The Cat's Out of the Bag

But the flip side is - It's Not Going To Happen.

Click to expand...

We'll just have to see about that. Everything this guy does is about pushing the envelope...especially EOs.

Dear Leader stands up, let the tears stream down his face, promises a bazillion dollars for nebulous "mental heath" initiatives, and sits back down.
When there is another mass shooting (and there will be) he will jump back up and say, "See? We tried it your way! Didn't work!" "The American people demand that we Do Something (more)!"

If there is a mass shooting (or even a small-scale one that can be exploited) between now and the State of The Union, there is "the crisis which will not go to waste."

And so on to the next step...and the next. He still has most of a year, and by-passing Congress has become a habit.

Don't doubt that a lot of damage can be done in that year...

orionengnr said:

We'll just have to see about that. Everything this guy does is about pushing the envelope...especially EOs.

Click to expand...

These are Executive Actions, not Executive Orders. That means that they are as legally binding as a grocery list.

which hasn't seemed to have slowed him down much, so far.

Silk purse from a sow's ear.

This has been accomplished in CT over one generation. When the current owners die, their heirs will not be able to possess their military patttern weapons.

Join the NRA if you havn't. We have to be willing to continue to put our money where our mouth is. Remember the pro-gun lobby is 6x bigger than the anti-gun. In our current political system, money talks. Even when the Democrats controlled both houses and the presidency, they weren't able to pass any significant gun control laws because the pro-gun lobby is so powerful.

helitack32f1 said:

People seem to be missing the crucial point that our system of checks and balances only works if it intends to. If it possesses both lawlessness on one side and spineless lawlessness on the other, combined with a citizenry devoid of constitutional knowledge, boosted by a heavy dose of apathy, it appears to be a perfect storm in which the constitutional checks and balances are essentially irrelevant.

Evidence of all this is seen in the continued ~46% approval rating of our dear leader despite Fast and Furious, Benghazi, ISIS, etc, etc, etc. It is seen in the popularity of an actual socialist running for president. It is seen in the very fact that someone 77% of Americans describe as a liar, destroyed the Middle East, destroyed rape victims, allowed Americans to die in Benghazi and then lied to the families and the nation and is buried deep in criminal investigations is the far and away front runner for one of the two parties.

Not to be left out is the massive popularity on the other side of a guy that makes bold statements about exactly what HE WILL do when he becomes president, statements that his followers eat up like honey covered salted chocolate caramel, yet it never crosses anyone's mind that most of what he says is subject to constitutional restraints and cannot be done, let alone be done by decree, legally.

In this day and age, the Constitution is no longer relevant and is considered archaic by the youth of today, because essentially none of them were educated to the importance of the Constitution in regards to the survival of this nation. A constitution is only relevant when the elected officials fear a citizenry that knows, understands respects and regards the constitution and will hold them accountable.

When the Presidency is operated without regard to constitutional constraint, when the so called opposition party will not stand up and actually oppose, when the people have little to no understanding or caring about our Constitution and you have a President that says we should look to the confiscations of Australia and elsewhere as the model for what we should do, we have every reason to worry that they are indeed coming for our guns.

Click to expand...

Very well put, I agree 100%.

gbran said:

The anti gun folks are mostly realists and UBC's are a huge incremental step toward registration, which will be needed before they go after certain types of firearms......... and trust me, that will be the result if they have their way.

Click to expand...

Registration is not needed for a ban. Australia did not have a registry before their ban. That didn't stop them from banning certain weapons and collecting the majority of those weapons.

JSH1 said:

Registration is not needed for a ban. Australia did not have a registry before their ban. That didn't stop them from banning certain weapons and collecting the majority of those weapons.

Click to expand...

While true, Australia's gun ownership is far smaller than the US and they also didn't have a 2nd amendment or an NRA. That certainly helped out in the gun grabbers favor back then.

Austrialia also didn't have police who refused to break the social contract with the people who have done no wrong. The entire foundation of the social contract is in which people accept that in order to live in a society with others, they have to give up some of their complete and total free will to maintain peace and order. The first step to removing that peace and order is to take away the people's natural right to self defense, which over the course of history has shown that the greatest threat to a person's freedom is government itself; as soon as the guns are taken, then the people become pawns unable to resist tyranny.

The US is fortunate at this auspicious time to be able to show the world again that there are laws that supersede those imposed by government and incontrovertibly Trumps those of man. Thankfully, we have a great many police who understand that there is a right naturally imbued in man to self defense and that those rights are not allowed to be trifled with or infringed.

