may be a girl's name, but that's cool.
If you want to pontificate, don't you think you should ID yourself if you want the statements to be given any actual weight by your readers? Anonymous statements just show someone isn't proud enough to be associated with them. Obviously, your choice and you must have your reasons.
KJ
