Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

NRA says Biden only interested in infringing gun rights

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Silent Bob, Jan 10, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. wild cat mccane

    wild cat mccane Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2009
    Messages:
    968
    wrong.

    They don't track what you buy. Just track the background check. which is destroyed very quickly.

    Nice try.
     
  2. browneu

    browneu Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2004
    Messages:
    739
    Location:
    ohio
    Oops my bad

    Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2
     
  3. Alaska444

    Alaska444 member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,136
    Yeah right, no permanent record created at all. Sorry, if you wish to believe that they do not track these things so be it. They have files on my elementary school records somewhere in cyberspace and they allegedly just let these documents go down the shredder. Sorry, but I don't believe that at all despite what they tell us. Sorry, but the govn't hasn't inspired a lot of confidence in honesty and integrity the last few years.

    http://www.atf.gov/forms/download/atf-f-4473-1.pdf
     
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2013
  4. fxstchewy

    fxstchewy Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2008
    Messages:
    439
    Yep, i have to agree....:(
     
  5. 22-rimfire

    22-rimfire Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2005
    Messages:
    11,380
    Location:
    TN
    What info is actually provided as part of the NICs check?
     
  6. Alaska444

    Alaska444 member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,136
    How did the FBI know where Cho bought his guns for the Virginia Tech Massacre if there are no permanent records. Cho filed off the serial numbers on his guns and the gun shop owner was notified by the ATF that he sold the gun?

    Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1611948,00.html#ixzz2HcYCxIEg

    Sorry, I truly do not believe that there are no permanent records kept anywhere.
     
  7. 481

    481 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2009
    Messages:
    1,942
    I would. I am tired of law-abiding, gun-owning Americans having to put up with this nonsense.

    Some piece of two-legged waste commits a heinous act and we (law-abiding gun-owning Americans) have to sacrifice another portion of our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms just so the liberal thugs in DC can feel good about "doing something- anything". Keep acquiescing to this and we will see the incremental elimination of our Second Amendment right.

    The problem is that mindset and to whom the liberal thugs are "doing it". Regulation of FTF sales is not the answer to what happened (the suspect murdered his mother, then stole her guns as she lay dead in her bed)- and anyone who is calling for further restrictions against law-abiding citizens in response to the acts of this monster is not "for" us. They are against us if they are willing to see our Second Amendment rights infringed upon any further as an answer to what happened in Sandy Hook.
     
  8. 12gaugeTim

    12gaugeTim Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2011
    Messages:
    293
    "Diminish the probability that children are at risk in our schools."

    I don't see how any human being, which is qualified by being capable of reason, can reasonably see guns as the problem of children not being safe in their schools. Most of the high schools in my area have a few resource officers (armed in some schools, some not) per hundreds and hundreds of kids, and a 99% guarantee that nobody else on campus has any way of defending themselves. Usually just one resource officer at elementary schools. THAT'S the reason why kids aren't safe at school. Not guns.
     
  9. Queen_of_Thunder

    Queen_of_Thunder member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    1,881
    Location:
    Where God purifies the soul. The West Texas desert
    Our schools say you have to sign in at the office if you wish to visit. Thats their defense measures.
     
  10. 12gaugeTim

    12gaugeTim Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2011
    Messages:
    293
    Unenforced gun free zones are good enough for the children of America but not for the courthouses and other state/federal buildings.. Hmm.. Why do they need metal detectors and armed guards at every entrance when the kids don't get that?
     
  11. KTXdm9

    KTXdm9 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2012
    Messages:
    528
    Location:
    Katy, TX
    He knows they don't have the votes. He's quietly trying to lower expectations for their "subjects."
     
  12. Trent

    Trent Resident Wiseguy

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2010
    Messages:
    17,590
    Location:
    Illinois
    Wow.. the NRA goes to a meeting with the chief gun grabber of the country and they're upset at his attitude.

    I'm shocked. Truly shocked, I tell you!

    No, really, I am.

    :)
     
  13. J.J.

    J.J. Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2003
    Messages:
    145
    Location:
    Central Texas
    I am loathe to admit that I work as a Manager @ a Walmart. I am by no means defending the crap company and crap job I have. However, I am one of the guys who walks you out. It's a crappy policy but, what you said is a blatant falsehood. No one watches you on camera like that.
     
  14. joeschmoe

    joeschmoe Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2012
    Messages:
    1,291
    Biden doesn't write the laws. Congress does.
    Obama doesn't write the laws. Congress does.

