Poll: What is the next front in the RTKABA struggle?


PDA






StrikeFire83
August 15, 2006, 06:58 PM
We have won some great victories in the past several years, the repeal of the national “Assault” weapons ban and the legal concealed carry of handguns has swept through a great many states.

I was just wondering what yall think the next great front is in the greater firearms struggle in this country.

If you enjoyed reading about "Poll: What is the next front in the RTKABA struggle?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Autolycus
August 15, 2006, 07:07 PM
We need national CCW. THis way we can get more states to become shall issue gaining more gun rights supporters. Then we can move on to other things.

sm
August 15, 2006, 07:10 PM
I voted "other".

While I like your poll and the choices given - the biggest front we continually face is NOT dividing ourselves when working toward common goals.

SuperNaut
August 15, 2006, 07:21 PM
IMHO the full-auto ship has sailed, disappeared over the horizon, and dumped its septic tanks.

The national CCW seems most logical. That of course means that California will never reciprocate.

StrikeFire83
August 15, 2006, 07:34 PM
sm I voted "other".

While I like your poll and the choices given - the biggest front we continually face is NOT dividing ourselves when working toward common goals.

I would tend to agree with you. I try and get along with everybody save the ultra frindge white supremacist/militia types.

IMHO the full-auto ship has sailed, disappeared over the horizon, and dumped its septic tanks.

The national CCW seems most logical. That of course means that California will never reciprocate.

Admittedly, this is the option that I myself care about the least, but I know there are those who are very passionate about it.

Why do you think the ship has sailed though?

MrTuffPaws
August 15, 2006, 07:41 PM
AWB sunsetted and was not repealed.

Finch
August 15, 2006, 07:44 PM
We need national CCW. THis way we can get more states to become shall issue gaining more gun rights supporters. Then we can move on to other things.

I don't know about this. I'm not sure if I want the federal government regulating ccw laws. Unless if was pure full faith and credit, like drivers licenses, I would/could not support a national CCW.

In my opinion, the UN is the greatest threat to not only our right to own firearms, but our freedom in general.

SuperNaut
August 15, 2006, 07:47 PM
Admittedly, this is the option that I myself care about the least, but I know there are those who are very passionate about it.

Why do you think the ship has sailed though?

IMHO, it is the most emotionally-charged and ideologically laden option on a firearm. I can have a perfectly rational conversation with an anti; right up until I mention full-auto. Then it all goes out the window. There are articles of faith among all philosophies, but among the anti-gun crowd full-auto is the cause of all misery and suffering for humans. Right up there with land mines and transfat.

wdlsguy
August 15, 2006, 07:51 PM
A repeal of 18 USC 922(o) [ban on post-1986 machineguns for mere citizens] would be a huge step in the right direction.

FeebMaster
August 15, 2006, 08:22 PM
We have won some great victories in the past several years, the repeal of the national “Assault” weapons ban and the legal concealed carry of handguns has swept through a great many states.

Repeal? The law had a built in sunset, it wasn't repealed.

I was just wondering what yall think the next great front is in the greater firearms struggle in this country.

How about an acutal repeal of a gun law or even easier an executive order to remove one of the previous anti-gun executive orders?

StrikeFire83
August 15, 2006, 08:46 PM
^ Thanks, but MrTuffPaws already pointed that out.

I guess I was referring to the fact that the AWB is no longer in exinstence, and nobody was willing to re-sign it.

It looks like legalized Concealed Carry is winning! Keep them coming.

jlbraun
August 15, 2006, 08:48 PM
Other.

Repeal of section 922(o) of the FOPA, the part that closes the NFA registry.

Brett Bellmore
August 15, 2006, 09:41 PM
Repeal of the "sporting purpose" test. Since "sport" is clearly not the only legitimate reason to own a gun, it should have nothing to do with which guns we can own or import.

lee n. field
August 15, 2006, 10:06 PM
I was just wondering what yall think the next great front is in the greater firearms struggle in this country.

What's do-able? National CCW is more achievable than any of the other worthy causes you list.

