Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by KNO3, Nov 20, 2018.
In my experience, nobody ever wanted me ignorant or disarmed for MY benefit.
I'm glad to say that in the late 70's through the 90's, I believed in our mission and purpose regarding the Communists. I'm only more certain that they are an evil to be exterminated.
You have to understand that some of the defeatism is manufactured and intended to harm the morale of the pro-Constitution side. I've been seeing that for 30+ years.
I love the lie that "Guns are easier to get now!". When I was in grade school, you could buy handguns through the mail.
The view is based on how power manifests itself in connection with laws. Elections and opinion polls drive politics, politics lead to legislation, courts are inlfluenced by politics, and ultimately internal conflicts or the threat of internal conflict shape policy.
The mood of the country is changing rapidly. The NRA is now viewed as the enemy of the people to the point where an NRA endorsement is almost a political liability. The vast majority of Americans want some kind of universal background check for private sales. They don’t agree with the registration leads to confiscation leads to genocide argument.
So whereas I once thought constitutional guarantees were once etched in stone, I now feel like I am witnessing history being made where rights will be lost due to the people’s interpretation of the issues at stake.
I don’t believe this trend will be corrected given the current turmoil. The division of the people is cyclical in nature and must run its course.
I can only wish the best for all my fellow Americans and pray for our country.
banning many parts, parts kits, even the ability to speak of it. Banning, sounds mmmmoderate doesn't it? Rrrrrreasonable; ssssensible. (not).
This is their lead. What comes afterward? What, not if?
So what does the 2A mean to me? Something to protect, cherish, fight to preserve. For clarification fight references the hard work; the extreme difficult of lifting the phone receiver and dialing Representatives, writing letters, etc.
Not a whit.
1, National carry - take a two week course and you can carry nation wide.
2. National stand your ground - consistent law that you can defend yourself and are not liable for civil or criminal penalties.
3. Constitutional right to own a bolt action rifle, shotgun and suppressors.
4. Constitutional right to own and carry pepper spray, air horns, brass knuckles, knives, and/or tasers. Its kind of dumb people can carry a gun, but not a keyring-eye-poker.
Now, I have no idea how to collect up all the guns that are already out there. Mandatory buybacks might work in Chesterfield, Mo (upscale suburb of St Louis), but not so well in other locations. FBI teams that use tactics like showing up when the owner isn't home, use charming female agents to soft soap people into giving up their firearms, could have some success. But how many can they seize? Maybe a hundred a week? At the end of the year, they'd have a whole five thousand, out of easily ten or fifteen million illegal guns. People would be making their own guns faster than the FBI could seize them.
As the teams have some success, they'd get expanded. Sooner or later, they'd run out of FBI agents and have to use feebs, federal employees who like to kick down doors, smash peoples faces into gravel, and wreck their house. A feeb would cause a shooting incident, and some of the more extreme gun owners would declare ACW 2.
So, yeah, I have no workable idea how to seize the guns that are out there. And, yes, I know there are like 300-400 million firearms owned privately. I'm assuming exceptional success in the voluntary surrender program. The government is letting your keep your shot gun, so why not give up the handgun? Criminals won't have them anymore, right? You can always take the two week course, right?
Certain locations will do their best to limit these guarantees, so lots of cases going to the Supreme Court.
Nor do I know how to write a decent definition of an MSR. Scary tacticool semiautomatic is a little vague.
Not sure how to write this into a constitutional amendment. They are usually pretty concise, and all this stuff would be pages and pages of rules.
Maybe we should take the guns away from the cops, too, like they do in Britain.
Maybe we should just enforce the laws we have.
You've already given up.
I can see what would happen. There would be ONE place in the US to take that course. The cost would be $10k. You would be responsible for all lodging and meals. The class size would be limited to 100 people per class and there would be 12 classes a year.
Why are you so willing to give up so much?
Absolutely, unequivocally without a doubt, NO. No one form of a firearm should be banned or regulated. Background checks are already in place and do not need to be expanded. And as a LEO I for one, and many many more like me, will never enforce a mandatory mass confiscation.
The Constitution already gives me the right to own whatever firearm I want or need. There is no reason to restrict it to only a few. If you are not comfortable with MSRs then don't own one. But don't tell me what I can or cannot own. I'm an adult and can make my own choices.
Gun control is not about guns. Compromise has never netted us any gains. And they will not stop until they have you cherished bolt actions and lever guns as well. The idea of selling one group down the river in the hopes they don't come after you is not only misguided, it is down right repugnant.
Note: I am using "you" in the general sense of the word.
This is incredibly cogent and precise.
The modern political reality, and on all matters political, not merely firearms, is that only the two extreme quintiles are politically active. The next two quintiles are the only "swing" votes either side can reach, but, even then, only poorly. The center quintile, per all the political pundits & handicappers, is immobile, unswayable, and thus unpredictable. Which devolves all political campaigning into energizing the "fringe" quintiles to a given end, to enure that they vote a given way, and rather than abstaining or voting in opposition.
So, yes, this probably suggests that the solution is to establish a multi party system. The problem being that the current soup sandwich allows great power to a small number of well-heeled power brokers. They would have to be willing (or forced) to cede some of that considerable power for the greater good.
The Ronald Reagan quote is apt here: "It's not that they don't know anything, it's that they are so certain of it."
The far-left Quintile has something of a fascination with out criminal class, one I do not understand at all. Nor of their constanst apologies for that class, either.
So, inadvertently, they are entirely correct, the criminal class has even less trouble violating the law in acquiring firearms than ever before.
While, we, the legal owners, are forced to leap through ever more constraining strictures for our purchases. All while our legal and lawful ownership is defamed and disgraced and dismissed.
I used to believe that there was some merit in allowing the smart to lead the less so, but, I have mellowed to better believe that the Reasonably Knowledgeable do a reasonably good job when not fettered by self-styled "superiors" and anti-libertarians.
I am sure you would, but we never get anything back, so no more giving up anything.
all manner of the Liberties of a free people.
Back in the dark reaches of time, I once was a California liberal and all that which it connotes. I was deeply indoctrinated by the University of California at Santa Barbara in the 1970s to expect entitlement at the expense of others and to hate the US government over the war in Vietnam. Ever see the movie "Hearts and Minds?" Then, I had a gun pushed against my head and I was thrown into the back of a car. My journey to being an American began that day. Since that day over forty years ago, I have become very hardened against anyone or any entity that works against Liberty. The Second Amendment is the canary in the coal mine. It means liberals are at work to destroy my, and your, American Liberty.
Actually, if you understand the history of the Soviet Union, Stalin and the GULAG, it makes perfect sense:
Stalin started out as a bank robber and extortionist, "fundraising" for the Bolsheviks.
Stalin had a soft spot for common criminals.
Stalin sent anyone who was even POTENTIALLY a political threat (whom he didn't just have shot) to the GULAG.
Common criminals in the GULAG were favored over the "politicals", and allowed to savagely exploit them.
American leftists are just "honoring" a VERY old "tradition".
You'd have an Isandlhwana every other day for the confiscators and an Adowa every week.
Pretty soon, you'd run out of confiscators before you ran out of guns.
So far, God hasn't rendered an opinion on gun control
If He does, I'll listen.
Not just no but hell no. Might I suggest that you bone up on what "shall not be infringed" means?
He has: He (Jesus) said to them, “But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one." - Luke 2:36, ESV
Jesus said that we should all have swords.
No judge would interpret that to mean that we should all have guns.
That's why this can't be in the hands of judges.
Separate names with a comma.