Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

WES CLARK OPPOSES CONCEALED WEAPONS

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU
 
funkyflathead Donating Member (723 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-27-03 06:26 PM
Original message
WES CLARK OPPOSES CONCEALED WEAPONS
Edited on Thu Nov-27-03 06:52 PM by funkyflathead
Clark blasts weapons, Medicare bills


http://www.wisinfo.com/postcrescent/news/archive/local_13392932.shtml

Dean is looking better and better. At least he has NO PROBLEM with ccws.

Vermont is one of two states in the Union where a legal pistol owner does NOT need a permit to carry concealed. The other is Alaska.

Heck I think even John Kerry has a ccw permit of some type!








Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Jerseycoa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-27-03 06:32 PM
Response to Original message
1. Willing to listen
Concealed weapons is good, how?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
billbuckhead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-27-03 06:36 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. Clark is fearless. The real leader we've been longing for.
It's time for pink tutu Dems to realize there can be no appeasment of gun nuts and their fellow travelers anymore than Al Queda. Afterall far more Americans are killed by domestic firearms than terrorist firearms.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Abe Linkman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-30-03 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #4
33. No, Clark is NOT fearless - just the opposite
Powerful people don't the rest of us to have access to firearms. They fear what citizens might do as the result of the treachery of their leadrs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
funkyflathead Donating Member (723 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-27-03 06:41 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. It's good because you can protect yourself
Don't ever bring a knife to a gun fight.

People who pack .45 autos get respect- automatically.

If you wanna be a victim fine but not me or my 7 friends.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
StClone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-27-03 07:10 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. Pea shooter
My 50 mm will blast that out of the water.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1a2b3c Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-27-03 07:18 PM
Response to Reply #1
13. easy
So you dont have to carry unconcealed so everyone and there dog knows you got a gun and exactly where it is incase they want to snatch it from you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Upfront Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-27-03 06:33 PM
Response to Original message
2. Clark
Against CCW? Good by, Clark, nice knowing you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catch22Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-27-03 06:37 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. do you mean good BYE Clark?
I'm against CCW too. Guess it's good "by" me too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Upfront Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-27-03 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Calls Um
Like I see um.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasMexican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-27-03 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. adios
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ksec Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-27-03 06:34 PM
Response to Original message
3. in Ohio we have a concealed weapon law.
Leave your gun on the seat of yer car OK, put it under yer coat , busted. Kind of a silly law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasMexican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-27-03 06:49 PM
Response to Original message
8. Glad I support Dean.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
funkyflathead Donating Member (723 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-27-03 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Glad to see someone else thinks like I do
Dean is looking better and better n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1a2b3c Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-27-03 07:17 PM
Response to Original message
12. I am tired of stupid gun control laws being passed
Clark is one of the Elite, military. What did you expect? Like he thinks the average joe needs protection, thats what he and all the marines are there for, right?

I wont vote for Clark. I wont vote for Kucinich. And i dont really want to vote for Kerry, the hunter. To be honest, i dont even want to vote for Dean, but i will. Its Dean or Braun for me and i doubt Braun will win the primaries. Anything else will be a vote for either the Green, Libertarian, or Socialist party. Hate me if you want, but thats the way it is. I am tired of the 2 party system and i am tired of people trying to tell me i cant own guns or i cant carry one for protection.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
billbuckhead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-27-03 07:27 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. Wes is just calling out the NRA 5th columnists in the Dean camp
If a Dem can't stand up to domestic terrorists like the NRA and GOA, how can we expect them to stand up to the BFEE, the military industrial complex, Kim Dumb-ill or Al Queda?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasMexican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-28-03 06:27 AM
Response to Reply #14
23. Armed Civillians != terrorists.
Armed civillians arent terrorists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrBenchley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-28-03 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #14
27. Well said
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Emoto Donating Member (914 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-01-03 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #14
38. ah...
So groups that seek to protect the Bill of Rights are "domestic terrorists"? I would laugh if it weren't so completely sad that a person could be so utterly misinformed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mikehiggins Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-27-03 09:08 PM
Response to Reply #12
20. Amazing
Because of this issue you would do your part to keep George Bush in office?

Tired of the two party system?

What, exactly, are you doing here, then?

