Looks close but insufficient Looks close but insufficient to carry a constitutional amendment.
My wife is opposed but open to argument. However she wants to go to a range and try shooting this year before we repeal it. I fear if she gets a taste for it she’ll never be persuadable.
Ah well
scaredyclassic
January 1, 2013 @
2:02 PM
Need a name fOr the group Need a name fOr the group that is catchy like
NRA but different
no_such_reality
January 1, 2013 @
3:06 PM
squat300 wrote:Looks close [quote=squat300]Looks close but insufficient to carry a constitutional amendment.
My wife is opposed but open to argument. However she wants to go to a range and try shooting this year before we repeal it. I fear if she gets a taste for it she’ll never be persuadable.
Ah well[/quote]
15 – 10 against is close? That’s 60/40 for a no vote.
scaredyclassic
January 1, 2013 @
5:07 PM
no_such_reality [quote=no_such_reality][quote=squat300]Looks close but insufficient to carry a constitutional amendment.
My wife is opposed but open to argument. However she wants to go to a range and try shooting this year before we repeal it. I fear if she gets a taste for it she’ll never be persuadable.
Ah well[/quote]
15 – 10 against is close? That’s 60/40 for a no vote.[/quote]
Vote count changed was 50/50. I think if I could raise $50 million I could persuade America and move the numbers
no_such_reality
January 2, 2013 @
8:17 AM
I don’t know, it took the I don’t know, it took the union’s $100 Million on Prop 32 to persuade just Cali.
and the NRA’s pockets are deep.
LuckyInOC
January 3, 2013 @
9:22 AM
Currently, all categories of Currently, all categories of ‘No’ has all categories of ‘Yes’ beat. 69% – 31% or 2:1
dumbrenter
January 3, 2013 @
9:39 AM
squat300 wrote: Vote count [quote=squat300] Vote count changed was 50/50. I think if I could raise $50 million I could persuade America and move the numbers[/quote]
If the 5 Yes votes that would put up money contribute $10 million each, you have your start up fund for “persuasion” squat!
Aecetia
January 4, 2013 @
12:43 PM
Not going to happen. Not going to happen.
scaredyclassic
January 5, 2013 @
10:26 AM
more than 1/3 say NO GUNS AT more than 1/3 say NO GUNS AT ALL. if the question were more moderate, say, severely limit gun rights, perhaps we could swing it…
LuckyInOC
January 5, 2013 @
12:04 PM
squat300 wrote:more than 1/3 [quote=squat300]more than 1/3 say NO GUNS AT ALL. if the question were more moderate, say, severely limit gun rights, perhaps we could swing it…[/quote]
Doesn’t #2 fit what you are saying?
Just because you repeal the 2nd amendment, does not mean there would be no guns allowed at all. Repealing the 2nd Amendment would not mean a total ban on all guns?
Lucky In OC
scaredyclassic
January 5, 2013 @
1:59 PM
shoulda been “no, but with shoulda been “no, but with very limited gun rights”. I fear people may fear amending the constitution.
all
January 1, 2013 @
2:49 PM
It might be easier to get It might be easier to get five guys to interpret the 2nd amendment differently than to repeal it.
January 1, 2013 @ 10:29 AM
Looks close but insufficient
Looks close but insufficient to carry a constitutional amendment.
My wife is opposed but open to argument. However she wants to go to a range and try shooting this year before we repeal it. I fear if she gets a taste for it she’ll never be persuadable.
Ah well
January 1, 2013 @ 2:02 PM
Need a name fOr the group
Need a name fOr the group that is catchy like
NRA but different
January 1, 2013 @ 3:06 PM
squat300 wrote:Looks close
[quote=squat300]Looks close but insufficient to carry a constitutional amendment.
My wife is opposed but open to argument. However she wants to go to a range and try shooting this year before we repeal it. I fear if she gets a taste for it she’ll never be persuadable.
Ah well[/quote]
15 – 10 against is close? That’s 60/40 for a no vote.
January 1, 2013 @ 5:07 PM
no_such_reality
[quote=no_such_reality][quote=squat300]Looks close but insufficient to carry a constitutional amendment.
My wife is opposed but open to argument. However she wants to go to a range and try shooting this year before we repeal it. I fear if she gets a taste for it she’ll never be persuadable.
Ah well[/quote]
15 – 10 against is close? That’s 60/40 for a no vote.[/quote]
Vote count changed was 50/50. I think if I could raise $50 million I could persuade America and move the numbers
January 2, 2013 @ 8:17 AM
I don’t know, it took the
I don’t know, it took the union’s $100 Million on Prop 32 to persuade just Cali.
and the NRA’s pockets are deep.
January 3, 2013 @ 9:22 AM
Currently, all categories of
Currently, all categories of ‘No’ has all categories of ‘Yes’ beat. 69% – 31% or 2:1
January 3, 2013 @ 9:39 AM
squat300 wrote: Vote count
[quote=squat300] Vote count changed was 50/50. I think if I could raise $50 million I could persuade America and move the numbers[/quote]
If the 5 Yes votes that would put up money contribute $10 million each, you have your start up fund for “persuasion” squat!
January 4, 2013 @ 12:43 PM
Not going to happen.
Not going to happen.
January 5, 2013 @ 10:26 AM
more than 1/3 say NO GUNS AT
more than 1/3 say NO GUNS AT ALL. if the question were more moderate, say, severely limit gun rights, perhaps we could swing it…
January 5, 2013 @ 12:04 PM
squat300 wrote:more than 1/3
[quote=squat300]more than 1/3 say NO GUNS AT ALL. if the question were more moderate, say, severely limit gun rights, perhaps we could swing it…[/quote]
Doesn’t #2 fit what you are saying?
Just because you repeal the 2nd amendment, does not mean there would be no guns allowed at all. Repealing the 2nd Amendment would not mean a total ban on all guns?
Lucky In OC
January 5, 2013 @ 1:59 PM
shoulda been “no, but with
shoulda been “no, but with very limited gun rights”. I fear people may fear amending the constitution.
January 1, 2013 @ 2:49 PM
It might be easier to get
It might be easier to get five guys to interpret the 2nd amendment differently than to repeal it.