Sen. Feinstien (Calif) to intro gun control bill

Fact is, there are as many Republicans as Democrats that might sign onto a new AWB bill.
Click to expand...
Ah, but how many Democrats would sign it? Many of the freshmen who took seats in 2006 were pro-gun. In fact, a couple had better NRA ratings than the guys they'd replaced. Consider the congressional briefs in support of us in Heller and McDonald. There are plenty of signatures from both sides of the aisle.

I've long argued that a politician's stance is not always determined by the color of his lapel pin. Folks pushing for stricter gun laws may find they've got much less support than they thought when they push the issue.

Then there are the folks who remember 1994. Many folks who might support a new ban in their hearts aren't going to risk their careers by supporting it in deed.
 
If you really want to have your voice heard BEFORE a vote contact your Senators and Congressmen and voice your opinion. After a vote.....won't matter one bit. Time is now to act. Later it will just be bitching that someone did'nt do their part.
 
In all the emotional hubbub let's try to maintain a rational train of thought here. Gun control is about CONTROL, not about the safety of an individual citizen or society as a whole. If that were the case, then it would be a requirement that all citizens be armed, as there is a multitude of unbiased statistics that would back that up. It is time to face up to the real facts, and stop trying to hide behind knee-jerk, feel-good legislation. The fact is that, as a nation, our moral compass is totally skewed. If you want to make a difference, then truly love your children and teach them to respect others. Teach them by your actions as well as your words. Go out and befriend your neighbors and take the time to help another person, even if it costs you something. Teach your children the uniqueness and beauty of each individual life. That, my friends, is how we can overcome the rash of heinous and unprecedented acts of violence that have occurred. Guns are not the problem, people are.
 
Look for AR15's and the like to be moved to NFA status. That won't require legislation.
Click to expand...
How do you figure?

NFA Title II firearms are specifically defined by law. The only major grey area is the "sporting purposes" test for shotguns with bore diameters over 1/2", but this does not encompass AR-type rifles.
 
Look for AR15's and the like to be moved to NFA status. That won't require legislation.

How do you figure?

NFA Title II firearms are specifically defined by law. The only major grey area is the "sporting purposes" test for shotguns with bore diameters over 1/2", but this does not encompass AR-type rifles.
Click to expand...

Yes, but could this be the ultimate “compromise” that is reached in Washington concerning the proposed AWB? This way everyone “wins” as the items are still available, but obviously heavily regulated.
 
....and in other news. Arabs hate Jews, water is wet, and the sky has been found to be blue.

Its what these folks do. Its a religion to them. For some them I honestly believe they are doing it for the right reasons, however misguided.
 
I know boards like these thread lightly on politics (which I agree with) but I would like to see some stickies for what we should do. Petitions to sign, politicians to contact, polls to vote on ect. I hope that I am not out if line for suggesting this and apologize if I am.
 
Some politicians will certainly try to use the tragedy in Connecticut to advance a gun control agenda. Although politicians may not have changed much since 1994, Americans have changed a lot with respect to gun control.

Yesterday, the New York Times reported the AR-15 as the most popular rifle in the US, with well over 3 million outstanding. Add to that number all of the other "assault weapons" covered by the former AWB and you have a substantial bloc of motivated citizens/voters today that did not exist to nearly the same extent in 1994.

FBI reports show that between November 30, 1998 and November 30, 2012 there were about 150 million NICS checks for direct firearms sales and permits. While nobody knows exactly how many individual gun owners those NICS checks represent, the number has to be in the tens of millions.

The 1994 AWB was a political miscalculation and politicians were subsequently spanked pretty hard by the electorate. With the growth in gun ownership since 1994, sweeping new gun control laws would result in a much larger voter response today. Politicians may not be the smartest or most trustworthy group of people in the country but, as a group, they are not prone to doing things that threaten their jobs.

Contact your members of Congress - there ARE enough of us to make the difference.
 
Feinstein has been introducing legislation like this for many years, 1000% ammo taxes, bans of various kinds. this is nothing new from her.
 
I've said it elsewhere. I'll say it here.

Donations to your preferred pro-gun groups are a good thing.

Taking action is better.

Spreading the word is even better.

Spreading the word, taking action, and making some donations will go even further.
(The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. / Lead by example. / Etc.)
 
NFA status

The president has already hinted that whatever steps he feels are necessary will come through executive order and he has certainly demonstrated that he is more than willing to use those.
 
M14fan said:
The president has already hinted that whatever steps he feels are necessary will come through executive order and he has certainly demonstrated that he is more than willing to use those.
Click to expand...

Executive Orders have to be based on an existing law. He can't just invent anything he wants.
 
Just heard on the radio (news) that Senator Feinstein from California is going to introduce a gun control bill very soon. This, with the help of a number of other congressional members.

I believe it is an assault weapons ban.

Told ya!
Click to expand...

Its all over. This one will pass. It will make politicans look good. Nothing will be done about the continuing failure of our mental health system that is really causing this.
 
Quote:
I think with the emotions running high after this most recent unspeakable act, the anti-gun proponents are going to have a shot at passing a bill...watered down or otherwise.

Well, I sincerely hope you are wrong. At the end of the day the politicians will have to answer to their constituents. I'm hoping.
Click to expand...

I'd proffer their constituents have no problem with taking away rights. NYC can't even have large size drinks thanks to the nanny state.
 
Part of what is missed on many levels is where do our rights come from? Were did the founding fathers believe these rights they enumerated actually come from? The answer is they believed they came from the divine and were inalienable.

In other words the rights existed and have always existed. It may or may not be a statement of fact as to their origin but it is the very belief the nation was founded upon. In the core what I am getting at is I believe the founding fathers in general would have argued that although the Bill of Rights was changeable they felt the rights they spelled out were the essence of freedom.

Rights do not come from government, they have always existed. So in these words as I read them I also interpret that to mean that regardless of might be added these things were not to be eliminated...
 
So in these words as I read them I also interpret that to mean that regardless of might
Click to expand...

These rights should not be open for interpretation as it was written in plan English. You should not have to interpret nor should the courts. If we the people feel that any of these rights need to change or be added that is one thing but, not interpreted IMO.
 
I'm sorry Zinc but where them came from is what makes them even more important.

The founding fathers knew what they laid out wasn't perfect and they allowed for changes to be made... But as I read it and understand what their thoughts were, was the things that are original to the Bill of Rights must exist and cannot be eliminated...

In the coming days I would not be surprised to see a push to change the 2A. There are lines of thought safety can only come when the government is the only entity that can legally bear arms... I disagree with these lines of thought. I think its important to try to spell out to people why we don't change any line of the Bill of Rights to create "Safety". This doesn't only speak to the 2A but the Freedom of Speech and the Freedom of Religion.

I'm am not even suggesting the votes exist out there to change the 2A, but as part of our interaction with our neighbors and friends it might be good to remind them were these things come from and why they are their. None of us here are immortal, it is important that part of our legacy to freedom that we inform future generations so they too can protect it and understand it.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top