TruthTellers said:

While true, Australia's gun ownership is far smaller than the US and they also didn't have a 2nd amendment or an NRA. That certainly helped out in the gun grabbers favor back then.

Austrialia also didn't have police who refused to break the social contract with the people who have done no wrong. The entire foundation of the social contract is in which people accept that in order to live in a society with others, they have to give up some of their complete and total free will to maintain peace and order. The first step to removing that peace and order is to take away the people's natural right to self defense, which over the course of history has shown that the greatest threat to a person's freedom is government itself; as soon as the guns are taken, then the people become pawns unable to resist tyranny.

The US is fortunate at this auspicious time to be able to show the world again that there are laws that supersede those imposed by government and incontrovertibly Trumps those of man. Thankfully, we have a great many police who understand that there is a right naturally imbued in man to self defense and that those rights are not allowed to be trifled with or infringed.

Click to expand...

Laws are a social contract that we make among ourselves. In Australia the legally elected politicians passed a law banning certain guns and it was carried out. The majority of Australians had no problem with it then or now.

JSH1 said:

Laws are a social contract that we make among ourselves. In Australia the legally elected politicians passed a law banning certain guns and it was carried out. The majority of Australians had no problem with it then or now.

Click to expand...

And self defense is not part of that social contract, it is a fundamental and natural right. The Aussie's by in large don't agree and as such they allow themselves to be slaves and not free men.

But I expect that from a former penal colony.

Can't wait for the "refugees" to smarten up and head to Kangaroo country. Then we'll all see how faith in government is a false idol.

The only way for "them" to win, is to convince all of "us" that they ARE winning.
There is no way that they can win unless we agree to give up all of our guns.

They passed an assault weapons bill in Connecticut that prevents anybody passing on their guns?
Oh yeah, the one where they had roughly 85% of the citizens owning so-called "Assault weapons" ignore the law and openly defy the state legislature? As I recall they had maybe 50,000 registrations and expected almost 400,000!

So, yeah, passing laws is one thing.

ENFORCING laws is the difficult, violent, bloody, civil-war-inciting part that nobody wants to talk about.

helitack32f1 said:

People seem to be missing the crucial point that our system of checks and balances only works if it intends to. If it possesses both lawlessness on one side and spineless lawlessness on the other, combined with a citizenry devoid of constitutional knowledge, boosted by a heavy dose of apathy, it appears to be a perfect storm in which the constitutional checks and balances are essentially irrelevant.

Evidence of all this is seen in the continued ~46% approval rating of our dear leader despite Fast and Furious, Benghazi, ISIS, etc, etc, etc. It is seen in the popularity of an actual socialist running for president. It is seen in the very fact that someone 77% of Americans describe as a liar, destroyed the Middle East, destroyed rape victims, allowed Americans to die in Benghazi and then lied to the families and the nation and is buried deep in criminal investigations is the far and away front runner for one of the two parties.

Not to be left out is the massive popularity on the other side of a guy that makes bold statements about exactly what HE WILL do when he becomes president, statements that his followers eat up like honey covered salted chocolate caramel, yet it never crosses anyone's mind that most of what he says is subject to constitutional restraints and cannot be done, let alone be done by decree, legally.

In this day and age, the Constitution is no longer relevant and is considered archaic by the youth of today, because essentially none of them were educated to the importance of the Constitution in regards to the survival of this nation. A constitution is only relevant when the elected officials fear a citizenry that knows, understands respects and regards the constitution and will hold them accountable.

When the Presidency is operated without regard to constitutional constraint, when the so called opposition party will not stand up and actually oppose, when the people have little to no understanding or caring about our Constitution and you have a President that says we should look to the confiscations of Australia and elsewhere as the model for what we should do, we have every reason to worry that they are indeed coming for our guns.

Click to expand...

Well reasoned and accurate IMO.

Keep the right pro 2a folks in the majority in congress. If we lose congress, and the anti's get control of it, nothing would stop them from passing any stupid law they want. AWB's? UBC's?, etc? Guess what, with the wrong majority in congress, all of that stuff becomes law.

With the right pro 2a majority, none of that junk even makes it out of committee.

Mid-term elections and congress!! Vote.

LongbowShooter said:

Well reasoned and accurate IMO.

Click to expand...

