|
Post by Conservator on Jan 10, 2013 12:58:36 GMT -5
Well, with the latest fever pitch in the media, along with the current administration... some sort of change is almost inevitable. The question is, how far will "they" go? What rights does the 2nd amendment give us. There is a line or limit to the right to bear arms, but are we near it? Seems like the recent mass shootings have created a shift in popular opinion and 'the left' is poised to jump at the opportunity while the stove is hot.
There's so many different angles to take on this topic and the recent cases that have brought this topic back to the front pages, so let's hear all sides/angles...
I am a strong proponent of the 2nd amendment, so I'm not in favor of any real changes to the current laws. I am, however, truly interested in the opinions of those of you that think there is a need for serious change, and how such changes (at the expense of our rights as Americans) will actually prevent or deter crazy/delusionals from committing such crimes.
Some interesting quotes on the subject:
"Our main agenda is to have all guns banned. We must use whatever means possible. It doesn't matter if you have to distort the facts or even lie. Our task of creating a socialist America can only succeed when those who would resist us have been totally disarmed." **accuracy of quote is debated** Sara Brady Chairman, Handgun Control Inc, to Senator Howard Metzenbaum The National Educator, January 1994, Page 3.
"There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters. " Noah Webster American Lexicographer
"The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand arms, like laws, discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside … Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them." Thomas Paine
"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." George Washington
"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them." George Mason Co-author of the Second Amendment during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788
|
|
BlackFox
Senior Forumite
Stay thirsty my friends
Posts: 4,496
|
Post by BlackFox on Jan 10, 2013 16:13:29 GMT -5
When you say "they", I assume you're referring to polititians like Ronald Reagan who:
-Signed the Mulford Act in California as Governor which prohibited the carry of all firearms in public by citizens.
- Signed the "Firearms Protection Act" as President which made it almost impossible for citizens to own automatic weapons
- Strongly backed the passage of the Brady Bill.
- Strongly backed passage of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban
Just making sure you "righties" know how far you've come. The NRA would be calling for Reagans head today.
I personally have no problem with banning large magazines, closing the gun show loophole( this is where most disturbed people and felons go to get their gun), and any other safeguards that would help prevent the mentally ill from getting guns.
I'm a gun owner.
By the way, if you think you need banana magazines in case you need to "cast off this government", then you are truly deluding yourself. That ship sailed a loooong time ago. You and everyone else has exactly zero chance against our government. You want a strong defense? Well you got one. If they got wind of a revolution brewing in your house, they could just fly a drone over it and you would disappear.
It's smart to keep guns as individuals, but I think I'll do just as well as any of these "preppers" with my .45, my .22, and my shotgun.
|
|
BlackFox
Senior Forumite
Stay thirsty my friends
Posts: 4,496
|
Post by BlackFox on Jan 10, 2013 16:27:08 GMT -5
Some interesting quotes on the subject: "Our main agenda is to have all guns banned. We must use whatever means possible. It doesn't matter if you have to distort the facts or even lie. Our task of creating a socialist America can only succeed when those who would resist us have been totally disarmed."Sara Brady Chairman, Handgun Control Inc, to Senator Howard Metzenbaum The National Educator, January 1994, Page 3.Does it make you question your sources at all when you discover the your "interesting quotes" consist of utter bullshit like the one above? Google it, or look anywhere besides The Blaze. Here's her groups mission statement: "The Brady Campaign and the Brady Center believe that a safer America can be achieved without banning all guns."
|
|
|
Post by Conservator on Jan 10, 2013 16:47:15 GMT -5
Hey! we have a response! Good point Mr.Fox. Many a political debates fall along party lines. But some rights can and have been threatened by both sides of the aisle... As you know, not one man (even President, but especially a Gov) has the power to control law. It's usually the Congress or Senate (or even Judges that have overstepped their bounds). that really have the power. Ironically, our current President is considering/threatening to use an Executive Order on this very issue... www.cnn.com/2013/01/09/politics/gun-control-battle/
|
|
|
Post by Conservator on Jan 10, 2013 16:54:47 GMT -5
And good point about Joe Prepper trying to take on the US Military... Ain't going to happen. But, I think it is worth giving at least a little respect to our rights to be able to protect ourselves from any threat/enemy. I don't foresee the collapse of our gov., but there's a lot of things I don't have the privilege of foreseeing. 15 years from now, I may feel a lot different. One thing I have come to understand is that the great US of A is far more fragile than I had ever thought. One big natural disaster, one financial meltdown, one military battle that escalates faster than intended, and all bets are off.