Hmmm. Embargo Chicago until Illinois sees the light?

limbaughfan
August 15, 2006, 10:40 PM
I say our next big fight will be with antigun legislation,not progun legislation.

progunner1957
August 15, 2006, 10:51 PM
IMHO, we may be at present seeing our right to arms in better condition than they will be in the future. This may be our high point.

Why? The American Sheeple may well be set to return the socialists/Democrats to power in this November's election; they may well be set to hand the White House to them in 2008. While it is not a done deal due to "unforseen events," it is nonetheless very possible.

If either of these events comes to pass - especially if The Sheeple hand the White House to the socialists/Democrats in 2008 with a S/D majority in the House and the Senate - the "S" will "HTF."

Of course, there is hope - if we can get gun owners to stop sleeping with the enemy (i.e., voting for antigun bigot scumbags).

See the last line of my signature for clarification.

stevelyn
August 15, 2006, 11:23 PM
Strip the "Sporting Purposes" clause from GCA '68.

"Sporting Purposes" is subjective and arbitrary and is open to whatever interpretation the current JBTIC at BATFEces says it is.:barf: :fire:

Getting rid of "sporting purposes" would automatically void a lot of restrictions currently in place such as the Bush I import ban, import restrictions on certain handguns and likely voiding the '86 MG freeze in FOPA.

I'm with Finch on national CCW. No fedlaw governing concealed carry, unless it's strictly limited to forcing Marxist states into recognizing state issued CHLs under the "full faith and credit" clause of the Constitution.

hoppinglark
August 15, 2006, 11:34 PM
No fedlaw governing concealed carry, unless it's strictly limited to forcing Marxist states into recognizing state issued CHLs under the "full faith and credit" clause of the Constitution
That's exactly what we need
I can drive my car from Miami to Seattle with my Florida Driver's License,
but can not carry my pistol on the same trip with my Florida CCW.

knoxx45
August 15, 2006, 11:48 PM
Keeping the anti's out of office in the next election. Bush, weather you like him or not, has left a sour taste in alot of mouths, and we have to stop the "knee-jerk" reaction of voting out all those associated with him.

The other thing that we MUST do, is to put ECONOMIC pressure on companies who support the anti's. That will mean not only a boycot on their products, but also informing them of the reason why we are not buying their goods/ services. You see, anti's can get a lot of attention because they mostly comprise the segments of society that are either the acidemic types, students, or the unemployed, all of which do not hold the jobs that most of us law abiding citizens do. I know that if most of us were to just leave work to protest anti gun laws or rally in support of a pro-gun canidate or politician, we would not have a job to go back to. That's why we need to hit'em where it hurts the most, with the best punch we have. That means hitting them in the wallet. Gun owners as a social class are made up mostly of middle to upper middle class. That is the bulk of most companies source of revenue. If we stopped buying their goods, and let them know why we are not buying from them, we can make a difference. If they stop giving groups like hand gun control inc money, then they cant pay for as much advertising, cant pay for the lobbyists... etc...etc.

Together we are powerful. Together, we have a voice. If we stick together we can force a change.

THINK ABOUT IT!

Knoxx

stevelyn
August 16, 2006, 12:50 AM
I guess I was refering to the the fact the AWB is no longer in existence, and nobody was willing to re-sign it.

:scrutiny: I guess you didn't hear Bush:barf: say he was willing to sign it when asked?:scrutiny:

The only reason he didn't was because it didn't land on his desk. :fire:

StrikeFire83
August 16, 2006, 12:56 AM
I guess you didn't hear Bush say he was willing to sign it when asked?

The only reason he didn't was because it didn't land on his desk.

I dislike Bush and the current Republican party ALMOST as much as I dislike the Democrats and the current Democratic party.

There is no mainstream political party that represents my views.

ConstitutionCowboy
August 16, 2006, 01:00 AM
I would propose legislative and legal actions to repeal unconstitutional law, starting with the 1934 NFA. We do not need any more patchwork exceptions to the existing unconstitutional law, because all those exceptions do is entrench the existing unconstitutional law.

Get rid of the old. Therein lies the problem.

Woody

"Revolution is the Right of the People to preserve or restore Freedom. Those vested with power should never deprive the People the means, for it may compel such recourse." B.E.Wood

lacoochee
August 16, 2006, 01:06 AM
Repealing the 1986 no new machine guns law should be the next law to go away.

