Will you vote for a presidential candidate based on his stance on guns?

Agreed.

My stance is Obama/Biden. PERIOD.

The 2d Amendment may not be important to you; but it is to me and a great many other Americans.  Sorry guys and gals,  don't get near my weapons!  I fought for and earned the right to have them.  I'm not a mentally impaired person nor am I a hot head and my handguns are legally registered.  So don't even think about messing with my right to have and bear arms.  The way things are going; if we let the Obamas of this country have their way soon the only ones who will have weapons are the criminals.

fact check dot org you don't have a clue. Bassless "he's gonna take ma guns" bull has been shot down by pretty much every news org (msnbc, cnn, AP, WP, etc...) Find out the facts. Our guns are goning to be fine I am a lifetime NRA member nad have been since I was 18. But that doesn't mean I just vote how I am told by them or anyone, I am also a registered REP, but will not be voting the party line (we see where that has gotten us). I will vote for who is best for the job and don't care to which party they are attached, that goes for the pres, sen, gov, all the way down to my state & local people running. Vote who you believe is best for the job & the country, not who is best for "the party".

Well stated and much better written than what I stated. I forgot about the statement Barack made at the convention. That pretty much summed it up.

Could be worse...we could have a president and vice president with no regurad for the constitution.  Oh wait...

Kenny, the DNC has stated "We recognize that the right to bear arms is an important part of the American tradition, and we will preserve Americans’ Second Amendment right to own and use firearms. We believe that the right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation, but we know that what works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne. We can work together to enact and enforce commonsense laws and improvements – like closing the gun show loophole, improving our background check system, and reinstating the assault weapons ban, so that guns do not fall into the hands of terrorists or criminals. Acting responsibly and with respect for differing views on this issue, we can both protect the constitutional right to bear arms and keep our communities and our children safe."  Wouldn't banning assault weapons be considered not upholding the constitution? 

Last time I checked, Democrats have control of congress.  Don't forget how bad the first six years of the current administration have been!  One party having control of the legislative and executive branch of government is a BAD thing!

Homeland defense ..... interesting .... now how will that play out if you can't defend your own home because you're not allowed to own a gun or are restricted in the type of gun and ammunition you can have?????

Homeland defence:  that's why we have a military.  Obama is not going to take your legally owned guns away from you.  He will try to prevent criminals having the easy access to high velocity automatic weapons that they have enjoyed for the last 60 years.  If you feel you need an assault rifle to protect yourself then move out of your unsafe neighborhood.  I have a weapon (and given the disasters visited upon us by the Republicans) that I have never even considered having to use for self protection. You are paranoid. 

Paranoid .... no.  Been there ... done that ..... NEVER ... EVER again.

I apologize, I know I specificly mentioned Senator Obama.  But I feel the same about anyone who tries to abridge my right to own and bear arms.

Those who choose not to have weapons -- that is their choice.  But don't infringe my rights.  I follow the rules.

Making certain weapons illegal will not prevent criminals from possessing them.  It will just make it another very lucrative commodity -- like drugs and prostitution.

i agree

Its Osama Bin Laden you idiot. Shows are smart you are.

Justify your argument there cchs, all I see from you is a smear without anything to back it up? How can you even compare the two people there Einstein? Seems to me its just more Koolaid drinking propaganda. Obama isn't perfect, but right now, given his stance on the issues, I feel more comfortable with him, than I do McCain.

i really don't care how you spell the names all i know is that both names both people have one thing in mind to kill Americans. they hate Americans. Obama wont even solute the flag and you wont this man to lead this country. how can a person rule this country and be in control of the military and never even serve in it. i agree there should be someone else for us to vote for. we have to vote for the lesser of two evils . obama has proved time and time again that he is the worst one for the job. if obama wins we all will loose. you need to look at the facts and not the  color!!!!.

Presidents don't 'rule'...Kings and Dictators 'rule'. Of course you may be confused by our current Dictator in Chief - George W. It's spelled 'salute' not 'solute'. Please give us 'your' facts to support your comment that Senator Obama desires to kill Americans. Or are you confused again with our current George W. who seems to place such low regard for human life in his conquest ro Iraq? Simply put...go back to school and take a civics class!

