This ranks right up there with the Bart Stupak “compromise” on Obamacare. That is, it’s essentially the same thing as before but with just enough window dressing to give Democrats from red states and/or swing districts cover.
Feh!
"You won't get gun control by disarming law-abiding citizens. There's only one way to get real gun control: Disarm the thugs and the criminals, lock them up, and if you don't actually throw away the key, at least lose it for a long time... It's a nasty truth, but those who seek to inflict harm are not fazed by gun controllers. I happen to know this from personal experience."
~ President Reagan, 1983
So, let’s kill the ammunition limit.
Obama and Reid and Pelosi all hate America. Period.
They must lose this fight.
Big Time.
This BS is starting to get on my nerves. Rick Moran is not a journalist. Rick Moran isn’t even a blogger. He’s what I call a bookends scribbler. Write an opening paragraph, excerpt someone else’s work for the major portion of your “article” and then write a couple of closing paragraphs.
Hell, anybody could do that.
Hope they don’t pay him very much.
What they’re really after is the universal background check. The Feds have illegally been ignoring the prohibition on maintaining a database of gun owners. No one who has any awareness of this issue thinks that the universal background check is to prevent crime. It is to register guns. And if the New York (Dinkins) and California (Lockyer) registration/confiscation episodes are any indication, you can bet real money that confiscation would be next.
Baby steps.
F U B O!
More bait and switch.
So if I want to give my rifle to my nephew I have to go to a licensed gun dealer and pay to give it away?
So, whoever was saying the Feinstein Assault Weapons ban was a decoy is obviously the winner...
======================= We all know the "assault weapons ban" is nothing short of idiocy and has been proven a waste of time. Same with the magazine bans. Anyone who supports them has questionable motives and every gun owner see's it this way. Anyone who supports these bans is dishonest to say the least.
We keep hearing that "most gun owners support stronger background checks". Well again, BS; and here is why: We know they can't be trusted to keep it honest and simple. We know THEY control the decisions on who gets a green light and who doesn't... and they can change the requirements anytime they like. We also know it's nothing more than disguised registration.
So, what would I support?
- Let us take weapons to an FFL for checks. this does a few good things for sellers and buyers. It gives the seller some peace of mind that the buyer isn't a felon and it gives the buyer the opportunity to check and make sure the gun isn't stolen. Meeting at a gun shop also reduces your risk of getting jacked by some craigslist thug in a dark parking lot. The problem is, the possible risks are just not worth it.
First, it's yet another way for FFL's to rape us for 40 bucks every time we sell a 100 dollar rifle just like they do when they sign for a UPS package for us. It pi#@$es us off!
Second, we don't trust government to purge the record of the names, SSN's and firearm serial numbers as soon as the check is complete. They have proven time and again that they cannot be trusted and cannot keep their promises. We also know THEY control the guidelines for approving the sale. Hell, all they would have to do is classify nail-biters as a public risk (like they already have for Tea Party conservatives) and you are done, no guns for you.
Also, the arbitration process for getting OFF the list is a joke, it can't be done... ask anyone who has tried. It doesn't matter if it's accidental, justified or not.
See, I can tell them what sort of measures I would support, but in the same breath it is important to let them know it can never come to pass because they cannot be trusted; and that's the very reason the Constitution prohibits them from meddling with this right to begin with.
“The goal is to get the bill to the Senate floor next month...”
It’s probably no coincidence that the U.N. Small Arms Treaty
also comes up for debate in the UN next month.
Hmmm. What did Thomas Jefferson say about eternal vigilance and liberty?
As for magazine size, I use standard sized magazines in my ARs (that would be 30 rounds. This is about as arbitrary as cosmetics of a weapon.
If it safety that we are after, then the government should drop the registration and $200 tax stamp on silencers. That will save a lot of people's hearing.
No. Any power they attempt to exert here should be seen as illigitimate and ignored by the strongest terms possible.
If they send enforcers with illegal orders to enforce their unConstitutional edicts...
Defend your Rights with force.
No!
Go after criminals and the mentally ill!
.
.
- no brains in the White Hut: :
http://www.google.com/search?ie=ISO-8859-1&hl=en&source=hp&gbv=1&q=who+was+Skeeter+Skelton
.
.
Time to call your favorite Senate Dem and demand that they include this AR ban ‘for gibby’.
Time for Senate Republicans to help O and Feinstein out and offer amendments to add this AR ban to their bill(and then vote against the bill, lets not go overboard.)
Help Dems be ‘principled’. Do it for gibby and the little ones.
Re: Gun Control - Professor Rummel’s stuff is always worth a look. He coined the term democide, meaning death by government. He estimates that in the twentieth century alone various governments have killed 262 million of their citizens. Most of those killed were in countries without a second amendment. His stats will surprise you.
Democide
Main article: Democide
Rummel is the creator of the term democide: “the murder of any person or people by a government, including genocide, politicide, and mass murder”. He has further stated: “I use the civil definition of murder, where someone can be guilty of murder if they are responsible in a reckless and wanton way for the loss of life, as in incarcerating people in camps where the may soon die of malnutrition, unattended disease, and forced labor, or deporting them into wastelands where they may die rapidly from exposure and disease.”
His research concludes that the death toll from democide is far greater than the death toll from war. After studying over 8,000 reports of government-caused deaths, he estimates that there have been 262 million victims of democide in the last century[7] and that six times as many people have died at the hands of people working for governments than have died in battle.
See link below after this teaser:
“He argues that there is a relation between political power and democide. Political mass murder grows increasingly common as political power becomes unconstrained. At the other end of the scale, where power is diffuse, checked, and balanced, political violence is a rarity. “The more power a regime has, the more likely people will be killed. This is a major reason for promoting freedom.” He concludes: “Concentrated political power is the most dangerous thing on earth.””
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolph_Rummel