Another Gun Ban?

[limbaughfan]

If Democrats retake control of congress in novenber,when do yall think another major gun ban will come along.When I say major I mean something like an AWB.And do you think the bill will ever get out of commitee and on the floor,with major attention.If there is an AWB II in committee now we need to really keep our eye on it if the dems retake congress.

 

[Soybomb]

As much as we should keep our eyes open, I don't think its even something enough Democrats would like to touch right now. Gun sales are up, people are still thinking terrorists (and why that makes them want guns I don't know but it seems to), and thinking about katrina. CCW is at an all time high. Someone would probably introduce one but I don't think it has a chance on the current political climate.

 

[GEM]

Didn't we just do this one? Search on it.

 

[the 22 junkie]

Do this one? What?

 

[bigun15]

It seems to me (and GEM) that there was just recently a thread on this topic.

 

[atlctyslkr]

When I hear my Democrat friends bitching about what is wrong with this country they aren't talking about guns. Haven't heard it. In fact some of these guys are hardcore DUers. I don't think there's much to worry about.

 

[thexrayboy]

We must worry about this fall...

If the GOP loses the house to the dumbocrats this fall that will mean that the next speaker of the house will probably be Nancy ( "I have an insane hatred for freedom" ) Pelosi. A fanatical communist like her in such a positon of power can do immeasurable harm to our freedom. She is not above using her position to block needed legislation such as funding for military or education if she thinks she can use such a move to bully through her anti freedom-antigun
agenda.

Remember, anti 2A fanatics do not go away or stop plotting. They merely learn to hide and work in more subtle ways to destroy this country. We can never rest or relax in our vigil against these mealmouthed mushbrain morons who cannot see reality. Vigilance is the neverending price of freedom.

 

[gbran]

I'd hate to think of the consequences of a dem prez in '08 with a dem house and senate.

We'd be soon steamrolled with anti gun legislation.

More likely, we won't see all three lost to dems.

 

[IndianaBoy]

some of these guys are hardcore DUers

Those people are NUTJOBS. I can only read about three threads on that site before my head starts to hurt.

 

[Justin]

DU denizens are hardly representative of your average Democrat, as much as their nuttery entertains.

The dems have been trying to stay quiet on the gun control issue because they know it's a loser. However, I wouldn't expect that to hold for long if there's another large-scale tragedy.

That said, I'm somewhat bearish on the upcoming election.

 

[vynx]

maybe not THIS November but if they have a majority in Senate or House AND get a President elected then I think they will try to make Gun Control an issue again...they love making issues out of illogical agendas vs. addressing real issues.

 

[clutch]

Don't forget John Conyers as head of the judiciary committee. He makes Pelosi look reasonable by comparison.

Clutch

 

[Hkmp5sd]

The Democrats will not push any gun ban in the next two years, even if they gain control of both the House and Senate. They want to win the White House and will do nothing to PO the gun owners until after the next presidential election.

 

[Dr. Dickie]

The dems do not tackle gun control as an issue because it is a loser, but the fact is they do not have to bring up gun control. Just as Iran has their proxy in Hezbollah, the dems have the UN to do it for them.
Oh yeah I know that the UN law will have no effect on US law, but how often do the dems talk about surrendering our sovereignty to UN law? Hell, that is the platform they are running on! There was even a recent (I don’t remember what it was about) Supreme Court decision where THEY cited international law as part of their decision. If the dems get power and the presidency, and another Supeme Court Justice gets appointed! What they could do to the Supreme Court could in fact strip away our rights in quick order.
I sure hope Scalia is taking his antioxidants, and I really, really wish Ginsburg would decide she has done enough damage to this country and step down before '08.

 

[GEM]

We don't have to worry. If a Democrat becomes president and says that he or she will sign AWBII if it gets to the White House oval office desk - IT OBVIOUSLY MEANS THAT THEY ARE CLEVERLY WORKING BEHIND THE SCENES TO BE A PR0-GUN PRESIDENT!

Look, boys and girls, I don't mean to be harsh but if we get a Dem president who goes after guns, the fault will be in how Bush and his cronies handled their so-called WOT in Iraq.

Also, Bush could have taken some of his time to pass some strong progun laws as a buffer against changes in administrations. He choose to do nothing proactive.

What a disappointment as a President and we will pay for it in many dimensions. That failure is what should be examined rather than complaining that the Democrats do what they always do. It's like complaining that the bear poops in the woods. The issue is why the GOP was the boob squad for 8 years.

 

[thexrayboy]

If we get an anti gun demo prez....

It doesn't matter whether the dumbocrats take control due to Bush and the way he handled the war on terror or Iraq or if they take control because they
found a better Ouiji board to channel through. What matters is what happens
after they get control of the government.

Below is a link to an article detailing how billionaire George Soros had essentially bought the democratic party and is running it as a shadow front for his communist goals. This is what we have to recognize and deal with.


http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=24073

 

[The Cavalry]

The Democrats aren't even in the majority now, and they're trying frantically to re-label themselves as supporting the 2nd Amendment...

And yet there's Senate Bill S.645:

Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2005 (Introduced in Senate)

S 645 IS


109th CONGRESS

1st Session

S. 645
To reinstate the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act.


IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

March 16, 2005
Mr. LAUTENBERG (for himself, Mr. CORZINE, Mr. SCHUMER, Mrs. BOXER, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. DURBIN, Ms. MIKULSKI, Mr. SARBANES, Mr. REED, Mr. AKAKA, Mr. DODD, and Mrs. CLINTON) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL
To reinstate the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act.


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2005'.

SEC. 2. RESTRICTION ON MANUFACTURE, TRANSFER, AND POSSESSION OF CERTAIN SEMIAUTOMATIC ASSAULT WEAPONS .

And the House version HR1312 with 94 Democrat cosponsors, same text.

 

[Manedwolf]

Because the Republicans have used their uncontested majority to roll back all sorts of gun laws, right?

Why, because of Republicans, they dissolved BATFE, and you can own machine guns and silencers anywhere now, right? Right?

*crickets*

 

[Phil DeGraves]

We have much more to fear from the libs than we do from Al Quaeda. Both hate America and freedom in the hands of the citizenry. The difference is that the liberals are actually in a position to do something about it.

 

[Byron Quick]

Gun control seems to be a source of angst amongst the Democrats. The usual suspects: Schumer, Boxer, Lautenberg, Feinstein, etc. ad nauseum will always be up there pushing something. But nationally, a lot of the politically active Democrats have been noticing a trend: Democrats tend to get their brains beat out at the polls after 'successes' at gun control.

There is a growing segment of the Democratic Party that views gun control as an issue to be avoided. Don't get wrong-these people are by no means pro-gun. Virtually all of them think gun control would be a wonderful thing in a perfect America. However, they have come to the conclusion that gun control in the America they're dealing with is a good way to get clobbered.

If the Democrats do take control of both houses and the presidency, I think we'll see some nasty dog-fights about gun control in the party. You still have the old guard there but there is a growing power base that views gun control as something to avoid at all costs.

 

[Jorg Nysgerrig]

But nationally, a lot of the politically active Democrats have been noticing a trend: Democrats tend to get their brains beat out at the polls after 'successes' at gun control.

To underscore the above statment:

The assault-weapons ban passed, but the result was the Democrats' worse loss in congressional elections since 1946. In losing a whopping 54 House seats, a rout in which such powerful figures as Speaker Tom Foley of Washington and Judiciary Committee chairman Jack Brooks of Texas were swept out of office, the Democrats gave up control of the House for the first time since the 1952 election. The rifle association said 19 of the 24 House members it targeted for defeat lost in 1994. San Francisco Chronicle​

Few career policitians want to risk that kind of attention again. While it is good to be wary, I think a sweeping ban is quite unlikely.

 

[mec]

I think the guys who don't expect a major push until they have both house and the presidency are right. They won't want to get hammered in the mid term elections like Clinton did. By then the Democrats who are basically, Marxist/Hegellian will believe they are riding the historic imperitive and destined to rule forever.

Richard Poe (The Seven Mythis of Gun Control, Hilliarie's Secret War) knows a communist when he sees one. He says Soros is not a communist-he just wants to rule the World.

 

[22-rimfire]

The Democrats as a party will never let go of the gun control issue. It may not be debated in the upcoming election, but it is ever present. No other single issue pushes me to vote Republican or for a Independant candidate.

Don't stick your head in the sand on this issue. It will come up again after another "event". If there is a Democrat president then, the controls will pass. The Democrats don't want to take away your firearms (for now), they just want to know where they are, who has them, further regulate the sale of firearms and ammunition, force unnecessary requirements onto manufactures who have to raise their prices to be in compliance, require that ALL firearms sales go through a FFL dealer, further tax the ownership through permit fees, and hold firearms manfactures liable for gun crimes. Is that enough reason to be suspicious of any Democratic politician beyond the local level?? Just my opinion.

 

[sonofodin]

It's hard to decide to vote left or right. it dosent matter which, i think, because their both so extreme. remember, the more they make you register, the easier it is for them to come back later WITH a list and demand to have your guns. I think as a new voter is very hard for me to decide WHAT to vote. on one hand, if i vote repub. i will probably keep my beloved thundersticks for longer, but if i vote left i might very well loose them the next day. i, for one, dont want to become a nation that succumbs to fear for lack of ways to defends oneself and his property. is already hard enough to defend yourself and your property, taking away guns wont make that easier and WONT stop the crooks from getting them. if the govt. on a federal leval lets illegal aliens walk in, they might as well have ak's tucked under each arm. just my opinion and thoughts on the matter.

 

[Lone_Gunman]

We've seen more infringements of the Constitution under Bush than under his predecessor. I am not too worried about Democrats anymore.