Once again dude, you have not justified your argument, nor learned how to use spell check apparently. Personally I don't care about color or gender of a leader, so long as they can lead and do their job well. Your ignorance frightens me only because you have the right to vote. Let's face it dude, you are a troll, trying to mix things up by throwing out paranoid unsubstantiated claims that you yourself can't back up. Grow up.

both of you do realise that bush is no longer running for president. shows just how smart you are. by the way if you haven't been to Iraq or have a brother in Iraq then you can't comment on it. i have 6 yes 6 relatives in Iraq. and its you liberals dumb asses like you that wont let the military fight the war the way it should be. Iraq should be a parking lot.  sorry that i can't spell as good as the rest of you but some of us  had to work for a living instead of going to school. i know that the president is not a king. so just wondering why is your hero obama so anti American why did he have the Americanflag covered up on his plane is he ashamed of it why wont he solute the  flag. you do know that he is for killing babies. abortion is killing babies. i tell you what put obama in the army let him spend years as a POW and then and only then would i vote for him. never mind i still would not vote for him. just to make one thing clear i don't like either obama or MCCain. i think that we need someone else to vote for. i just know that obama is not the answer. if you think that i am wrong about his views then google them if you know how.  

You're confusing me... I thought that the story about Obama being a radical Muslim was overridden by the Jeremiah Wright story about Obama being a radical Christian. Are you saying that he's no longer a radical Christian anymore, but he's back to being a radical Muslim? Or are you saying that he's BOTH--a radical Christian AND a radical Muslim? ...That would be a dastardly, cunning move!

CCHS I have been to war, my wife has been to Iraq twice, so don't lecture me on the military. Although I respect McCains military service, his insight has not helped us win a war that never should have begun in the first place, nor has he used his vast experience to center our focus where it really matters which is Afghanistan. You clearly do not know what you are talking about. As for abortions, Obama is for a womans right to decide for herself, something the Republicans are against as it does not follow the right to life philosphy. I find that term interesting, according to them we should not terminate them before they are born, we should wait until the hit 18 then send them off to a foreign country under false pretense to get killed. BTW, you still have not justified you argument, you have only filled it with more propaganda, not fact.

here try this out this is what your hero is for. 

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/pastors-hellfire-sermons-put-obamas-campaign-hot-water

http://www.liberallyconservative.com/?p=2331

http://www.gopbloggers.org/mt/archives/004414.html

http://www.capveterans.com/the_year_2007/id59.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwpSPiKUhB0&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwpSPiKUhB0&feature=related

 When the federal bill was being debated, NARAL Pro-Choice America released a statement that said, “Consistent with our position last year, NARAL does not oppose passage of the Born Alive Infants Protection Act ... floor debate served to clarify the bill’s intent and assure us that it is not targeted at Roe v. Wade or a woman’s right to choose.”

But Obama voted against this bill in the Illinois senate and killed it in committee. Twice, the Induced Infant Liability Act came up in the Judiciary Committee on which he served. At its first reading he voted “present.” At the second he voted “no.”

The bill was then referred to the senate’s Health and Human Services Committee, which Obama chaired after the Illinois Senate went Democratic in 2003. As chairman, he never called the bill up for a vote.

Jill Stanek, a registered delivery-ward nurse who was the prime mover behind the legislation after she witnessed aborted babies’ being born alive and left to die, testified twice before Obama in support of the Induced Infant Liability Act bills. She also testified before the U.S. Congress in support of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act.

Stanek told me her testimony “did not faze” Obama.

In the second hearing, Stanek said, “I brought pictures in and presented them to the committee of very premature babies from my neonatal resuscitation book from the American Pediatric Association, trying to show them unwanted babies were being cast aside. Babies the same age were being treated if they were wanted!”

“And those pictures didn’t faze him [Obama] at all,” she said.

At the end of the hearing, according to the official records of the Illinois State senate, Obama thanked Stanek for being “very clear and forthright,” but said his concern was that Stanek had suggested “doctors really don’t care about children who are being born with a reasonable prospect of life because they are so locked into their pro-abortion views that they would watch an infant that is viable die.” He told her, “That may be your assessment, and I don’t see any evidence of that. What we are doing here is to create one more burden on a woman and I can’t support that.”

As a senator, Obama has opposed measures to criminalize those who transport minors across state lines for the purpose of obtaining an abortion.

Variety is the spice of life Ricky. Handguns are nice due to their compact nature, however rifles have better range and stopping power, shot guns give you a nice spread or leave grapefruit sized holes in your target. Fully automatics will allow you to spray rounds faster downrange, so it all depends on what you need it for. I prefer having the ability to change up when needed, but hey, I am military, i just like to have my options open. Given the nature of this thread however, I serioulsy doubt that guns are an issue thie or any election cycle.

