I don't think they expected the push back we gave them

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

gym

member
Joined
Dec 9, 2007
Messages
5,901
Doesn't mean it's over because it's far from over, but perhaps Obamma didn't expect the backlash he recieved from the guys like us, who wrote letters every week and made calls and contributed money to fight this crud.
Perhaps he may alter his approach to disarming America, or at least lay off for the time being, as between Lybia and Isreal, he has his plate full at the moment.
I always thought, and mentioned it here, that this is why he put Biden in charge. So he can have deniability if these laws didin't make it through.
Biden on the other hand will say we passed signifficant changes.
Now we need to have the laws that they did pass overturned in court, while continuing to write letters and get a list of who to vote for in upcoming elections. If we lose our right to keep and bear arms, we lose everything.
 
I don't think they expected the push back we gave them
Click to expand...

????. I'm not sure what planet you have been on, but the reason that they haven't been beating the drums of confiscation since the day the last AWB expired is because they KNEW the push back that would come. They only pushed this now because they thought the time was ripe to take advantage of the Sandy Hook shooting. They overestimated their support and overreached for their goals (by making nearly all semi autos illegal). I wished that they would take a floor vote in the Senate so that we could get, on the record, those anti's who would undercut the 2nd. That way, folks could realize that these fiscal conservative/socially liberal politicians ARE a danger each and every second they hold office. They will pledge to the NRA today and (given the right opportunity) vote against the NRA tomorrow. If you are in a state with a Harry Reid or a Joe Manchin or an Al Franken, it is only a matter of the next shooting incident or two (or ten) before they get bold enough or empowered enough to take away your rights. Get rid of them at the next election or put all of our rights at risk!
 
I think they DID expect a push. Perhaps even the size they got. They are fully aware of the size and political/financial clout of their opponents and the reaction they will get from them.

You've got to remember that these people are in this for the long haul. Individuals come and go, but the party platform lives on.

So the push will ALWAYS be there, to one extent or another. And one common tactic is to give a HUGE push on something major...and then fall back on "minor" and "more reasonable/acceptable" terms when that fails.

Don't budge. Not an inch. Which translates into "keep up the pressure".
 
Agreed - they fully expected the push back. The AWB was destined to fail. In some respects, it was almost designed to fail. Now the focus will move to more "moderate" proposal.

Honestly, we need to stop the back-slapping over the failure of the Feinstein AWB.
- it was not going to pass as stand-alone legislation
- part or all of it could be reintroduced as an amendment or rider to other legislation
- this clears the way for putting additional gun control proposals on the table, like universal background checks (a la universal registration), magazine capacity limits, and so forth.

The real work starts now ... defining why more "reasonable" proposals are not in fact that reasonable either ...
 
^^ The above. This was designed to fail so that it, in a somewhat reduced format, can be slipped in again to another bill package at a later date, and they can claim a "compromise", (something they will continue to sound off that we never offer.)
 
There'll be no celebrating by me while my New York brethren are still subjected to seven-round mag restrictions and other draconian measures. And if it can happen to us, it can happen to you. (Yes, I know, "move to Texas and other 'free' states," but that doesn't really solve anything.) Isn't it a unique feature of the Second Amendment that its protections aren't equally afforded to all citizens in all states, as are the other Amendments? How would it be if slavery or free speech was dependent upon the state in which you lived?
 
I'd like to think that it had more to do with the unprecedented spike in gun and ammunition sales. Several dealers I've talked to say that it beats all they've ever seen, heard tell of, or stepped in.
One told me that his ammunition is being sold as soon as it's unloaded from the truck without even hitting the shelves.

That's a clear message. Though a few on Capitol Hill seem to have missed it, others apparently didn't.
 
I smell desperation on the part of the antigunners. For example, Chris Matthews on MSNBC begged his audience to contact their representatives on behalf of the AWB, even to the point of putting the phone number up on the screen. I don't recall him having done that for any other cause.
 
I dont think the administration was caught off guard, but I do think many in the media who thought they had what they needed in Sandy Hook were caught completely off guard. I read an article by an east coast or west coast liberal talking about how assault weapons are this and that, then I go visit the LGS and see moms and pops, blacks and whites, gays and straights, all lined up to buy these rifles as they come off the truck. I always wonder what some of those people would think if they just stood there for a minute and watched. I think a lot of them would just move to France.
 
The actions of anti-gunners accomplished several things. Reinvigorated NRA membership, got gunnies to realize we may have to make some single-issue vote decisions (i voted for Alan Grayson- D and Marco Rubio- R, now there will be no Ds on my votes), got SAFE ACT passed, took down Colorado for the time being, created a whole slew of possible cases to go to the SCOTUS over the next decade, got gun grabbers to come out of the closet against guns, and helped the AR-15 become an even more popular firearm in today's market. I know a dozen buyers-in-waiting with a thousand dollar budget so soon as they can find one for less than a grand they are going to snatch it up.

We won a little, we lost a little, now the fight is on and we have to stay vigilant and push for more victories in the courtroom, street, house and senate, and every day life.
 
They did expect the push back. The reason they didn't do this in 2009 when they had the House and a filibuster-proof Senate, is that they knew it'd cost Obama a second term. They wanted Healthcare reform badly and used their numbers to ram it through by the skin of its teeth.

I'm sure they were all overjoyed last December after Sandy Hook apparently gave them the political momentum they'd need to get AWB2 done, or so they thought.
 
The fight is far from over. It will never be over and in fact I think this whole we are defeated junk they are feeding everyone right now is a ploy to get people to back off. And while you guys may think this is a victory of some proportion consider this, there are now more anti-gun states than there were meaning they may not have won it all but they certainly made an impact. Its just like football, as long as you can move the ball down the field 10 yds. every play you will when the game, a small part at a time, but you will win the game if you can do that every possession. its kind of the same thing here. They are doing it incrementally and winning IMO.
 
As I meant they underestimated the push back. The President appearing on TV with the kids was supposed to help lock in some sort of AWB, but failed. I saw Fienstein on CNN "I believe it was yesterday", telling the moderator that Harry Reed, had promised her one more chance for a vote for an ammendment before it was finished.
I am no a political expert, but she said she would be very dissapointed if he went back on his word.
So obviouslly we all know it isnt by any means over. But the intensity and even the tone of the responses I recieved from everyone "other than the White House" had drastically changed from the first round of letters to the most recent.
They know we aren't going to let it slide by.
The President is backing away from this and declaring a win, "which is what he does", being able to point to NY and CO, along with saying that the background check issue is proceeding. This will probablly be where it stays for now, when all is said and done, what I fear is another incident, which would put this back on the front burner again. Thank God they got that kid yesterday before he struck, that would have restarted the whole thing again.
He has other pressing matters to deal with now that he has support for, so he won't waste any more time, "for now" on guns, unless there is another incident.
Along with what Tuner said, about more people buying guns and ammo, than ever before, they put more guns on the street with all their rethoric.
I see folks who were not interested in guns at all, buying a gun. This had to be an unintended, and undesireable consequence, for politicians who are anti-gun.
I think that one must look at society and assume that bad things will occasionally happen, and nothing we ever do will stop them .Just as good things happen, but they just don't make the news, only bad news is news.
 
I think at least some of them knew what was coming, but were also cognizant of increasing firearms ownership and increasing ownership of specifically the kind of weapons they fear most. So they jumped on any chance in front of them now to play for the big win for fear they will lose in a longer fight. SCOTUS isn't with them, gun rights have been making steady in roads for a generation, etc.

Some of them recognized they are losing, so they gambled on a big win before demography completely marginalized them.
 
this nation wide success unpredictably missed colorado but was easily predicted in new york state.
 
I feel the antis thought they would have free reign to make this country another UK or Australia in the first few weeks after Sandy Hook. I remember reading articles about banning guns totally, eliminating all CCW permits nationwide, etc. I do think they were surprised that while citizens were willing to listen to arguments about banning assault weapons they were not even close to agreeing that all guns should be banned.
 
I don't know about you all but I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop.
Click to expand...

This. Waiting on the "common sense compromise" that "we can all agree" on.

Remember, even GW Bush declared that he would sign a new AWB if it got to his desk. This is not a Republican/Democrat thing even if it mostly follows along party lines. EVERY ELECTION will be weighed by the anti-2nd faction for a new push. EVERY mass shooting incident has the possibility of causing a new push for gun control.

Thus, in the future, have your guns and ammo in line BEFORE the next national election. As you can see from the last two national elections, the day after might be too late!
 
For me and especially those in California, this simply has been another battle in our protracted war. Believe me, we are in a war.

In this latest battle, the antis showed more clearly of their true and ultimate goal - To take guns away from law abiding citizens. They may be crafty in their appearances but their objective is to violate/infringe on the US Constitution/Second Amendment and take away the means we can protect ourselves from criminals and oppressive government.

"We the People" must once again stand and fight for our freedom so that our children and their children can enjoy the freedom our forefathers envisioned for this great nation!

Stand and fight ... and keep pushing back!
 
I always chuckle when Feinstein and Schumer say it is the NRA's fault, the powerful gun lobby... I think that things are the way they are because of everyday gun owners who are aware of the political situation.

The NRA is good for fighting the big fights where it requires significant financial resouces.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top