|
|
|
Post by Conservator on Jan 10, 2013 16:55:49 GMT -5
Some interesting quotes on the subject: "Our main agenda is to have all guns banned. We must use whatever means possible. It doesn't matter if you have to distort the facts or even lie. Our task of creating a socialist America can only succeed when those who would resist us have been totally disarmed."Sara Brady Chairman, Handgun Control Inc, to Senator Howard Metzenbaum The National Educator, January 1994, Page 3.Does it make you question your sources at all when you discover the your "interesting quotes" consist of utter bullshit like the one above? Google it, or look anywhere besides The Blaze. Here's her groups mission statement: "The Brady Campaign and the Brady Center believe that a safer America can be achieved without banning all guns."Guess I should have SNOPES'd that one. It was quite damning (and possibly too good to be true).
|
|
|
Post by Conservator on Jan 10, 2013 16:58:10 GMT -5
I'd love to pick up a semi-auto shotgun before they are off the market...
|
|
JC
Full Forumite
No Messiah
Posts: 1,919
|
Post by JC on Jan 10, 2013 18:37:56 GMT -5
I do not have any banana clips for that purpose.
I'm not worried one iota that a gun confiscation "proactive gun regulation" is ever gonna pass. Just ain't gonna happen. I am worried about O and his executive order signing butt trying something, though. But I'm not worried about what will happen to my weapons. I am worried what will become of this country if he tries.
BTW, If you read Feinstein's bill or the BS Biden is suggesting, you'll see that those evil assault weapons are not the only weapons they're targeting. Lot's of nonthreatening looking weapons are on the chopping block, too.
|
|
JC
Full Forumite
No Messiah
Posts: 1,919
|
Post by JC on Jan 10, 2013 19:27:25 GMT -5
to clarify a little. us1.campaign-archive1.com/?u=3a5a3fb1ad250e247bde9f42d&id=aa1d21b5a6&e=20e79daa8dTennessee has a similar law that passed a few years back, following in the footsteps of many other states. If O uses an executive order as Biden has suggested, we will become a nation of truly sovereign states. There will not be any civilians fighting the US Military in a civil war. It will be state politicians fighting with DC. It will be state and local authorities fighting with f-troops. Federal funding and programs will stop. Federal taxes will not be paid. O, Biden and DC will no longer have any power over the states. Lots of havoc.
|
|
elf
Regular
Posts: 39
|
Post by elf on Jan 10, 2013 20:02:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Tsavodiner on Jan 10, 2013 20:06:54 GMT -5
At the time of the Revolution, Britain ruled the Seas and most of the civilized world. Second in historical power only to the Roman Empire, she had defeated the Spanish Armada and largely cuckolded France. Their Army was armed with the feared "Brown Bess", their equivalent of modern-day assault rifles. Colonists were armed with less sophisticated "Kentucky Muskets" with less range, accuracy, and power.
Everybody figured they'd lose.
During World war II, one Japanese general bemoaned the task of invading America, saying "there will be a rifle behind every blade of grass". He was a prophet.
Nobody thinks what's left of an America that prides Freedom and self-reliance (that's RESPONSIBILITY) will stand up on their hind legs and resist tyranny, whether it wears a Federal uniform or not.
It won't just BE about the one thing; it'll be over EVERYthing, with the right thing to set it off.
Ladies and Gentlemen, place your bets.
|
|
BlackFox
Senior Forumite
Stay thirsty my friends
Posts: 4,496
|
Post by BlackFox on Jan 10, 2013 20:51:05 GMT -5
I think comparing this grade of Americans we have now with the founders is not an equivalent comparison. I feel like the real question is whether or not our troops would turn their guns on the citizenry. Maybe not.
|
|
|
Post by ssmynkint on Jan 10, 2013 21:44:19 GMT -5
Got it reversed, Tsavo: The bess was a smooth bore musket, the Kentucky was a rifle, longer range and accuracy.
|
|
|
Post by Justin Thyme on Jan 10, 2013 21:48:25 GMT -5
Regardless of how successful an armed rebellion against the US might be isn't important. What is important is that assault weapons in the hands of citizens makes an armed rebellion a possibility and sending a drone against US citizens would be as politically appealing as dropping a satchel bomb from a helicopter on a row house in Philadelphia.
