Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Okie Corral' started by Restless28, Jan 13, 2013.
Incrementalism. Slippery slope.
IF it settles back down. It may be like sugar years ago. Sugar went up so everything that had sugar in it went up. Sugar went down and all the sugar related products stayed high and still are.
First, it's not compromise when one side gives up nothing. Giving up a demand Is not giving up something.
Second, what does any of this have to do with SH or gun violence?
To stop gun violence, you start with lenient judges and parole boards. No one should have a lengthy rap sheet.
One violent strike and you're out.
Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
My predictions for the recommendations to be made on tuesday:
Three things and all are for different purposes-
An assault weapons ban.... They will not pursue it with any vigor. It is only included to provoke the expected wailing and gnashing of teeth from gun owner and the NRA and then to be dropped as a show of compromise.
Ten round magazine restriction.... They will push for this one fairly hard, because they think they can sell it to the public as "reasonable" and because not going for it hard would be letting a good crisis go to waste. They honestly believe this might help.
Universal background checks..... This is the one they really want. There will be no compromise here. They want it and they are going to get it. It is backdoor registration because it will force a paper trail for every gun transfer going forward. Later they will find an excuse to push for centralizing all the data collected on the Form 4473. They want this for the future as a step towards disarming america. This will be part of the foundation laid down early that full registration will be built on.
There will be a couple of other things, better data sharing and collection for mental problems for example, but the meat of it is going to be the Universal background check.
They may or may not get the mag restriction, but if they don't you can bet they will bring it to a vote and use a vote against the bill to microtarget electioneering to paint those opposed as being in the pocket of the NRA and more concerned with keeping HIGH CAPACITY ASSAULT MAGAZINES available than protecting your children. There are voters who will be swayed by that.
I saw earlier someone post that we "could not expect to come out of this unscathed" and that we should accept background checks as the price of not having an assault weapons ban. To that I say WTF did any responsible gun owner do wrong! Accept nothing. Fight for every inch of ground. Write your elected officials. Join NRA or GOA. Make a donation if already a member. Talk to family and friends to see if you can get them involved.
A FREE PEOPLE CAN BE DISARMED IN THE FACE OF TYRANNY ONLY ONE TIME.
I exchanged a gun once. I bought a 50th anniversary Ruger single six that had a deep groove in the ejector rod shroud. They applied the finish over the defect and I didn't notice it when I bought it. I took it back and they exchanged it for another single six no questions asked.
Speaking of conspiracies and questionable activities of duly sworn LE officers, where's Hillary?
Are you a betting man?
I've sold two rifles lately without a background check, one of them to someone I just met. We need to pick our battles, and there needs to be some compromising or we are going to end up losing badly. There is no need for a registry, there is no need for gov to know what we own or are trying to sell. A simple authorization and complete the sale.
If we don't come to an agreement we are going to look like a bunch of freaks that don't trust anyone and that don't care at all about all the innocent people murdered.
Don't agree with me, fine, I understand. But most of you guys aren't 10 miles away from sandy hook, a day don't know half the crap that we are dealing with here. I'm sorry, but this is going to be offered, and I think it's something to consider over the alternatives.
posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
The only alternatives to "nothing" that I'd consider would be the repeal of '86, '68, and '34.
Whatever they do, I expect them to slip in a database keeping records of purchases. Be it by EO or sneaking it in another bill.
See below. Also, I probably should have said misguided instead of stupid. I'm not implying that you are stupid.
Expect ATF undercover sting buys, just like the DEA does with drug dealers.
I would take that. I dont think there are going to be any significant changes.
There's a lot of crap "all over the web". The latest thing today is that Walmart is no longer going to sell ammo.
I would hold off on the celebrations for at least bit longer.
I like the way you think.
I would be just as happy for the courts to one day discover that all of that legislation is incompatable with the phrase "shall not be infringed".
I hope you are right OP, but I disagree. I predict Biden will "recommend" everything you mentioned, but will also include the AWB and 10rd magazine limits.
Not that the two latter recommendations have any chance of passing Congress. He just has nothing to lose by including those in his talking points.
There are maybe 5 leading contenders for the 2016 dem nominations:
2. Joe Biden
3. Corey Booker
4. Davel Patrick
5. NY Gov. Cumo
Basically, the last 2 weeks have taken Biden and Cumo out, completely.
Obama was able to downplay his anti-second amendment stance during the campaigns in 2008 and 2012 because he had rarely taken a public stance, one way or the other. His statements on gun control were mostly boilerplate.
But now Biden and Cumo cannot walk back their positions.m
Meaning Hilldawg can become Mrs. 2nd Ammendment in 2016.
Bill Clinton made a state about the AWB a few days ago.
Hilldawg gets to say "I don't agree with my husband on everything and I support the 2nd Ammendment." Now she's earned points with two demos; to women she's a strong career woman who won't play 2nd fiddle to her husband; to gun owners she's the "reasonable" candidate.
Does she support the 2nd Ammendment? Don't be silly. But that's politics.
Agreed, and when the above has been in effect for some time, anyone in possession of a gun not in the national database will be subjected to intense pressure and the presumption of guilt.
A very slippery slope indeed.
So, there will be another big push in the aftermarket to buy used guns. Because no tracking them.
Hate to say it. But, those of us who have pistols or CPL/CCW's are already on the list of having guns. If they want them. They know you have some. So, they will come with a warrent for firearms. Unless you can bury them in the yard two doors down. It won't help you at all if they are in your house.
At least that is my thought. I'm on the list , more then once.
I am more than happy for you to voluntarily submit to a background check for each private transfer you are involved in. I am ok for you to demand one from anyone you are selling to in a private transaction. I not not interested in doing that, I don't plan to sell any guns, but I might transfer them to my future heirs. If I were to sell a gun, I would probably require they show me a state DL and CHL as a substitute.
I might even be OK if your state passed a law requiring a background check for all transfers in your state, if your citizens are willing to throw their own rights under the bis of appeasement over something(Sandy Hook) that would have been prevented by said law.
I am not interested in a federal law requiring such. We don't want that here in Texas.