If anything illustrates that the traditional checks and balances cannot be relied upon its the Supreme Courts interpretation of the ACA that the government can tax you for NOT buying something

Many people here will vote for HRC knowing full well that the wench is going to try to pull an Australian on us.

TruthTellers said:

And self defense is not part of that social contract, it is a fundamental and natural right. The Aussie's by in large don't agree and as such they allow themselves to be slaves and not free men.

But I expect that from a former penal colony.

Can't wait for the "refugees" to smarten up and head to Kangaroo country. Then we'll all see how faith in government is a false idol.

Click to expand...

All laws and rights are part of that social contract.

I will step forward.

As God is my witness, I really did not think Barack Obama cared much about gun control. I really wasn't sure he believed in it much, and I was fairly sure he knew it was a non-starter politically. I did not see the real evidence. I was convinced, junior Democrat that he always was, that his voting record meant very little and that his passions lay in other areas.

I don't know if he has changed in his viewpoint, or he was concealing his gun control feelings back then or I just missed them or what. Hillary? Sure. Bloomberg? Obvious. Feinstein? Of course. But Obama didn't seem, back in his "health care" days, to be the same. Today he seems to be. My son, who is a real for sure liberal (or a liberal leaning libertarian or whatever he is) can't stand Obama either and he too did not fee that Obama was a gun control agenda person. The only people who hate the guy worse the conservatives are liberals.

I am on record here in several posts that "I just didn't see it". I stand by the posts for the time I made them frankly.

Obviously, I cannot, and do not believe that any longer.

I still preach that gun control and RKBA is not a right or left, Republican or Democratic thing. There plenty of As and Fs on both sides of the aisle.

I was wrong and I know it.

buck460XVR said:

Ain't gonna happen. The Chicken Little's have been screaming the "Sky is falling!" for eight years now along with the little shepherd boys screaming "Wolf!" Neither is correct and has done little but raise the price and lower the availability of firearms, ammo and reloading components. If there is something firearm related we can't buy right now, it's not the fault of Obama and Hilary, but the fault of those Chicken Littles and Shepherd boys, and the panic buying they created. As has been said, this is not Australia, nor is it Nazi Germany. The same forefathers that gave us the 2nd Amendment also gave us other safeguards to protect it.

Click to expand...

Sure...like ALL things that are divisive across society, the truth almost always lies somewhere in the middle. this is a common sense deduction that has nothing to do with the actual topic being debated and yet it says a lot about us as humans. the real problem isn't one side or the other, but rather the people who lack the self-awareness to realize they have fallen into one of these polarized, immovable viewpoints. THAT is the true danger and it exists just as much among the people posting on this forum as it does with the anti-gun people.

however with all that being said, the issue is never simple and straightforward. Our forefather's certainly had great wisdom but they also lived in a completely different era. I believe a lot of those posting in here have little to no interaction with people on the subject outside of their like-minded friends and family....so they may lack the perspective to see the danger. Forget the people who already have an opinion on the subject of guns....science has shown they are extremely unlikely to ever change their opinion(s)...regardless of any new information. My concern is the people who are not already biased on the subject and their rapidly shifting viewpoint on the subject.

In the last 15 years there has been a MAJOR shift in your average, non-opinionated person's feelings on gun control. I live down here in the deep south in Georgia, and before all the media coverage of mass shootings if you walked up and asked a random non-gun owner if they believed in the right to own a firearm...I'd say 90% of them would of said yes. However in the last 10 years the coverage of these mass shootings and fears of terrorism etc have started changing the views shared by this segment of the population and now those very same people think we NEED to do something about gun control.

too many of you on here assume everyone else grew up with guns in the household and understand the sport/hobby side of firearms....and you assume people know a ton of responsible gun owners who have safely owned firearms for their whole lives without an incident. yet this is the MINORITY of people.

the majority of American's under 35 grew up in households that did not own a gun. they never went to a shooting range for a nice day of family fun. they never went hunting as a child. they've never been to a gun show and seen the hundreds/thousands of people who consider firearms a hobby. They've simply never seen the uses for a gun outside of committing horrible acts of VIOLENCE.

how could any person(with a heart) who grew up like that NOT feel as though something needs to be done with gun control? their argument is logically sound to them because they do not even know about the world of guns outside of violent crime. too many of you guys on here assume these people are out to take your rights and tell you what you to do....in reality the people who will actually decide the fate of guns in our country are just doing what any reasonable person would do when you turn on the news and every other day you hear about another psycho going on a mass shooting.

how could any person(with a heart) who grew up like that NOT feel as though something needs to be done with gun control? their argument is logically sound to them because they do not even know about the world of guns outside of violent crime

Click to expand...

Exactly. It appears logically sound to them because they don't have the information to build a better logical conclusion, and don't have the personal investment and therefore impetus to research what they SHOULD know before they try to connect the dots to a truly logical conclusion.

Education and sharing experience is our only hope.

too many of you guys on here assume these people are out to take your rights and tell you what you to do....in reality the people who will actually decide the fate of guns in our country are just doing what any reasonable person would do when you turn on the news and every other day you hear about another psycho going on a mass shooting.

Click to expand...

Certainly, we cannot fault the middle-ground, simply ignorant, folks for wanting to "do something."

Of course what they don't know is that the politicians pandering to their fears aren't offering SOMETHING. They're offering nothing, wrapped up in false promises and requests for campaign donations.

In the last 15 years there has been a MAJOR shift in your average, non-opinionated person's feelings on gun control.

Click to expand...

I agree there has been a major shift. But not quite the one you're suggesting. In the last 15-20 years we've seen ENORMOUS growth in firearms ownership and usage, incredible increases in the numbers of folks buying, shooting, competing with, and carrying firearms. And in some cases, nearly unbelievable advances in our legal position throughout the land. (As always, and eternally -- "with some exceptions.")

All in all, whatever we're doing -- IS WORKING! So that's a good thing.

This isn't Australia, we have checks and balances to keep Australian type of bans and confiscation from happening. Some have said that the only time we need the Second Amendment when someone is trying to take it away.

Click to expand...

Originally posted by: Midwest

Normally, I would agree with you, but the check's and balances you speak of did not work out so well for those against things like Obamacare, which was forced down our throats despite overwhelming opposition to it. So, to say it couldn't or won't happen because we have checks and balances is crazy. I don't thing there will ever be confiscation but there could certainly be a ban and then the first time you go to the range and use your gun and the cops show up, there goes your gun you have been hanging onto despite the ban. Do you see what I am driving at? I think the endgame is to get rid of all guns through the "1000 cuts method" that someone else mentioned. Its that simple.

SilentStalker said:

Originally posted by: Midwest

Normally, I would agree with you, but the check's and balances you speak of did not work out so well for those against things like Obamacare, which was forced down our throats despite overwhelming opposition to it. So, to say it couldn't or won't happen because we have checks and balances is crazy. I don't thing there will ever be confiscation but there could certainly be a ban and then the first time you go to the range and use your gun and the cops show up, there goes your gun you have been hanging onto despite the ban. Do you see what I am driving at? I think the endgame is to get rid of all guns through the "1000 cuts method" that someone else mentioned. Its that simple.

Click to expand...

But lets also remember what happened when they passed the Federal "Assault Weapons Ban" in 1994 . Politicians lost their jobs and the seat of power was changed because of it. Listen to what Bill Clinton had to say about it after Newtown/Sandy Hook.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/bill-clinton-warns-Democrats-against-overreaching-on-gun-debate/


"And Clinton said that passing the 1994 federal assault weapons ban “devastated” more than a dozen Democratic lawmakers in the 1994 midterms — and cost then-Speaker of the House Tom Foley (D-Wash.) his job and his seat in Congress."

Remember too, 2016 is an election year. We can (if we are well organized) throw the anti-gunners out of office! We did it before!
.

Of course they won't target and search every house and gun in the country. They will create a system here every gun must have paperwork on it. Then, when they DO demand a turn in, those who DO comply with the law will allow them to target everyone else. Then, every gun that is found is illegal, period. They won't concentrate on the general population. They will focus on the non-compliant.

Deanimator said:

The point is not that it is, but that they have OPENLY said they WANT it to be.

LIARS have been coming here for the last seven years denying it.

Now we have IRONCLAD PROOF that they're liars.

If they lie about that, none of their OTHER claims, about "universal background checks" or ANYTHING else should be believed.

Click to expand...

Or maybe, the people here posting were being truthful about their intentions, and did not know that Obama would advocate Australian-style laws in 2015, and would not have agreed with such a position.

Neither side of the political aisle is monolithic. Neither side of the political aisle is a hive-mind who all know what each other is thinking or planning.

And whether they're right or wrong in the specific policies they advocate, the vast majority of people on both sides of the aisle have good intentions.