BHO will organize his" CIVILIAN SECURITY FORCE"-which are Black Nationalists-the same that murdered Cleveland Policeman July 23, 1968, in the name of justice!!!
The Obama gang will find away to get around the 2nd Amendment to take guns away from every law abiding citizen. This will leave only the U.S. Military and criminals with weapons. And Obama and his crew are working to make the U.S. Military inept, giving their equipment to his hand picked CNSF.
Folks we're headed for some dark days. Obama is a liar. He IS NOT an honorable man.
Remember folks, Freedom isn't Free. It was bought with the blood and sacrifice of the men and women who are serving and who have served in the U.S. Armed Forces.
For those who fought for it, Freedom has a flavor that the protected will never know.
Also remember folks, that the way to SUPPORT THE TROOPS is to support their mission. Anyone who says that they support the troops but don't support their mission is lying about supporting the troops. And if you want to know, yes I do have a dog in the fight, he is a United States Marine.
I think he would like to. But I don't think he plans to, at least not yet. Ruining the economy so he can socialize/nationalize everything is his first priority; after he gets that kicked up a few more notches, then he'll probably get serious about guns.
He may come at it from another angle. He could restrict/heavily tax or apply something else that would make bullets hard to get. Obambi: "no, I won't take your guns". Ammo, that's another thing.
Libs don't like to sound as if they were taking something away from law-abiding citizens. Sure, they may not zap the 2nd ammendment, but they may wound it so thick and tight with red tape as to annul it for all practical purposes.
We don't have leaders, we have stage magicians exploiting the people's blindspots with malice aforethought.
His Chicago thugs are already well on their way to that in Illinois. We just marched on the Capitol here (that's the first, but not last,time I've done that sort of thing...) this past wednesday. nearly 5000 people, and barely a mention in the local paper!
Their tactics here include: 1) requiring every gun owner to carry a $1,000,000 insurance policy that would cover them in case of willfull or accidental mayhem, 2) laser-engraved serial numbers on every single bullet and casing purchased, 3) essentially criminalizing the victim of firearm theft.
The day of the march, our lawmakers learned what was planned, and scheduled every gun-measure for the morning of the event. Essentially pre-empting our march, so they could vote against it and ignore us. They scheduled the Senate bill for concealed carry for the Public Health committee. They held back every sensible gun law, while passing out of committee almost every gun control measure. THESE are the Chicage thugs from which our President hails!
Take away our guns? No way! Make it impossible to own one? That's their goal!
"Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy." - Winston Churchill
You beat me to it dmntd.
In addition to your comments. I think O and Pelosi will at least attempt to slip some anti 2nd Ammendment clauses into the next porkulus. They'll most likely get a second pork & socialism TARP (properly pronounced as TRIPE) bill. If not there it will show up in next years budget or under some bill with a misleading title (maybee a school lunch subsidy program?). It will be worded VERY ambiguously to allow wide latitude for state and local leftys to have harsh policies.
I guess it will be sooner rather than later so they can take adventage of the economic issues and his popularity before it declines further. They also it to happen before the 2010 mid-term elections.
ALSO on another topic, I like your signature quote. Churchill was anardent anti-Socialist/communist. That's why O gave the Brit's the Churhlill statue back and gave them an el-cheapo gift tn return. Maybee O will quietly replace it with a statue of Marx or Lenin.
"The interests of [radical Facist] Muslims and the interests of the socialists coincide in the war against the crusaders[USA, UK and all other "infidels"]."
Osama bin Laden - March 2003
The "Stealth Jihad" is progressing.
Hey Agent, that's not exactly true. If the liberals can get an amendment passed and ratified by 3/4 of the states then that amendment becomes the law of the land until it is repealed. And that has only happened once to the best of my knowledge. If the liberals can keep control of congress and gain control of the state legislatures then "We the People" ar truly screwed.
Remember folks, Freedom isn't Free. It was bought with the blood and sacrifice of the men and women who are serving and who have served in the U.S. Armed Forces.
For those who fought for it, Freedom has a flavor that the protected will never know.
Also remember folks, that the way to SUPPORT THE TROOPS is to support their mission. Anyone who says that they support the troops but don't support their mission is lying about supporting the troops. And if you want to know, yes I do have a dog in the fight, he is a United States Marine.
Hey Cobra, yes the 18th Amendment was repealed by it took approximately 14 years for that to happen after cooler head prevailed.
I would be almost sure that if an amendment was passed to repeal the 2nd Amendment that liberal judges would up hold it. If it should happen, I don't think anything short of another Civil War or Revolution would change it.
Remember folks, Freedom isn't Free. It was bought with the blood and sacrifice of the men and women who are serving and who have served in the U.S. Armed Forces.
For those who fought for it, Freedom has a flavor that the protected will never know.
Also remember folks, that the way to SUPPORT THE TROOPS is to support their mission. Anyone who says that they support the troops but don't support their mission is lying about supporting the troops. And if you want to know, yes I do have a dog in the fight, he is a United States Marine.
I suppose that they want to eventually try to take them, but I'm thinking of a "bipartisian compromise". They can have them, pointy end first, one piece at a time, starting with the ammunition.
I always think its good to work with people, you know, to make sure everybody gets something in the end. I'm lovable that way.
But, I dont think they can do it until the greater majority of the population are brainwashed enough. So far it has not happened, but never say never. At the moment there are too many Americans who will not relinquish their firearms and other devices. But, with a marxist congress and President I wont rule anything out. In fact I would not rule out some obscure provision in any of teh last pieces of legislation.
birth & education records??? After all, he is an elected official who couldn't have passed the first level of scrutiny if he had to answer under oath. Will all he has passed be undone when full disclosure is ever made??
I don't believe he is taking his presidential oath seriously - he is harming our country beyond comprehension...full steam ahead...hide the many little liberty take-aways in the thousand-page UNREAD bills that our Congressmen vote on without even knowing what is in them!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It is no dishonor to be in a minority in the cause of liberty and virtue. ~ Sam Adams
The birth certificate isn't even necessary to prove he's not a "natural born citizen." All we need to do is understand the law as it is written. You should read the essay at the link I provided. The proof is in the writing.
Will it all be undone when the fraud is exposed and remedied? There's no telling. Such a scenario has never happened before in this country. We'll have to wait and see how it all plays out.
You obviously didn't read your own reference carefully.
It said that as long as the precedent set by United States v. Wong Kim Ark in 1898 remains in force, Obama will be regarded as a natural born citizen unless it can be shown that he was not born on US soil.
Your reference clearly argues this precedent is wrong, because the feudal notion of jus soli is explicitly rejected by US law, but, until overturned or repealed by statute, it remains the law.
No, I actually did read it...and I wrote it. The Wong Kim Ark decision was not a precedent on "natural born" citizenship. Article II, Section I of the Constitution was not being debated - the 14th Amendment was. And the Court did not say Wong Kim Ark was a natural born citizen - they merely called him a "citizen of the United States."
Barack Obama's situation is different in many aspects and would need to be considered by the Court through different laws. No new statute would need to take effect in order to declare him constitutionally ineligible for the presidency. I will further explain this on my site by next week. Keep an eye out for it.
I think you have to show that his mother is not a citizen to exclude his citizenship on the gounds you are arguing. From a legal standpoint, she did not meet the tests of the 1961 legal statutes if Obama was born on foreign soil. If he was born here to a natural born citizen, as his mother plainly was, then he is a natural born citizen unless he renounces that status later.
I think you would do better to examine the actions of his mother when she married Lelo Soetoro. It appears that Soetoro adopted Obama in Indonesia coincident with his marriage to Stanley Ann Dunham. If this is in fact the case, then Obama became an Indonesian citizen by Indoesian law at that time. In effect, his mother and stepfather renounced his US citizenship. I do not see that Obama ever took any action to change this upon reaching age of majority if it was ever his desire to do so.
75% of Americans may want the 2nd Amendment to stay, however, it is the state legislatures that have the final say in the matter. And if enough pressure is put on them, well you can guess what will happen.
Sorry to report, most people have forgotten what they learned in their civics classes.
Remember folks, Freedom isn't Free. It was bought with the blood and sacrifice of the men and women who are serving and who have served in the U.S. Armed Forces.
For those who fought for it, Freedom has a flavor that the protected will never know.
Also remember folks, that the way to SUPPORT THE TROOPS is to support their mission. Anyone who says that they support the troops but don't support their mission is lying about supporting the troops. And if you want to know, yes I do have a dog in the fight, he is a United States Marine.
RD, I tend agree with you. Here is another little bit of news, for those who might not have heard it yet, Obama now says that the economy isn't as bad as first thought. He's been talking the economy down since last fall and probably before. Why all of a sudden the turn-around?
Simple, he wants the "We the People" to think that he, "the one", has turned things around. That couldn't be further from the truth.
Obama has lied to "We the People". Obama IS NOT an honorable man.
Remember folks, Freedom isn't Free. It was bought with the blood and sacrifice of the men and women who are serving and who have served in the U.S. Armed Forces.
For those who fought for it, Freedom has a flavor that the protected will never know.
Also remember folks, that the way to SUPPORT THE TROOPS is to support their mission. Anyone who says that they support the troops but don't support their mission is lying about supporting the troops. And if you want to know, yes I do have a dog in the fight, he is a United States Marine.
There must be a lot of worried gun owners out there I just ordered@ $600 worth of ammo and half is backordered . Last time I was in Sportsmans Warehouse in Green Bay the shelves were almost empty. The guys at the gun counter said obama was a shoein for salesman of the year. Many of the guys I know who voted for 'that one' are having serious buyers remorse.
That is why I ordered them now. Before that one raises taxes on ammo or makes it illegal. It is only a matter of when not if they come after 'guns and ammo' hey, that would be a good name for a mag.
Heads up on this one folks.....recieved this the other day in an email, have NOT checked it out on snopes, but the website seems legit.
FYI
Here it comes folks, but I guess we knew it was coming! Please keepthis moving to everyone including those in other states. Ammunition Accountability LegislationIt has already started... Ammunition Accountability Legislation Remember how Obama said that he wasn't going to take your guns? Well, it seems that his allies in the anti-gun world have no problem with takingyour ammo!The bill that is being pushed in 18 states (including Illinois andIndiana ) requires all ammunition to be encoded by the manufacture a data baseof all ammunition sales. So they will know how much you buy and what calibers.
Nobody can sell any ammunition after June 30, 2009 unless the ammunition is coded... Any privately held uncoded ammunition must be destroyed by July 1,2011.
(Including hand loaded ammo.) They will also charge a .05 cent tax onevery round so 20 every box of ammo you buy will go up at least $2.50 or more! If they can deprive you of ammo they do not need to take your gun!
This legislation is currently pending in 18 states: Alabama, Arizona,California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland,Mississippi, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, SouthCarolina, Tennessee, and Washington.
Send to your friends in these states AND fight to dissolve this BILL!!
To find more about the anti-gun group that is sponsoring this legislation and the specific legislation for each state, go to:
Ammunition Accountability is a term invented by a
company called Ammunition Coding System that holds a
patent for laser engraving a serial number on the base
of the bullet, and another on the inside of the case. Of
course no one would want to buy or produce such
ammunition, so Ammunition Coding System hired lobbyists
to try to get states to pass laws to require the use of
their “technology”. Of course they’re not doing it out
of the kindness of their hearts: Ammunition Coding
expects to get paid a licensing fee for every round of
ammunition produced.
To date, no such bills have been passed in any state,
but last year there was legislation submitted in 18
states, including Illinois. Ammunition Coding System’s
lobbyists had contacted every legislator in the Illinois
General Assembly.
In the now past 95th General Assembly, there were four
bills introduced in the Illinois House, and one [through
amending a bill] in the Senate. All of these bills would
have required the formation of a state-wide ammunition
registry. Some of the bills would apply a monetary fine
paid to the state for each round of ammo of $0.05.
(Don’t forget, the base price of the ammo will go up as
well, as Ammo Coding System will get their cut from the
manufacturer.) Some of the bills contained lists of
firearms for which the ammunition must be encoded,
others covered all firearms ammunition. And forget
holding onto any old ammunition for that family
heirloom, these bills would create penalties for
ammunition that wasn’t encoded.
"Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy." - Winston Churchill
...on a table for years and not kill anyone, nor will it discharge for that matter. But, a person can pick it up and kill someone in just a few seconds.
The point is that all limiting guns accomplishes is slowing the rate at which one person can kill another but it will not stop that person from killing the other it that is what the first person wants to do!
The limits on gun ownership also will not stop nor hardly slow the illegal keeping and use of guns. What will happen is that it will be only the government and the bad guys who will have guns!
Therefore, the motivations behind limiting guns must be something else. I, for one, believe a motive behind limiting or banning guns is to increase the power and control that government has over the individual.