I'm ex-military (USMC Viet Nam 1968-1970)  Guns are not an issue this cycle, but are a consideration at all times.  I hunt for sport, don't need a fully automatic assault rifle for that.  Ryal should attest that for the common sportsman, the fast pace multi recoil of a fully automatic makes the muzzle angle difficult to control inspite of what you see on Law and Order or CSI.  So while I think we have  right to arms, I have no problem limiting the types of weapons available.  When the bad guys are better armed than the good guys, that's a problem.

you need to get out into the real world. i need as many guns as the criminals have. you can outlaw any weapon you wont to but the criminals will have it anyway. 

I don't hunt, I just like to shoot for fun. After years of blowing stuff up for the Army, this is the next best thing. I agree with cchs, you can get "dirty" guns if you want. Limiting the guns available by citizens does not keep them out of the hands of criminals. The only way to do that is to remove guns from the planet. Even in countries where guns are banned for private citizens, criminals can obtain them, so the argument of gun control is ridiculous. As for people who swear the need an AK or M16 to hunt deer with a 3rd burst or full auto, that argument is as moronic as a gun control law to cut down on crime.

As long as you're a law-abiding citizen, why does it matter how many you own?  Does the government restrict how many cars it "allows" you to have, or how many TV sets, or how many chairs you can have in your dining room based on how many some bureaucrat thinks you "need"?  Funny how people can be such sheep.

We can look at this two different ways.  First here is the text of the 2nd Amendment:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

1.  We could look at this as saying only people designated as being part of a militia, i.e. the Army, Air Force, Marines, Navy, Police, Coast Guard, National Guard.  If we look at it like this then the right for all citizens to bear arms is null and void. 

2.  If we look at as that all citizens of the United States have a duty to ensure the freedom of the state then all citizens have the right to have any type of weapon they want and as many as they want.  No laws shall be passed that infringe upon that right.

The second way to look at this issue is the only way to look at this issue.  It is part of the checks and balances that we as citizens have against our government.  Our founding fathers said it best:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident:

That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. "  The Declaration of Independence

What planet did you just arrive from and when is the mother ship coming to take you home?

Lance, you are the reason stupid people should not breed. Your statement was not only ignorant, but racist in nature. Your ignorance and prejudice only feed the problems facing this country. I may disagree with Obama on his stance on gun laws, but to add such a harsh speculation based on your own paranoia and ignorance disgust me.

Lance if you were running for dog catcher I would make sure all your political signs read

VOTERS BEWARE KNUCKLEHEAD WANTS TO CAPTURE YOUR DOGS!!!

Problem with your view is that Black Folks would be denied their rights in your world.  I am an originalist in my interpretation of the constitution but denying anyone their 14th Amendment rights makes me nauseaous and fearful of what other rights they would want to take next.

The Right Wingers are showing their true colors as we get closer to the election and it was bound to happen that the old red baiters of the 1950's, the Joe McCarthyism and the John Birch Society Pilgrims would turn to RACE. They have nothing else than to try the old standards of Right Wing politics and that is fear. Fear of losing your guns, fear that blacks will take over, fear of the Jews and just plain fear that a terrorist lurks in every corner of the American continent. Well not this time, not this year. They are on the USS McCain and it has hit a MUDBERG and is sinking and the USS Sarah Palin is nowwhere in Alaska shooin away Russians and shootin Moose. All they need now are their hoods and sheets.

there are some people in this world that need to get out more and see what is really happening. how soon you forget 9/11/2001     obama will be the death to this country. it was his religion his people that was flying those planes

Another Kool-Aide drinker. You have no proof of your statement and facts seem to get in the way of your right wing politics. Please be informed before making any statement in the future. Also try the truth. OBAMA is a Christian an American and has more character in his little finger than the likes of John "the phony war hero" McCain and you.  Spend your time this week washing your hood and sheet.

i never said i had a hood and sheet and for you to say that is racist. the only reason that obama says he is Christin is because he new he would not get elected as a Muslim. he grew up a Muslim and he will always be one. he should be proud of his religion what ever it is. that's what this country was founded on. every body should be able to worship what ever god they wont. obama turning his back on his religion shows just how quick he will turn his back on the US. He cannot be trusted. you do know that he is a baby killer.

Again prove your statements that Obama was or is a Muslim or ever has been and he or his kind as you stated flew in to the twin towers on 9/11/01 prove it. 