Zundfolge
August 16, 2006, 01:29 AM
IMHO the full-auto ship has sailed, disappeared over the horizon, and dumped its septic tanks.
I'd say thats not true ... its a long way off, but I do believe that within the next decade we could see suppressors de-regulated and maybe the NFA registry reopened (and if we're real lucky the $200 tax stamp lowered).

Incrementalism is how we got here and its how we're going to get back.

jeepmor
August 16, 2006, 01:57 AM
1. National CCW would be nice, but the Feds would screw it up like everything else they touch, or make it painfully bureaucratic. I suspect we'd be in a national database and everytime you boarded a plane or entered a government building with visual recognition cameras, that it would pop up with your name, address, record and of course, you CCW status would be on there too, opening you up to much greater scrutiny for simply being a permit holder.

2. The 2nd Amendment does state we, as citizens, should be able to bear any arms the Armed Forces can....which we cannot without piles of paperwork and clean records. Not that I think everyone should own a machine gun, but it's a right we should have since the armies that will be oppressing us most certainly will.

3. I don't follow the letter of the law enough to argue these points with any education level beyond what I've read here.

I think national CCW embracement by all states would go a long way in reducing crime everywhere in this nation. Like they say, An armed society is a polite society.

Oregon's CCW is roughly at 3-4%. Which means 30 or 40 in every thousand are packing a pistol. I really like this premise and wish there was some way to communicate it effectively to the general populous without all the big city libtards overreacting. Something like, "4 of every 100 people in this city is carrying a pistol to protect themselves, join them to insure a safer crime free community together."

jeepmor

mljdeckard
August 16, 2006, 02:02 AM
I can see urgent and valid arguments for ALL these options. But I'm tending to agree that existing laws, like the NFA and the '86 list need to be targeted as infringements and repealed. This not only puts the opposition on the defensive, it sets a non-interventionist tempo for gun legislation. We have good momentum right now, and I think we need to make the most of it. If another VERY conservative wins the presidency in '08, and the republicans can keep the majority in both houses, I think it would be feasible to take these on.

Redneck with a 40
August 16, 2006, 02:13 AM
I think the Castle Doctine laws will gain momentum soon. So far, 14 states have passed such laws, also known as "stand your ground law". Hopefully within the next two years, all the states will adopt laws like these. I know California, Hawaii, Illinois, New York, and Mass. are hopeless, but the chances for the rest of us look pretty good.:D Colorado is currently working on a Castle Doctine law, hopefully it gets passed.

StrikeFire83
August 16, 2006, 02:32 AM
California, one of the most anti- of the anti-gun states, may not have a "castle" doctrine law, but here is an excerpt from the penal code.

The occupant may use a firearm when resisting the intruder’s attempt to commit a forcible and life-threatening crime against anyone in the home provided that a reasonable person in the same or similar situation would believe that (a) the intruder intends to commit a forcible and life-threatening crime; (b) there is imminent danger of such crime being accomplished; and (c) the occupant acts under the belief that use of a firearm is necessary to save himself or herself or another from death or great bodily injury. Murder, mayhem, rape, and robbery are examples of forcible and life-threatening crimes.

crazed_ss
August 16, 2006, 02:37 AM
Yea... our Self Defense Laws are decent. Our most disgusting gun law is the AW ban. Everything else is tolerable for the most part.

Cuda
August 16, 2006, 02:41 AM
At first I thought a national CCW would be important, but I decided no because we have the 2A which to me is the same. So I choose the ban on registration, privacy is more important. If you need to know I carry a gun, you are probably a threat to me or my liberties, whether you are a criminal or a gov employee.


C

xd9fan
August 16, 2006, 12:37 PM
Not running to the Govt for a permission slip to carry would be a fresh start.

Lonestar
August 16, 2006, 12:51 PM
I voted other too. Honestly what great victory are you talking abou like someone else said..

AWB sunsetted and was not repealed.

1 ) the AWB can pop back up some day. Focus on that again

2) National CCW sounds nice but what about carrying in DC or NYC??? I rather live in a gun friendly state like PA, FL or NH instead of being stuck with a national CCW program that has multiple restictions thanks to unfriendly state influences.

3) Full Auto for all??? Will never happen, and honestly the reasons explosives and Full Auto weapons were made illegal in the 30's were pretty good reasons. Instead of Mobsters shooting tommy guns you will have Crips and Bloods fighting with AKs and ARs...umm no thank you.

4) We need to stop funding the UN for more than just their stance on world gun control.

5) Registration to find out who owns what gun is good and bad. If it is used for gun grabbing its bad, if it is used to solve a murder it's good. The should have an admendment that registration will only be used for criminal investigation only. If the 2nd admendment get repealed, the info is dumped.

I do like to see some of the restrictions on foriegn guns and the 10 evil guns outlawed by clinton to be overturned.

jlbraun
August 16, 2006, 12:54 PM
"3) Full Auto for all??? Will never happen, and honestly the reasons explosives and Full Auto weapons were made illegal in the 30's were pretty good reasons. Instead of Mobsters shooting tommy guns you will have Crips and Bloods fighting with AKs and ARs...umm no thank you."

Um, they already are fighting with M16's and AK's, mostly either smuggled from Mexico or lifted directly from National Guard or police armories. I just support being able to get a full auto weapon at a reasonable price by opening the NFA registry.

Bartholomew Roberts
August 16, 2006, 01:21 PM
The biggest front we face right now is creating new politically active shooters while we can. Once we have enough of those, we can pick and choose what we want from the list like kids in a candy store.

Without those, then it doesn't matter what victories we win today since they will be eliminated once we no longer have the numbers to protect them.

Look at the current anti strategies in targeting things like "toy guns" and creating astroturf groups like AHSA and AGS. These basically have two goals - to reduce the amount of people who ever develop an interest in firearms and to make sure that those who have that interest remain politically unaware.

The antis ultimately plan to choke out the "firearms culture" in this nation. That is the real battle we have to fight.

JesseJames
August 16, 2006, 01:28 PM
Way ahead of you chief.

Gordon Fink
August 16, 2006, 01:56 PM
I predict that in a few years we will be fighting a renewed attempt to ban semi-automatic firearms. We may also see a federal attack on shall-issue laws. At best, we might get the sporting-purposes requirement relaxed administratively or even legislatively. Potentially, a favorable Supreme Court decision could wipe away a few outright prohibitions but leave “reasonable” restrictions in place.

Oh, and watch out for attempts to close the C&R “loophole.”

~G. Fink

Bubbles
August 16, 2006, 02:03 PM
Getting rid of the '86 machine gun ban should be the next big fight.

Lone_Gunman
August 16, 2006, 02:05 PM
I just hope that one day we could have a pro gun president.

With the stroke of the pen, he could un-do a lot of the damage done by executive order from Bush I and Clinton.

I think we are wasting our time right now trying to reopen the machine gun registry. Can you imagine what the media would do to a politician who wanted to make full automatics more available?

JBusch8899
August 17, 2006, 01:43 AM
It won't be on the national front at the moment. The elected federal politicians in Washington D.C. have attacked all the anti gun laws they are going after for the moment.

Following the current trend, going after those last holdouts of Wisconsin and Illinois to loosen their stranglehold will be the major battles. Concessions by attrition will come from the legislatures in those handful of may-issue states.

Eightball
August 17, 2006, 01:48 AM
Ban "them" from banning "us" to use "banned" firearms.

Green Lantern
August 17, 2006, 07:48 AM
Uhm...it's waaay too early for me this morning, but of the options I picked "revoke funding to the United Nations. Because there's a LOT more wrong with them than just thinking that the "little people" like us have no RIGHT to self-defense!

I too fear an even MORE restrictive CCW situation if the Feds get ahold of it. And NC is pretty rough as it is, but not as bad as some! (though wasn't there something in the bill saying that the Fed could NOT make a state's CCW more restrictive than it was?)

