Candidate Who Campaigned For New AWB Says She Isn't Going to Take Your Guns

We really don't do organized armed resistance threads, so let's get back on track or this get closed.

We discuss the technical issues of the law and civil rights issues. Plenty of other places to do the 'Red Dawn' story.

As far as the social approbation attack, I give you two instances:

1. The Atlantic have a quite negative view of a program for young people:

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...us-military-is-teaching-kids-to-shoot/494429/

While the story has positive aspects - the headline suggests a camp for rampage nuts.

2. The negative social media response to the first Olympic gold medal.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...rasher-laments-controversy-gun-laws/88333030/
 
We really are only marking time until the next law.
They are prepping for the opportunity that is potentially coming up with the new POTUS and fresh new SCOTUS judges.

They will chip away at public opinion until Mrs. Clinton is elected.

This is the Super Bowl election for guns... If we luck out and a pro-gun candidate gets into office, then we buy time... 4 years; but that does nothing to stop the onslaught at state levels. If we don't, it will be the beginning of the end.

In my opinion, we saw the last pro-gun president 7 years ago.
 
They are prepping for the opportunity that is potentially coming up with the new POTUS and fresh new SCOTUS judges
Click to expand...
this is true. This election is more about who gets to appoint potential new SCOTUS positions lasting much longer than whoever wins the presidency...
 
Historically, GWB said that he would sign the AWB if it got to his desk. Luckily, the Congress did not oblige.

Now some said that was clever politics as he knew that would not happen but still could pretend to worry about the children. I regard that as dishonest.

Granted he did the TX CHL. The AR seems to be litmus test of a true understanding of the RKBA.
 
The AR seems to be litmus test of a true understanding of the RKBA.
Click to expand...
It may seem like that but if the antis really had a limiter they would go for handguns before AR15s considering...

even many gun owners support the AWB but they don’t realise the only way gun control will theoretically work is if all guns are banned including hunting guns.

the antis wont stop with AR15s
 
It may seem like that but if the antis really had a limiter they would go for handguns before AR15s considering
Click to expand...

They already tried that and failed. Before it was "Brady Campaign" it was called "Handgun Control, Inc." and before it was called that it was the "National Coalition to Ban Handguns." The shift to "assault weapons" came because the other gun ban organization Violence Policy Center correctly realized they were an easier target. They were involved rarely in crime but often in high-profile crimes. At that time, they weren't common even among gun owners. And their major defining characteristic was they were "scary" which allowed a lot of vague language that could later be used to inch gun control forward.

The same language Martha Healey just used to justify banning broad swaths of firearms in MA is almost verbatim from the federal ban.

Because when you get right down to it, what is the defining feature of an "assault weapon"? A detachable magazine and semi-automatic. If you can get people to ban guns based on that idea because those guns are scary looking, you are more than halfway to a handgun ban. I'd say they knew exactly what they were doing when they picked a firearm that was used more often in service rifle competition than any crime to demonize.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top