--
In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. From time to time we've been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people. Well, if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else? All of us together, in and out of government, must bear the burden. The solutions we seek must be equitable, with no one group singled out to pay a higher price. - Ronald Reagan from his first inaugural address
You summed it up pretty good R D. I would agree with you, but while I might share just a little bit of my weapons with the new civilian corp I dont intend to hand hand any over.
Honestly, the majority of you are as looney toones crazy as the lefty doofs are. We're going to have to start calling this site DailyNewsbusters if you all keep the paranoia at its current level.
Obama isnt dumb regardless of what most of you say; he is calculating and smarter than everyone here including myself. He knows better, and he also knows where the line is.
The last thing he wants is some kook ranting about his deer rifle being confiscated.
Your guns will be fine (why you'd need more than 2 or 3 is beyond me anyway, I have a 9mm for protection that I keep in the closet and a rifle for the occasional hunt with longtime friends). - I also have my grandfather's WWII pistol but that's out of use anyway.
Assault weapons SHOULD only be used by our troops as I have witnessed far too many people that have ZERO clue how to use them and cause plenty of close calls with their stupidity. - Those, yes, say goodbye to them.
Anyone that ain't a Marine couldn't possibly have had the training to deal with one (that's a joke people).
but your weapons will be fine. I doubt Obama will even broach the subject of guns during the duration of his presidency, outside of banning assault weapons.
Quit being so paranoid, jeesh.
"Democracy is worth dying for, because it's the most deeply honorable form of government ever devised by man." - Ronald Reagan
You're ruining their preparation for The Great War. I imagine compound construction has gone up in the last couple of months, along with barb wire sales, survival gear, and blueprints for perimeters.
"You people" has nothing to do with any of the adjectives you decided to use.
In this case, it means those so paranoid that they actually fear that all guns will be banned. That will never happen..."you people" still sound way too paranoid if you think that's plausible. We will always have guns in this country, its part of who we are and what the country was founded with the help of.
Don't buy my "story" about guns. I could care less. I'm fine with guns, for 6 years I carried the M16(A2) for my occupation. - Many moons ago.
What I don't like is people that are ill trained to handle very powerful weapons doing just that.
"Democracy is worth dying for, because it's the most deeply honorable form of government ever devised by man." - Ronald Reagan
Since you did carry an M16 for 6 years, thank you by the way, you know that there is a vast difference between the M16 and the AR-15. Semi-automatic fire vs Full Automatic fire which should be the ONLY deciding factor to classify a firearm as an Assault weapon. But since we have lawyers writing laws about things that they are clearly unexperienced in we get our current, and i say current because i live in NY, assault weapons ban. Yes, NY in it's infinitesimal wisdom decided to adapt the Biden written legislation for good. So we have outlawed adjustable shoulder stocks, vertical forearm handles, flash suppressors, oh and best of all - bayonet lugs. I thank the lord Joe Biden had the good sense to include bayonets in his 'classification' of an assault weapon. God only knows how many lives have been spared because of that pearl of wisdom. We have a long list of banned weapons because of how they look not what they are capable of. The only thing the ban did successfully was drive their value up. Also, if you purchase a pistol you are required to file 2 fired shell casings with the State Police for balistics. This has cost NY a million a year so far and has produced nothing. Once again "We have to do something." resulting in nothing.
But we're missing the point, as most of you know, gun laws do NOTHING to stop crimes. The fact is the towns with the toughest gun laws have the highest crime rates and the towns with the most carry permits have the lowest.
"Assault weapons SHOULD only be used by our troops as I have witnessed far too many people that have ZERO clue how to use them and cause plenty of close calls with their stupidity. - Those, yes, say goodbye to them."
Every veteran trained after 1970 knows how to use an assault rifle. Some of us also know how to use an M1 Garrand and the M3 or M14. There is zero difference in effect between the semi-auto versions of the AR-15, AK-47 or SKS and the M1 Garrand excepting the M1 will pierce rather substantial armor with full load cartridges.
The intent of the 2nd Amendment was to place in the hands of the ordinary citizen the standard small arm of the military. In 1788, that was a muzzle loading musket. Today in the US, it is the M-16. The stated purpose of this placement was so the citizenry could protect itself against our own government, which the founders viewed as the greatest threat to liberty in this land.
Lo and Behold, 200+ years later, we see the founders were right.
"The stated purpose of this placement was so the citizenry could protect
itself against our own government, which the founders viewed as the
greatest threat to liberty in this land."
Yes! In fact, the first four Amendments were established to protect citizens from the government's intrusion into our God-given rights.
The Government cannot give to anybody anything which the government does not first take from somebody else. Dr. Adrian Rogers
"Obama isnt dumb regardless of what most of you say; he is calculating and smarter than everyone here including myself."
You've got to be in your teens. Quick, what state is closer to Kentucky: Illinois or Arkansas? Don't feel bad if you don't know - Obama doesn't either, but then, like you wrote, he is smarter than you.
"Your guns will be fine (why you'd need more than 2 or 3 is beyond me anyway)"
We're not as paranoid as you are naive (goes with being a teen). So in a free society we should only have what we "need"? Who decides what we "need"? What if Obama says you only "need" one pair of shoes?
"Assault weapons SHOULD only be used by our troops as I have witnessed far too many people that have ZERO clue how to use them and cause plenty of close calls with their stupidity."
Look who's stupid. "Assault" rifles are no different in function than any other rifle. The only things that distinguish an "assault" rifle from a regular one are the cosmetics. So how are collapsible stocks, pistol grips, flash suppressors, bayonet mounts, a shorter barrel etc. creating the close calls you've seen? You DID see some close calls didn't you?
Those who have not swords can still die upon them.
Like I said earlier, regardless of what you'll say, one guy got to be President of the United States while the other two bicker over just which guns will Americans no longer be able to legally own on some web chat forum.
Obama has the most limited qualifications of any POTUS ever...but he got there... and no fool is capable of that. - And yes, he is much smarter than I am, and far smarter than yourself...quick, tell me the capital of Guam...Don't feel bad if you don't know, I'm sure Obama doesn't either...and he still is POTUS, and you are a what??? - Hint: the answer is nobody.
and NO, I'm far beyond teen years, although those were great days so thanks for sparking some memories.
I just don't see why anyone not serving our country or the police,etc. would need an assault weapon. (Obviously this is a VERY broad word, I mean an infantry weapon here).
Unless that is you ARE preparing for war? - In which case, good luck with your trial for treason.
Yes, I've seen close calls. Put a high powered rifle in the hands of a not yet trained 20 year old while in basic and you'll see a few...unless you never served.
The last thing I'd want to see is the police outgunned by a terrorist that legally bought an M16A1 and decided to take it out for a spin. - THEY should be the one's outgunned, not those that put their lives on the line to protect us.
"Democracy is worth dying for, because it's the most deeply honorable form of government ever devised by man." - Ronald Reagan
You sound like a true liberal, regardless of claims to the contrary. It's not for YOU to decide what kind of firearm I decide to own. In fact, I can own a machinegun if I like because my record is spotless and I can acquire the license for such a purchase. Well, until your buddy Obama and his puppet masters say otherwise. And while you may wring your hands over that scenario, be advised that as far as I know no crime has ever been committed by a licensed owner of such a weapon since the 1930's when the rules were enacted.
The only people that should be tried for treason are people like you that would cheer the dismantling of the Second Amendment. Your ignorance of what it stands for is astounding. Try doing some research of what the Founding Fathers said instead of what Sarah Brady said.
Oh.. some raghead is not going to waltz into a gun store and buy a select-fire M16A1 legally. If this is such a danger, why hasn't it happened? Any other scary scenarios you'd like to share to justify disarming the law-abiding?
Damn, you're dumb!!!
"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them." George Mason
Yeah, it's paranoia alright as we all know that liberals do not have a history of trying to disarm the law abiding - not!
I suppose that you need to be in charge of determining who needs a firearm and how many would be permissible? How liberal of you. If I want a 100 firearms - that's my right, doofuss.
More liberal claptrap. Assault rifles account for less than 1% of firearms-related deaths in the U.S. in any given year. You have zero facts to back YOUR irrational paranoia of 'assault' weapons.
What a bunch of liberal gobbledeegook... geesh!
"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them." George Mason
why you'd need more than 2 or 3 is beyond me anyway
I went back and checked, and lo and behold, I was right! The first ten amendments to our Constitution were named the BILL OF RIGHTS. They were NOT named the BILL OF NEEDS.
Someone asked me why I had four guns. I replied simply "I have the right to own them". That's all there is to it.
Oh, and my friends frequently hunt coyotes with their AR15. It's their form of target practice.
"Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy." - Winston Churchill
all right. Under the proposals out there, is the so-called Assault Weapons Ban. That includes my Remington 30-06, model 742, because it has a 5 round, detachable magazine. That makes it an assault weapon in Eric Holder's eyes. Ditto my S&W Model 39-2, S&W .40cal semi-auto pistol, and my Springfield Armory .45 ACP pistol, because they have "high capacity magazines". The only "safe" guns are my muzzle loader and Mauser, because it's a bolt action rifle with a fixed magazine. As to why I have more than "2 or 3", it's because I have that right.
Remember this is how the THEY {oh, I know the mysterious "they", but "they" really do exisit ;-) } THINK! If we remain passive, our rights, including the 2nd amendment, will be destroyed.
Please remember the 2nd amendment was saved by a 5 to 4 vote. If the judges change what happens then?
If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you.
For a gun to be an assault rifle it has to have the ability to be fired full auto and semi auto. If it only fires semi auto no matter what it looks like it is NOT AN ASSAULT RIFLE!
and knives and any weapon that could be used to oppose them.
The Constitution is clear on this matter, the SCOTUS has just ruled on our individual right in this matter, and for me, it ends right here - right now. Jefferson (to paraphrase) said any law without Constitutional authority is in-valid and not to be obeyed. I will not give up any more of my God given and Constitutionally protected rights.
Folks if you own a rifle and have a desire to learn to shoot better and hear some history please come to an Appleseed this year. What is Appleseed? Appleseed is a combo American Heritage and rifle marksmanship program put on by volunteers from the Revolutionary War Veteran Association, A 501.3c non for profit group. Attendees learn the fundamentals of rifle marksmanship, safety and most importantly the historical events of April 19th 1775, the date when marksmanship met history. These are family friendly events and are offered FREE to Women, Children under 21 and anyone in the active military. Most of the course of fire is done at 25m on simulated targets out to 400 yrds so a simple .22 rifle is perfect !
I don't expect a frontal assault on gun rights, but a much more dangerous, slow erosion of rights and efforts to lower the availability of guns and ammo through "sensible" regulation.
health care in the Stimulus - who reads that stuff anyhow! Daschle wrote a book saying that is the only way to get universal healthcare going - Hillary's method bombed bigtime...the SNEAKS IN CHARGE are destroying America!
It is no dishonor to be in a minority in the cause of liberty and virtue. ~ Sam Adams
That won't work in Texas though. Hell, even the majority of dimwits...uh...I mean democrats here have a Lone Star in one hand and a rifle in the other. Yeeee-Haaawwww!!!
"This
liberal would be all about socialize -- uh, uh, would be about
basically taking over and the government running all of your companies."-Maxine Waters 2008
Until last year the only rifle I owned was a Ruger 10-22. However, I have been an avid birdhunter for forty years, using a Model 12 and an 870. This year, I have bought two bolt action rifles. I am sure I could safely and competently operate any so-calle "assault rifle" in about three minutes. I'm not alone. Anybody thinking we are a bunch of doofuses shooting our feet off would be well of minding their own business,
They told me if I voted for McCain, the nation's hope would deteriorate, and sure enough there has been a 20 point drop in consumer confidence index since the election, reaching the a lower point than any time during the Bush administration.
They told me if I voted for McCain, the US would become more deeply embroiled in the Middle East, and sure enough tens of thousands of additional troops are scheduled to be deployed to Afghanistan.
They told me if I voted for McCain, that the economy would get worse and sure enough unemployment is approaching 8.8% and the new stimulus packages implemented recently have sent the stock market lower than at any time since 9-11.
They told me if I voted for McCain, we would see more 'crooks' in high ranking positions in Federal government and sure enough, several recent cabinet nominees and Senate appointments revealed resumes of bribery and tax fraud.
Well I ignored my Democrat friends in November and voted for McCain and they were right....all of their predictions have came true. Old, Retired and glad of it.
This is gold. They say that good comedy contains a grain of truth, but you have struck a vein here.
"This
liberal would be all about socialize -- uh, uh, would be about
basically taking over and the government running all of your companies."-Maxine Waters 2008
Over the course of the history of this Nation, there have been elements of the population which has sought to undermine the Citizens last refuge of government control, the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
It is an obvious move for the leftists to make an effort to remove this Box of Political Action and Change, just like they are working to remove the other two.
In response to an earlier post, who waited until now to arm themselves and build their compound? Fool, all the "kooks" have been ready for...wait for it...GENERATIONS! I was thinking of adding a patio and some flower beds to my "compound" this summer.
When we will all learn that the government will not honor its contract (Constitution) with us? When will we all learn that to be "reasonable" and "compromising" for a false since of approval from the leftists has been our undoing? When we will learn that the leftists WILL NOT PLAY FAIR!?!?
Not trained to use assault weapons properly? I assure you that Ranger training is more than adequate. Nifty stuff about other things as well.
Folks are worried about their weapons and rights, as they should be. But consider this: even if the government manages complete confiscation or ammo inventory or whatever, do you think that there are no machinists left? That no one knows chemistry?
Do you think they will be able to ban sharp, pointy sticks?
A person armed with a sharp stick or a rock and a modicum of skill can access and utilize a fair supply of firearms and ammunition. This aquisition can be used to aquire more. It would take time, but if we don't get a hammerlock on the Communists in the White House, time is all we will have left.
Having your own arsenal is your right. It is wrong for the government to interfere with that. It is wrong for the government to do a lot of things.
But who stops them?
We have come to the precipice. The wilderness approaches once more. Keep your powder dry, use the Three Boxes of Political Change with Divine guidance and hard common sense. We have had a long run of good times. Bad times come around and it may be that time again.
The only true lethal weapon in the one between your ears; is it loaded?
"You can have Peace or you can have Freedom; just don't count on having both at the same time." - R.A.H
"I'll take the harsh reality of liberty over the illusion of security...everytime!" -me
It looks to me like guns will be taken away by forced purchase of personal/homeowners insurance, extremely high ammo/weapon prices, expensive registration/purchase and impediments, forced training with expensive charges, annual tax assesments icing on the cake will be tying all these new restricitions/expenses to Fed funding to States legislation.
Plan for the Worst and hope for the Best....
PS: Scrapiron "RIGHT ON THE MONEY". Excellent campaign line for 2010 & 2012, thanks.
CALL FAX EMAIL OR SNAIL MAIL YOUR REPS NOW AND STOP HR 45 IN IT'S TRACKS !!
March 13, 2009
Here it is, folks, and it is bad news. The framework for legislation is always laid, and the Democrats have the votes to pass anything they want to impose upon us. They really do not believe you need anything more than a brick to defend your home and family. Look at the list and see how many you own. Remember, it is registration, then confiscation. It has happened in the UK, in Australia, in Europe, in China, and what they have found is that for some reason the criminals do not turn in their weapons, but will know that you did.
Remember, the first step in establishing a dictatorship is to disarm the citizens.
Gun-ban list proposed. Slipping below the radar (or under the short-term memory cap), the Democrats have already leaked a gun-ban list, even under the Bush administration when they knew full well it had no chance of passage (HR 1022, 110th Congress). It serves as a framework for the new list the Brady’s plan to introduce shortly. I have an outline of the Brady’s current plans and targets of opportunity. It’s horrific. They’re going after the courts, regulatory agencies, firearms dealers and statutes in an all out effort to restrict we the people. They’ve made little mention of criminals. Now more than ever, attention to the entire Bill of Rights is critical. Gun bans will impact our freedoms under search and seizure, due process, confiscated property, states’ rights, free speech, right to assemble and more, in addition to the Second Amendment. The Democrats current gun-ban-list proposal (final list will be worse):
Rifles (or copies or duplicates):
M1 Carbine,
Sturm Ruger Mini-14,
AR-15,
Bushmaster XM15,
Armalite M15,
AR-10,
Thompson 1927,
Thompson M1;
AK,
AKM,
AKS,
AK-47,
AK-74,
ARM,
MAK90,
NHM 90,
NHM 91,
SA 85,
SA 93,
VEPR;
Olympic Arms PCR;
AR70,
Calico Liberty ,
Dragunov SVD Sniper Rifle or Dragunov SVU,
Fabrique National FN/FAL,
FN/LAR, or FNC,
Hi-Point20Carbine,
HK-91,
HK-93,
HK-94,
HK-PSG-1,
Thompson 1927 Commando,
Kel-Tec Sub Rifle;
Saiga,
SAR-8,
SAR-4800,
SKS with detachable magazine,
SLG 95,
SLR 95 or 96,
Steyr AU,
Tavor,
Uzi,
Galil and Uzi Sporter,
Galil Sporter, or Galil Sniper Rifle ( Galatz ).
Pistols (or copies or duplicates):
Calico M-110,
MAC-10,
MAC-11, or MPA3,
Olympic Arms OA,
TEC-9,
TEC-DC9,
TEC-22 Scorpion, or AB-10,
Uzi.
Shotguns (or copies or duplicates):
Armscor 30 BG,
SPAS 12 or LAW 12,
Striker 12,
Streetsweeper. Catch-all category (for anything missed or new designs):
A semiautomatic rifle that accepts a detachable magazine and has:
(i) a folding or telescoping stock,
(ii) a threaded barrel,
(iii) a pistol grip (which includes ANYTHING that can serve as a grip, see
below),
(iv) a forward grip; or a barrel shroud.
Any semiautomatic rifle with a fixed magazine that can accept more than
10 rounds (except tubular magazine .22 rim fire rifles).
A semiautomatic pistol that has the ability to accept a
detachable magazine, and has:
(i) a second pistol grip,
(ii) a threaded barrel,
(iii) a barrel shroud or
(iv) can accept a detachable magazine outside of the pistol grip, and
(v) a semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10
rounds.
A semiautomatic shotgun with:
(i) a folding or telescoping stock,
(ii) a pistol grip (see definition below),
(iii) the ability to accept a detachable magazine or a fixed magazine capacity
of more than 5 rounds, and
(iv) a shotgun with a revolving cylinder.
Frames or receivers for the above are included, along with conversion kits.
Attorney General gets carte blanche to ban guns at will: Under the proposal, the U.S. Attorney General can add any “semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General.”
Note that Obama’s pick for this office, Eric Holder, wrote a brief in the Heller case supporting the position that you have no right to have a working firearm in your own home. In making this determination, the bill says, “there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.” In plain English this means that ANY firearm ever obtained by federal officers or the military is not suitable for the public.
The last part is particularly clever, stating that a firearm doesn’t have a sporting purpose just because it can be used for sporting purpose — is that devious or what? And of course, “sporting purpose” is a rights infringement with no constitutional or historical support whatsoever, invented by domestic enemies of the right to keep and bear arms to further their cause of disarming the innocent.
<b>Federal Gun Bill Angers Alaskans</b>
A new gun proposal DC legislators are currently considering is under fire from Alaska lawmakers. It would require everyone who has a gun to get a license, or be considered a felon.
Two years ago Blair Holt was one of the many folks on a crowded Chicago bus. The teen was riding to high school when a teenage gunman looking for a rival gang member got onto the bus an opened fire, murdering Holt.
That is the motivation behind Rep. Bobby Rush, D-IL, "Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009." It would require every gun owner to get a license, and a be part of a national database. Here in Alaska, our lawmakers and gun owners are calling the idea unconstitutional.
As business went on inside Wild West Guns the idea is making everyone mad.
"I think that's ridiculous," said Eagle River Gun Owner Lawrance Weeks.
Wild West Guns' Manager Ken Feinman added, "You know under this new legislation as proposed a lever action rifle like this one requires a federal license."
Under the proposal not having a license would mean if you had a gun you would be committing a felony.
"That basically means everybody in Alaska would have to have a federal license to posses a simple rifle or be a criminal," Feinman says.
The proposal's language goes further. Violators would also be a felon for giving a gun to another person who does not license.
Feinman says, "If I was to want to give this gun to my children as an inheritance they would have to have a license, and the government would have to approve it."
And, if your gun were stolen, it would be a felony not to report the theft within 72 hours.
Monday, Rep. John Harris, R-Valdez, introduced a resolution telling congress to back off, "And what were trying to do is say from Alaska we don't want to go down that road. So knock it off and deal with other issues that are more important."
In part, Alaska lawmakers believe parts of Rush's proposal, like not letting anyone under 18 possess a firearm, will not work in Alaska.
"Maybe if you're in the inner city of Chicago and you're thinking about gangs that might make sense to you," says Rep. Lindsay Holmes, D-Anchorage. "But when you're in Alaska and we want to teach our youngsters gun safety. And we want to teach them how to hunt and enjoy the great outdoors. I just thought that was symbolic of many parts of this resolution that I thought were out of step with Alaskans' values."
Harris' resolution passed out of committee Monday, and soon the full house will debate.
This is such a heated issue because of the implications. In Alaska there are no laws requiring gun owners to register the guns they buy, and no laws requiring licenses for ownership or conceal and carry. Although officers remind gun owners it's not legal to conceal and carry everywhere in AK.
Both Weeks and Feinman predict if the measure passes Alaskans will not follow the new restrictions.
"I believe in practice that people just wouldn't comply with it," Feinman says. "It would just create millions of criminals in the country. There's millions of law abiding gun owners that just wouldn't do it."
CALL FAX EMAIL OR SNAIL MAIL YOUR REPS NOW AND STOP HR 45 IN IT'S TRACKS !!
It makes no sense to change a law because of one isolated crime. What makes them think any type of legislation will keep illegal weapons out of the hands of criminals? You can't legislate human behavior.....our overflowing prisons attest to that. There is no way to confiscate guns from over 300 million Americans. Do they want another Revolution? You can probably count on one hand the number of law abiding gun owners who have gone on random killing sprees. Liberals are just afraid we'll use 'em on them.
This was a gang related crime. You know what prevents kids from joining gangs? Having two parents committed to each other and their family. Something Liberals despise. I wonder what some of their kids are up to!
Eric Holder is antagonistic toward the Second Amendment right to bear arms, and had supported the Washington, D.C. ban on all hand-guns, even for self-defense in the home.
(That law was later found unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.)
Holder supports federal licensing of all handguns, three-day waiting periods, one gun per month purchase limits, national gun registration, and strict limits on gun shows that would effectively shut them down.
Mr. Holder is as much an enemy of the USA as Resident oblahblahbinladen. He will be included in the group of guilty when the eligibility issue is resolved with each co-conspirator enjoying their new condo apartments in the FEMA prisons. That is, if the American public doesn't lynch them first. There are 10s of millions of American citizens who are PIST. Mr. Holder has all the evidence necessary to remove the Resident and prosecute him. Mr. Holder is also committing treason for not acting on this proof. He is an ENEMY of the American people!!!!! Pelosi, Ried, and numerous Senators/Congressman both Dem & Republican ARE going to answer to America for their crimes. Mark my words. See DefendOurFreedoms.us
While serving as director of the Joyce Foundation board (1994-2001),
Obama gives millions of dollars to gun control organizations like the Council Against Handguns and the Violence Policy Center.
(Between 1994 and 2001, the Joyce Foundation gave $18.6 million to about 80 anti-gun and anti-Second Amendment projects, including $1.5 million to the Violence Policy Center.)
The Joyce Foundation is closely linked to the “Soros Open Society Institute,” which advocates a worldwide ban on civilian firearm ownership.
During his Illinois Senate career Obama votes four times against legislation that would allow a homeowner to use a firearm in defense of his home and family.
To avoid criticism of his anti-gun agenda, Obama enlists an organization known as the “American Hunters and Shooters Association” (AHSA) to distribute literature stating that he is “pro-Second Amendment.”
On its surface, the AHSA supports hunting, but it also supports strict gun controls on non-hunters.
(The AHSA is known to be a “sham” organization set up solely to endorse leftists who need political cover for their anti-gun leanings.)
I wasn't aware of the existance of the AHSA. It's a good thing to know.
It sounds just like another lib "gun safety" organization with a 2-faced name (I don't recall the name). I was in San Francisco and got stuck walking downtown. There was some guy at a rally talking about how his own handgun "was of no use" to him when his jewelry store was robbed. He was shot with his own pistol because he didn't know where the safety was. The thugs grabbed the guys gun from his hands, flipped the safety and shot him.
He bought a handgun, loaded it once and never bothered to figure out how to use it. Somehow that guy was speaking at an anti-gun rally and was getting applauded. I feel sorry that he was shot (almost fatally). But he's using the typical "lib victim" philosophy. It's not his fault for never figuring out how to operate a simple revolver. Also the thugs are somehow victims of society,so the guns themselves must be at fault.
The crowd was very thick, it took me a while to escape the collective stupidity. It was a good example for me to see these folks up close and hear the twisted logic.
"The interests of [radical Facist] Muslims and the interests of the socialists coincide in the war against the crusaders[USA and all so-called infidels]."
Osama bin Laden - March 2003
I wasn't aware of the existance of the AHSA. It's a good thing to know.
It sounds just like another lib "gun safety" organization with a 2-faced name (I don't recall the name). I was in San Francisco and got stuck walking downtown. There was some guy at a rally talking about how his own handgun "was of no use" to him when his jewelry store was robbed. He was shot with his own pistol because he didn't know where the safety was. The thugs grabbed the guys gun from his hands, flipped the safety and shot him.
He bought a handgun, loaded it once and never bothered to figure out how to use it. Somehow that guy was speaking at an anti-gun rally and was getting applauded. I feel sorry that he was shot (almost fatally). But he's using the typical "lib victim" philosophy. It's not his fault for never figuring out how to operate a simple revolver. Also the thugs are somehow victims of society,so the guns themselves must be at fault.
The crowd was very thick, it took me a while to escape the collective stupidity. It was a good example for me to see these folks up close and hear the twisted logic.
"The interests of [radical Facist] Muslims and the interests of the socialists coincide in the war against the crusaders[USA and all so-called infidels]."
Osama bin Laden - March 2003
this is what the lib'ers from (taxen'n your a$$) have been doing for a long time, sling shots & bows & arrows are next, thanks to the swimmer & flounder,an disbarred from be-corning you hill.
Why do liberals and conservatives have such differing views on gun rights---could it be its because of where they live. Generally, a good case can be made for this. Conservatives tend to be concentrated in the rural areas while liberals are in the urban areas. The majority of gun violence is in the urban center, despite the fact that per capita gun ownership is greater in the rural areas. Let me say this, gun violence in the urban areas is a direct result of the large minority population living there--go ahead liberal and call be racist. Seems to be your only defense at times. Throw out then, the fact of the minority factor. More guns in the rural areas then should result in higher gun violence in those areas, but then thats not the case. Could it be that more guns means less gun violence---liberals certainly don't want to hear that. So what's their answer. I say this---people breed violence, not guns. And it seems, therefore that liberal areas breed more violence than conservative areas---why is this?
To answer your question of why liberal areas appear more violent - just watch any liberal on the news. These are violent, hateful people. Couple that with a disdain for any kind of morality and the desire to be soft on crime, and voila, you have violent areas in charge by liberals. The truth is, liberalism kills.
Simple truth is that liberals hate guns in the hands of free Americans. Thier goal is to see to it that no American can legally own any kind of firearm, or failing that, see to it that no firearm can actually be used. As I recall, at the outset of the American Revolution, the British were on thier way to confiscate guns in the hands of the colonials and met with some resistance in a place called Concord. Hence the "shot heard round the world." Not to be an alarmist, but nothing surprises me these days and I would not be surprised to learn that the administration is going to find a backdoor way to make the 2nd Amendment worthless. God help this country if they try.
I keep trying to envision how this is going to go down:
1. Excessively taxing or banning ammunition won't work as most people have already stocked up.
2. Making firearms harder to get won't work as most who want them already have them.
So, that leaves forcing a Gordon Kahl or Ruby Ridge type deal which would 'necessitate' more 'drastic measures' for the sake of 'national security.
Actually, the Feds have little to be afraid of. Most of those who have lots of ammunition do not have enough, nor the supply support the Feds/military/police have and would quickly go through their ammo in a firefight.
Also, such hotheads probably don't have gas masks, have no intelligence, no organization, no communications, little training, would be isolated, have no way to combat armored vehicles/aircraft, would have no hope of reinforcement, etc.
They would face highly-trained and supported SWAT and military special forces, snipers, etc.
In fact, the Feds probably know who the most prepared ones are and could easily pick them up at Wal-Mart or at their jobs.
So, considering the above, I'm not 100% sure as to why the government would even bother.
Most of these folks are armed simply because they want to be prepared for a break down of law and order (such as it is) if the economic situation worsens, and are no threat to the government anyway.
One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 61% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory (yep...approval for Congress now at 39%...do you believe that!?).
unlike the goons in obama's proposed "civilian defense force" .most of the police i know are ex-military and can read the constitution and the bill of rights. if they get orders that are clearly so out of bounds the gun grab "ain't gonna happen" simply the ratio of police to armed citizens is too great. in my state maybe 100 local police. maybe 50 state troopers. 15 local fbi . going knocking on the doors of nearly half a million people (locally) asking you to give up your lifeline in an emergency. the ratio of police to citizens only works when most (nearly all) citizens adhere to the laws. read solzhenitsyn in the gulag archipelago. how many of the kgb would be so eager to go out and arrest citizens who had done nothing wrong if they had to face a loaded pistol.you have to wonder what kind of person was elected where we even consider such talk after all, wasn't bush the new hitler? sarcasm alert....
Either controlling our guns, or taking them away is his ultimate goal, but he has alot on his plate right now so expect it to be done in little bites by changing or making new laws. This you can bet on and win big money!
We'll see how effective his un-Constitutional plan is at July 4th's March on Washington when 10 million gun-owners show up waving their guns in the air!
If you're going to mention a gun-rights rally in D.C., you are required to post a link so the rest of us gun-nuts can join :-)
I've been to the one in Illinois, and while it was my first, it won't be my last. The Dhimmicrats in our state General Assembly realized there were going to be some of us, and so they put all (or almost all) of the gun-laws up to a committee vote that MORNING. CCW was relegated to the "PUBLIC HEALTH" committee, and was tabled. It was the only committee they could guarantee it would be tabled in, due to the high number of Chicago Thugs present in that committee. The ammo-engraving bill passed out of committee, as did the million-dollar insurance policy to own a gun, and the criminalizing of the victim of firearm theft/loss.
"Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy." - Winston Churchill
In 2004, Obama says he is "…consistently on record and will continue to be on record as opposing concealed carry,” and that he would back "federal legislation that would ban citizens from carrying weapons, except for law enforcement.”
He also votes, in March, to allow prosecution of citizens who use guns for self-defense in their own homes (SB 2165).
Obama votes for a bill in the Illinois Senate that would ban most hunting rifles, shotguns, and target rifles.
The bill would also authorize the Illinois State Police to raid homes and forcibly confiscate banned guns.
Obama also votes for a bill that would shut down all Illinois firearm manufacturing businesses (Springfield Armory, Armalite, Rock River Arms, and Les Baer).
Obama votes for a bill (S 2579) prohibiting Illinois citizens from purchasing more than one gun per month.
Obama votes for a bill that bans most single-shot and double-barreled shotguns as “semi-automatic assault weapons” (even though they are not semi-automatic), along with hundreds of models of rifles and handguns. (Had the bill had passed, Illinois residents would have had 90 days to turn their guns in or face felony charges.)
What I like about New Hampshire is that it is illegal for the state to keep records on who bought guns. It can do a background check --- but then, after the gun is purchased, it has to delete any information that could be construed as "registration" info. See item #8 here regarding Permit to Purchase, Registration of Firearms, and Licensing of Owner.
New Hampshire residents will never have their guns confiscated.
___________________________________
The challenge is to follow a consistent plan despite inconsistent prices - Sarah Palin, State of the State of Alaska speech
Obama proposes legislation prohibiting gun stores from operating within five miles of a school or a park.
Inasmuch as most communities have schools and parks scattered widely throughout their areas, the legislation would effectively ban gun stores or force them to re-locate far from population centers.
Even if the courts were stacked in their favor, I don't see liberals taking away guns. I do however think it is entirely possible to regulate ammunition. This way they can create a black market, create an artificial crime (like the war on drugs) and toss us constitutionalists in the hoosegow.
"A man with an experience is never at the mercy of a man with an argument." Hilmar von Campe
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
.
March 13, 2009 - 11:12 ET by JimboGuns don't kill people....Terrorists do.
the word "all" made me vote no
March 13, 2009 - 11:13 ET by SouthJersey1953I do not think he will take ALL gun rights, but I do think he will try to take MOST rights away....
Good though.
March 13, 2009 - 14:10 ET by someloudthunderI agree but I voted "No" on the basis that HE won't be taking the rights away.
Leave that to our Supreme Court.
once the guns are gone.....
March 13, 2009 - 11:17 ET by JIMMY1660BHO will organize his" CIVILIAN SECURITY FORCE"-which are Black Nationalists-the same that murdered Cleveland Policeman July 23, 1968, in the name of justice!!!
Then the lines will be drawn in the sand.
BHO- ill equipped to lead America
The Obama gang ...
March 13, 2009 - 11:22 ET by SentryDanThe Obama gang will find away to get around the 2nd Amendment to take guns away from every law abiding citizen. This will leave only the U.S. Military and criminals with weapons. And Obama and his crew are working to make the U.S. Military inept, giving their equipment to his hand picked CNSF.
Folks we're headed for some dark days. Obama is a liar. He IS NOT an honorable man.
Remember folks, Freedom isn't Free. It was bought with the blood and sacrifice of the men and women who are serving and who have served in the U.S. Armed Forces.
For those who fought for it, Freedom has a flavor that the protected will never know.
Also remember folks, that the way to SUPPORT THE TROOPS is to support their mission. Anyone who says that they support the troops but don't support their mission is lying about supporting the troops. And if you want to know, yes I do have a dog in the fight, he is a United States Marine.
I think he would like to.
March 13, 2009 - 11:29 ET by bdshepherdI think he would like to. But I don't think he plans to, at least not yet. Ruining the economy so he can socialize/nationalize everything is his first priority; after he gets that kicked up a few more notches, then he'll probably get serious about guns.
Ammo?
March 13, 2009 - 11:52 ET by FOXFANHe may come at it from another angle. He could restrict/heavily tax or apply something else that would make bullets hard to get. Obambi: "no, I won't take your guns". Ammo, that's another thing.
Good evening Fox
March 13, 2009 - 12:10 ET by cocodrieYou've got it. Rules and regulations.
Make the hoops small enough and high enough, we won't be able to jump through.
Jesus Loves You
Thats what I thought as well...
March 13, 2009 - 13:11 ET by hierogrammateLibs don't like to sound as if they were taking something away from law-abiding citizens. Sure, they may not zap the 2nd ammendment, but they may wound it so thick and tight with red tape as to annul it for all practical purposes.
We don't have leaders, we have stage magicians exploiting the people's blindspots with malice aforethought.
His Chicago thugs are
March 14, 2009 - 09:11 ET by dmntd1His Chicago thugs are already well on their way to that in Illinois. We just marched on the Capitol here (that's the first, but not last,time I've done that sort of thing...) this past wednesday. nearly 5000 people, and barely a mention in the local paper!
Their tactics here include: 1) requiring every gun owner to carry a $1,000,000 insurance policy that would cover them in case of willfull or accidental mayhem, 2) laser-engraved serial numbers on every single bullet and casing purchased, 3) essentially criminalizing the victim of firearm theft.
The day of the march, our lawmakers learned what was planned, and scheduled every gun-measure for the morning of the event. Essentially pre-empting our march, so they could vote against it and ignore us. They scheduled the Senate bill for concealed carry for the Public Health committee. They held back every sensible gun law, while passing out of committee almost every gun control measure. THESE are the Chicage thugs from which our President hails!
Take away our guns? No way! Make it impossible to own one? That's their goal!
"Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy." - Winston Churchill
They'll slip it into Stim' 2
March 14, 2009 - 15:26 ET by Dont_Like_TheBluesYou beat me to it dmntd.
In addition to your comments. I think O and Pelosi will at least attempt to slip some anti 2nd Ammendment clauses into the next porkulus. They'll most likely get a second pork & socialism TARP (properly pronounced as TRIPE) bill. If not there it will show up in next years budget or under some bill with a misleading title (maybee a school lunch subsidy program?). It will be worded VERY ambiguously to allow wide latitude for state and local leftys to have harsh policies.
I guess it will be sooner rather than later so they can take adventage of the economic issues and his popularity before it declines further. They also it to happen before the 2010 mid-term elections.
ALSO on another topic, I like your signature quote. Churchill was anardent anti-Socialist/communist. That's why O gave the Brit's the Churhlill statue back and gave them an el-cheapo gift tn return. Maybee O will quietly replace it with a statue of Marx or Lenin.
"The interests of [radical Facist] Muslims and the interests of the socialists coincide in the war against the crusaders[USA, UK and all other "infidels"]."
Osama bin Laden - March 2003
The "Stealth Jihad" is progressing.
Don't panic...
March 13, 2009 - 11:47 ET by AgentAmericanObama will not even get close to gun confiscation. If the GOP takes back the Hill in 2010, it won't happen. I don't see a good future for this fraud.
If he even attempts to steal our guns, a civil war would break out, and he would be totally screwed.
I think the left would love to take all the guns, but it's a fantasy at best.
2010: A GOP Hill
Hey Agent,
March 13, 2009 - 11:54 ET by SentryDanHey Agent, that's not exactly true. If the liberals can get an amendment passed and ratified by 3/4 of the states then that amendment becomes the law of the land until it is repealed. And that has only happened once to the best of my knowledge. If the liberals can keep control of congress and gain control of the state legislatures then "We the People" ar truly screwed.
Remember folks, Freedom isn't Free. It was bought with the blood and sacrifice of the men and women who are serving and who have served in the U.S. Armed Forces.
For those who fought for it, Freedom has a flavor that the protected will never know.
Also remember folks, that the way to SUPPORT THE TROOPS is to support their mission. Anyone who says that they support the troops but don't support their mission is lying about supporting the troops. And if you want to know, yes I do have a dog in the fight, he is a United States Marine.
Like alcohol?
March 13, 2009 - 12:23 ET by CobraManThat would work as well as the Constitutional ban (18th Amendment, anyone?) on Alcohol did. In other words, it won't work at all.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court
Hey Cobra, yes ...
March 13, 2009 - 12:36 ET by SentryDanHey Cobra, yes the 18th Amendment was repealed by it took approximately 14 years for that to happen after cooler head prevailed.
I would be almost sure that if an amendment was passed to repeal the 2nd Amendment that liberal judges would up hold it. If it should happen, I don't think anything short of another Civil War or Revolution would change it.
Remember folks, Freedom isn't Free. It was bought with the blood and sacrifice of the men and women who are serving and who have served in the U.S. Armed Forces.
For those who fought for it, Freedom has a flavor that the protected will never know.
Also remember folks, that the way to SUPPORT THE TROOPS is to support their mission. Anyone who says that they support the troops but don't support their mission is lying about supporting the troops. And if you want to know, yes I do have a dog in the fight, he is a United States Marine.
Tell your kid I said THANKS!
March 14, 2009 - 10:08 ET by Willis_Leon_JohnsonIf I can't have guns, can I have some napalm please?
http://gjresult.com
I suppose....
March 13, 2009 - 11:53 ET by CaligulaI suppose that they want to eventually try to take them, but I'm thinking of a "bipartisian compromise". They can have them, pointy end first, one piece at a time, starting with the ammunition.
I always think its good to work with people, you know, to make sure everybody gets something in the end. I'm lovable that way.
Yes. All liberals want to
March 13, 2009 - 11:57 ET by Dan The Man 2Yes. All liberals want to take away our guns
But, I dont think they can do it until the greater majority of the population are brainwashed enough. So far it has not happened, but never say never. At the moment there are too many Americans who will not relinquish their firearms and other devices. But, with a marxist congress and President I wont rule anything out. In fact I would not rule out some obscure provision in any of teh last pieces of legislation.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
Once a larger segment of
March 13, 2009 - 11:58 ET by DJEddleOnce a larger segment of the population realizes he's not eligible for the presidency, he will need to have the public disarmed for his own good.
Thoughts on United States Citizenship
Luckily, I already knew about this fraud and won't need to worry about arming myself once the bans are in place.
Rational Liberty: Where Reason and Government Collide - The best website ever!
WHEN will the FOIA come through for us re: the locked up
March 13, 2009 - 12:15 ET by Cape Conservativebirth & education records??? After all, he is an elected official who couldn't have passed the first level of scrutiny if he had to answer under oath. Will all he has passed be undone when full disclosure is ever made??
I don't believe he is taking his presidential oath seriously - he is harming our country beyond comprehension...full steam ahead...hide the many little liberty take-aways in the thousand-page UNREAD bills that our Congressmen vote on without even knowing what is in them!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It is no dishonor to be in a minority in the cause of liberty and virtue. ~ Sam Adams
The birth certificate isn't
March 13, 2009 - 12:21 ET by DJEddleThe birth certificate isn't even necessary to prove he's not a "natural born citizen." All we need to do is understand the law as it is written. You should read the essay at the link I provided. The proof is in the writing.
Will it all be undone when the fraud is exposed and remedied? There's no telling. Such a scenario has never happened before in this country. We'll have to wait and see how it all plays out.
Rational Liberty: Where Reason and Government Collide - The best website ever!
You obviously didn't read
March 13, 2009 - 12:39 ET by NL207You obviously didn't read your own reference carefully.
It said that as long as the precedent set by United States v. Wong Kim Ark in 1898 remains in force, Obama will be regarded as a natural born citizen unless it can be shown that he was not born on US soil.
Your reference clearly argues this precedent is wrong, because the feudal notion of jus soli is explicitly rejected by US law, but, until overturned or repealed by statute, it remains the law.
No, I actually did read
March 13, 2009 - 13:01 ET by DJEddleNo, I actually did read it...and I wrote it. The Wong Kim Ark decision was not a precedent on "natural born" citizenship. Article II, Section I of the Constitution was not being debated - the 14th Amendment was. And the Court did not say Wong Kim Ark was a natural born citizen - they merely called him a "citizen of the United States."
Barack Obama's situation is different in many aspects and would need to be considered by the Court through different laws. No new statute would need to take effect in order to declare him constitutionally ineligible for the presidency. I will further explain this on my site by next week. Keep an eye out for it.
Rational Liberty: Where Reason and Government Collide - The best website ever!
I think you have to show
March 13, 2009 - 13:11 ET by NL207I think you have to show that his mother is not a citizen to exclude his citizenship on the gounds you are arguing. From a legal standpoint, she did not meet the tests of the 1961 legal statutes if Obama was born on foreign soil. If he was born here to a natural born citizen, as his mother plainly was, then he is a natural born citizen unless he renounces that status later.
I think you would do better to examine the actions of his mother when she married Lelo Soetoro. It appears that Soetoro adopted Obama in Indonesia coincident with his marriage to Stanley Ann Dunham. If this is in fact the case, then Obama became an Indonesian citizen by Indoesian law at that time. In effect, his mother and stepfather renounced his US citizenship. I do not see that Obama ever took any action to change this upon reaching age of majority if it was ever his desire to do so.
Liberalism =
March 13, 2009 - 11:59 ET by mattmLiberalism = Totalitarianism
Totalitarianism requires a disarmed citizenry.
It's just that simple.
Won't Happen
March 13, 2009 - 12:01 ET by rammingspeedTo Sentry Dan:
75% of Americans want the Second Amendment to remain. Over reach on that, and those Democratic majorities will disappear.
75% of Americans ...
March 13, 2009 - 12:05 ET by SentryDan75% of Americans may want the 2nd Amendment to stay, however, it is the state legislatures that have the final say in the matter. And if enough pressure is put on them, well you can guess what will happen.
Sorry to report, most people have forgotten what they learned in their civics classes.
Remember folks, Freedom isn't Free. It was bought with the blood and sacrifice of the men and women who are serving and who have served in the U.S. Armed Forces.
For those who fought for it, Freedom has a flavor that the protected will never know.
Also remember folks, that the way to SUPPORT THE TROOPS is to support their mission. Anyone who says that they support the troops but don't support their mission is lying about supporting the troops. And if you want to know, yes I do have a dog in the fight, he is a United States Marine.
Good evening Sentry
March 13, 2009 - 12:16 ET by cocodrieYou're right, but the democrats don't play by the rules, neither do their treasonous judges. They will try to bypass the law.
Jesus Loves You
The government will soon be coming for our guns
March 13, 2009 - 12:03 ET by R D HelmAfter all, gun ownership equals self-reliance and freedom.
Two things that will be verboten in the new Amerika.
-Dave
This coup has gone on long enough. The time to put it down is NOW.
RD, I tend ...
March 13, 2009 - 12:11 ET by SentryDanRD, I tend agree with you. Here is another little bit of news, for those who might not have heard it yet, Obama now says that the economy isn't as bad as first thought. He's been talking the economy down since last fall and probably before. Why all of a sudden the turn-around?
Simple, he wants the "We the People" to think that he, "the one", has turned things around. That couldn't be further from the truth.
Obama has lied to "We the People". Obama IS NOT an honorable man.
Remember folks, Freedom isn't Free. It was bought with the blood and sacrifice of the men and women who are serving and who have served in the U.S. Armed Forces.
For those who fought for it, Freedom has a flavor that the protected will never know.
Also remember folks, that the way to SUPPORT THE TROOPS is to support their mission. Anyone who says that they support the troops but don't support their mission is lying about supporting the troops. And if you want to know, yes I do have a dog in the fight, he is a United States Marine.
LOT OF FEAR
March 13, 2009 - 12:28 ET by MaytagThere must be a lot of worried gun owners out there I just ordered@ $600 worth of ammo and half is backordered . Last time I was in Sportsmans Warehouse in Green Bay the shelves were almost empty. The guys at the gun counter said obama was a shoein for salesman of the year. Many of the guys I know who voted for 'that one' are having serious buyers remorse.
May I have your address,
March 13, 2009 - 12:58 ET by IndyAdamMay I have your address, please, Sir, so that I may know where to confiscate your illegal explosive cartridges?
"O"
Timing
March 13, 2009 - 13:08 ET by MaytagThat is why I ordered them now. Before that one raises taxes on ammo or makes it illegal. It is only a matter of when not if they come after 'guns and ammo' hey, that would be a good name for a mag.
My Guns
March 13, 2009 - 13:27 ET by boomerconAfter 5 generations of soldiers, sailors, and outdoorsmen."From my cold dead hands".
Final word on the subject.
Ammo Information
March 13, 2009 - 14:22 ET by AnotherFedUpOneHeads up on this one folks.....recieved this the other day in an email, have NOT checked it out on snopes, but the website seems legit.
FYI
Here it comes folks, but I guess we knew it was coming! Please keepthis moving to everyone including those in other states. Ammunition Accountability LegislationIt has already started... Ammunition Accountability Legislation Remember how Obama said that he wasn't going to take your guns? Well, it seems that his allies in the anti-gun world have no problem with takingyour ammo!The bill that is being pushed in 18 states (including Illinois andIndiana ) requires all ammunition to be encoded by the manufacture a data baseof all ammunition sales. So they will know how much you buy and what calibers.
Nobody can sell any ammunition after June 30, 2009 unless the ammunition is coded... Any privately held uncoded ammunition must be destroyed by July 1,2011.
(Including hand loaded ammo.) They will also charge a .05 cent tax onevery round so 20 every box of ammo you buy will go up at least $2.50 or more! If they can deprive you of ammo they do not need to take your gun!
This legislation is currently pending in 18 states: Alabama, Arizona,California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland,Mississippi, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, SouthCarolina, Tennessee, and Washington.
Send to your friends in these states AND fight to dissolve this BILL!!
To find more about the anti-gun group that is sponsoring this legislation and the specific legislation for each state, go to:
http://ammunitionaccountability.org/Legislation.htm
Heck with snopes... here's
March 14, 2009 - 09:25 ET by dmntd1Heck with snopes... here's from the Illinois State Rifle Association (bold mine):
"Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy." - Winston Churchill
Fear the goverment that
March 13, 2009 - 12:51 ET by GlennFear the goverment that fears your guns......
To be fair, there are a lot
March 13, 2009 - 13:02 ET by Ruths husband BenTo be fair, there are a lot of liberals who believe in gun rights. They just aren't running the party right now.
Obama: "The Fresh Prince of Bill Ayers." -Ed Mahmoud
A Loaded Gun Can Sit...
March 13, 2009 - 13:29 ET by Wildcatter1980...on a table for years and not kill anyone, nor will it discharge for that matter. But, a person can pick it up and kill someone in just a few seconds.
The point is that all limiting guns accomplishes is slowing the rate at which one person can kill another but it will not stop that person from killing the other it that is what the first person wants to do!
The limits on gun ownership also will not stop nor hardly slow the illegal keeping and use of guns. What will happen is that it will be only the government and the bad guys who will have guns!
Therefore, the motivations behind limiting guns must be something else. I, for one, believe a motive behind limiting or banning guns is to increase the power and control that government has over the individual.
--
In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. From time to time we've been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people. Well, if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else? All of us together, in and out of government, must bear the burden. The solutions we seek must be equitable, with no one group singled out to pay a higher price. - Ronald Reagan from his first inaugural address
The government will soon be coming for our guns
March 13, 2009 - 13:30 ET by RD KingYou summed it up pretty good R D. I would agree with you, but while I might share just a little bit of my weapons with the new civilian corp I dont intend to hand hand any over.
You people sound crazy
March 13, 2009 - 14:36 ET by ImAllRightHonestly, the majority of you are as looney toones crazy as the lefty doofs are. We're going to have to start calling this site DailyNewsbusters if you all keep the paranoia at its current level.
Obama isnt dumb regardless of what most of you say; he is calculating and smarter than everyone here including myself. He knows better, and he also knows where the line is.
The last thing he wants is some kook ranting about his deer rifle being confiscated.
Your guns will be fine (why you'd need more than 2 or 3 is beyond me anyway, I have a 9mm for protection that I keep in the closet and a rifle for the occasional hunt with longtime friends). - I also have my grandfather's WWII pistol but that's out of use anyway.
Assault weapons SHOULD only be used by our troops as I have witnessed far too many people that have ZERO clue how to use them and cause plenty of close calls with their stupidity. - Those, yes, say goodbye to them.
Anyone that ain't a Marine couldn't possibly have had the training to deal with one (that's a joke people).
but your weapons will be fine. I doubt Obama will even broach the subject of guns during the duration of his presidency, outside of banning assault weapons.
Quit being so paranoid, jeesh.
"Democracy is worth dying for, because it's the most deeply honorable form of government ever devised by man." - Ronald Reagan
You're ruining their
March 13, 2009 - 14:40 ET by balboaYou're ruining their preparation for The Great War. I imagine compound construction has gone up in the last couple of months, along with barb wire sales, survival gear, and blueprints for perimeters.
"You people"
March 13, 2009 - 14:49 ET by Jimbo"You people sound crazy".
Who are you referring to? I find that most folks who use the term "you people" are elitist, bigoted, or both.
"The last thing he wants is some kook ranting about his deer rifle being confiscated."
Face it. You don't like guns. You don't like people who own guns. And I don't buy your story about owning your own.
Look up, and you may see a point
March 14, 2009 - 04:26 ET by ImAllRight"You people" has nothing to do with any of the adjectives you decided to use.
In this case, it means those so paranoid that they actually fear that all guns will be banned. That will never happen..."you people" still sound way too paranoid if you think that's plausible. We will always have guns in this country, its part of who we are and what the country was founded with the help of.
Don't buy my "story" about guns. I could care less. I'm fine with guns, for 6 years I carried the M16(A2) for my occupation. - Many moons ago.
What I don't like is people that are ill trained to handle very powerful weapons doing just that.
"Democracy is worth dying for, because it's the most deeply honorable form of government ever devised by man." - Ronald Reagan
Damn it!
March 14, 2009 - 04:49 ET by RowaneThe Second Amendment is NOT about hunting!
It's in the definition
March 15, 2009 - 02:20 ET by pagg30Since you did carry an M16 for 6 years, thank you by the way, you know that there is a vast difference between the M16 and the AR-15. Semi-automatic fire vs Full Automatic fire which should be the ONLY deciding factor to classify a firearm as an Assault weapon. But since we have lawyers writing laws about things that they are clearly unexperienced in we get our current, and i say current because i live in NY, assault weapons ban. Yes, NY in it's infinitesimal wisdom decided to adapt the Biden written legislation for good. So we have outlawed adjustable shoulder stocks, vertical forearm handles, flash suppressors, oh and best of all - bayonet lugs. I thank the lord Joe Biden had the good sense to include bayonets in his 'classification' of an assault weapon. God only knows how many lives have been spared because of that pearl of wisdom. We have a long list of banned weapons because of how they look not what they are capable of. The only thing the ban did successfully was drive their value up. Also, if you purchase a pistol you are required to file 2 fired shell casings with the State Police for balistics. This has cost NY a million a year so far and has produced nothing. Once again "We have to do something." resulting in nothing.
But we're missing the point, as most of you know, gun laws do NOTHING to stop crimes. The fact is the towns with the toughest gun laws have the highest crime rates and the towns with the most carry permits have the lowest.
"Assault weapons SHOULD
March 13, 2009 - 15:42 ET by NL207"Assault weapons SHOULD only be used by our troops as I have witnessed far too many people that have ZERO clue how to use them and cause plenty of close calls with their stupidity. - Those, yes, say goodbye to them."
Every veteran trained after 1970 knows how to use an assault rifle. Some of us also know how to use an M1 Garrand and the M3 or M14. There is zero difference in effect between the semi-auto versions of the AR-15, AK-47 or SKS and the M1 Garrand excepting the M1 will pierce rather substantial armor with full load cartridges.
The intent of the 2nd Amendment was to place in the hands of the ordinary citizen the standard small arm of the military. In 1788, that was a muzzle loading musket. Today in the US, it is the M-16. The stated purpose of this placement was so the citizenry could protect itself against our own government, which the founders viewed as the greatest threat to liberty in this land.
Lo and Behold, 200+ years later, we see the founders were right.
NL... "The stated
March 13, 2009 - 20:23 ET by celatorNL...
"The stated purpose of this placement was so the citizenry could protect
itself against our own government, which the founders viewed as the
greatest threat to liberty in this land."
Yes! In fact, the first four Amendments were established to protect citizens from the government's intrusion into our God-given rights.
The Government cannot give to anybody anything which the government does not first take from somebody else. Dr. Adrian Rogers
What's crazy...
March 13, 2009 - 15:56 ET by 911isbusy"Obama isnt dumb regardless of what most of you say; he is calculating and smarter than everyone here including myself."
You've got to be in your teens. Quick, what state is closer to Kentucky: Illinois or Arkansas? Don't feel bad if you don't know - Obama doesn't either, but then, like you wrote, he is smarter than you.
"Your guns will be fine (why you'd need more than 2 or 3 is beyond me anyway)"
We're not as paranoid as you are naive (goes with being a teen). So in a free society we should only have what we "need"? Who decides what we "need"? What if Obama says you only "need" one pair of shoes?
"Assault weapons SHOULD only be used by our troops as I have witnessed far too many people that have ZERO clue how to use them and cause plenty of close calls with their stupidity."
Look who's stupid. "Assault" rifles are no different in function than any other rifle. The only things that distinguish an "assault" rifle from a regular one are the cosmetics. So how are collapsible stocks, pistol grips, flash suppressors, bayonet mounts, a shorter barrel etc. creating the close calls you've seen? You DID see some close calls didn't you?
Those who have not swords can still die upon them.
Oh...soooo sorry to ruin your day
March 14, 2009 - 03:30 ET by ImAllRightLike I said earlier, regardless of what you'll say, one guy got to be President of the United States while the other two bicker over just which guns will Americans no longer be able to legally own on some web chat forum.
Obama has the most limited qualifications of any POTUS ever...but he got there... and no fool is capable of that. - And yes, he is much smarter than I am, and far smarter than yourself...quick, tell me the capital of Guam...Don't feel bad if you don't know, I'm sure Obama doesn't either...and he still is POTUS, and you are a what??? - Hint: the answer is nobody.
and NO, I'm far beyond teen years, although those were great days so thanks for sparking some memories.
I just don't see why anyone not serving our country or the police,etc. would need an assault weapon. (Obviously this is a VERY broad word, I mean an infantry weapon here).
Unless that is you ARE preparing for war? - In which case, good luck with your trial for treason.
Yes, I've seen close calls. Put a high powered rifle in the hands of a not yet trained 20 year old while in basic and you'll see a few...unless you never served.
The last thing I'd want to see is the police outgunned by a terrorist that legally bought an M16A1 and decided to take it out for a spin. - THEY should be the one's outgunned, not those that put their lives on the line to protect us.
"Democracy is worth dying for, because it's the most deeply honorable form of government ever devised by man." - Ronald Reagan
More ignorance
March 14, 2009 - 08:29 ET by Sergeant ROCKYou sound like a true liberal, regardless of claims to the contrary. It's not for YOU to decide what kind of firearm I decide to own. In fact, I can own a machinegun if I like because my record is spotless and I can acquire the license for such a purchase. Well, until your buddy Obama and his puppet masters say otherwise. And while you may wring your hands over that scenario, be advised that as far as I know no crime has ever been committed by a licensed owner of such a weapon since the 1930's when the rules were enacted.
The only people that should be tried for treason are people like you that would cheer the dismantling of the Second Amendment. Your ignorance of what it stands for is astounding. Try doing some research of what the Founding Fathers said instead of what Sarah Brady said.
Oh.. some raghead is not going to waltz into a gun store and buy a select-fire M16A1 legally. If this is such a danger, why hasn't it happened? Any other scary scenarios you'd like to share to justify disarming the law-abiding?
Damn, you're dumb!!!
"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason
Come and get 'em then.
March 14, 2009 - 08:10 ET by Sergeant ROCKYeah, it's paranoia alright as we all know that liberals do not have a history of trying to disarm the law abiding - not!
I suppose that you need to be in charge of determining who needs a firearm and how many would be permissible? How liberal of you. If I want a 100 firearms - that's my right, doofuss.
More liberal claptrap. Assault rifles account for less than 1% of firearms-related deaths in the U.S. in any given year. You have zero facts to back YOUR irrational paranoia of 'assault' weapons.
What a bunch of liberal gobbledeegook... geesh!
"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason
why you'd need more
March 14, 2009 - 09:32 ET by dmntd1I went back and checked, and lo and behold, I was right! The first ten amendments to our Constitution were named the BILL OF RIGHTS. They were NOT named the BILL OF NEEDS.
Someone asked me why I had four guns. I replied simply "I have the right to own them". That's all there is to it.
Oh, and my friends frequently hunt coyotes with their AR15. It's their form of target practice.
"Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy." - Winston Churchill
Confusion
March 23, 2009 - 07:10 ET by Sergeant ROCKI think he confused a Karl Marx quote with the Bill of Rights.
You are, however, exactly right.
"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason
No, you aren't
March 14, 2009 - 20:08 ET by UpNorthall right. Under the proposals out there, is the so-called Assault Weapons Ban. That includes my Remington 30-06, model 742, because it has a 5 round, detachable magazine. That makes it an assault weapon in Eric Holder's eyes. Ditto my S&W Model 39-2, S&W .40cal semi-auto pistol, and my Springfield Armory .45 ACP pistol, because they have "high capacity magazines". The only "safe" guns are my muzzle loader and Mauser, because it's a bolt action rifle with a fixed magazine. As to why I have more than "2 or 3", it's because I have that right.
Remember folks -- President
March 13, 2009 - 14:51 ET by Jack BauerRemember folks -- President Obama's duplicity can only work effectively with dupes.
The clock on guns is runnin out.....
March 13, 2009 - 15:08 ET by HillbillyKingHere is AG Holder's thoughts on the D.C. ban (he signed this amici in FAVOR of the D.C. gun ban)
BRIEF FOR FORMER DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OFFICIALS AS AMICI CURIAE SUPPORTING PETITIONERS
Here's the entire case....
Heller v/s D.C.
Remember this is how the THEY {oh, I know the mysterious "they", but "they" really do exisit ;-) } THINK! If we remain passive, our rights, including the 2nd amendment, will be destroyed.
Please remember the 2nd amendment was saved by a 5 to 4 vote. If the judges change what happens then?
If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you.
Don Marquis 1878-1937
Holder is a public enemy.
March 13, 2009 - 15:25 ET by NL207Holder is a public enemy. He should be removed.
NL...and all... Here is
March 13, 2009 - 15:40 ET by bigtimerNL...and all...
Here is what else Public Enemy No#1or #2, depending on how you look at it, just did...
Lock and Load folks...keep your powder dry!
When are people going to wake the heck UP!
Obami can crap in one hand
March 13, 2009 - 15:50 ET by ConservativeRexObami can crap in one hand and wait for my gun in the other and see what fills up first.
Of course, they can try to take our weapons.
For a gun to be an assault
March 13, 2009 - 17:12 ET by kbassFor a gun to be an assault rifle it has to have the ability to be fired full auto and semi auto. If it only fires semi auto no matter what it looks like it is NOT AN ASSAULT RIFLE!
Yes, the Government wants all guns..
March 13, 2009 - 17:09 ET by blueridgerand knives and any weapon that could be used to oppose them.
The Constitution is clear on this matter, the SCOTUS has just ruled on our individual right in this matter, and for me, it ends right here - right now. Jefferson (to paraphrase) said any law without Constitutional authority is in-valid and not to be obeyed. I will not give up any more of my God given and Constitutionally protected rights.
End of my story. God bless our American Republic!
Appleseed Project
March 13, 2009 - 18:08 ET by FALalleujahFolks if you own a rifle and have a desire to learn to shoot better and hear some history please come to an Appleseed this year. What is Appleseed? Appleseed is a combo American Heritage and rifle marksmanship program put on by volunteers from the Revolutionary War Veteran Association, A 501.3c non for profit group. Attendees learn the fundamentals of rifle marksmanship, safety and most importantly the historical events of April 19th 1775, the date when marksmanship met history. These are family friendly events and are offered FREE to Women, Children under 21 and anyone in the active military. Most of the course of fire is done at 25m on simulated targets out to 400 yrds so a simple .22 rifle is perfect !
For more information go to : www.appleseedinfo.or...
For the 2009 schedule go to here: www.appleseedinfo.org/as_schedule.htm
Please find the time to go......not only is it fun but you'll learn a ton there is not a better course in all of the land !
I don't expect a frontal
March 13, 2009 - 18:20 ET by alamojbI don't expect a frontal assault on gun rights, but a much more dangerous, slow erosion of rights and efforts to lower the availability of guns and ammo through "sensible" regulation.
But I could be wrong.
Just as they are SNEAKING in all their little wishes like
March 14, 2009 - 10:31 ET by Cape Conservativehealth care in the Stimulus - who reads that stuff anyhow! Daschle wrote a book saying that is the only way to get universal healthcare going - Hillary's method bombed bigtime...the SNEAKS IN CHARGE are destroying America!
It is no dishonor to be in a minority in the cause of liberty and virtue. ~ Sam Adams
Alamo
March 13, 2009 - 20:05 ET by RESTLESS 1That won't work in Texas though. Hell, even the majority of dimwits...uh...I mean democrats here have a Lone Star in one hand and a rifle in the other. Yeeee-Haaawwww!!!
"This
liberal would be all about socialize -- uh, uh, would be about
basically taking over and the government running all of your companies."-Maxine Waters 2008
yo
March 13, 2009 - 19:08 ET by owlpelletsUntil last year the only rifle I owned was a Ruger 10-22. However, I have been an avid birdhunter for forty years, using a Model 12 and an 870. This year, I have bought two bolt action rifles. I am sure I could safely and competently operate any so-calle "assault rifle" in about three minutes. I'm not alone. Anybody thinking we are a bunch of doofuses shooting our feet off would be well of minding their own business,
Don't blame me....I voted for Palin...
My Liberal Friends.....
March 13, 2009 - 20:17 ET by ScrapironI should have listened to my liberal friends:
They told me if I voted for McCain, the nation's hope would deteriorate, and sure enough there has been a 20 point drop in consumer confidence index since the election, reaching the a lower point than any time during the Bush administration.
They told me if I voted for McCain, the US would become more deeply embroiled in the Middle East, and sure enough tens of thousands of additional troops are scheduled to be deployed to Afghanistan.
They told me if I voted for McCain, that the economy would get worse and sure enough unemployment is approaching 8.8% and the new stimulus packages implemented recently have sent the stock market lower than at any time since 9-11.
They told me if I voted for McCain, we would see more 'crooks' in high ranking positions in Federal government and sure enough, several recent cabinet nominees and Senate appointments revealed resumes of bribery and tax fraud.
Well I ignored my Democrat friends in November and voted for McCain and they were right....all of their predictions have came true. Old, Retired and glad of it.
Author unknown (but 100% correct)
Scrapiron
March 13, 2009 - 20:24 ET by RESTLESS 1This is gold. They say that good comedy contains a grain of truth, but you have struck a vein here.
"This
liberal would be all about socialize -- uh, uh, would be about
basically taking over and the government running all of your companies."-Maxine Waters 2008
Weapon Availability
March 13, 2009 - 22:00 ET by rexdraconimOver the course of the history of this Nation, there have been elements of the population which has sought to undermine the Citizens last refuge of government control, the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
It is an obvious move for the leftists to make an effort to remove this Box of Political Action and Change, just like they are working to remove the other two.
In response to an earlier post, who waited until now to arm themselves and build their compound? Fool, all the "kooks" have been ready for...wait for it...GENERATIONS! I was thinking of adding a patio and some flower beds to my "compound" this summer.
When we will all learn that the government will not honor its contract (Constitution) with us? When will we all learn that to be "reasonable" and "compromising" for a false since of approval from the leftists has been our undoing? When we will learn that the leftists WILL NOT PLAY FAIR!?!?
Not trained to use assault weapons properly? I assure you that Ranger training is more than adequate. Nifty stuff about other things as well.
Folks are worried about their weapons and rights, as they should be. But consider this: even if the government manages complete confiscation or ammo inventory or whatever, do you think that there are no machinists left? That no one knows chemistry?
Do you think they will be able to ban sharp, pointy sticks?
A person armed with a sharp stick or a rock and a modicum of skill can access and utilize a fair supply of firearms and ammunition. This aquisition can be used to aquire more. It would take time, but if we don't get a hammerlock on the Communists in the White House, time is all we will have left.
Having your own arsenal is your right. It is wrong for the government to interfere with that. It is wrong for the government to do a lot of things.
But who stops them?
We have come to the precipice. The wilderness approaches once more. Keep your powder dry, use the Three Boxes of Political Change with Divine guidance and hard common sense. We have had a long run of good times. Bad times come around and it may be that time again.
The only true lethal weapon in the one between your ears; is it loaded?
"You can have Peace or you can have Freedom; just don't count on having both at the same time." - R.A.H
"I'll take the harsh reality of liberty over the illusion of security...everytime!" -me
A-Men!
March 14, 2009 - 04:59 ET by RowaneKeep preaching it like that and I'm gonna nominate you for board chaplin, Whoah!
2nd amendment
March 13, 2009 - 22:23 ET by afuelplans by Dems/Obummer.
It looks to me like guns will be taken away by forced purchase of personal/homeowners insurance, extremely high ammo/weapon prices, expensive registration/purchase and impediments, forced training with expensive charges, annual tax assesments icing on the cake will be tying all these new restricitions/expenses to Fed funding to States legislation.
Plan for the Worst and hope for the Best....
PS: Scrapiron "RIGHT ON THE MONEY". Excellent campaign line for 2010 & 2012, thanks.
No Representation in NorCal
!!!! ACTION ALERT Obama’s Gun Ban List Is Out ACTION ALERT !!!!
March 14, 2009 - 08:54 ET by Horizon3Obama’s Gun Ban List Is Out
CALL FAX EMAIL OR SNAIL MAIL YOUR REPS NOW AND STOP HR 45 IN IT'S TRACKS !!
March 13, 2009
Here it is, folks, and it is bad news. The framework for legislation is always laid, and the Democrats have the votes to pass anything they want to impose upon us. They really do not believe you need anything more than a brick to defend your home and family. Look at the list and see how many you own. Remember, it is registration, then confiscation. It has happened in the UK, in Australia, in Europe, in China, and what they have found is that for some reason the criminals do not turn in their weapons, but will know that you did.
Remember, the first step in establishing a dictatorship is to disarm the citizens.
Gun-ban list proposed. Slipping below the radar (or under the short-term memory cap), the Democrats have already leaked a gun-ban list, even under the Bush administration when they knew full well it had no chance of passage (HR 1022, 110th Congress). It serves as a framework for the new list the Brady’s plan to introduce shortly. I have an outline of the Brady’s current plans and targets of opportunity. It’s horrific. They’re going after the courts, regulatory agencies, firearms dealers and statutes in an all out effort to restrict we the people. They’ve made little mention of criminals. Now more than ever, attention to the entire Bill of Rights is critical. Gun bans will impact our freedoms under search and seizure, due process, confiscated property, states’ rights, free speech, right to assemble and more, in addition to the Second Amendment. The Democrats current gun-ban-list proposal (final list will be worse):
Rifles (or copies or duplicates):
M1 Carbine,
Sturm Ruger Mini-14,
AR-15,
Bushmaster XM15,
Armalite M15,
AR-10,
Thompson 1927,
Thompson M1;
AK,
AKM,
AKS,
AK-47,
AK-74,
ARM,
MAK90,
NHM 90,
NHM 91,
SA 85,
SA 93,
VEPR;
Olympic Arms PCR;
AR70,
Calico Liberty ,
Dragunov SVD Sniper Rifle or Dragunov SVU,
Fabrique National FN/FAL,
FN/LAR, or FNC,
Hi-Point20Carbine,
HK-91,
HK-93,
HK-94,
HK-PSG-1,
Thompson 1927 Commando,
Kel-Tec Sub Rifle;
Saiga,
SAR-8,
SAR-4800,
SKS with detachable magazine,
SLG 95,
SLR 95 or 96,
Steyr AU,
Tavor,
Uzi,
Galil and Uzi Sporter,
Galil Sporter, or Galil Sniper Rifle ( Galatz ).
Pistols (or copies or duplicates):
Calico M-110,
MAC-10,
MAC-11, or MPA3,
Olympic Arms OA,
TEC-9,
TEC-DC9,
TEC-22 Scorpion, or AB-10,
Uzi.
Shotguns (or copies or duplicates):
Armscor 30 BG,
SPAS 12 or LAW 12,
Striker 12,
Streetsweeper. Catch-all category (for anything missed or new designs):
A semiautomatic rifle that accepts a detachable magazine and has:
(i) a folding or telescoping stock,
(ii) a threaded barrel,
(iii) a pistol grip (which includes ANYTHING that can serve as a grip, see
below),
(iv) a forward grip; or a barrel shroud.
Any semiautomatic rifle with a fixed magazine that can accept more than
10 rounds (except tubular magazine .22 rim fire rifles).
A semiautomatic pistol that has the ability to accept a
detachable magazine, and has:
(i) a second pistol grip,
(ii) a threaded barrel,
(iii) a barrel shroud or
(iv) can accept a detachable magazine outside of the pistol grip, and
(v) a semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10
rounds.
A semiautomatic shotgun with:
(i) a folding or telescoping stock,
(ii) a pistol grip (see definition below),
(iii) the ability to accept a detachable magazine or a fixed magazine capacity
of more than 5 rounds, and
(iv) a shotgun with a revolving cylinder.
Frames or receivers for the above are included, along with conversion kits.
Attorney General gets carte blanche to ban guns at will: Under the proposal, the U.S. Attorney General can add any “semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General.”
Note that Obama’s pick for this office, Eric Holder, wrote a brief in the Heller case supporting the position that you have no right to have a working firearm in your own home. In making this determination, the bill says, “there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.” In plain English this means that ANY firearm ever obtained by federal officers or the military is not suitable for the public.
The last part is particularly clever, stating that a firearm doesn’t have a sporting purpose just because it can be used for sporting purpose — is that devious or what? And of course, “sporting purpose” is a rights infringement with no constitutional or historical support whatsoever, invented by domestic enemies of the right to keep and bear arms to further their cause of disarming the innocent.
<b>Federal Gun Bill Angers Alaskans</b>
A new gun proposal DC legislators are currently considering is under fire from Alaska lawmakers. It would require everyone who has a gun to get a license, or be considered a felon.
Two years ago Blair Holt was one of the many folks on a crowded Chicago bus. The teen was riding to high school when a teenage gunman looking for a rival gang member got onto the bus an opened fire, murdering Holt.
That is the motivation behind Rep. Bobby Rush, D-IL, "Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009." It would require every gun owner to get a license, and a be part of a national database. Here in Alaska, our lawmakers and gun owners are calling the idea unconstitutional.
As business went on inside Wild West Guns the idea is making everyone mad.
"I think that's ridiculous," said Eagle River Gun Owner Lawrance Weeks.
Wild West Guns' Manager Ken Feinman added, "You know under this new legislation as proposed a lever action rifle like this one requires a federal license."
Under the proposal not having a license would mean if you had a gun you would be committing a felony.
"That basically means everybody in Alaska would have to have a federal license to posses a simple rifle or be a criminal," Feinman says.
The proposal's language goes further. Violators would also be a felon for giving a gun to another person who does not license.
Feinman says, "If I was to want to give this gun to my children as an inheritance they would have to have a license, and the government would have to approve it."
And, if your gun were stolen, it would be a felony not to report the theft within 72 hours.
Monday, Rep. John Harris, R-Valdez, introduced a resolution telling congress to back off, "And what were trying to do is say from Alaska we don't want to go down that road. So knock it off and deal with other issues that are more important."
In part, Alaska lawmakers believe parts of Rush's proposal, like not letting anyone under 18 possess a firearm, will not work in Alaska.
"Maybe if you're in the inner city of Chicago and you're thinking about gangs that might make sense to you," says Rep. Lindsay Holmes, D-Anchorage. "But when you're in Alaska and we want to teach our youngsters gun safety. And we want to teach them how to hunt and enjoy the great outdoors. I just thought that was symbolic of many parts of this resolution that I thought were out of step with Alaskans' values."
Harris' resolution passed out of committee Monday, and soon the full house will debate.
This is such a heated issue because of the implications. In Alaska there are no laws requiring gun owners to register the guns they buy, and no laws requiring licenses for ownership or conceal and carry. Although officers remind gun owners it's not legal to conceal and carry everywhere in AK.
Both Weeks and Feinman predict if the measure passes Alaskans will not follow the new restrictions.
"I believe in practice that people just wouldn't comply with it," Feinman says. "It would just create millions of criminals in the country. There's millions of law abiding gun owners that just wouldn't do it."
CALL FAX EMAIL OR SNAIL MAIL YOUR REPS NOW AND STOP HR 45 IN IT'S TRACKS !!
Source?
March 14, 2009 - 09:07 ET by PopularTechCarbon Dioxide (CO2) is Not Pollution
Morons
March 15, 2009 - 00:24 ET by UgottaBkiddinMeIt makes no sense to change a law because of one isolated crime. What makes them think any type of legislation will keep illegal weapons out of the hands of criminals? You can't legislate human behavior.....our overflowing prisons attest to that. There is no way to confiscate guns from over 300 million Americans. Do they want another Revolution? You can probably count on one hand the number of law abiding gun owners who have gone on random killing sprees. Liberals are just afraid we'll use 'em on them.
This was a gang related crime. You know what prevents kids from joining gangs? Having two parents committed to each other and their family. Something Liberals despise. I wonder what some of their kids are up to!
Obama's Attorney General
March 14, 2009 - 10:24 ET by Retired GeekEric Holder is antagonistic toward the Second Amendment right to bear arms, and had supported the Washington, D.C. ban on all hand-guns, even for self-defense in the home.
(That law was later found unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.)
Holder supports federal licensing of all handguns, three-day waiting periods, one gun per month purchase limits, national gun registration, and strict limits on gun shows that would effectively shut them down.
Going down....
March 15, 2009 - 00:27 ET by UgottaBkiddinMeTuck
Mr. Holder is as much an enemy of the USA as Resident oblahblahbinladen. He will be included in the group of guilty when the eligibility issue is resolved with each co-conspirator enjoying their new condo apartments in the FEMA prisons. That is, if the American public doesn't lynch them first. There are 10s of millions of American citizens who are PIST. Mr. Holder has all the evidence necessary to remove the Resident and prosecute him. Mr. Holder is also committing treason for not acting on this proof. He is an ENEMY of the American people!!!!! Pelosi, Ried, and numerous Senators/Congressman both Dem & Republican ARE going to answer to America for their crimes. Mark my words. See DefendOurFreedoms.us
Read the dossiers by Dr. Orly Taitz.
Obama Past History on Guns
March 14, 2009 - 10:26 ET by Retired GeekWhile serving as director of the Joyce Foundation board (1994-2001),
Obama gives millions of dollars to gun control organizations like the Council Against Handguns and the Violence Policy Center.
(Between 1994 and 2001, the Joyce Foundation gave $18.6 million to about 80 anti-gun and anti-Second Amendment projects, including $1.5 million to the Violence Policy Center.)
The Joyce Foundation is closely linked to the “Soros Open Society Institute,” which advocates a worldwide ban on civilian firearm ownership.
Obama Hides Hatred for Guns
March 14, 2009 - 10:27 ET by Retired GeekDuring his Illinois Senate career Obama votes four times against legislation that would allow a homeowner to use a firearm in defense of his home and family.
To avoid criticism of his anti-gun agenda, Obama enlists an organization known as the “American Hunters and Shooters Association” (AHSA) to distribute literature stating that he is “pro-Second Amendment.”
On its surface, the AHSA supports hunting, but it also supports strict gun controls on non-hunters.
(The AHSA is known to be a “sham” organization set up solely to endorse leftists who need political cover for their anti-gun leanings.)
Very interesting, rg! Thanks for enlightening us ;-)
March 14, 2009 - 10:34 ET by Cape ConservativeIt is no dishonor to be in a minority in the cause of liberty and virtue. ~ Sam Adams
Thanks for the info RG
March 14, 2009 - 16:21 ET by Dont_Like_TheBluesI wasn't aware of the existance of the AHSA. It's a good thing to know.
It sounds just like another lib "gun safety" organization with a 2-faced name (I don't recall the name). I was in San Francisco and got stuck walking downtown. There was some guy at a rally talking about how his own handgun "was of no use" to him when his jewelry store was robbed. He was shot with his own pistol because he didn't know where the safety was. The thugs grabbed the guys gun from his hands, flipped the safety and shot him.
He bought a handgun, loaded it once and never bothered to figure out how to use it. Somehow that guy was speaking at an anti-gun rally and was getting applauded. I feel sorry that he was shot (almost fatally). But he's using the typical "lib victim" philosophy. It's not his fault for never figuring out how to operate a simple revolver. Also the thugs are somehow victims of society,so the guns themselves must be at fault.
The crowd was very thick, it took me a while to escape the collective stupidity. It was a good example for me to see these folks up close and hear the twisted logic.
"The interests of [radical Facist] Muslims and the interests of the socialists coincide in the war against the crusaders[USA and all so-called infidels]."
Osama bin Laden - March 2003
Thanks for the info RG
March 14, 2009 - 16:23 ET by Dont_Like_TheBluesI wasn't aware of the existance of the AHSA. It's a good thing to know.
It sounds just like another lib "gun safety" organization with a 2-faced name (I don't recall the name). I was in San Francisco and got stuck walking downtown. There was some guy at a rally talking about how his own handgun "was of no use" to him when his jewelry store was robbed. He was shot with his own pistol because he didn't know where the safety was. The thugs grabbed the guys gun from his hands, flipped the safety and shot him.
He bought a handgun, loaded it once and never bothered to figure out how to use it. Somehow that guy was speaking at an anti-gun rally and was getting applauded. I feel sorry that he was shot (almost fatally). But he's using the typical "lib victim" philosophy. It's not his fault for never figuring out how to operate a simple revolver. Also the thugs are somehow victims of society,so the guns themselves must be at fault.
The crowd was very thick, it took me a while to escape the collective stupidity. It was a good example for me to see these folks up close and hear the twisted logic.
"The interests of [radical Facist] Muslims and the interests of the socialists coincide in the war against the crusaders[USA and all so-called infidels]."
Osama bin Laden - March 2003
I wonder why the MSM
March 15, 2009 - 08:40 ET by ThisnThatI wonder why the MSM doesn't report this?
___________________________________
The challenge is to follow a consistent plan despite inconsistent prices - Sarah Palin, State of the State of Alaska speech
only the begining
March 14, 2009 - 12:36 ET by foolnomorethis is what the lib'ers from (taxen'n your a$$) have been doing for a long time, sling shots & bows & arrows are next, thanks to the swimmer & flounder,an disbarred from be-corning you hill.
Gun Rights
March 14, 2009 - 13:05 ET by russellshihWhy do liberals and conservatives have such differing views on gun rights---could it be its because of where they live. Generally, a good case can be made for this. Conservatives tend to be concentrated in the rural areas while liberals are in the urban areas. The majority of gun violence is in the urban center, despite the fact that per capita gun ownership is greater in the rural areas. Let me say this, gun violence in the urban areas is a direct result of the large minority population living there--go ahead liberal and call be racist. Seems to be your only defense at times. Throw out then, the fact of the minority factor. More guns in the rural areas then should result in higher gun violence in those areas, but then thats not the case. Could it be that more guns means less gun violence---liberals certainly don't want to hear that. So what's their answer. I say this---people breed violence, not guns. And it seems, therefore that liberal areas breed more violence than conservative areas---why is this?
To answer your question of
March 14, 2009 - 17:05 ET by jdawg2009To answer your question of why liberal areas appear more violent - just watch any liberal on the news. These are violent, hateful people. Couple that with a disdain for any kind of morality and the desire to be soft on crime, and voila, you have violent areas in charge by liberals. The truth is, liberalism kills.
Liberals and Gun laws
March 14, 2009 - 17:02 ET by jdawg2009Simple truth is that liberals hate guns in the hands of free Americans. Thier goal is to see to it that no American can legally own any kind of firearm, or failing that, see to it that no firearm can actually be used. As I recall, at the outset of the American Revolution, the British were on thier way to confiscate guns in the hands of the colonials and met with some resistance in a place called Concord. Hence the "shot heard round the world." Not to be an alarmist, but nothing surprises me these days and I would not be surprised to learn that the administration is going to find a backdoor way to make the 2nd Amendment worthless. God help this country if they try.
I keep trying to envision
March 14, 2009 - 17:09 ET by RR GOPI keep trying to envision how this is going to go down:
1. Excessively taxing or banning ammunition won't work as most people have already stocked up.
2. Making firearms harder to get won't work as most who want them already have them.
So, that leaves forcing a Gordon Kahl or Ruby Ridge type deal which would 'necessitate' more 'drastic measures' for the sake of 'national security.
Actually, the Feds have little to be afraid of. Most of those who have lots of ammunition do not have enough, nor the supply support the Feds/military/police have and would quickly go through their ammo in a firefight.
Also, such hotheads probably don't have gas masks, have no intelligence, no organization, no communications, little training, would be isolated, have no way to combat armored vehicles/aircraft, would have no hope of reinforcement, etc.
They would face highly-trained and supported SWAT and military special forces, snipers, etc.
In fact, the Feds probably know who the most prepared ones are and could easily pick them up at Wal-Mart or at their jobs.
So, considering the above, I'm not 100% sure as to why the government would even bother.
Most of these folks are armed simply because they want to be prepared for a break down of law and order (such as it is) if the economic situation worsens, and are no threat to the government anyway.
One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 61% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory (yep...approval for Congress now at 39%...do you believe that!?).
actually, they do have something to worry about
March 14, 2009 - 21:52 ET by tonemeisterunlike the goons in obama's proposed "civilian defense force" .most of the police i know are ex-military and can read the constitution and the bill of rights. if they get orders that are clearly so out of bounds the gun grab "ain't gonna happen" simply the ratio of police to armed citizens is too great. in my state maybe 100 local police. maybe 50 state troopers. 15 local fbi . going knocking on the doors of nearly half a million people (locally) asking you to give up your lifeline in an emergency. the ratio of police to citizens only works when most (nearly all) citizens adhere to the laws. read solzhenitsyn in the gulag archipelago. how many of the kgb would be so eager to go out and arrest citizens who had done nothing wrong if they had to face a loaded pistol.you have to wonder what kind of person was elected where we even consider such talk after all, wasn't bush the new hitler? sarcasm alert....
Either controlling our
March 14, 2009 - 22:12 ET by Clear thinkerEither controlling our guns, or taking them away is his ultimate goal, but he has alot on his plate right now so expect it to be done in little bites by changing or making new laws. This you can bet on and win big money!
California Is A Wet Dream
Making Fun of AGW http://giovanniworld.wordpress.com/
He Can Try....
March 14, 2009 - 23:22 ET by UgottaBkiddinMeTuck
We'll see how effective his un-Constitutional plan is at July 4th's March on Washington when 10 million gun-owners show up waving their guns in the air!
UBM...I hope you are
March 14, 2009 - 23:34 ET by bigtimerUBM...
I hope you are right!
In fact...more than right...I hope millions more are in that crowd!
If you're going to mention
March 15, 2009 - 01:24 ET by dmntd1If you're going to mention a gun-rights rally in D.C., you are required to post a link so the rest of us gun-nuts can join :-)
I've been to the one in Illinois, and while it was my first, it won't be my last. The Dhimmicrats in our state General Assembly realized there were going to be some of us, and so they put all (or almost all) of the gun-laws up to a committee vote that MORNING. CCW was relegated to the "PUBLIC HEALTH" committee, and was tabled. It was the only committee they could guarantee it would be tabled in, due to the high number of Chicago Thugs present in that committee. The ammo-engraving bill passed out of committee, as did the million-dollar insurance policy to own a gun, and the criminalizing of the victim of firearm theft/loss.
"Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy." - Winston Churchill
Obama against Concealed Carry
March 15, 2009 - 08:19 ET by Retired GeekIn 2004, Obama says he is "…consistently on record and will continue to be on record as opposing concealed carry,” and that he would back "federal legislation that would ban citizens from carrying weapons, except for law enforcement.”
He also votes, in March, to allow prosecution of citizens who use guns for self-defense in their own homes (SB 2165).
Obama as State Senator in 2002-2003 against Guns
March 15, 2009 - 08:21 ET by Retired GeekObama votes for a bill in the Illinois Senate that would ban most hunting rifles, shotguns, and target rifles.
The bill would also authorize the Illinois State Police to raid homes and forcibly confiscate banned guns.
Obama also votes for a bill that would shut down all Illinois firearm manufacturing businesses (Springfield Armory, Armalite, Rock River Arms, and Les Baer).
Obama votes for a bill (S 2579) prohibiting Illinois citizens from purchasing more than one gun per month.
Obama votes for a bill that bans most single-shot and double-barreled shotguns as “semi-automatic assault weapons” (even though they are not semi-automatic), along with hundreds of models of rifles and handguns. (Had the bill had passed, Illinois residents would have had 90 days to turn their guns in or face felony charges.)
What I like about New
March 15, 2009 - 09:00 ET by ThisnThatWhat I like about New Hampshire is that it is illegal for the state to keep records on who bought guns. It can do a background check --- but then, after the gun is purchased, it has to delete any information that could be construed as "registration" info. See item #8 here regarding Permit to Purchase, Registration of Firearms, and Licensing of Owner.
New Hampshire residents will never have their guns confiscated.
___________________________________
The challenge is to follow a consistent plan despite inconsistent prices - Sarah Palin, State of the State of Alaska speech
Obama as US Senator in 2006 against Guns
March 15, 2009 - 08:23 ET by Retired GeekObama proposes legislation prohibiting gun stores from operating within five miles of a school or a park.
Inasmuch as most communities have schools and parks scattered widely throughout their areas, the legislation would effectively ban gun stores or force them to re-locate far from population centers.
Even if the courts were
March 15, 2009 - 16:09 ET by CrashEven if the courts were stacked in their favor, I don't see liberals taking away guns. I do however think it is entirely possible to regulate ammunition. This way they can create a black market, create an artificial crime (like the war on drugs) and toss us constitutionalists in the hoosegow.
"A man with an experience is never at the mercy of a man with an argument." Hilmar von Campe
I will go to the grave
March 15, 2009 - 17:59 ET by BlazerI will go to the grave with my 2nd amendment rights wholly intact. Either from a natural death from old age or by defending them with my lifeblood.
"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "
- Ben Kenobi on Liberals, and the MSM.
" The Cake is a lie."
Who could forget Richard Kiel in Happy Gilmore....
March 15, 2009 - 22:29 ET by Lord ErondHis T-shirt
"Guns don't kill people, I do"
"To sin by silence when we should protest, makes cowards of men" -Ella Wheeler Wilcox