It isn't the idea that armed revolt would be successful, it's that the threat of an armed revolt exists.
BTW, the AR-15, the rifle currently being suggested as the type of gun that doesn't belong in the hands of the public, fires a round that is currently a favorite among varmint hunters. Considering the definition of a varmint I can understand why politicians would want to ban varmint guns.
|
|
|
Post by Conservator on Jan 11, 2013 14:55:31 GMT -5
I hate to give credibility to the term "assault weapons", as any weapon used in an assault can be defined by that term... But I have a feeling the semi-auto rifle that doesn't have a wood stock is what "they" are going to go after first. Nevermind that pistols are all semi-auto as well. Will they define it by barrel length? So we can have semi-auto guns, just you can't be accurate from more than 25 yards with them?? Just curious where exactly this arbitrary line that will have to be drawn will be. Goomba... your expertise/opinion is needed. (careful what we say... "they" could be reading
|
|
JC
Full Forumite
No Messiah
Posts: 1,919
|
Post by JC on Jan 11, 2013 15:40:21 GMT -5
I hate to give credibility to the term "assault weapons", as any weapon used in an assault can be defined by that term... But I have a feeling the semi-auto rifle that doesn't have a wood stock is what "they" are going to go after first. Nevermind that pistols are all semi-auto as well. Will they define it by barrel length? So we can have semi-auto guns, just you can't be accurate from more than 25 yards with them?? Just curious where exactly this arbitrary line that will have to be drawn will be. Goomba... your expertise/opinion is needed. (careful what we say... "they" could be reading They want any and all semi-auto guns banned. That includes handguns and rifles. Rifle wise, the wood stocked M1 and Mini-14 rifles are included. The "other" list is: Yup.... cosmetic. Don't outlaw the whore, outlaw the whore's lipstick. There is also some speculation that Obama will alter the NFA Registry to include these weapons and weapon features. The white house can bypass the legislative branch to issues a "backdoor gun ban" with this action.
|
|
|
Post by Justin Thyme on Jan 11, 2013 16:16:20 GMT -5
Technically a double action revolver would qualify as a semi-automatic firearm. Just something to think about in this context.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2013 17:38:53 GMT -5
and then there's my walmart shopping bag that can hold more than ten rocks, but I'm not sure if that's considered single or double action.
|
|
|
Post by Conservator on Jan 11, 2013 17:52:46 GMT -5
muzzle loaders... that's what they'll leave us.
|
|
JC
Full Forumite
No Messiah
Posts: 1,919
|
Post by JC on Jan 11, 2013 18:49:22 GMT -5
Kinda exaggerated but kinda not.
The wording in the proposed bill is "detachable magazine or ammunition holding device" which could be interrupted to include nearly all weapons. Nearly all shotguns, leverguns, etc. have "removable" magazines. Even the cylinder on a revolver is "detachable".
That interpretation will be left up to the ATF to determine.
Unlikely but feasible under this administration.
|
|
JC
Full Forumite
No Messiah
Posts: 1,919
|
Post by JC on Jan 11, 2013 19:21:16 GMT -5
to clarify a little. us1.campaign-archive1.com/?u=3a5a3fb1ad250e247bde9f42d&id=aa1d21b5a6&e=20e79daa8dTennessee has a similar law that passed a few years back, following in the footsteps of many other states. If O uses an executive order as Biden has suggested, we will become a nation of truly sovereign states. There will not be any civilians fighting the US Military in a civil war. It will be state politicians fighting with DC. It will be state and local authorities fighting with f-troops. Federal funding and programs will stop. Federal taxes will not be paid. O, Biden and DC will no longer have any power over the states. Lots of havoc. Starting already? __________________________________ www.wsmv.com/story/20559458/tn-lawmakers-wary-of-any-new-federal-gun-lawsThe talk of gun control is making the lawmakers looking at a bit of a preemptive strike. "This is serious business the president is talking about," said State Sen. Frank Niceley, R-Strawberry Plains. Niceley said he's hearing a lot of concerns from his constituents who worry Congress will pass bans on military-type assault rifles and high capacity magazines. Now, Niceley has a plan of his own. If the federal government wants to pass gun control laws, he said, they won't get any help from Tennessee in enforcing them.
|
|
JC
Full Forumite
No Messiah
Posts: 1,919
|
Post by JC on Jan 13, 2013 14:22:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Conservator on Jan 13, 2013 17:42:01 GMT -5
Will be interesting how this all pans out.
