justashooter in pa
member
- Joined
- May 31, 2009
- Messages
- 358
in regard to your text: imported semi-automatic rifles without at least 9 US-made parts in them, it should read "not more than 10 foreign made parts in them"
(article)Do you think guns will be outlawed soon?: The future of guns in America
- Thread starter MrPeter
- Start date
- Status
Just a response to MrPeter:
To be totally honest, all this irrational Obama paranoia does nothing but hurt the gun ownership course because the majority of the population looks at it in a balanced way, and actions speak louder than words. Didn't Obama sign the bill to allow carry in National Parks?
The worst part is the hysteria out there just make easier to point to the so called "kook right" and you know how it goes from there.... makes gun ownership advocates seem like a fringe element. People elected him did they not? Before I get shouted down, lets just look at this from the other side. The Brady group to me is as irrational and "kook" as they come. But if I was in an argument with them, the I started ridiculing and name calling, and maybe making some incendiary statements, then I only suceed in looking like the one who is the "kook". My message and rationale gets burried in the noise that is a turn off to most people. So finally people side with the cool headed one in the argument even if they don't totally agree with their rationale. There is something to be said about that. Absolutely.
To be totally honest, all this irrational Obama paranoia does nothing but hurt the gun ownership course because the majority of the population looks at it in a balanced way, and actions speak louder than words. Didn't Obama sign the bill to allow carry in National Parks?
The worst part is the hysteria out there just make easier to point to the so called "kook right" and you know how it goes from there.... makes gun ownership advocates seem like a fringe element. People elected him did they not? Before I get shouted down, lets just look at this from the other side. The Brady group to me is as irrational and "kook" as they come. But if I was in an argument with them, the I started ridiculing and name calling, and maybe making some incendiary statements, then I only suceed in looking like the one who is the "kook". My message and rationale gets burried in the noise that is a turn off to most people. So finally people side with the cool headed one in the argument even if they don't totally agree with their rationale. There is something to be said about that. Absolutely.
JochenWeber
Member
It's up to you!
"If you make yourself sheep, the wolves will eat you."
Benjamin Franklin
Goto www.1215.org and inform yourself as much as you can. I bet you will be surprised.
"If you make yourself sheep, the wolves will eat you."
Benjamin Franklin
Goto www.1215.org and inform yourself as much as you can. I bet you will be surprised.
TexasBill
Member
I don't think we need to worry about Obama as much as we need to worry about some governors, including the Republican who occupies the state house in California.
We've got 40 states now that allow citizens to carry concealed weapons. Twenty years ago, there was no way for a Texan to carry a handgun, concealed or openly, without being arrested. No permit, no exceptions (other than police, judges and certain prison employees). Now, one can obtain a concealed handgun license (if one lives long enough for the state to issue it) and carry a concealed handgun. You can have a concealed handgun in your car without a license.
Morton Grove, Illinois, repealed its handgun ban last year.
The waiting period that was once three days is now more like three minutes and there are more military-style weapons and more people making them than I ever recall in the past. When I started buying guns nearly 40 years ago, there were a few good names (S&W, Colt, Browning, Walther, etc.) in handguns and a bunch of junky pieces a lot of gun shops wouldn't even carry. Today, we have lots of good choices (and there's still a fair amount of junk).
Pelosi and Reid told Eric Holder not long after President Obama's inauguration that there was no chance the renewal of the Assault Weapons Ban was going to even come up in the House; there were too many new Democrats who opposed it. HR45 is still stuck in committee with no sponsors. The only way this might change is if we see even more liberal Democrats being elected in the 2010 elections and I just don't see that (and I am a Democrat!). Unless we have another 9/11 and Obama can spin it like Bush did, our gun rights seem to be pretty safe at the federal level.
I'd like to see the Thune-Vitter amendment come up again. I would also like to see the Supreme Court rule in our favor in McDonald vs. Illinois.
Even the tragic incidents at Ft. Hood and in Orlando probably won't have much lasting impact. Even though they are tragic and despicable, they aren't the kind of stuff that can ignite the sustained public furor that the assassinations of Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King did or the gangland violence that brought us the National Firearms act of 1934. In addition, the mood of country has changed; there are probably more firearms in civilian hands now that at anytime in our nation's history.
What I am curious about is why, with the situation the way it is in Congress, everyone is still running around like Chicken Little crying "Obama's gonna take our guns?" Why aren't we pressing for legislation favorable to our cause?
We've got 40 states now that allow citizens to carry concealed weapons. Twenty years ago, there was no way for a Texan to carry a handgun, concealed or openly, without being arrested. No permit, no exceptions (other than police, judges and certain prison employees). Now, one can obtain a concealed handgun license (if one lives long enough for the state to issue it) and carry a concealed handgun. You can have a concealed handgun in your car without a license.
Morton Grove, Illinois, repealed its handgun ban last year.
The waiting period that was once three days is now more like three minutes and there are more military-style weapons and more people making them than I ever recall in the past. When I started buying guns nearly 40 years ago, there were a few good names (S&W, Colt, Browning, Walther, etc.) in handguns and a bunch of junky pieces a lot of gun shops wouldn't even carry. Today, we have lots of good choices (and there's still a fair amount of junk).
Pelosi and Reid told Eric Holder not long after President Obama's inauguration that there was no chance the renewal of the Assault Weapons Ban was going to even come up in the House; there were too many new Democrats who opposed it. HR45 is still stuck in committee with no sponsors. The only way this might change is if we see even more liberal Democrats being elected in the 2010 elections and I just don't see that (and I am a Democrat!). Unless we have another 9/11 and Obama can spin it like Bush did, our gun rights seem to be pretty safe at the federal level.
I'd like to see the Thune-Vitter amendment come up again. I would also like to see the Supreme Court rule in our favor in McDonald vs. Illinois.
Even the tragic incidents at Ft. Hood and in Orlando probably won't have much lasting impact. Even though they are tragic and despicable, they aren't the kind of stuff that can ignite the sustained public furor that the assassinations of Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King did or the gangland violence that brought us the National Firearms act of 1934. In addition, the mood of country has changed; there are probably more firearms in civilian hands now that at anytime in our nation's history.
What I am curious about is why, with the situation the way it is in Congress, everyone is still running around like Chicken Little crying "Obama's gonna take our guns?" Why aren't we pressing for legislation favorable to our cause?
I agree with you Texas. I am an independent and have voted both ways in the past. In regard to the Thune-Vitter bill, I support it too; I say let them leave it alone until after 2010 when I think there will be more friendlies in congress, then re-introduce it. Look at Virginia, safer than DC, NJ or NYC. I don't see CHP holders running around starting wild wild west style gun fights anywhere. And I think just the fact someone might be armed is a big deterrent to would be criminals. I go to the range and there is a healthy female population there all the time among all the males. I say its a good thing. My significant other "hate" or rather is "scared of" an inanimate gun sitting on the table all by itself. There are no kids around either. I just don't get it. Yet she "feels" safe at night knowing I'd stop any BG who happens upon us.
THE DARK KNIGHT
Member
Completely true. But the pot of moron soup is being stirred by two factions.
One people stirring up fear since last year, and still are, would be gun/ammo dealers. They love this of course. I mean, sure they could sell you that rifle for $600. and make a decent profit. But why do that when they can say oh my god you gotta by this the new HRbunchanumbers is gonna ban this tomorrow afternoon!!! And sell you it for $1100. And then sell you the bullets for it at $1 a pop.
Second is a much more devious one. Many of those on the right simply exploit the gun issue to marginalize voters and other issues. They drum up statements and exaggerate little things to get people all worked up over guns. The same way they do with the other hot buttons like abortion and religion. They turn heated debate and divert attention. That way everyone is ranting and raving and panicking and worrying about buy overpriced guns and ammo before the imaginary ban, and meanwhile these politicians are getting away with not dealing with real issues like health care or education. Shame on the left, and shame on the right too.
Look at the panic this year. Just look at it. The Democrats did nothing! All these people needed were an anecdote from a press release here, a survey from 14 years ago there, mix it in with some sound bytes from a speech 3 years ago and that's it! Voila! Winchester White Box .45 is $67!
And the most ironic of all, is all this panic only HELPS the anti-gunners. It's not easy trying to show people you're a responsible, sane person, when you're stereotyped by panicky fools stockpiling ammo for the end of the world. Which is in 3 days by the way.
OrangePwrx9
Member
They're no longer taking the frontal approach on gun control because they know it doesn't work. They've also learned that they don't need to go that way to control guns. The healthcare bill will give them the power they need to control guns, and a lot of other things, indirectly.
As everyone knows, gov't run healthcare will turn out to be hideously expensive. There will be a big push to drive costs down. Someone will tally up the costs of treating gunshot wounds and gun related injuries (and maybe multiply it by five or ten). These costs will be labeled "totally unacceptable".
The solution will be to force us to buy liability insurance (from the gov't?) for each gun we own, similar to how we buy liability insurance for our automobiles. This will make ownership of more than one or two weapons cost prohibitive. It will also create a hard record of exactly what weapons we each own.
They'll get there one way or another. The question is, whether we'll know the time (and have the guts) to stand up and say "Enough!" and drive our point home.
As everyone knows, gov't run healthcare will turn out to be hideously expensive. There will be a big push to drive costs down. Someone will tally up the costs of treating gunshot wounds and gun related injuries (and maybe multiply it by five or ten). These costs will be labeled "totally unacceptable".
The solution will be to force us to buy liability insurance (from the gov't?) for each gun we own, similar to how we buy liability insurance for our automobiles. This will make ownership of more than one or two weapons cost prohibitive. It will also create a hard record of exactly what weapons we each own.
They'll get there one way or another. The question is, whether we'll know the time (and have the guts) to stand up and say "Enough!" and drive our point home.
THE DARK KNIGHT
Member
This is exactly the kind of pot stirring I'm talking about in my previous post. Politicians have actually gotten people to believe stuff like this.
I take it you've had no experience with yourself or family being stricken with a prolonged illness? Are you aware that you can suffer and die, right here in the USA, because an insurance company would rather let you die than shrink their profits?
People are focused on asinine things like rumored possible future legislation and completely miss the big picture - mission accomplished!
But this isn't a political forum so I'll stop.
OrangePwrx9
Member
I was caregiver for my Dad for the last few years before he died. He had Alzheimers. Does that count?
Family takes care of family here.
THE DARK KNIGHT
Member
Possibly. I'm not sure if your father had quite the medical nightmare my grandfather did during his last years. I hear all this talk about how the government run healthcare is gonna be so expensive, and I just laugh. The private system left grandma a 1.3 million dollar bill.
Family takes care of family here too. But unfortunately we don't know how to install a feeding tube or perform dialysis, so we have to hire someone to do that for us.
But let's just agree to disagree. This isn't a political forum.
dondavis3
Member
I do not think so.
:banghead:
:banghead:
outerlimit
Member
USSR said:
Just after the 2003 Norinco ban.
Then he nominated Alberto "gun control is in my heart" Gonzalez as Attorney General.
While we had his buddy Arnold banning .50cals
Then the ATF went nutty on "parts kits"
His appointed Solicitor General Paul D. Clement filed a brief to the Supreme Court in support of the D.C. Handgun Ban.
And as mentioned he pledged to sign any extension of the "Assault Weapons Ban" that came to his desk, and was quite ready to sign AWB II if it came to that.
I could go on..
He campaigned on this stuff in 2000 as well. He wasn't just saying this in 2004. I wouldn't call that pandering, I'd call it being consistent.
All this, while the average gun owner was sitting around sucking their thumb because they thought Bush was the second coming.
THE DARK KNIGHT
Member
Thank You!
sfc_mark
Member
Just to keep this factual: He signed a bill for credit card reform with an 11th hour National Parks CCW rider.
Last edited:
sfc_mark, what does it matter? He could have refused to sign it with the rider and veto-ed it, could he not? This is an informal forum, I see no need for a lot of legalese. Lets eek it light and entertaining while being informative. Geez, lets call a spade a spade here and please people relax.
As for you OrangePwrx9, in case you are not aware, there is already a backdoor national gun registry, and even if you bought from an anonymous individual owner, in 99.9% of the cases they can still trace it to you. What are you drinking? Why do you think guns have serial numbers and why gosh I wonder why its illegal to deface a firearms or file off the serial number...crickets!! $%$##$...
Do you know the first time ANY firearm is sold from a manufacturer to a dealer there is a paper trail maintained by BATF? And when that dealer sells to the first individual owner the serial number is registered with who it was sold to? ... if you then sell to a guy and it winds up in a crime, you better know who you sold it to or you have a BIG problem on your hands. Enough of a BIG problem you will be in a hurry to reverse your fake amnesia in fact. Do you also realize at lot of these policies date back to the Reagan era? Yes that Reagan! Not saying anything, just making a comment. And some date even further in the past. For austerity sake, let me pose an intriguing question: How long did it take them to Trace the gun that killed JFK? 14 minutes!! How do you suppose they did that? How do they trace guns now from supposed non-existent registries? They don't need any health-care backdoor way to do what they already do, and if you really believe that anonymous gun you bought, no one knows about it, you ate the biggest whopper there is out there; And I got a bridge to sell you.
Leave politicians to change colors and camouflage to the environment of the day like chameleons, honest politicians are as rare as green cows. That is a fact. No need for another indirect registry when one has been there for decades. Just know the facts, and you will be fine. I don't want to start political fights here, but I don't trust either side very much. Call me cynical but nothing is really what it seems to be when you look closer. I think for myself and don't let some politician feed me facts. I want to read the bill for myself and not just assume things either.
Please allow me to contradict myself here for good measure. I don't want government snooping on anyone, let alone myself. So naturally I would never vote a national registry real or imagined, but if a Crime is committed against me or anyone I care about, you are damn right I want that gun traced ASAP and I am glad there is a way to trace it. In that moment perhaps the evil registry isn't so evil anymore.
By the way I am with stupid.
As for you OrangePwrx9, in case you are not aware, there is already a backdoor national gun registry, and even if you bought from an anonymous individual owner, in 99.9% of the cases they can still trace it to you. What are you drinking? Why do you think guns have serial numbers and why gosh I wonder why its illegal to deface a firearms or file off the serial number...crickets!! $%$##$...
Do you know the first time ANY firearm is sold from a manufacturer to a dealer there is a paper trail maintained by BATF? And when that dealer sells to the first individual owner the serial number is registered with who it was sold to? ... if you then sell to a guy and it winds up in a crime, you better know who you sold it to or you have a BIG problem on your hands. Enough of a BIG problem you will be in a hurry to reverse your fake amnesia in fact. Do you also realize at lot of these policies date back to the Reagan era? Yes that Reagan! Not saying anything, just making a comment. And some date even further in the past. For austerity sake, let me pose an intriguing question: How long did it take them to Trace the gun that killed JFK? 14 minutes!! How do you suppose they did that? How do they trace guns now from supposed non-existent registries? They don't need any health-care backdoor way to do what they already do, and if you really believe that anonymous gun you bought, no one knows about it, you ate the biggest whopper there is out there; And I got a bridge to sell you.
Leave politicians to change colors and camouflage to the environment of the day like chameleons, honest politicians are as rare as green cows. That is a fact. No need for another indirect registry when one has been there for decades. Just know the facts, and you will be fine. I don't want to start political fights here, but I don't trust either side very much. Call me cynical but nothing is really what it seems to be when you look closer. I think for myself and don't let some politician feed me facts. I want to read the bill for myself and not just assume things either.
Please allow me to contradict myself here for good measure. I don't want government snooping on anyone, let alone myself. So naturally I would never vote a national registry real or imagined, but if a Crime is committed against me or anyone I care about, you are damn right I want that gun traced ASAP and I am glad there is a way to trace it. In that moment perhaps the evil registry isn't so evil anymore.
By the way I am with stupid.
