Again CVC we'll have this conversation in one year and we can honestly let each other know how many of our guns have been taken during Obama's first year in office. We'll do that every year and we'll be open and honest about any new firearm purchases we'll have made as I am sure I will buy a couple more in that time. Time will tell the truth.

I don't believe that BHO will take away our guns on day one, day 100 or day 1000. His actions will be insidious and long lasting. The appointment of federal and even SCOTUS justices is what I worry about.

I also worry about back door methods such as requiring bullets to be serialized or creating an environment that allow lawsuits against gun manufacturers.

I know nothing I say or post will sway you in your view and that is ok. I respect your point of view.

The thing is many who hold your view point give the message "YOUR GUNS WILL BE GONE," "STOLEN BY THE EVIL LIBS AND YOU WILL BE CASTRATED AND MADE TO BE COMMUNISTS," but then the reality is that just isn't true and the argument is changed to back door methods. There will always be extremists on both ends and I would fight against one who tried taking my gun rights. While Obama may support some measures of gun control some of them may be good ideas and won't affect law abiding sportmen in any way. Well, as you said you have your view and I mine. Just want to say I will be posting here in the next few years and it will give us the opportunity to see if any of the politics of fear was true or not. I also respect your POV.

i figured you may have missed this part when you said this part

"While Obama may support some measures of gun control some of them may be good ideas and won't affect law abiding sportmen in any way. "

Because to me every single one of these issues would affect sportsmen. Especially the part about the ammunition. Unless you just use rocks or hug your deer to death

That's exactly right Csumerall, SoCoKHntr is just deluded. See according to SoCoKHntr, if Barrack says and votes to reduce gun rights in the past and present that means that he actually won't when he's president.

Some other Happy-Happy-Joy-Joy thoughts.

Barrack won't really pull out of Iraq either, even though he says he will.

Barrack won't meet with Iran, he'll bomb them.

Barrack will leave the bush tax cuts in place, even though he says he'll do otherwise.

Barrack is actually a republican, instead of a democrat.

So I guess he just says one thing and will do another thing. His "Change" is no change and all of a sudden he is.... drum roll please.... just another politician.

Wait, wait, let me see if I correct myself and the error of my ways and thinking. I am forming a new belief system. You guys tell me if I got it right.

Oh dear, oh dear, if that (secret terrorist after all his name is Osama) Obama gets elected within the next four years we will...........

1. Surrender to Iran.

2. I will lose my guns.

3. Gas will go to $20.00 a gallon.

4. He will welcome terrorists into our country.

5. I will lose all my guns.

6. Bibles will be burned en masse.

7. taxes will be used on minorities for welfare programs and not spent in a sinkhole war which is how I want them spent for generations to come.

8. Hippies and gays will run the country.

9. I will lose every gun I own.

10. The economy will collapse.

Hell no, I'm Voting Mcsame and keep this train rolling in the right direction. To hell with hippie, commie, terrorist loving, gun stealing, communist dems.

Nobody has said any of that, SoCo. Try to stay focused.

But when you compare Obama's record of everything he's said in the past to what he's saying now, they just don't match. It's like the infamous "I did not have sex with that woman" speech, or Nixon's "I am not a crook." He's asking you to ignore all the evidence and trust him.

It's called "pandering." Obama's good at it. But as for me, I'm not dumb enough to dance with a girl who has crushed the toes of everyone else who has joined her on the floor, simply because she says she won't do it anymore.

If you re-read what I wrote i just pointed out to you that you had said that nothing obama had said or done would negatively infulence sportsmen. When in fact he has regularly voted against them. But instead of answering the question you stick to the same "old mcsame" name sake that every liberal loves to use. You cant answer the question or accept that you may have misspoke instead you turn to the other party. The question was on Obama's voting record no one else. But when I pointed that out I forgot I was talking about the second coming the messiah him self, the one who we shall speak no evil of, the one who may not be questioned the great Barac Obama.

What you ignore by design or ignorace is the the fact that those laws largely deal with inner city violence and crime rates that are out of control. I know you probably don't care about impoverished people in the inner city, but those laws are designed to protect people in those communities.

You can't compare inner city Chicago or D.C. to Pork Bend Utah or Pine Bend Arkansas. Yet people like you will fixate on legislation that had a completely different target then law abiding sportsmen. Again, the proof is in the pudding and for all of your politics of Fear surrounding your attacks on Obama if and he likely will be President we will all still be hunting and shooting. Your doomsday prophecies about this won't come true.

I will add, I have plenty of friends and family that own guns and hunt and.................... are voting for Obama

How do allowing lawsuits against firearm companies only affect the inner cities? Clinton gun ban doesnt only affect the inner cities, The ban against rifle ammunition doesnt affect the inner cities. I may see where the hand gun ownership would affect the inner cities but in all reality it ends up hurting them because regular folks cant protect themselves but Im sure in Baraks mind there should be a government program for that. I would like to know how Barak supporting legislation to prosecute people who use firearms in self defense is good for the country. You can twist these facts around to which ever way you wish but the fact remains that he has repeatedly voted against firearm owners. And yes these are facts there are records to show how he voted. The only reason he is where he is, is because he is young and supposedly "in". I am 26 years old and I personally think if you are willing to vote for someone who hasnt answered any questions and is always playing the race card along with stating that you cant ask me that, isnt worth voting for. He has yet to lay down any achievable goals besides spending more of our tax money. When it comes right down to it he has gotten further by saying nothing than saying something. The vast majority of his speaches are actually from someone elses speaking points. Lets not also forget the fact that he sat in an anti american, black militant church for over 20 years but coinceadently never heard any thing that came out of the reverends mouth. But the fact still remains that it is your right to vote for him. But as for me dont try to sugar coat a turd. I dont want to hear it and for the most part everything you have said has been twisted around to suit the liberal agenda. Next we'll be hearing george bush blew up the trade center and blew up the levies in new orleans.