Not sure if this admin was planning on passing any gun control laws or not this next 4 years (my guess is that it was on the docket anyway), but with emotions/opinions running so high on both sides of the issue - it provides 2 things this admin is loving and taking advantage of... Obviously passing some sort of new legislation, but also this topic being a huge distraction that keeps the news/headlines off of other things this admin is or isn't doing.
|
|
frayne
Senior Member
Shortsighted rocket scientist
Posts: 648
|
Post by frayne on Jan 13, 2013 18:48:16 GMT -5
Banning any type of weapon or magizine won't accomplish anything except to drive up prices, that train has already left the station when one realizes there are 300 million firearms in the US. However, it will give something our idiot politicians can point to and say "look what we did".
|
|
|
Post by LimitedRecourse on Jan 14, 2013 11:16:31 GMT -5
This is another perfect example of how the left claim to be "open to discussion" and "fair & open-minded" but in reality will NOT budge from their position and ridicule/name-call at any who oppose their ideas. Typical demagoguery ( or should I say "democratagoguery"?).
|
|
JC
Full Forumite
No Messiah
Posts: 1,919
|
Post by JC on Jan 14, 2013 14:28:36 GMT -5
President Obama said he'd take "executive action" to deal with guns at his press conference today: "My understanding is the vice president's going to provide a range of steps that we can take to reduce gun violence," said Obama. "Some of them will require legislation, some of them I can accomplish through executive action. And so I will be reviewing those today, and as I said, I will speak in more detail to what we're going to go ahead and propose later in the week. But I'm confident that there are some steps that we can take that don't require legislation and that are within my authority as president, and where you get a step that, has the opportunity to reduce the possibility of gun violence, then i want to go ahead and take it." Video of press conference at link www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-some-gun-control-measures-i-can-accomplish-through-executive-action_695381.html__________________________________ Obama said "Opponents have a way to gem up fear [snip] and somehow the federal government is gonna take all of your guns away" No, I don't think the federal government is gonna take all of my guns away. I think the president is gonna try to take all of my guns away. Key word is "try".
|
|
JC
Full Forumite
No Messiah
Posts: 1,919
|
Post by JC on Jan 14, 2013 14:33:50 GMT -5
NEW YORK — Sen. Charles Schumer says retailers that sell assault weapons should stop offering them for purchase while Congress discusses gun regulation legislation. Schumer on Sunday released a letter he sent to major retailers asking for a voluntary moratorium. The New York Democrat says consumer demand for guns has gone up in the weeks since the December mass shooting in Newtown, Conn. Schumer says Congress is debating the issue, and if measures get passed that limit these type of weapons, it won’t help if more of them have recently been sold. washington.cbslocal.com/2013/01/13/sen-schumer-asks-gun-retailers-to-stop-sales-as-congress-debates/______________________________ Suck an egg
|
|
|
Post by Tsavodiner on Jan 14, 2013 16:54:48 GMT -5
Banning any type of weapon or magizine won't accomplish anything except to drive up prices, that train has already left the station when one realizes there are 300 million firearms in the US. It will give something our idiot popliticians can point to and say "look what we did". I begin to see the converging threads of History winding a spellbinding pattern. A highly popular, but highly illegal, mood-changing substance interwoven with highly popular, but deadly-in-the-wrong-hands tools uniquely suited to protecting one's trade while thwarting Government intervention. Finally, an "Act", restricting the civilian ownership of these tools whilst legalizing the highly popular but illegal substance. 1919-1934, anyone?
|
|
JC
Full Forumite
No Messiah
Posts: 1,919
|
Post by JC on Jan 15, 2013 3:05:16 GMT -5
An Eastern Kentucky sheriff has vowed that he will not take part in enforcing federal gun laws that he believes violate his constituents’ Second Amendment rights. “My office will not comply with any federal action which violates the United States Constitution or the Kentucky Constitution which I swore to uphold,” said Jackson County Sheriff Denny Peyman. the sheriff says he has “a team of attorneys to step up with me if necessary to be sure the Second Amendment is upheld.” Read more: dailycaller.com/2013/01/14/kentucky-sheriff-pledges-to-defy-obama-on-guns/#ixzz2I1sndDaa
|
|
|
Post by LimitedRecourse on Jan 15, 2013 10:54:46 GMT -5
Not a lot of "pro gun control" comment on this thread. It's hard to argue for an obviously illegal action.
|
|