Quantcast

Opinion piece from Dr. John Lott in the Wall Street Journal

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by hso, Oct 17, 2020.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. hso

    hso Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2003
    Messages:
    57,661
    Location:
    0 hrs east of TN
    Dr. Lott has a been a pro 2A researcher for decades bringing light into the smoke and mirror world of the Anti 2A propaganda machine. Seeing an opinion piece in the WSJ by him is refreshing.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/Democrats-are-coming-for-your-guns-11601938911?mod=opinion_lead_pos6

    https://crimeresearch.org/2020/10/a...s-liable-for-gun-crimes-hurts-the-vulnerable/
     
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2020
  2. buck460XVR

    buck460XVR Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    8,152
    Can't read unless I subscribe. That ain't gonna happen.

    Won't be Joe Biden and the Democrats coming for your guns, nor will it be the strong antis. It will be the majority of Americans that don't own a firearm, if and when they see fit. Right now the sentiment is strong to keep things the way they are. No new gun restrictions and the keeping of the old ones. Look at Obama's two terms. While Republicans ranted the same rhetoric about him taking our guns, he actually did more for responsible gun ownership than Trump has.

    Remember, it's "we the people".........
     
    Twiki357, Poper, Fiv3r and 8 others like this.
  3. JTHunter

    JTHunter Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2010
    Messages:
    2,357
    Location:
    Southwestern IL-ANNOY
    Here's the first part of the WSJ article.
    The second link is the same article.
     
    steves2, d2wing, jhb and 1 other person like this.
  4. SharpDog

    SharpDog Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    2,466
    Location:
    Tennessee
    I found this part to be the most revealing:

    upload_2020-10-17_22-8-39.png
     
  5. SharpDog

    SharpDog Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    2,466
    Location:
    Tennessee
    P5 Guy likes this.
  6. AlexanderA
    • Contributing Member

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    7,390
    Location:
    Virginia
    Exactly. The reason that antigun planks are in the Democrats' platform is that they believe the antigun stance will win them more votes than it will lose them. As gun owners, we have a serious problem that transcends the posturing of politicians. We need to try to change the attitude of our fellow citizens. I'm not sure how we go about doing that.
     
    Tcruse, Poper, steves2 and 3 others like this.
  7. defjon

    defjon Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2005
    Messages:
    401
    The royal we, idunno.

    But be responsible. Offer to take folks shooting. Just be cool and personable. It's a good time since so many new gun owners have purchased firearms due to covid or social unrest concerns. (once ammo comes back that is!)

    I think a lot of anti gun people have never actually been around guns much at all, most likely never fired one. Or they had a negative firearms experience.

    A couple have refused the range offer politely, but many more have gone just from the relationship previously established.

    One especially anti gun lady has since gone as far as starting her own LGBT gun rights group and shooting community. I think that's great.

    So yeah, just try to reach across the aisle folks, be the change you wanna see and all that.

    Treating others for way you want to be treated would solve about all the issues in society today. I've found more takers than passers when it comes to the offer of some free range time (and some light safety instruction of course).

    If worried about cost, grab a 22 semi and revolver. Had luck with an sr22 in the past.
     
    steves2, hps1, theotherwaldo and 3 others like this.
  8. kidneyboy

    kidneyboy Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2018
    Messages:
    955
    Location:
    SE WI
    Please explain how the unarmed take away the guns of the armed. Particularly the "if and when they see fit" part.
    Then a detailed explanation of your last two sentences please.
     
    stevek likes this.
  9. Barbaroja

    Barbaroja Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2020
    Messages:
    180
    Like anything else. With legislation of course
     
    steves2, 23tony, DeepSouth and 3 others like this.
  10. hso

    hso Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2003
    Messages:
    57,661
    Location:
    0 hrs east of TN
    That's why the pieces is pasted from CPRC where Dr. Lott made it available (I got it by email) and I provided the link to the CPRC site so there's no need to subscribe to WSJ to read it.
     
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2020
  11. GAF

    GAF Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2012
    Messages:
    986
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    IMHO It is the criminal and the news that sways a lot of public opinion on gun control. You all know the rest of the story on this.
     
  12. Old Dog

    Old Dog Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2004
    Messages:
    7,151
    Location:
    Back on Puget Sound
    One suspects part of the plan is requiring gun owners to have insurance, in the manner of automobile insurance. Next, special taxes (already a fact in a couple of our cities up here) on ammunition and firearms, more "administrative" fees (like the DROS fees in California, only running into the hundreds of dollars per firearm) -- a lot of this can be done in a regulatory fashion, avoiding legislation. But, if the Dems take the Senate -- and they probably will -- there will be legislation, and the goal will be to legislate firearms ownership out of existence by pricing purchasing and owning (imagine paying annual taxes on your guns, just like vehicle registration and property taxes) firearms out of the realm of ordinary citizens.
     
    steves2, Mark39, d2wing and 3 others like this.
  13. wiscoaster

    wiscoaster Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2019
    Messages:
    711
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    I really think it has more do with money. The anti-gun people have almost unlimited sums. For Michael Bloomberg to spend a billion dollars on buying politicans their seats in Congress is just a tiny fraction of his net worth.
     
    steves2, Baybum and P5 Guy like this.
  14. Ernie Bass

    Ernie Bass Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2019
    Messages:
    1,082
    Location:
    No Town N.C.
    I do not think their is a time in history when Politicians have been preaching using false pandering to a uneducated public to secure votes. I think the greatest danger lies in the belief that Kamala Harris would become President. She loves theatrics more than fact and in a effort to appease voters she will go strong on taking away all firearms and bring hardships to Firearm manufacturers. She is void of knowledge on all matters to the Important Global issues and national issues that face our country. And because of this she attempts to make up for this lack of knowledge with a false persona of being strong and again use childish stories that have no meaning other than to appeal to a ignorant base. Blind leading the Blind with a vengeance. A crusader leading off to a war that does not exist all in order to serve self.

     
  15. buck460XVR

    buck460XVR Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    8,152
    Simple. Only about 30% of folks in America actually own a gun. That leaves around 70% that don't. That makes us gun owners a minority. Out of that 70%, there is another minority that are hard core antis. The remainder, the majority of Americans, are pretty much neutral. While they don't own a gun, they don't mind that others do. They are the ones that are most influenced by the news of violence using guns, accidental shootings and just plain old everyday irresponsible gun ownership. They are why there is such a "every which way the wind blows" sentiment about gun ownership and the laws regulating gun ownership. They are the ones we need to keep on our side. All of this chest beating and screams of "shall not be infringed!" on gun forums is pretty much useless in this respect, i.e., it's just preaching to the choir. If the sentiment that majority has, changes negatively towards gun ownership and is added to the minority of hard core antis....we don't have a chance. This is not rocket science, and any supporter of the RKBA needs to understand how fragile and complicated this relationship is. According to the same source as the linked article(The WSJ) 89% of Americans support stricter and expanded background checks for the purchase of firearms. This tells me that over half of those folks that already own guns.....also support stricter background checks..

    Last two sentences?

    Next to last...... Research shows that only two gun laws passed during Obama's two terms and those did nothing to restrict gun ownership, but actually expanded the rights of gun owners here in the U.S. Trump on the other hand, supported and signed into law, the banning of bump stocks, a restriction on responsible gun ownership.

    Last.....as far as I know, it is still "We the People" that control the country, by our opinions, by expressing our opinions and using our right to vote to elect folks to represent those same opinions. Not much to explain there.
     
    Mark39, The Last Outlaw and Tommygunn like this.
  16. Tommygunn

    Tommygunn Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    Messages:
    6,673
    Location:
    Morgan County, Alabama
    The unarmed vote in politicians who promise to ban guns. Those politicians win. They enact laws to ban and confiscate guns ("bingo! If you have an AR or AK, we're coming for them!) . Then they send out ATF, U.S. Marshals, FBI counterterrorism taskforce, to do the taking if the peons/myrmidons don't turn them in.


    That's how.

    Edit: see post immediately above this (#15). That's part of the process too.
     
  17. scaatylobo

    scaatylobo Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    2,415
    Location:
    Western NYS
    This is as simple to understand as ANYTHING that is in print.

    If anyone still can say & believe that Biden is not going to 'try' and disarm Americans = your either blind or a fool.

    I will not try to reason with fools !
     
    DoubleMag, Mark39, gifbohane and 3 others like this.
  18. AlexanderA
    • Contributing Member

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    7,390
    Location:
    Virginia
    I've said this before and I'll say it again -- if the Democrats take the Senate, they'll have an organizational majority but not an antigun majority. Antigun stances are not popular in the marginal "purple" states that they have to carry in order to achieve their Senate majority.

    There's not a chance that a gun confiscation bill would pass the Senate, whether under Democratic control or not.
     
  19. Old Dog

    Old Dog Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2004
    Messages:
    7,151
    Location:
    Back on Puget Sound
    Oh, but I'm not talking about gun confiscation. The Democrats have been closely watching states such as Virginia, Oregon, Washington, and they are most certainly looking at further regulations that will impact -- and infringe -- upon the rights of everyone to keep and bear arms. The plans have already been drawn up and tested; it's simply cooking the frog on a slow boil.

    Have you even bothered to read Biden's platform?
     
  20. AlexanderA
    • Contributing Member

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    7,390
    Location:
    Virginia
    Indeed. The main thing that worries me is a new AWB. He's taking a two-pronged approach -- a halt to new production, and registration of existing weapons under the NFA (or purchase by the government). (Incidentally, initial NFA registration -- after a law change -- has historically been free. So much for the allegation that there would be a $200 tax on all semiautomatics.)

    The practical difficulties of registering millions of semiautomatics under an already overburdened NFA system would become clear soon enough, and this proposal would be dropped like a hot potato. I have to classify this as campaign rhetoric and nothing more.

    That brings us, basically, to a renewal of the 1994-2004 AWB. We lived through that once, and we can live through it again -- with the difference being that there are a lot more AWs out there now. With the current stockpiling of lower receivers, it would be a long time before we saw a significant effect on the market.
     
  21. wiscoaster

    wiscoaster Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2019
    Messages:
    711
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    The main problem with an NFA excise tax is not the amount - $200 would never fly - but the real problem is that is involves the IRS in a firearm regulatory situation. That is not the IRS's mandate, and if they got the power to tax all firearms they would have the same authority they have now over non-payment or non-compliance on income taxes. Just imagine waking up some morning to find all your financial accounts frozen, your debit and credit cards not working, a lien on your property, and your wages attached. All because you didn't pay the excise tax on some old gun in the back of your safe you forgot you had. Extreme scenario, yes, but possible.
     
  22. Tommygunn

    Tommygunn Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    Messages:
    6,673
    Location:
    Morgan County, Alabama

    Never say never. New Democrats have very little power and those who do, like Pelosi and Feinstein, twist arms very hard to get newbies to fall in line.

    Just sayin' .....
     
  23. Tommygunn

    Tommygunn Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    Messages:
    6,673
    Location:
    Morgan County, Alabama
    Unless it is done differently I believe it is done by the BATF, not the IRS.

    As far as the .gov. freezing your accounts, don't kid yourself; they can do THAT right now. The more we go away from checks and cash over to computer/Internet transfers, the more vulnerable we become to this.
     
    old lady new shooter and defjon like this.
  24. Slotback

    Slotback Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    323
    Location:
    Texas
    Go back and look at SharpDog's post. Every manufacturer in the United States has a vested interested in seeing the gun manufacturing industry protected. If someone uses a widget criminally you think the widget maker wants to be on the hook civilly?
     
    Cannibul likes this.
  25. CapnMac

    CapnMac Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2009
    Messages:
    7,982
    Location:
    DFW (formerly Brazos County), Texas
    There was, to my information, knowledge, and/or belief, no "law" involved. This did not go before Congress and get submitted as a Bill. The bureau, ATFE, simply enlarged an existing Regulation. The belief that a Law was debated, sent to conference and put upon the president's desk persists despite. It's accepted canon by NeverTrumpers.

    The difference being that they will not allow a sunset provision to be inserted. They--as has been repeatedly reported--intend to also make sure that no "workarounds" will be allowed. And they have a number of State AWB to examine to find the best approach.

    That is correct, IRS was the original controlling organization, hence the presence of Alcohol and Tobacco in the name of the Tax collecting and enforcement agency. "ATF" moved to Justice in the 70s or 80s. The "E" was added after Waco in the 90s. What role the agency plays in the collection of alcohol or tobacco taxes is not clear.
     
    JTHunter, Mark39 and Cannibul like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice