Posted on 04/15/2013 7:14:15 AM PDT by Perdogg
prominent gun-rights advocate claims his group’s staff was in the room during the drafting of the recently unveiled proposal to expand gun-purchase background checks and said that “we snookered the other side — they haven’t figured it out yet.”
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
The 2nd’s wording is so strong that I’m not even certain that we should deny ex-felons the right.
Apparently they missed the tendency for the current regime towards “selective enforcement.” The Obama will only enforce the parts they want to, and will ignore the rest.
Heck, I'll even take the repeal of 18 USC 922 (o). That is truely unconstitutional, especially after Heller.
We shouldn’t deny ex-felons the right. That’s what magnum revolvers and high-capacity magazines are for.
If they can’t be trusted with a firearm,
what the heck are we doing releasing them from prison?
IMHO
If the words “shall not” appear in any of these laws, I will ignore them.
Any man too dangerous to carry a gun is a man too dangerous to walk free.
Someone please tell me the current “problems” this bill solves in a way that benefits gun owners.
You’re right.
God bless and keep you.
The basic question...
Was the noose loosened or tightened (even if just a little bit)?
The left could never directly state why they want to confiscate guns, which is simply to be able at some point to assert absolute control. So they need a way to game the general population into following them, and that is the multifaceted argument about crime, mental health, the “if we can save just one life by trashing the constitution” gambit, etc.
But because reality doesn’t support their theory, I.e., gun control does not reduce violent crime, they need a rationalization, and that, it seems to me, is the Feinstein theory of gun market atrophy. This theory is premised on the idea that if they can take guns away from everybody, even the black market will dry up, and gun violence will go away. This is obviously magical thinking, as guns will continue to be made, only now the black market will be international, and very profitable. And as it will require the further corruption of our political class to work, well, all I can say is, if you think its bad now, you ain’t seen nothin yet.
Well, SOMEBODY got snookered, but I don’t think they were in that room, or even in D.C. for that matter.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3006927/posts?page=10#10
Sure looks like WE are the intended “snook -ees”.
Dear Lord, guide our course.
Tatt
Exactly. Rather than more legislation, we should be repealing all gun control that was ever passed in the first place. Not that that’s going to happen. Why can’t people understand that the more the Second Amendment is cut into little pieces, defined, then returned to us, the more they keep a few of the pieces every time it undergoes this operation?
Bill Maher is absolutely correct. The left needs to man up and come right out and say what they mean.
It might just force the right to stop playing games and stand up for the second amendment as it is without trying to tweak it with words like “sensible” and “reasonable”.
What bunk!
Whatever “concessions” this man dreams he has written into the law will be ignored by Left Wing prosecutors, unenforced by Left Wing police chiefs, overruled by Democrat judges, prohibited by bureaucratic agencies, challenged by Blue State governors and Blue State Supreme Courts.
Can someone explain to this guy that the Democrat Party has one, and only one, goal - the political destruction of Conservatives.
This man is a political illiterate!
Re: “TENACIOUSLY REPRESENTING THE SIMPLE IDEALS OF THOSE WHO ELECTED THEM.”
Beautifully said, Tick.
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.