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"
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?
THE DARK KNIGHT said:Which is in 3 days by the way.
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.
I was caregiver for my Dad for the last few years before he died. He had Alzheimers. Does that count?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.
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
USSR said:That statement was made by Bush during the 2004 election when Bush was trolling for Independant's votes, and Congress was safely in Republican hands.
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.
He signed a bill for National Parks CCW.
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.
sfc_mark, what does it matter? He could have refused to sign it with the rider and veto-ed it, could he not?
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?
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.
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..