Gun Control

[Brent C.]

Death by a thousand razors.

[Buford T. JuSStice]

Originally Posted by Lance

Looks good to me.

Originally Posted by Lance

I do not see the ban on assault weapons or high capacity magazines in the list even though CNN states that Obama asked for them.

I'm surprised to say... looks good to me too... no bans, no further restrictions on the individual to buy a weapon or NORMAL capacity magazines. No registration... safe and responsible gun ownership campaign... I'm not mad at it.

Oh, and watched that CNN video... was I the only one who giggled when Obama said, "Magazine clips"?

Originally Posted by Hilpala SS

That's the overview though Lance.
What they list and what he's stated are slightly different.

They are looking to bring back the AWB, along with any military grade firearms ban. No mags above 10 and it was eluded that all persons shall have background checks...for all purchases.

They'll have a tough time passing an AWB through the congress, and there's a lot of support right now to oppose any sort of Executive Order that bypasses the Legislative Branch. What was listed above doesn't look too bad, it's when he starts calling for registration, and bans that people will be up in arms. Maybe literally.

But the Congress is going to have a tough time because A: They don't have Republican support and B: D.C. v Heller may be cited to overturn any ban on weapons or magazines based on common lawful use.

[Lance]

Originally Posted by Buford T. JuSStice

But the Congress is going to have a tough time because A: They don't have Republican support and B: D.C. v Heller may be cited to overturn any ban on weapons or magazines based on common lawful use.

Interesting. Will the liberals allow those of us to site DC v. Heller like they do Roe v. Wade? I can't wait to try it out on my liberal friends. They always shut me down by referring to Supreme Court rulings.
Maybe KW could respond and justify why gun owners can not use a Supreme Court ruling to end any conversation and/or protest against guns like his fellow liberals do with abortion?

It always fascinates me how a group could be for "choice" when it comes to abortion but not when it comes to guns, sex and drugs.

Then again, that is why I do not support either party. Too much hypocrisy and complete denial.

Me, I am in support of everyone's right to choose what's best for them as long as it does not violate anyone else rights.

[Brent C.]

[ScottLC]

^^^ Ain't that the truth

And regarding Heller...one wonders if that might not be what has Obama moving with caution. They aren't so much waiting for the next atrocity or for Feinstein to go down in flames as they are for the much dreaded opportunity to appoint another lefty to SCOTUS and overturn Heller...

[Buford T. JuSStice]

Ever read something that is so stupid that it makes you want to... I don't know... just shake your head and wonder if the person is legitimately retarded, or purposefully trying to distort reality?

Well... I'd say I just did, but I think it's pretty clear they were trying to do the latter...

http://truth-out.org/news/item/13890...eserve-slavery

Never mind reading the Federalist Papers, never mind historical context, never mind reading what the rest of the Founding Fathers said about the idea of an Armed Populace... let's put words in Patrick Henry's mouth, take another quote of his, and George Mason out of context, and then make it look like the only purpose of the 2nd Amendment was to get Virginia on board, and not so that an Armed Citizenry could be the first line of defense against invasion, and the last line of defense against tyranny.

*EDIT*
I just can't get over this ridiculous farce of an article...

Originally Posted by My written response to the article

This article is a load of crap. Way to put words in Patrick Henry's mouth, and then take things he and George Mason said out of context and try to make it seem like the ONLY purpose of the 2nd Amendment was to "Keep a brothah down".

This is the worst kind of shameless propaganda there is. It was obviously meant to be inflammatory, and factually incorrect. It's like context doesn't even exist in the authors' mind. It's the opposite of the scientific theory, where he chose an objective, and then found random snippets to support it. As we kids say on the internet these days, "He's trolling".

"Little did Madison realize that one day in the future weapons-manufacturing corporations, newly defined as "persons" by a Supreme Court some have called dysfunctional, would use his slave patrol militia amendment to protect their "right" to manufacture and sell assault weapons used to murder schoolchildren."

Quoted directly from the article. The DC v Heller and McDonald v Chicago decisions said nothing about corporate "person hood", rather it reaffirmed that the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution enumerates and protects the individual Right of the People to keep and bear arms. The People in this case being the same People that have an individual right to free press, religion and speech that is protected by the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution. One that was not written with the intent to protect only spoken word, book, manual printing press and religious beliefs existing before 1791.