I'm sure Ashcroft and Bush will be happy to protect your Second Amendment rights while they continue to gut the other nine. After that, of course, all bets are off.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-27-03 07:52 PM
Response to Original message
15. concealled??
why do that..just get a holster and wear your gun on your belt. what the fucks the difference? if you got it-show it!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasMexican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-28-03 12:38 AM
Response to Reply #15
21. Tactical Reasons...
if you are in a convience store going to buy something and someone comes in and wants to rob they could see your gun first and single you out first since you are the most obvious threat to them. If you were carrying concealed they might not not pay you much attention.

That being said I have no problem with people who want to open carry or conceal carry. It should be a personal choice. I cant see why one should be legal when the other isnt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jerseycoa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-27-03 07:59 PM
Response to Original message
16. Question
Was it Wisconsin where the people voted this down and the Republicans voted it in, anyway, and then overrode the Democrat governor's veto? Or was that Missouri? Ohio, maybe?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jerseycoa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-27-03 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Oh, I see
In Wisconsin, the Republicans approved the bill and the Democratic governor vetoed it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dolomite Donating Member (689 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-02-03 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #16
40. "Was it Wisconsin where the people voted this down and...
...the Republicans voted it in, anyway, and then overrode the Democrat governor's veto?"

Ummm... No. Actually what happened last year in Wisconsin was that the Dem controlled State Senate was supposed to hear the CCW bill (the Personal Protections Act, as it is known) after it was passed by the State Assembly (there are just a ton of pro-gun Democrats in northern Wisconsin). They assured everyone that it would be defeated, but nonetheless, promised everyone that the bill would have a chance to be voted on.

Well, since it was fairly obvious that this thing had the support of the people (including key Dems in both Houses) and that it would indeed pass due to the fact that then Governor, Republican Scott McClueless, would sign anything put in front of him - the bill was brought up for a reading and the Democrats in charge of the Senate simply adjourned for the year. There’s a link somewhere to an MP3 recording of that night – you should hear the people screaming in the chamber after they pulled that one.

The people that wanted this bill asked the Republican leadership what they could do to punish the Democrats in the Legislature for pulling such obviously low parliamentary BS – guess what their answer was? Vote Republican! So now there’s a huge Republican majority in both houses and the former Dem leader in the Senate was booked for 20-some felony counts on a variety of campaign infractions (a self-professed hunter, he doesn’t own any guns now).

The current Governor that vetoed the CCW bill, Dem Jim Doyle, is an anti-gun extremist: just last year he tried to push a bill that would ban all firearms in the State except for single shot shotguns and rifles. He got into office by a combination of generous donations from Native American casino operators (man, are THEY loaded!), and using the State’s tobacco industry settlement money to get his named splashed over half the billboards in Wisconsin.

Currently the Personal Protection Act is waiting for a veto override vote in the Legislature – it’s almost a lock to pass the Senate – but it’s going to be a real squeaker in the Assembly – Governor Jim Doyle has a lot of money to spread around to gain favor from the Democrats. One Representative from Eau Claire has already received funding to repair an old Locomotive roundhouse in exchange for changing his stance on concealed carry. It will be interesting to see what happens next – things are bound to get very intense in January when the CCW veto override vote hits the Assembly so stay tuned.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HereSince1628 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-27-03 08:24 PM
Response to Original message
18. I have nothing against carrying a weapon,
I really worry about its use...mostly they don't get used, but the potential for misuse and vigilantism make me nervous. Killing someone to stop a robbery is an overapplication of punishment...in Wisconsin robbery itself isn't a capital offense, nor is battery.

Moreover, I think the general acceptance of the argument that average citizens need this protection because the "state" can't guarantee safety is really sad. Its a hallmark of a broken society. I think having the average person feeling a need to walk around in Kevlar would indicate the same thing.

A heightened need to manage fear of death is one of the strong characteristics linking personal and political conservatism. I lament the spread of a sentimentality that favors political movement to the right.

















Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jerseycoa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-27-03 08:51 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. Not sure
I don't think we have this in New Jersey. We're generally anti-gun except for hunting. Republicans opposed smart guns here, where only the owner is supposed to be able to shoot it, which passed by the Democrats, I do remember.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tinfoil Donating Member (153 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-28-03 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #19
25. If smart guns are such a good idea...


why are the police exempted from them?

One would think a person likely to have their own gun used against them would be a police officer. It would be nice to have that technology used for law enforcement, but for some reason the police are exempt from this new law....

Just another form a gun control to keep firearms out of the hands of the average citizen.

Sad, really....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demsrule4life Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-28-03 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #25
26. Roughly 25% of police officers that are killed by a firearm
are killed by their duty weapon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fescue4u Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-28-03 11:40 PM
Response to Reply #19
31. Don't forget..
That smart guns havent been invented yet, but New Jersey has passed a law that only makes smart guns legal...

Oh..but they don't want to ban guns, they only want you to have guns that don't exist......

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tinfoil Donating Member (153 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-28-03 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #18
24. We'll probably have to agree to disagree, but...
Killing someone to stop a robbery is an overapplication of punishment...in Wisconsin robbery itself isn't a capital offense, nor is battery.

So you would not step in to stop a robbery in which the robber has a gun drawn on another individual and is threatening to kill them..? Or a rape? Or just a plain old fashioned assault because the victim "looks funny" to the attacker. If I ever had to draw and shoot someone (and I REALLY hope I don't.. I'm not a violent person by any means), I am not "punishing" them. I am stopping them from threatening the life of myself or another human being.


Moreover, I think the general acceptance of the argument that average citizens need this protection because the "state" can't guarantee safety is really sad. Its a hallmark of a broken society.

The idea of people being responsible for their own personal safety is the hallmark of an independent society, not a broken one. The US Government and its agencies have never been responsible for the personal protection of individual citizens. That is up to you and me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
neuvocat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-28-03 01:52 AM
Response to Original message
22. Thanks for posting this.
I happen to agree with Clark on this-although I'm sure you wouldn't be surprised by now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beevul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-28-03 01:51 PM
Response to Original message
28. Too bad, I almost liked him (NOT)
Anyone who cannot trust law abiding citizens with guns can NOT be trusted with my vote.

Looks like its iether: Dean gets my vote, or the same party as the last 2 elections, the Fictional Party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Township75 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-28-03 09:42 PM
Response to Original message
29. Sooo Long Clark! Dean once again is the only choice.
I thought I was going to end up liking Clark alot, but I guess not.

GO DEAN! Our pro CCW, pro Gun Nominee!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Democratic_Sway Donating Member (101 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-28-03 10:00 PM
Response to Original message
30. well good
Finally someone takes a stand
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasMexican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-29-03 09:10 AM
Response to Reply #30
32. because...
taking a stand against freedom is a good thing, right? :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrSandman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-30-03 09:16 PM
Response to Reply #32
34. Southern Democrats
will believe we have been ignored again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fescue4u Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-01-03 03:16 AM
Response to Original message
35. Clark seems determined to shrug off our vote
that is the vote of folks who believe in the 2nd ammendment.

First his flippant attitude on "assault" rifles, and now his stance on ccw.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
funkyflathead Donating Member (723 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-01-03 08:48 AM
Response to Reply #35
36. Just more votes for Dean then n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Superfly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-01-03 08:51 AM
Response to Reply #36
37. It is because of this revalation
and other comments by Clark that I have changed my vote from him to Dean. You can search for threads posted by me in the last few months attessting to the fact that I was a Clark supporter, now turned Dean supporter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
funkyflathead Donating Member (723 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-01-03 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #37
39. I'm leaning towards Dean too
He won't take my guns away and he wants to get us out of Iraq quick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoctorWho Donating Member (18 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-02-03 10:06 PM
Response to Reply #37
41.  General clark ? thats a scary thought !
I would vote for Freddy krueger first !
this is the same Guy that said something to the effect of
suspending the US Constitution if a major attack occurs in the
US and having a Military junta style Government replace it !
no thanks General, have a nice retirement and enjoy Your
advanced insanity....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
neverforget Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-02-03 10:56 PM
Response to Reply #41
42. That would be General Tommy Franks not Clark.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/11/20/185048.shtml
--snip--
But Franks’ scenario goes much further. He is the first high-ranking official to openly speculate that the Constitution could be scrapped in favor of a military form of government.
--snip--

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 12:01 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC