Reagan bans guns now and of the future
- Thread starter Joliet Jake
- Start date
Only half as clever and twice as obvious as you thought eh.........Each generation has its own definition of tyranny
As what is new to them. What they are raised with is just normal, and the regular way things are. There is often a strong feeling that the way things are is the way they ought to be. We have no problem living with these things, because we have always lived with these things.
If you wish to look at passed administrations to see who did the worst to gunowners, I suggest you study FDR and the NFA of 1934. The '86 ban would never even have been considered, had not the NFA been in place for half a century. And in place half a century without any effective legal challenge. The Govt won the only challenge case (through trickery some say), and the appeal was never made. Remember at the time most folks weren't interested, or if they were affected, they didn't foresee just how ruthless our Govt would become over a tax matter.
Our Govt can, and does ignore lots of things that are technically crimes, but if they think you are trying to cheat them out of tax money, even a small amount, they can get downright belligerent. Sometimes with lethal results. And not over something which does actual physical harm to innocents, but over money! It seems to me we would be better served if our Govt put that degree of emphasis elsewhere.
Sorry Jake, I can't remember the form #s that got some folks I knew slightly nearly 40 years ago thrown in jail. I was aware that it happened, but other things had more importance in my life.
As far as the FOPA goes, unfortunately there is no certainty that it would have been passed without the amendment, after being vetoed. It could have been, it might have been, but it also could just have likely been shelved by a Congress who had "done something" (to keep us happy), lost (got vetoed), and was now more interested in moving on to other topics.
Note that with the passing of time, some of us actually learn things. The recent bill protecting gun dealers/makers from lawsuits was killed by the NRA (by withdrawing support) when the antis added restrictive amendments. The idea was brought back later, and passed without the "poison" amendments. This is what should have happened with the FOPA, but there are a couple of things that made it possible today that didn't exist back in the late 80s. They are the AWB of 94 (and the result on Congress when for once, large numbers of gun owners voted in the next election, and 9/11/2001. The sunset of the AWB, and the fact that the nation was not drowned in blood as predicted by the antis pointedly exposed the failure and hypocrisy of gun control. And the attack on 9/11, done without any guns went a long way to opening the eyes of a lot of folks, that guns are not the problem, and their blind support for the idea that gun control equals safety has waned.
Politics, unfortunately, involves more than just passing laws. It involves the pride, prestige, and egos of some people who consider themselves "movers and shakers". Overriding a Presidential veto involves a lot more politics than just the votes in Congress. Professional political people (elected officials, their unelected staffs and advisers, and even lobbyists) plan their exchanging of influence, votes, vetoes, etc. carefully, the way shooters will select the right caliber and weight of bullet, but shooters don't have to worry about some of the things politics must take into account. Your 150gr .30-06 ammo won't be mad at you and refuse to group well because you took your .243 hunting last month.
Well Jake, if you aren't the troll some folks have you pegged as (or even if you are), you ought to read John Ross's novel "Unintended Consequences". It is a few years old now, so there is no "post 9/11" viewpoint, but it does an absolutely excellent job of tracing the history and results of gun control, and the main characters own NFA weapons. It also gives some factual and some fictional unintended consequences resulting from it. Even though it is a novel, considering your interest in the subject, I think you would find it a very good read.
As what is new to them. What they are raised with is just normal, and the regular way things are. There is often a strong feeling that the way things are is the way they ought to be. We have no problem living with these things, because we have always lived with these things.
If you wish to look at passed administrations to see who did the worst to gunowners, I suggest you study FDR and the NFA of 1934. The '86 ban would never even have been considered, had not the NFA been in place for half a century. And in place half a century without any effective legal challenge. The Govt won the only challenge case (through trickery some say), and the appeal was never made. Remember at the time most folks weren't interested, or if they were affected, they didn't foresee just how ruthless our Govt would become over a tax matter.
Our Govt can, and does ignore lots of things that are technically crimes, but if they think you are trying to cheat them out of tax money, even a small amount, they can get downright belligerent. Sometimes with lethal results. And not over something which does actual physical harm to innocents, but over money! It seems to me we would be better served if our Govt put that degree of emphasis elsewhere.
Sorry Jake, I can't remember the form #s that got some folks I knew slightly nearly 40 years ago thrown in jail. I was aware that it happened, but other things had more importance in my life.
As far as the FOPA goes, unfortunately there is no certainty that it would have been passed without the amendment, after being vetoed. It could have been, it might have been, but it also could just have likely been shelved by a Congress who had "done something" (to keep us happy), lost (got vetoed), and was now more interested in moving on to other topics.
Note that with the passing of time, some of us actually learn things. The recent bill protecting gun dealers/makers from lawsuits was killed by the NRA (by withdrawing support) when the antis added restrictive amendments. The idea was brought back later, and passed without the "poison" amendments. This is what should have happened with the FOPA, but there are a couple of things that made it possible today that didn't exist back in the late 80s. They are the AWB of 94 (and the result on Congress when for once, large numbers of gun owners voted in the next election, and 9/11/2001. The sunset of the AWB, and the fact that the nation was not drowned in blood as predicted by the antis pointedly exposed the failure and hypocrisy of gun control. And the attack on 9/11, done without any guns went a long way to opening the eyes of a lot of folks, that guns are not the problem, and their blind support for the idea that gun control equals safety has waned.
Politics, unfortunately, involves more than just passing laws. It involves the pride, prestige, and egos of some people who consider themselves "movers and shakers". Overriding a Presidential veto involves a lot more politics than just the votes in Congress. Professional political people (elected officials, their unelected staffs and advisers, and even lobbyists) plan their exchanging of influence, votes, vetoes, etc. carefully, the way shooters will select the right caliber and weight of bullet, but shooters don't have to worry about some of the things politics must take into account. Your 150gr .30-06 ammo won't be mad at you and refuse to group well because you took your .243 hunting last month.
Well Jake, if you aren't the troll some folks have you pegged as (or even if you are), you ought to read John Ross's novel "Unintended Consequences". It is a few years old now, so there is no "post 9/11" viewpoint, but it does an absolutely excellent job of tracing the history and results of gun control, and the main characters own NFA weapons. It also gives some factual and some fictional unintended consequences resulting from it. Even though it is a novel, considering your interest in the subject, I think you would find it a very good read.
