Vote MSNBC Poll on Supreme Court Decision

[Acujeff]

Do you agree with the Supreme Court's decision to limit local laws curbing gun rights?

http://msnbc.polls.newsvine.com/_qu...gun-rights?threadId=995554&commentId=15152577

So far we're winning:

78.9%
Yes
10,898 votes


20.6%
No
2,846 votes


0.5%
I'm not sure
65 votes

Total of 13,809 votes

__________________
Get and stay informed with "America's First Freedom" NRA monthly magazine (the most consistent in-depth reporting on gun issues, laws and politics).

Get NRA-ILA legislative and political RKBA e-mail alerts. Subscribe at http://www.nraila.org/

 

[Zappa]

79.6%
Yes
11,815 votes

19.9%
No
2,959 votes

0.5%
I'm not sure
69 votes

Total of 14,843 votes

 

[RichM]

Results with 265 short comments
Total of 15,194 votes - click on the "Display Comments" bar below to sort comments
80%
Yes
12,158 votes

19.5%
No
2,966 votes

0.5%
I'm not sure
70 votes

Ducks Unlimited hasn't weighed in on this one yet...

 

[Titan]

An interesting slant on the poll...

"....limiting local laws curbing gun rights?"

How about...

"Do you agree with the Supreme Court Ruling that the individual right to keep and bear arms is a FUNDAMENTAL right and applies to all states and municipalities."

The wording of the question shows the continuing bias in the media, even in the face of REALITY!

 

[vicpinto]

Read some of the "anti" comments after you vote if you want your head to explode.

Yippee...a rocket launcher for every home. Go shoot someone to celebrate!

What a f retard.

or....

The Second Amendment reads something like "_CONGRESS shall make no law..." This court is in the NRA's pocket!

????WTF over????

 

[Dry Powder]

Guess I'll have to celebrate by reloading another 1000 rounds of hole makers!

 

[cekim]

Red some of the "anti" comments after you vote if you want your head to explode.

The Second Amendment reads something like "_CONGRESS shall make no law..." This court is in the NRA's pocket!

Umm, that's what the FIRST Amendment says...

2A says "shall not be infringed"... Nothing about Congress in that amendment...

If you want to make that argument, you have to claim that the 1st only applies to Congress...

I wish I could find that one to respond... Amazingly stupid or intentionally misleading...

 

[Blitz1]

81.7 yes 17.9 no .4 to stupid to vote.

Actually 18.3 to stupid to vote.

 

[Jose]

Who the F cares?

We jammed it in the rear of the antis and broke it off.

 

[cekim]

Who the F cares?

We jammed it in the rear of the antis and broke it off.

This is more of a nut-kick...

When we dismantle the MA, NY, CA, et al. style regulations, one-gun-a-month and other "criminalize the good-guys" legislation in court that will be the moment that we have "jammed it in the rear of the antis and broke it off".

 

[CRSIII]

81.7 yes 17.9 no .4 to stupid to vote.

Actually 18.3 to stupid to vote.

Is that like voting ''present''?

18.3 of us are ''obamites''?

 

[ShadeWPI]

Umm, that's what the FIRST Amendment says...

2A says "shall not be infringed"... Nothing about Congress in that amendment...

If you want to make that argument, you have to claim that the 1st only applies to Congress...

I wish I could find that one to respond... Amazingly stupid or intentionally misleading...

No, it's just pure ignorance on the Constitution and a hopeful attempt to make a plausible argument.

As they point out, by the letter of the law in the Constitution, Free Speech, Press, etc are only provided at the Federal Level. There was nothing in the Constitution until Incorperation restricting any of the States from adopting a State Religion or restricting the Free Press since it was specifically "Congress shall make no law"

 

[LoginName]

Well yes, we're wining; but when this same online poll is in all likelihood being posted on
several firearms related forums, there's no reliable way to tell if we're actually wining or not.

ARFCOM alone can easily flip an %80 negative polling to an %80 positive polling within a few hours (not that I really care or give any credibility to online polls to begin with).

Just for once I'd like to see the results of an online poll... any online poll that isn't stuffed by Internet commandos.

 

[Turbocharged]

Some of the comments by people that voted "No" are just painful.

 

[upStomp]

81.7 yes 17.9 no .4 to [sic] stupid to vote.

Actually 18.3 to [sic] stupid to vote.

Whoopsie.

 

[mikem317]

In reality it doesn't matter. I don't care if there's a piece of a paper that says I can have a firearm, or if somebody with a fancy title and a black cape tells me that a piece of paper says I can have a firearm.

If we truly believed in 1. private property rights and 2. the right of the individual to protect their bodies and those of their family, all of this comes a moot point.

Sorry, I think Ted Nugent took over my body!

 

[MrSparkle]

Love this comment:

No

GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE, PEOPLE WITH GUS KILL PEOPLE! One man's "law abiding citizen" can quickly become another man's terrorist. Stop.Now.
#288
- Tracey W
- 2:26 am EDT on Tue Jun 29, 2010

Who is this Gus and why is he so dangerous?

 

[mikem317]

Love this comment:

Who is this Gus and why is he so dangerous?

Gus doesn't appear to be dangerous. It's Gus's effect on people in his close proximity that drives them into homicidal maniacs.

 

[upStomp]

If you outlaw Gus...

 

[Dressed to Kill]

83.2% yes
16.4% no
0.04 not sure

 

[Martlet]

It's amazing how few people understand the concept of State's Rights. More people need to read the Constitution.

 

[cekim]

It's amazing how few people understand the concept of State's Rights. More people need to read the Constitution.

First they would have to understand what a "right" is and that no government document creates them, but rather limits the government in its ability to infringe upon them...