    It doesn't matte what Biden says. VP has no power.

    Elections for Congress is in 2 years.

    The sky is not falling.
     
  15. Alaska444

    Alaska444 member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,136
    Where in your view of the US is the Executive Order. Certainly it is NOT in the constitution but it is a fact of life. If you don't think it is going to be a very LONG 4 years, then I am not sure where you have been the last 4 years.

    In addition, have you seen the 6000 new regulations Obama put into effect since the election. There are more ways to mess up this country than just through legislative action. In addition, Obama continually ignores constitutional provisions and requirements such as reporting those pending regulations or submitting a budget every year. No, I stand by my statement, it is going to be a very LONG 4 years.
     
  16. blkbrd666

    blkbrd666 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    1,301
    Location:
    Georgia
    Probably because they are in the business of "bending you over" and don't want any retaliation...same reason useless and his followers want to disarm the population.
     
  17. Hapworth

    Hapworth Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2011
    Messages:
    370
    It doesn't have to mean a four year (or more) wait; there are many way to effectively counter an E.O.:

    1) Congress can pass laws undermining it.

    2) Congress can withhold funds needed to enforce it.

    3) It's legality/Constitutionality can be challenged in court, requiring the E.O. to be put on indefinite hold until a court's decision.
     
  18. goon

    goon Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2003
    Messages:
    7,251
    Honestly, I wouldn't be opposed to background checks on every sale and making it possible for private people to run them on each other. I keep a bill of sale when I sell a gun to a private guy anyhow, so why not also write an approval number on it?

    I know some disagree with me on this and I can see their point... criminals will get guns anyhow.
    But you could also use that rationale to sell a gun to known criminal. He's the criminal. He is the one who is going to rob old ladies with the gun. By selling him a gun, you don't really make the situation any worse because he would have got a gun anyhow.
    Still, I wouldn't sell a gun to a criminal knowingly. I am a fan of a background check on every transfer (immediate family could be excluded) and updating/modifying the system so the average guy can run a check on another average guy.
     
  19. jhb

    jhb Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2010
    Messages:
    632
    Location:
    dixie, but some call it florida
    This was just a dog and pony show. Whitehouse already knows what they want to do. Feinstein already had the legislation. All that was left was pretending to do a study, to appease those who are easily duped. Bringing the nra but not inviting the saf, goa, etc.....says it all. It wasn't meant to be serious discussion of ideas....it was a pr stunt so they can say...we tried to work with that evil nra but they refused.

    Course this is all my opinion and nothing more.
     
  20. Alaska444

    Alaska444 member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,136
    If you look up the history of EO's, only a handful have been overturned by congress or courts. In fact, court rulings have made it even harder to over turn an EO.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_order

    According to the wiki, that is only a handful EO's overturned in all the history of EO if this is an accurate rendition of the facts.

    Yes, it will be a long 4 years and beyond since these EO's have a life of their own.
     
  21. Alaska444

    Alaska444 member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,136
    +1, it is all for show this week since they "already have a consensus." They already knew what they were going to do a long time before the election. This is just falling into their plans anyway.
     
  22. 2ifbyC

    2ifbyC Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2010
    Messages:
    298
    Location:
    Arizona
    They had two of the pro-gun rights people on Hannity tonight that attended Biden’s meeting. This was supposed to be a committee on safety for our school children. They said the item was not even discussed. Biden controlled the meeting and cut off discussions with which he did not agree.

    They said they and the NRA are ready to do battle when the report goes to the POTUS next Tuesday.
     
  23. AlexanderA

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    2,961
    Location:
    Virginia
    goon wrote:

    In theory, I would agree with you. I would be OK with background checks on sales between non-licensees, provided it could be done in such a way as not to create de facto registration. As a personal choice, I always go through an FFL when selling a gun.

    However, the antis are really after much bigger things, such as banning the effective modern weapons (military-style semiautomatics and large-capacity magazines). This really is a "slippery slope." Therefore, as a matter of strategy, we can't concede anything. Let them try to take it from us, inch by inch. If there are concessions, they should be at the last minute, not at the outset of negotiations.
     
  24. esheato

    esheato Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    2,784
    Location:
    NoVa
    My thoughts exactly.
     
  25. poboy6

    poboy6 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2013
    Messages:
    82
    Location:
    MO
    This is what troubles me. Yeah, we know all the other stuff they want accomplished. But why in the world could they possibly want anyone other than LEOs or prosecutors to know who has which firearms?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page