As far as allusions to corporate "person hood", the idea of corporate "person hood" has existed since 1819 with the case Trustees of Dartmouth College v Woodward. And even then corporate "person hood" only extends to protections and rights exercised by a group, which does not include any protected right that is otherwise meant to be exercised by an individual. In other words, they either don't know what they're talking about, or they're purposefully trying to distort reality to their own ends. I mean, c'mon. Way to pick, choose, forget and distort when and what is most convenient for the Author.

Read the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the Federalist Papers, put all of that into historical context, and then read the decision on District of Columbia v Heller, and read quotes from the Founding Fathers concerning an armed citizenry. The 2nd Amendment was CLEARLY put in place to re-affirm what was already true as stated in the Declaration of Independence and Constitution. That being the individual, unalienable right to keep and bear arms unconnected with the service of the militia for defense of self and others, as the first line of defense against invasion, and the last line of defense against tyranny, and had absolutely NOTHING to do with preserving slavery. Everything said by the founding fathers in respects to the right to keep and bear arms affirms this unequivocally.

SHAME on Thom Hartmann!

[BALLSS]

Sadly what is going on real time now is a frantic purchase rate of ANY gun, ammo or clip that can be found...and at prices 2 to 10 times what it cost 1 month ago as a result of current gun law revision speculation.

There are 1 million Magpul 30 round AR-15 clips on back order.

cheaperthandirt has 30 round "used" AR 15 clips for $139. These are military used items mostly from other countries. People are actually buying this stuff at these prices out of panic. Customer feedback reports these clips are very used and some came full of dirt.

The panic will continue until politicians STFU about aimlessly trying to control random acts of violence by adding/changing the access to guns and ammo this country had prior to current gun law changes being proposed.

Here in Calif. you can't buy any gun with a clip larger than 10 rounds. "AR-15" rifles have a clip release button that requires any pointed object to be used to release the clip. You can purchase 1 handgun in a 30 day period.

The 10 round AR 15 clips sold in Calif. look just like a 30 round clip but have a plastic plug in them to stop at 10 rounds. You can also buy just the short 10 round clips also. Unless a state officer (because the 10 round clip thing is not a federal law here it is a state law) actually inspects the clip by seeing if it can hold more than 10 rounds he will not know if it does visually if using one of the “looks like 30 round” clip types. Also these look alike clips have a clip release protrusion on them making it easy to change them on “bullet button” AR 15.

The Federal Govt. may settle for what already is in place here in Calif., but weather Congress let alone the country’s population approve and pass this type of legislation remains to be seen.

http://oag.ca.gov/firearms

No law will ever stop the "bad guys" from getting weapons either by private sell (cash baby) or using fake ID or "surrogates" (any US citizen with ID and no criminal background who will do it for $) to buy them as what has been happening for years in the border states to Mexico by buyers intent on bringing weapons into Mexico.

[sherlock9c1]

Gregory Bady, 28;
Damian Barnes, 22;
Marcus Wallace, 23;
Tyrone Soleberry, 39;
Brian Cross, 34;
John Taylor, 23;
Darville Brown, 24;
Tyshawn Blanton, 31;
Marcus Turner, 19;
Lavonshay Cooper, 22;
David Bartzmark, 25;
Michael Kozel, 57;
Ulysses Gissendanner, 19;
Kevin Jemison, 29;
Myron Brown, 30;
Devanta Grisson, 19;
Octavius Lamb, 20.

These are the people who have been murdered in Chicago since January 1, 2013 from the Chicago Tribune’s RedEye website. Chicago has one of the strictest gun control laws in the nation, BTW.

You don’t know the names of the other 530 young people, most of them minorities, who were killed in Chicago between 2008 and January 2012 either.

You don’t know their names, and the national media haven’t parked their media trucks in Chicago, because the liberal narrative does not offer easy answers to the problems haunting Chicago.

You don’t know their names because the real racism that exists in the media is this: A young black male’s life is not worth reporting when it is taken by another black male.

You don’t know the names because the media don’t or can’t blame the deaths in Chicago on a weapon like the AR-15, or on the NRA.

You don’t know their names because the media aren’t interested in getting at the real cause of much of the senseless gun violence in America: fatherlessness.

Chicago doesn’t have a gun problem; it has a father problem.

Gun control isn’t the problem on Chicago’s streets; self-control is.

From this article. What a tragedy.

[GreenHornet]

They are not the same!

[Erik]

^^^Thank you!