Hmmm....maybe if we do get national CCW, we can carry on Amtrak? Not before then since all Amtrak property falls under the Communist laws of that modern utopia, Washington DC!:rolleyes:

If I had to pick something else, I'd say either pass a nationwide law that bans employers from firing you for keeping a gun LOCKED UP in your car at work, or state-by-state CCW improvement. Get rid of stupid laws that say
-you can only carry a registered gun (Nevada, I think?)
-You can't carry in a place you have to pay admission to get into (NC and others)
-You can't carry in a place that serves alcohol, even if you don't drink at all (NC, TN, many others I think)
-And I'm not real fond of the section in NC law (and other states) that says you HAVE to inform LEO you're carrying. Maybe just trim it down to add 'in a traffic stop' or something. Otherwise, you risk some "embarassing" social situations if you obey the law to the letter......!

wdlsguy
August 18, 2006, 12:36 PM
Getting laws passed in all 50 states similar to the following Tennessee law:

39-17-1361. Execution of documents by sheriff or chief of police.

The sheriff or chief of police of the city of residence of a person purchasing any firearm, defined by the National Firearms Act, 26 U.S.C. § 5845 et seq., shall execute within fifteen (15) business days of any request all documents required to be submitted by the purchaser if the purchaser is not prohibited from possessing firearms pursuant to § 39-17-1316.

That way people can dispense with creating trusts or LLCs to bypass the CLEO signature.

bamawrx
August 18, 2006, 05:53 PM
I have been spending some time on this topic and I think we should go for three things:MG amnesty for GI bring backs, national reciprocity, and the removal of rimfire suppressors from the NFA.

The MG amnyesty will increase the number of guns available, and allow for privately owned museums to possess post-86 guns (as the bill is currently worded), and incrementally work in our favor.

The national RP for CCW will help in the same way that Florida has become a stellar example to the rest of the country on the success of CCW. It will also help us CCW people travel without worry.

The rimfire suppressor becoming a title 1 transfer will open the door to other suppressors in the future being removed from NFA. Its the most important suppressor since we can use them to teach new shooters.

Monkeyleg
August 18, 2006, 06:32 PM
stevelyn, just curious: how would the removal of the "sporting purposes" clause affect the '86 full-auto ban?

Maybe I'm naive, but I don't think that, if the Democrats regain control in DC, they're going to go after guns with the same zeal as in the 1990's. After losing congress in 1994 and two presidential elections in large part because of gun control issues, I suspect they'll want to tread softly. Or not even tread at all.

I also think that we're at something of a stalemate with the anti's at the federal level: they're not likely to get any new laws passed in the near future, and we're not likely to get any repealed.

Our best option for advancing gun rights is at the state level. Once WI gets concealed carry, for example, I think the next step would be to eliminate the 48 hour waiting period on handgun purchases.

cmidkiff
August 18, 2006, 06:35 PM
We have 2 more states that need a CCW law... and a few 'may issue' states that should be changed to 'shall issue'... those need to be taken care of.

We need national recognition of CCW permits just as we have with drivers licenses, I think this is possible in the fairly near future.

Castle doctrine should take off and sweep the nation, just as CCW has. The biggest battles on this one have already been fought, time will take care of the rest.

The 'No New Machine Gun' regulation needs to go. If it doesn't go soon, we'll get to the point that it's impossible to own a MG, through attrition. It's not going to be easy, but it needs to be tackled _before_ people get used to MG's being extinct. (as an aside, it will return US designs to the forefront... we're way behind in this area, since there is no civillian market for gun designers to target)

Silencers need to be removed from the NFA list... they're not firearms, and could even be looked at as a safety feature. This would be my first target on ridding us of the GCA... not nearly as politically charged as MG's.

strambo
August 19, 2006, 02:15 AM
We need national recognition of CCW permits just as we have with drivers licenses, I think this is possible in the fairly near future

Yes, I believe this is possible too. The passing of the law allowing police officers to carry nationwide will help pave the way for this. That's why I was all for that law and didn't criticize it because it was just for cops. It helps set a precedent and we will make ground back incrementally just like we lost it incrementally.

gunsmith
August 19, 2006, 02:22 AM
not a national ccw law!!!:barf:

If you enjoyed reading about "Poll: What is the next front in the RTKABA struggle?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!