Gun Control laws being introduced already

[fastpat]

Originally posted by MRM
Pat, I noticed the initial post came from the JFPFO. Isn't that David Gross' organization? Also with the Minutemen, etc. I used to work with him. He loaned me his side arm once when some gangbangers were coming in to retrieve property from the evidence room and I was going to be alone with them. Before he was fired for carrying. Fun times.

JPFO is Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership founded and headed by Aaron Zelman. I've been a member for over 10 years. It's the most aggressive pro-gun owner rights organization in America.

[tabs]

This is why I decided to buy a coupla black guns after the ban expired. There is at least one more I'd like to get ahold of before the Iron Curtain comes down. An Knights Armament SR25

[Flatbutt1]

Originally posted by stevepaa
I think I'll want until final laws are passed before reacting too much.

and then its to late. yes the child protection bits are vital but what happens when they attach riders to these laws that are intrusive and unrelated. snooze you lose?

[cashflyer]

Originally posted by tabs
This is why I decided to buy a coupla black guns after the ban expired.

http://yarchive.net/gun/long_term_storage.html

[tabs]

When the Peoples Repblic of Mexifornia outlawed the ownship of Black Guns, they Granfathered the ones allredy in peoples hands, even though by law one had to Register them. They had to extend the Drop Dead Date by several years because so few people were Registering them.

[fastpat]

Originally posted by tabs
When the Peoples Repblic of Mexifornia outlawed the ownship of Black Guns, they Granfathered the ones allredy in peoples hands, even though by law one had to Register them. They had to extend the Drop Dead Date by several years because so few people were Registering them.

As a matter of fact, fewer than 5% of the so-called assault weapons in CA were registered. The state government has no idea where they are.

Estimated assault weapons in CA: over 900,000; known registered weapons, about 40,000. My figures may be obsolete, many AR-15's have been assembled int he state and continue to be assembled there. The receivers were never outlawed, and can still be purchased today.

[cool_chick]

Ok, I wanted to clarify my point. I now have time to elaborate.

And especially to you, m21sniper

First, the comparison to Iraq is not applicable. The comparison to Iraq would be applicable if someone knocked our government out. The question would then be, could we defend ourselves against that army.

So the discussion involves the U.S. Government and if we could defend ourselves against them. First of all, be realistic, yes, we are outpowered. And we'd still be outpowered if they lifted every handgun restriction in the world. The only way we wouldn't be outpowered is if we were able to purchase the weapons they can, and yes, this includes a nuke. That question was applicable, was meant to demonstrate that yes, we are in fact outpowered. Additonally, nukes isn't the only type of weapon we cannot
purchase...

What can happen to us at the hands of the resident government (as it pertains to this discussion) is not similar to Iraq (we're not talking about our government being knocked out and the anarchy that ensues), we're talking about the potential of our government oppressing the people. This is more similar to that of a country such as China. Now........guns alone will not defend us against that oppression, the laws is what prevents that oppression.

Rebellion doesn't just suddenly "happen", it usually takes a person or two to lead the way. What Thom was saying was, if we continue to allow these restrictive laws on our rights, that person or two, then 3 then 4, etc., will be jailed so fast and "removed", there will be a quash of a rebellion...think of Tinjamin Square (sp)......and with their superior weaponry over the people, it's doomed. Guns are nice and I agree, we need less restrictions, but guns alone will not protect us, we have to stop these restrictive rights that have been passed.

We need both guns and people-protective freedoms. Handguns alone won't do it. Thom is right....and ya'll need to pay attention.

[Lothar]

Originally posted by cool_chick
Now........guns alone will not defend us against that oppression, the laws is what prevents that oppression.

First, let me say that your point is very well made. I agree that guns are not the first, best weapon against government oppression.

However, I disagree that the law is what prevents oppression. As FastPat points out, The constitutions of China and the former Soviet Union have similar sounding clauses regarding rights to property and habeas corpus.

In our case, it is the law that oppresses us. Law after law, passed by Congress, signed by Presidents and validated by activist courts, strip Americans of their constitutional protections. Only the Constitution can protect us from laws passed by evil or misguided legislators and executives. When the courts will not defend the Constitution and the protections it affords, people have few options to combat laws which infringe on their rights.

The next weapon against tyranny is the ballot. If elected politicians pursue the passage of laws which abridge the rights of the people, then those politicians must be removed. However, if the election process does not remain intact, i.e. dead people in Chicago vote three four and five times each election, then the ballot is also compromised.

Beyond that, I guess States can secede from the union or people will be taking up arms against what is essentially a dictatorship or totalitarian regime.

[m21sniper]

Originally posted by Jeff Higgins
For many of us, gun rights are the proverbial "canary in the mineshaft". When that canary dies, there is certainly bigger trouble on the way. Gun rights are a bellweather for how any one person, or group of people, feel about the broader spectrum of individual rights.

Dubya and company have absolutely ***** all over our individual rights in the name of this "war on terror". Myself, and obviously many others, decided to send them a message this last election and vote for the other guys. We saw a Democratic House and Senate as the long needed balance we were lacking; as a way to reign in the Republicans who had run amok.

I stated back then that this mid-term was important to those of us who had switched sides. It provides an opportunity to see, for just two years, if the Dems had learned their lesson on certain issues. Like gun control. Their recent actions have demonstrated beyond any shadow of a doubt that that leopard has not changed its spots. Gun control is near and dear to them; it is a lynch pin in their wished-for nanny state. It sure didn't take them long, did it? In one fell swoop, they have managed to lose the swing voters that got them in. In retrospect, that much should have been predictible.

While it is true that Dubya has trampled on our rights, I believe what he has done is more unique to his administration than intrinsic to his party. Therein lies the difference; Dubya was going against long standing Republican traditions and tendencies. The Dems are merely picking up where they left off. That leaves the Republicans, as a whole, arguably a lesser threat to our personal freedoms than the Dems. With two years left for the Dems to re-itterate that, 2008 should be a landslide. Especially if they choose Billary or Obama. They'll just never learn...

As usual Jeff, i agree, and well put sir.

Lothar: I wouldnt say the second amendment is our "first defense against tyranny" either, but as Jefferson put it, "The right to bear arms is the keystone upon which all other rights are built."

It's the "teeth" in the bill of Rights. We'd be wise not to let the gov't(or anyone) pull said teeth. The 2nd Amendment is our last line of defense...

[Mr_Wizard]

Who said it?

"You have the right to bear arms, you have the right to arm bears, what ever the hell you want to do!"

[widebody911]

There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."

-Ed Howdershelt

[id10t]

"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."

[widebody911]

Originally posted by id10t
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."

Missed it by that much, 99!

[id10t]

Yeah, see, I had to go searching for the actual quote... saw it as a slashdot sig a while back