Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Talk

Why should YOU join our Glock forum?

  • Converse with other Glock Enthusiasts
  • Learn about the latest hunting products
  • Becoming a member is FREE and EASY

If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.

guns in our future

Discussion in 'Gun-Control Issues' started by mc24, Nov 29, 2011.

  1. mc24


    Jan 30, 2011
    i was reading today in my nra magazine american rifleman an article that said if our current administration is re-elected in 2012, that by 2016 our right to carry and bear arms would be gone. what is your thoughts on this matter. i personally think there would be a riot if the govt tries to take our weapons.
  2. mrsurfboard

    mrsurfboard The Anti-Glock

    May 23, 2010
    I think in certain states that would be so. If the nationwide CC reciprocity should somehow pass, certain states (NJ, NY and others) would probably challenge it in court. If Obama's socialists control the court, you know they will side with the anti states and that will be that. I don't think we have to worry about an all out gun ban. It's not politically popular right now, no matter who controls the WH or SC.

    Last edited: Nov 29, 2011

  3. Jerry

    Jerry Staff Member Moderator Millennium Member

    Dec 21, 1998
    There was an E-mail going around recently about how many hunters there were in, I believe it was, Ohio. Something like 40,000. Now that’s just people that purchased hunting licenses not people that own firearms. The numbers of hunters in another state were also given and between the two the numbers were greater than those of the combined armed forces. That’s just “hunters”. I don’t believe the government will be trying an all out ban on firearms. The states got away with “may” issue CCW for quite a long time. That could possibly come back but it would be hard fought.
  4. 1gewehr


    Mar 22, 2006
    Mid TN
    Democrats are looking at losing control of the Senate next year. The House is already Republican, and some liberal Republicans will be leaving office at the end of their current term. We are likely to see the most gun-friendly Congress we have ever seen. Even if Obama is reelected, he will be a lame duck. The NRA has done this type of scare-mongering for 30 years. It is an effective tool for raising money.
  5. Acujeff


    Jan 1, 2000
    Boston, MA
    We were fortunate that 5 Supreme Court Justices in McDonald vs Chicago confirmed the Second Amendment as an individual right to armed self defense and must be applied to all levels of government. And, in case you forgot, we were fortunate that Bush and a pro-Second Amendment US Senate Republican majority appointed Alito and Roberts as Justices to make that pro-Second Amendment majority and obtain that opinion.

    However, the minority opinion by the other four Justices was that the Second Amendment:
    - did not protect a private right of armed self-defense
    - does not apply to the states
    - does not apply to individuals outside of the militia context

    If there were five, instead of four, anti-Second Amendment Justices the RKBA would have been effectively written out of the Bill of Rights.

    It could still happen.

    Anti-Second Amendment Justice Ginsberg has stated that the majority opinions in this case are “grievously mistaken” and that minority opinions would be used to rewrite legal history and create a purely “collective right connected to the militia”.

    Obama and the Democratic majority Senate appointed anti-Second Amendment Justices Sotomayor and Kagan (replacing Stevens). All they need is one more like minded Justice to get a majority of five anti’s and implement their stated agenda through the courts.

    Still trust Obama won't appoint another anti-RKBA Justice if he has the opportunity?

    It would be in our best interests to work to create enough of a pro-Second Amendment Senate in November that can block anymore anti-Second Amendment nominees. Sotomayor and Kagan pretended to be pro-Second Amendment so even the pro-Second Amendment Democrats (and RINOS) could confirm them and support the anti-Second Amendment Democrat leadership.

    In the long run, if we want to protect the Second Amendment, we need to get a Republican in the White House and a pro-RKBA Republican majority and leadership in the Senate.
  6. Jerry

    Jerry Staff Member Moderator Millennium Member

    Dec 21, 1998
    What people seem to forget is neither the Congress the Supreme Court nor the President run this country. The People do! It doesn’t make a rats backside what the Supreme Court says if The People don’t agree and show them where to shove their ‘minority” opinion.

    "The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." Thomas Jefferson :patriot:
  7. Acujeff


    Jan 1, 2000
    Boston, MA
    Four US Supreme Court Justices are now over the age of 70 and three of them will be over the age of 80 by the end of Obama's second term. He could likely appoint 3 more Justices if he is re-elected. An anti-gun Court would be free to re-define and dismantal the RKBA out of existence. The current anti-gun Justices have already stated their intention to do exactly that.

    In addition, Obama and a Democrat Senate would likely sign on to the UN global gun ban treaty and the OAS gun control treaty.

    In the very least, if Obama is re-elected, gun control will no longer be "under the radar" and we'd see more regulations and executive orders governing every aspect gun and ammo ownership and commerce.