1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

New way to control guns...

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by thekomet, Apr 29, 2009.

  1. thekomet

    thekomet Well-Known Member

    For those of you who think that the liberals have forgotten about gun control, one of the more influential liberals out there is encouraging new insidious ways to keep the average person from being able to purchase firearms. Eliot Spitzer feels the government should use its power as the largest purchaser of firearms to mandate trigger locks, unique serialization of weapons, and even restrict certain firearms. Our constitutional rights are never safe from the statists.


  2. Zombie_Flesh

    Zombie_Flesh Well-Known Member

    By Eliot Spitzer and Peter B. Pope

    that Eliot guy really boils by blood
  3. hso

    hso Moderator Staff Member

    My response -

  4. BhmBill

    BhmBill Well-Known Member

    All I can do is laugh then frown at Spitzer.

    It's so idiotic that it's funny and sad.

    People actually believe this crap.
  5. Thaddeus Jones

    Thaddeus Jones Well-Known Member

    Eliot, stick with something you know, like......hookers. Leave the guns to those who know something about them. Thanks! :)
  6. Sam1911

    Sam1911 Moderator

    Wow. I thought the 9mm Parabellum cartridge was a lot older than that! An hats off to those guys for being so inventive as to develop their own cartridge!

    Or, maybe he's just pointing out that those drug dealers were the first folks to make widespread use of that round. I'll bet it was pretty darned obscure before the 1980s!

    Just wow.

  7. Smithiac

    Smithiac Well-Known Member

    You have got to be kidding me this guy is an idiot.
  8. Polar Express

    Polar Express Well-Known Member

    I wonder what the numbers are?

    I wonder who actually buys more guns, the US FEDERAL Gov't, (keep in mind that's what they are talking about here, not state gov't) or the general public. I suspect the general public out-buys the gov't substantially. Could they force the states to follow suit using the same tactics? They could sure try, but even then I don't think the numbers are big enough. Keep in mind just how many cops, and military folks are out there? Just how many guns to their departments provide? one? Maybe two? I suspect the majority of American gun owners have more than one.

    So, a couple manufacturers decide they will sell only to the gov't. OK, bummer. The rest of them tell the Gov't to piss off, cancel the contracts, and the public gets exclusive access to those manufacturers. Capitalism will stupid idea, as long as we keep voting, and keep the socialists out of office. We have to look at the big picture, and not let any of our rights be invaded, regardless of how rosey of a picture they paint of the Gov't administering more stuff.

  9. JImbothefiveth

    JImbothefiveth Well-Known Member

    How many guns are bought legally by criminals? I doubt a sgnificant number of guns sold legally are sold to criminals.
    They don't sell the, gun stores sell them. Mostly to law abiding citizens. Unfortunantly, the occasional criminal will pass the background check and many will get guns illegally. Nonetheless, they are used more for self-defense than for murder.

    And how do you say they should do this? Not sellng to dealers? You are aware that it's already illegal to sell to felons, correct?
    Most guns are not used for crime. And when people are allowed to carry concealed weapons, crime is reduced. It's not like the licensed dealers are regularly selling to criminals, other than a few corrupt ones.
    Attempts like this have repeatedly failed. They have failed in D.C., failed in other lbieral states, they have failed in the rest of the world, why wouldn't they fail here?
    Show me one firearm company that doesn't sell through only authorised dealers.
    No, that's how many times they were suspected of selling a gun used by criminals.
    Then close them. That's what the ATF is for.
    A hidden serial number just means it's not as easy to report stolen. A magazine disconnect safety won't stop crime. A trigger lock probably wo't either.
    So, why shouldn't I have access to a reliable handgun that's good for self-defense? Not having certain guns sold to the populace won't really stop crime because those guns are most likely used for self-defense more than murder, and the guns criminals use most would probably never win a government contract.

    Only it won't work. You want peace? Try imprisoning criminals.
    Last edited: Apr 29, 2009
  10. Polar Express

    Polar Express Well-Known Member

    Just to be clear, it is always important for us to be vigilant with regards to all of our rights, the 2nd amendment especially for it is what allows us to protect all of our other rights.

    And yes, we need to keep a sharp eye out for anyone trying to do an end-run around our Constitution on all matters.

  11. HK G3

    HK G3 Well-Known Member


    This is what a man who throws away his entire career, and is now entirely reduced to writing articles for the sole intent of robbing the citizenry of their rights looks like.
  12. Superlite27

    Superlite27 Well-Known Member

    Let me get this straight:

    So, since Spitzer was caught in a prostitution ring, this means he is a bad guy, right?

    He has seen the enemy, and he is him.
  13. KBintheSLC

    KBintheSLC Well-Known Member

    He forgets that private sales are also a major chunk of the market. There are nearly 400 million privately owned firearms in the US... I doubt manufacturers want to play hardball with that.

    Anyway, Spitzer is the poster boy for all things wrong with the far left socialist movement. A perfect fusion of politics and crime. As far as I am concerned, I welcome him to join the anti chorus... it will only serve to further discredit them.
  14. MisterMike

    MisterMike Well-Known Member

    I'm glad he's on their side!
  15. USAFNoDAk

    USAFNoDAk Well-Known Member

    It's ironic that he shares the same last name as a type of bullet, but I digress.

    So why should we listen to "John" Spitzer in the first place. He's a knob. What a horses butt.

    Listen, this idea has already been tried by another man who tended to stray outside of his marriage vows, Bill Clinton. Remember Smith and Wesson when they were owned by the french company "Thomkins" or something like that? They were all into kissing the posterior of Clinton/Gore/Reno and signed up for just what "John" Spitzer is proposing. What happened? They went bankrupt. They got back in business by walking away from the agreement they had signed with Clintoon/Bore/Repo.

    Remember, many cops who actually use the guns are on our side. They don't want handguns with magazine disconnects and other "safety" features that might fail when the gun is needed most. Many military folks are also on our side, that is the side of gunowners. There are some 80 million gun owners in the US. How many cops and soldiers are there that need new guns every year? Look at how fast guns are selling to the private markets right now. Take Mr. Barrett. Didn't he elect to prevent sales of his .50 cals to California for their LEO's use since the state banned him from selling to civilians in CA? How is his company doing I wonder? I bet he's making more money than he ever has.

    "John" Spitzer should stick to buying women for sexual favors. That's a financial transaction for which he's an expert. Well, except for getting caught, that is.
  16. Pack

    Pack Well-Known Member

    This kind of thinking, in the minds of those who think it, touches every right we have, our access to firearms being one of the more prominent issues.

    The article states:

    "In 2000, this idea's time had not come. The government did not so boldly exercise its prerogatives as owner and purchaser. It did not freely insist that companies receiving our tax dollars change their practices—even in fundamental ways—if they wanted our money. Today, of course, this is the way business is done."

    This is, unfortunately, very true, and very likely to make me :barf:

    Good luck to us all, in the maelstrom of the latest "new deal"... :barf:
  17. Old Fuff

    Old Fuff Well-Known Member

    Spitzer should also be remembered as one of the principals behind the Clinton Asministration's attempt to either take over the handgun industry, or drive it into bankruptcy. That didn't work either, but it did result in the infamous Smith & Wesson Agreement.

    At that time Spitzer and others called for the cities that were petitioners in that civil action to make an agreement among themselves to only buy guns from "approved" companies. It didn't work.

    Think what would happen if they tried to force the officers, deputies, and agents that have to use the firearms he proposes the government require; rather then the ones they want. Does anyone believe they would turn in what they have for something made by an unknown manufacturer who was going along with Spitzer’s idea of political correctness and hanging the pistols with superfluous Brady-gadgets without a very public fight? :evil:
  18. Rellian

    Rellian Well-Known Member

    based on all of the recent threads about the millions spent by people stockpiling and hoarding I don't know that companies would NEED government contracts to stay afloat.....;)
  19. Noxx

    Noxx Well-Known Member

    Mr. Spitzer essentially suggests that if he cannot get the laws he wants to control the people, passed by the representatives of the people, that the government simply strongarm it's way around them financially (with the peoples money, no less), is the most amazing sort of hubris. Cleary he sees a "ruling" and "governed" class, and nothing resembling a government "of, by, and for" the people.
  20. BhmBill

    BhmBill Well-Known Member

    There's 20,000,000+ federal, state, and local employees. Add the 3,300,000 million soldiers. A conservative guess would be 25,000,000. Lets be ultra conservative and say 50% of federal (even though the article is about federal employees), state, and local employees have guns. 12,500,000 armed employees. Lets be conservative and say theres 5 guns per armed employee. 62,500,000 guns for the government.

    60,000,000+ gun owners in the US. 400,000,000+ million guns owned by private parties. 1,500,000+ sold each month through dealers.


    Would you rather sell to the 60,000,000 who buy several guns a year each, or the 12,500,000 who might buy 1 gun each each year?

Share This Page