Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Anti-gun Senate bill apparently intended to close 'advertising loophole'
St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner ^ | 11 April, 2013 | Kurt Hofmann

Posted on 04/12/2013 7:08:21 AM PDT by marktwain

The U.S. Senate is expected to take action today on the next set of infringements on that which shall not be infringed. The promised filibuster by Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) and at least thirteen other senators appears unlikely to be enough to defeat today's planned "motion to proceed" vote, thanks to something like a quarter of GOP senators refusing to do their part to keep this dangerous legislation from gaining any ground.

Meanwhile, we are told that Senator Pat Toomey (R-PA), narrowly elected to his seat in 2010 only with the help of gun owners, in closed-door negotiations with supposedly "pro-gun" Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV), has agreed to a "bi-partisan compromise" (despite having told concerned constituents that no such "deal" was in the works?) on the anti-gun legislation to be voted on today.

While details of the proposed legislation are not yet available, we are told that the "The Public Safety and Second Amendment Rights Protection Act(?)" will greatly expand reporting of mental health information to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). Apparently, these "pro-gun" senators are not concerned about a "blanket dragnet" sweeping up people who pose no danger of violence.

That, of course, while dangerous to the gun rights of millions of Americans, would not be dangerous enough to suit the forcible citizen disarmament advocates' lust for "universal background checks." Rumor has it that they will not be getting that in this bill, but what they will be offered is the most extensive, invasive federal regulation of private gun sales since at least the Gun Control Act of 1968. From the Washington Post:

(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: banglist; constitution; firstamendment; guncontrol; secondamendment; universalbackground
Isn't a ban on the advertising of private sales of firearms a direct violation of the First Amendment?
1 posted on 04/12/2013 7:08:22 AM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Its obvious they are trying to purge the very concept of firearms from the public arena. Trying to un-invent firearms.


2 posted on 04/12/2013 7:12:22 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
Isn't a ban on the advertising of private sales of firearms a direct violation of the First Amendment?

It's a clear violation of the First and Fifth Amendments. It's a clear infringement on "the freedom of speech", and "of the press", as well as a violation of the takings clause, since an essential element of private property rights is the ability to contract for the disposition of . . . property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

The thugs in power today do not care about the rule of law. They have to be stopped, and gun rights are the line they cannot be permitted to cross.

3 posted on 04/12/2013 7:17:08 AM PDT by Pollster1 (A war can only be just if it is fought with a reasonable chance of success.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
Manchin and Schumer got the dumb RINO wasted on this yacht, double teamed him and rolled him.


4 posted on 04/12/2013 7:59:36 AM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

And still Conservatives cling to the “rule of law” and bemoan the fact that the Communists in power don’t play by the rules.

NEWS FLASH: There is NO rule of law when one side believes that the ends justify the means. We are at war, and in war there is only one rule - Take no prisoners.

Conservatives who keep insisting that we remain with the GOP and reform the party from within are on a fool’s errand. How many times do we have to be told that the GOP does not want Conservatives? Sure, they want our money and our votes. But, they want us to shut up and take whatever they give us.

The government we have is what we deserve for repeatedly falling for the same old line and because the elected have ZERO fear of the people. War has been declared; start fighting back. War has been declared; start fighting back.


5 posted on 04/12/2013 8:02:15 AM PDT by NTHockey (Rules of engagement #1: Take no prisoners)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1
They have to be stopped...

When the rule of law is dead and rule by the whims of men is the order of the day, there will be only one way to stop them. What would Michael Collins do?

6 posted on 04/12/2013 8:16:36 AM PDT by Noumenon (What would Michael Collins do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]




Click the Tree

We wish it grew there

Please Donate Monthly to help end FReepathons
Sponsors will chip in $10
For each new monthly sign-up

7 posted on 04/12/2013 8:18:53 AM PDT by TheOldLady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Time to fly, in this order:
top ... Old Glory upside down
middle ... Gadsden Flag
bottom ... Pirate Black Flag

How would Congress wrap its mind around an immediate 250 million ‘pirates’ popping up?


8 posted on 04/12/2013 8:27:33 AM PDT by Terry L Smith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

What are the odds that the collection of concealed weapons permit holder names is limited to Missouri?


9 posted on 04/12/2013 8:32:28 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
0.00%.

Now is when the state LE bureaucrats are trying to curry favor with the new SA/SS/DHS, in order to line up higher-paying jobs with more power, prestige and perks.

10 posted on 04/12/2013 8:42:39 AM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

So the real question is how long do we have before they start going house to house collecting firearms.

I’m sure they’ll have a good excuse; you took valium, made a threatening post on the internet, voted for a republican.


11 posted on 04/12/2013 8:48:25 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

They can ban aything they like. When is the last time you saw a Cigarette Commercial?

The First Amendment is much like the 2nd. Amendment -—on the way out.

Pat Toomey is a one term loser.


12 posted on 04/12/2013 9:38:26 AM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

The terrifying thing is what the heck is going on in the House. Right now, complete and utter silence from both the leadership and rank & file.

The fear is that Boehner will follow through with his threat to ignore the Hastert rule, take a minimum number of Republicans and join with every single Democrat to force this madness through the House.

But nobody is saying anything. What the heck is going on? Suddenly congressmen who never shut up have been utterly silent. And that is scary.


13 posted on 04/12/2013 10:04:37 AM PDT by yefragetuwrabrumuy (Best WoT news at rantburg.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

This is where Satan takes hold.


14 posted on 04/12/2013 10:09:10 AM PDT by bmwcyle (People who do not study history are destine to believe really ignorant statements.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

We need to remember that it does not matter if something violates an amendment or not (even though if it violates an amendment then the violation becomes even worse): These proposed laws violate even MORE than those two amendments you mention.

The fact is that regulating ANY type of speech, particularly LOCAL speech, is NOT AN ENUMERATED POWER OF CONGRESS. Period. Congress may not regulate it at all. Just because it got away with version of that before does not justify it either.

And that was true even BEFORE the Tenth Amendment, which was added at the end of it all, when they did the Bill of Rights more as an EXCLAMATION POINT, than anything else, a DOUBLE reminder that Congress may not legislate on anything not specifically enumerated in the Constitution.

So this proposal violates more than the amendments you mention.

It violates:

(1) the constitution itself,

(2) the 10th Amendment,

(3) the 9th Amendment (since we the people have an unalienable right to effective self defense (against both bad guys and despotic government), which means we have the right to engage in trade for the purpose of effective self-defense, even across state lines),

(4) the 2nd Amendment, and also as you point out,

(5) & (6) the 1st and 5th amendments.

Never forget to include the concept of enumerated powers when arguing against unconstitutional and bad gun laws.


15 posted on 04/12/2013 11:29:09 AM PDT by Weirdad (Orthodox Americanism: It's what's good for the world! (Not communofascism!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: bmwcyle
This is where Satan takes hold.

There are times when TV hits the nail on the head.

16 posted on 04/12/2013 11:34:50 AM PDT by Pollster1 (A war can only be just if it is fought with a reasonable chance of success.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

What if you just inform your siblings via Facebook (internet) that you have a surplus weapon? Does that change the nature of the transaction? Email?


17 posted on 04/12/2013 1:32:29 PM PDT by LZ_Bayonet ( I AM THE TEA PARTY LEADER !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson