Posted on 07/29/2016 5:13:38 AM PDT by Olog-hai
Hillary Clinton devoted part of her speech Thursday night to guns, telling the Democrat National Convention, “If we’re serious about keeping our country safe, we…can’t afford to have a president who's in the pocket of the gun lobby.”
“I’m not here to repeal the Second Amendment. I’m not here to take away your guns. I just don’t want you to be shot by someone who shouldn’t have a gun in the first place,” Clinton said.
She once again called for “common-sense reforms” to “keep guns out of the hands of criminals, terrorists and all other who would do us harm,” but she did not offer specifics. …
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
First, they want to set a precedent. That’s what the attempt to ban .223 ammunition was about last year. Get one form of ammunition banned, you can start to systematically ban others. We got .223, now we want 9mm. We got .223 and .9mm now we want those evil .22 rounds.
I’m really surprised they didn’t make any headway with the “assault rifle” ban of years ago. I was sure that would be their precedent, now the only reason I can think of it wasn’t used to get more gun bans is a lot of strong opposition on the other side.
And by the way, no true “assault rifle” is commercially available in the US. The scary rifles Democrats are calling by that name are NOT true assault weapons, which are described as being capable of semi or true automatic fire, usually by way of a switch.
Hillary has already said we should look to Australia, where they imposed a forced government buy back. Sell your guns back to the govt or they come confiscate them. That’s what both Hillary and Obama have said they want.
There’s also this video of a former delegate specifically stating that a total gun ban is what they want, they just can’t say so. I’ve known that for over 20 years.
http://louderwithcrowder.com/exposed-the-truth-about-common-sense-gun-reform/#.V5tbHRZg_iy
In the 90’s when Bill Clinton was pushing to pass the Brady Bill and Hillary was making speeches for it, I don’t know how many of you actually read it, I downloaded a copy and did. Deciphering the legalese wasn’t easy, but the Brady Bill would have banned everything but shotguns, and to get ammunition for your shotgun you would have to have a federal license and go through 9 miles of red tape. It was eventually watered down to the 10 year ban on assault weapons, but the original bill was scary. That’s what Bill and Hillary were pushing.
Something else also happened though. They found out using the term “gun control” was a very bad idea, so many Democrats were also gun owners they would actually lose enough votes to lose elections, and the term “gun control” was quickly faded out of their talking points, replaced by “common sense gun legislation”. That’s now code for gun control.
Same as most everything else Hillary says, it’s an outright lie. She wants a total ban on guns, except, of course, for the dozen protecting her own sorry ass. She’ll send some government agency to confiscate them in no time at all and without a second thought. She can’t implement her totalitarian, socialist agenda as long as we can fight back. We must be disarmed, then we can be controlled.
Where the Clintons are concerned, I have a rule. Never believe anything you hear and half of what you see.
OK, we agree that Hillary will if elected be the biggest gungrabber yet seen in the WH. Didn’t say successful gungrabber, because Obama’s one & he has failed miserably.
BTW, no one’s yet predicted how the balance in Congress will turn out in November. Strange omission, IMO.
“No country stands up to the passage of time, and the USA is not immune.”
Is its decline and fall inevitable? I’m not as pessimistic; unlike Obama I believe in American exceptionalism. And I quit reading dystopia novels decades ago.
I was forced in school to read Gibbon’s Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Long, boring & depressing; in the essay exam I wrote “ancient Romans were known to say, `Mehercule, hoc quidem lapsus et ruina est!’”
(”Indeed, this really is a decline and fall!”)
Anyway, the more googling I do, the less powerful those who seek gun confiscation really appear to be. That pesky Constitution is one of their greatest frustrations. And speaking of which, read the comments at gun control discussion sites by the gungrabbers. Geez, you never saw such language!
I don't believe her. I think the first deadly sin of a professional politician is to lie without qualms or conscience. This line was designed to appeal to NeverTrumpers who purport to support the Second Amendment.
I have a “common sense” reform:
Make possession of a firearm mandatory, and proof of firearms ownership a requirement for voting.
REMEMBER 1962! Thomas J Dodd and Emauel Cellar proposed a gun registration scheme..
“We don’t want to take away your guns! We ONLY want to register HANDGUNS! Long guns will not be affected!”
See how that went.
Dodd had a copy of the Nazi Weapons Law from 1938 Germany. He later based his writing of the 1969 Gun Control Act on it.
If you like your guns, you can keep your guns. Period.
It tells me the same thing I remember seeing on bumpers in the 70's: "Fear the government that fears your guns".
There. I fixed it.
My new tag line.
The War on Drugs has been very effective in that regard.
1. The case where they held that peyote-smoking of Indians in religious settings was under the jurisdiction of Congress.
2. The "prohibited persons" amendment to NFA. (It might be GCA, I get the two confused.)
4. Eroded to almost nothing, Kentucky v. King shows how little regard it's held in the judiciary. ("Terrorists!" didn't help; thanks NSA.)
5. Like #4, eroded to almost nothing. ("Officer Safety" is used as justification for what often boils down to summary execution.)
[Our police tend to be trained to escalate situations, not deescalate; combined with an us vs. them
attitude and of course things are messy.]
6. Arguably undermined by accusations being slung by the prosecutor, certainly undermined by the judiciary's propensity to prohibit excuse potential jurors that believe (a) that the Constitution is superior to normal legislation, and/or (b) that jurors can judge the law as well as facts [and therefore nullify].
7. Civil asset forfeiture.
8. Absurdly long sentences. (IMO, "life" [or 20 yrs (1/4 avg lifespan)] is far more inhumane than simple death.)
9. Ties into #4/#5 — the violation of unenumerated rights (like travel) is used to excuse violations of enumerated rights (like being secure in your papers and possessions).
10. The oft-cited saying federal laws trump state laws
is pushed because it preserves federal power; via Wickard they claim that the congress can regulate intrastate commerce, and even non-commerce, which is the basis of the War on Drugs.
That's 90% of the amendments if the Bill of Rights undermined by the War on Drugs.
Your new tagline should be used by all of us.
I will use it except when Clintoon’s Islamic Terrorists kill innocent Americans.
If I had to guess, it will be “Fusion Centers”, such as used to combat terrorist, where the FBI is set up to work with the local police.
My guess is the Fed gov would strong arm local and state police through such joint projects to do the actual legwork on an individual basis.
It will probably be a carrot-stick approach, where the threat is to pull free Federal goodies.
My guess would be it would be done piecemeal at first, done to a few people to try and intimidate the vast majority of people who don’t want to cooperate, by making an example out of a few.
For example, 15 local police & SWAT show up with maybe one FBI guy on site, and they do a “no knock raid”, kick your door in and take your stuff. If you resist, they shoot you. Then your obituary gets published later that week.
Hmm...giving your post a lot of thought. Interesting....
What you’ve described, though, is a strategy and not a legal basis for action. The latter must come in the form of legislation or executive orders backed by the legislative branch.
So...who sets up the fusion centers and under what authority? States don’t necessarily knuckle under to the withholding of Federal monies, and dragooning local LEOs would turn them into ‘enemies of the people’.
It would require a very pliant Governor & state assembly. Does the Federal government have enough tanks & aircraft to dominate fifty states?
Frightened gun owners turning in their property en masse? More likely bullets will be flying in both directions. It doesn’t take much effort for even a couch potato to lock & load. Murdering one gun owner to make an example could have the opposite effect:
“Freedom’s just another word for nothing left to lose”.
When they tell you “I’m not here to take away your Guns”, they are going to take away your Guns.
Yeah right. This whopper ranks right up there with all time great like “Read My Lips” and “If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor”. Lying hag.
I live in CA. The Commies here just passed a plethora of New Anti-Gun Laws.
If I refuse to Register certain Firearms I will become an overnight Felon for simply doing nothing different than I did the day before.
Should Law Enforcement get a tip from a disgruntled Liberal Family Member or Friend of my transgression, the Authorities can get a Search Warrant and enter my Home to find any Firearms that are not compliant to the new Laws which would result in confiscation of my Firearms, outrageous Fines, Imprisonment and a forfeiture of my Constitutional Rights to Bear Arms and Vote.
All this for being a Law Abiding Citizen for the previous 63 Years of my Life who finally figured out what was going on with the Tyrants that occupy Public Office.
Apparently you have no worries regarding the slow and steady erosion of your Constitutional Rights. Better climb into the Pot while the Water is still cold.
The Second Amendment won’t be repealed, it will be redefined as a hollow Privilege for the chosen few.
Yes, hellacious things are being done in certain states, no doubt about it. I hope it alerts other gun friendly states to guard 2nd Amendment freedoms within their borders.
NY, CT, CA, & NJ are hostile to gun rights.
I thought ex post facto laws which criminalize what was previously legal are unconstitutional. Will there be no court challenges, are these new restrictions airtight & immune?
Meanwhile, black rifles continue to fly off the shelves. Are the Feds compiling lists for future midnight raids? The Form 4473 is a snapshot, not a marriage certificate. I repeat, there is no confiscation without registration. Not dealing you into a fight I’m not part of, but do you suppose compliance will be universal? Again, google compliance rates in those states and in Australia.
As for a disgruntled liberal relative or neighbor ratting you out, that’s a real danger now. Will CA set up a snitch hotline & offer rewards? I’m going to look into that.
I don’t intend to get into a cookpot but I think sometimes we 2A lovers let our anxiety levels get out of hand. I say that writing from the gun friendly state of South Carolina and I invite nonliberal immigration from the communized ones.
Never thought Governor Moonbeam would have lasted this long. Must be his quinoa & sprouts diet.
With all the Gun Laws passed, Governor Moonbeam Vetoed the one that would have made theft of Firearms a Felony.
Now, why would he do that? Very simple, he doesn’t want his Base to lose their Right to Vote.
Court challenges will do nothing. The Courts are infiltrated with Leftists who will Rubber Stamp anything that Democrats decide to Pass. Yes, they are airtight and immune.
>>I repeat, there is no confiscation without registration<<
My point was that they are requiring retroactive Registration for Firearms that are already in Private Hands in addition to ones that are being newly purchased. In Ca, Registration is required for ALL Firearms Sales.
They already did this with so called Assault Weapons. Now they just redefine what an Assault Weapon is and move on.
Now they will require Background Checks for Ammunition Purchases.
You can’t even buy a .50 Caliber Weapon here anymore. That is the level of Stupidity. I guess .45’s will be next then they will get to my .44 Magnum.
They already did this with so called Assault Weapons. Now they just redefine what an Assault Weapon is and move on.
My Brother moved from CA to CO decades ago. He always told me that what was happening in CA in regard to Firearms would NEVER happen in CO.
Governor Hickenpooper and the Liberals in the CO Legislature have done exactly what I told my Brother would be done and they will do more. Drip - drip - drip...
I’m happy for you that South Carolina hasn’t drunk the Antigun Kool Aid, but anything is possible given time.
You might consider relocating from the Left Coast (knowing nothing about your employment, family, or roots) to the Palmetto State. A small amount of liberal craziness here but it’s a skin problem, not a bone disease.
And we like our guns, lots are manufactured here.
Y’all come!
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.