Please Take a Half a Minute

[rhutchinson]

This was a forwarded e-mail from a co-worker today. It takes just a couple seconds to click the answer on one question.
I don,tknow if the USA Today link will come up hot or not, if it don't please Google it. They at least need to know how many people they're PI--ING Off! :evil: :evil: :evil: "Vote early......and often!!!



Obama's Attorney General, Eric Holder, has already said this is one of his major issues. He does not believe the 2nd Amendment gives individuals the right to bear arms. This takes literally 2 clicks to complete. Please vote on this gun issue question with USA Today. It will only take a few seconds of your time. Then pass the link on to all the pro gun folks you know. Hopefully these results will be published later this month. This upcoming year will become critical for gun owners with the Supreme Court's accepting the District of Columbia case against the right for individuals to bear arms.

Here's what you need to do:

First - vote on this one.

Second - launch it to other folks and have THEM vote - then we will see if the results get published.

The Question is:

"Does the Second Amendment give individuals the right to bear arms?"

Click on the link below and PLEASE vote.
>>>>>>>>>USATODAY.com - Quick Question

 

[mike]

Well, 97% of the responders voted "yes". Here's a link Aim Here

Mike

 

[BEARS BUDDY]

Only 97%? These folks think they know what's best for all and would not accept any result that differs from their opinion. For proof check the vote on the "health care" bill.

 

[Kayak Jack]

Results look pretty clear to me. 97% say yes. I wonder how he'll find hanging chads in that?

 

[Manjimike]

Well, 97% of the responders voted "yes". Here's a link Aim Here

Mike

Then hit the Refresh button and vote again and again :lol:

Cheers Mike

 

[rhutchinson]

I wonder how many responded. I would like for it to have been a bunch.
Our elected offcials are under the misconception there job is to do whats best for us (in there opinion). It was always my understanding they are supposed to do what what the majority wants. Of course this could also get us in trouble. More and more of the population are born and raised in an inviroment that is completely removed from hunting,fishing,farming etc. that they just don't have a clue. They are easy prey for the anti nuts. Fifty years ago everyone had a grandfather, uncle, or someone that lived rural and had some sort of connection. The majority of the population live along the east and west coast in urban settings and scew all the "averages"completely away from the rest of us that populate the majority of the country in between.

End of rant.....sorry.

Richard

 

[oldsparkey]

Received this in a email today from a friend........ It might help to explain the reason the government wants to put there thumb on the activities.
*********************************************************************************************************************************************************
The state of Wisconsin has gone an entire deer hunting season without someone getting killed. That's great.
There were over 600,000 hunters. Allow me to restate that number.

Over the last two months, the eighth largest army in the world - more men under arms than Iran ; more than France and Germany combined - deployed to the woods of a single American state to help keep the deer menace at bay.
But that pales in comparison to the 750,000 who are in the woods of Pennsylvania this week.

Michigan 's 700,000 hunters have now returned home. Toss in a quarter million hunters in West Virginia , and it is literally the case that the hunters of those four states alone would comprise the largest army in the world.

America will forever be safe from foreign invasion of troops with that kind of home-grown firepower.

*Hunting - it's not just a way to fill the freezer.
It's a matter of national security!
*******************************************************************************************************************************************************

That's just the folks that went hunting in four ( 4 ) , not counting the ones who did not go in those 4 states or the folks at home with a firearm of some make , model and caliber.

Now add in all of the rest of the 48 states and we have a home grown army that no one can match and I am one of them........

Looks to me like any politician wanting to get rid of the firearms is committing political suicide when it comes to votes for them.

 

[catfish]

that is a lot of income for the states towns & cities. look at all the things we spend our money on. bait,gas,tackle,permits,guns,ammo, eats,trucks to get us there ( some of us have yellow goats) :wink: :roll: boats,canoes & yea piro,s & they want to cut it out. :shock: :? i think the merchants of stores & sporting good stores better be voting too. that number was just hunters alone not counting every other outdoors man. that would be a lot of pennies. i know you cant even go on a short fishing or hunting trip without at least spending 20 or 30 dollars .

 

[Wannabe]

Chuck,
Just remember that a large part of these hunters are (as a guy we know would put it) Sheeple.
Bob

 

[oldsparkey]

Catfish .. I agree............

The politicians and the anti gun nuts forget one thing , well a couple of them.
The legal person is just that ...Legal.
The crook could care less and does not care. Gets his stuff off the street from a shady dealer and no taxes are paid and could care less about hunting. Unless you call robbing a convince store hunting.

The legal person pays the tax for his equipment , including all of it , the firearm , ammo and everything else.
You don't just get a firearm and ammo and walk out the back door blasting away. You get a state license , permits and all the rest. Then you pay for the vehicle , gas , oil , tires and all the rest. If you are in a hunting club then membership fees which help to build the game population with feeders and land management. That takes tractors , seeds and fences along with a lot of work ,none of it is free. Ever the property tax the rancher has to pay for the area to hunt in and raise cattle.

Then there is the clothing needed for the season , food while in camp and all of the rest of the expenses to be there and enjoy your time in the woods.

It is one sport that can run up the bill more then a person cares to think about. To top it all off there are no guarantees you will come home with any meat. I would bet most folks that go hunting could take there money and purchase a whole cow for what they spend and have some meat to enjoy. That beef could be cheaper then what they spent and returned home from the hunt with nothing. :lol:

Hunters and firearm folks provide a lot of tax money for the system , just look at all the stores or shops selling hunting gear and are making a lot of money , all which is taxable.

Besides controlling the wildlife population the hunter is keeping the economic system green.

The part I like the most was during WW 2 , the Japanese said they did not want to directly attack the U.S.A because they knew everyone was armed with a firearm.

 

[BEARS BUDDY]

I
Our elected officials are under the misconception there job is to do whats best for us (in there opinion).
End of rant.....sorry.

Richard

Except for the apology, that was my point exactly. Too many elected officials believe the citizens are incapable of making intelligent choices. (Seeing election results sometimes makes me think they may have a point.) :mrgreen:

 

[Kayak Jack]

When you work for the government, and I did for 43 years, you have to remember just who is paying your salary. And, that you are a public servant. When you meet with the public, never forget to thank them for the privilege of serving them, and for paying your salary. Never fails to set'em back a bit.