For if you believe your own delusional allegations I am afraid you are a closet hood and sheet wearer.

This is what Joe McCarthy did make it up as you go along.

I've heard this stuff for 83 years and as a member of POW's for Obama (Germany 1944) I am insulted by your statements. This has no p[lace in American politics.

thank you for your time spent in the military. but remember if it walks like a duck talks like a duck swims like a duck then there is a pretty good chance that it is a duck. and by the way OBAMA said he was raised as a Muslim and the Christin church that obama has spent so many years in. did you forget just what that preacher said. you know or were you asleep he said God damn America and so look it up it is out there for you idiots that forget so soon to see. and as for the baby killing look this up. When the federal bill was being debated, NARAL Pro-Choice America released a statement that said, "Consistent with our position last year, NARAL does not oppose passage of the Born Alive Infants Protection Act ... floor debate served to clarify the bill's intent and assure us that it is not targeted at Roe v. Wade or a woman's right to choose."

But Obama voted against this bill in the Illinois senate and killed it in committee. Twice, the Induced Infant Liability Act came up in the Judiciary Committee on which he served. At its first reading he voted "present." At the second he voted "no."

The bill was then referred to the senate's Health and Human Services Committee, which Obama chaired after the Illinois Senate went Democratic in 2003. As chairman, he never called the bill up for a vote.

Jill Stanek, a registered delivery-ward nurse who was the prime mover behind the legislation after she witnessed aborted babies' being born alive and left to die, testified twice before Obama in support of the Induced Infant Liability Act bills. She also testified before the U.S. Congress in support of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act.

Stanek told me her testimony "did not faze" Obama.

In the second hearing, Stanek said, "I brought pictures in and presented them to the committee of very premature babies from my neonatal resuscitation book from the American Pediatric Association, trying to show them unwanted babies were being cast aside. Babies the same age were being treated if they were wanted!"

"And those pictures didn't faze him [Obama] at all," she said.

At the end of the hearing, according to the official records of the Illinois State senate, Obama thanked Stanek for being "very clear and forthright," but said his concern was that Stanek had suggested "doctors really don't care about children who are being born with a reasonable prospect of life because they are so locked into their pro-abortion views that they would watch an infant that is viable die." He told her, "That may be your assessment, and I don't see any evidence of that. What we are doing here is to create one more burden on a woman and I can't support that."

As a senator, Obama has opposed measures to criminalize those who transport minors across state lines for the purpose of obtaining an abortion.

You see you wasted all that space for me to say I know and I agree with Obama. Now lets use your comparisons of the facts: I shook the hands of JFK Nixon and Ford so because of that I am responsible for the Bay of Pigs, Watergate, Pardoning Nixon. I suppose in your warped soul I am a baby killer for agreeing with Obama. Now to turn the tables on you using your own set of values I will assume you support the Iraq war so you must be in favor of BABY KILLING along with Mother killing grandmother killing all the killing. Just because it is war these poor souls are just as dead.

well Mr. green if you are for abortion then yes yor are a baby killer. it is sad to hear that someone that has been to war seen the death that war brings and yet you agree with killing babies. that shows what type of person you are ( a cold blooded killer ).  and do i agree with the war in iraq no.  not the way it is being fought. i DO support the troops that are over there. yes i think that more effort and support should be put in Afghanistan.  i do believe that anybody any country that attacks the USA should be wiped off the face of the earth. and back to the Iraq war if you notice we are winning and it is sad that the kids are being killed. but that should not bother you. 

i agree that there are to many people killing people. one death is to many, by the way how does a gun load, aim, and shoot someone. this i have to see.  according to the NHTSA there are about 43000 people killed and 2.9 million injured each year in car accidents so why not ban cars. GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE.

Most of those gun deaths are criminals killing other criminals.  That doesn't have anything to do with the right of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms.  Furthermore, they'd be killing each other without access to firearms.  Draconian restrictions on firearms possession in Britain and Australia haven't stopped crime.  Japan manages to have the highest suicide rate in the world with almost no private gun ownership. 

Infringing on the rights of law-abiding citizens due to problems that do not have their root cause in gun availability is simply unacceptable, just as it would be unacceptable to ban automobiles or swimming pools because their existence facilitates injuries and deaths (and usually not of criminals).

those who give up their liberty in the name of freedom, deserve neither, more laws lead to more laws and pretty soon you have lawless, because you have no freedom to make laws over, so Go ahead and give up All your rights,  what a bunch of Rupes........