Last edited:
As you might suspect I have taken a liking to The Dark_Night's thinking. But that one (in 3 days...) threw me off for curve. Care to enlighten us all?I see what you did there.
gc70
Member
What matters is that CCW in National Parks was a crumb tossed to us to ensure that the credit card bill was passed quickly. I can't even imagine a rider that would have kept Obama from signing a bill to save American consumers from the predatory practices of evil bankers (since that is the line that is selling well today). I also can't imagine him signing a stand-alone, pro-gun piece of legislation.
THE DARK KNIGHT
Member
There really was no special meaning to the 3 days thing. It was just a joke referencing the earlier part of the post, where I poked fun at the meaningless panic of this year.
outerlimit
Member
I understand your overall premise, but I just wanted to point out that comparing credit card companies and their handlers to "bankers" is like comparing a Siberian tiger to a tabby.
KJS
Member
Hasn't the Obama administration decided to remain silent since February 25th when Holder said the Obama administration would seek to reinstate the "assault weapons" ban?
I think even Obama knows that it's best to keep his mouth shut as every time he opens it more guns & ammo are sold.
Obama has unintentionally become the #1 guns salesman in America. Actually, I saw a joke about that at a local gun shop. They had a pic of him on the wall and it was captioned #1 Gun Salesman.
I think even Obama knows that it's best to keep his mouth shut as every time he opens it more guns & ammo are sold.
Obama has unintentionally become the #1 guns salesman in America. Actually, I saw a joke about that at a local gun shop. They had a pic of him on the wall and it was captioned #1 Gun Salesman.
moooose102
Member
short answer to a long question. no! if "they" try to outlaw guns in america, it WILL be the start of the next civil war. only it will be the general population against the government. i know that the government has the military, and all of their hi-tech stuff. but a great deal of them are true patriots, and would have a really hard time shooting and bombing its own civillian population. it would be an ugly time for the U.S.A. , in which we also may find ourselves entering into another war at the same time. think about it, what better time to invade a country, than when it is tearing itself apart?! we have been very fortunate in the fact that no one has invaded mainland U.S.A. . but if you think it could NEVER happen, you had better sit down, and re-think that. remember 911! while not an official invasion, we could very easily be invaded, especially if all or most of our government resourses were aimed at a general dis-arming of its own citizens. i also think that there would be many assasanation attempts in washington. amny of the "big shots", not just the president, would be in extreeme perril. that is not a threat, it is just my opinion. but i think many people would agree with me. yes, "they" have lists, especially of recent firearms purchases. but, with all of the panic buying that has happened in the last 12 months, the general population has NEVER been so well armed, and "ammo'd up". it would be suicide to try to dis-arm america. and not just for the president. we would actually probably end up with an etnirely new government. not saying it would be good for a while. it would be a disaster for at least 10 years. but when push comes to shove, sometimes ugly things happen.
I think, if they outlawed guns in america, the population would roll over and take it. grudgingly, not without whining and yelling about it. But we would.
There is a lot of precident of that happening to many other nations across the world that have enacted gun bans. The people roll over and accept it.
To think that americans are different or somehow superior is... patriotism? Or just wishfull thinking.
After Katrina did they hand over their guns? yes they did.
When you have to choose between your guns and your family losing their dad to prison... I would hope most of us would choose our families.
It would be the beginning of the end, but gun control needs to be stopped far FAR before it gets to that point.
Support the NRA.
There is a lot of precident of that happening to many other nations across the world that have enacted gun bans. The people roll over and accept it.
To think that americans are different or somehow superior is... patriotism? Or just wishfull thinking.
After Katrina did they hand over their guns? yes they did.
When you have to choose between your guns and your family losing their dad to prison... I would hope most of us would choose our families.
It would be the beginning of the end, but gun control needs to be stopped far FAR before it gets to that point.
Support the NRA.
USSR
Member
And so could I. Name a single significant piece of Federal antigun legislation passed during Bush's 8 years? Yeah, I thought so, Nada. His predecessor hit us with the AWB, and Bush and the Republicans allowed it to expire during his term in office. I would not take much solice in the fact that Obama and the Dem's haven't acted on their antigun inclinations. Knowing that someone hates what you stand for and is only waiting for the right moment to attack you does not give me any warm, fuzzy feelings.
Don
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked