Thread: Select-fire
View Single Post
Old January 8, 2010, 02:40 PM   #228
USAFNoDak
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 21, 2000
Location: Minnesota, Twin Cities
Posts: 1,076
TG:
Quote:
I understand your point and as I stated before it is part of the slippery slope fallacy to wit:


Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tennessee Gentleman
Political momentum: Once the government has passed this gun law it becomes easier to pass other gun laws, including laws like confiscation.
It does not follow.
Remember, we did have an assault weapons ban for 10 years. And polling seems to show that the public still supports a ban on "assault weapons". Thank God the anti's couldn't get enough support in congress to renew it. Lord knows the anti's such as Dianne Feinstein, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Chuck Schumer, and others tried. Even old "go along to get along" GW Bush said he'd sign an "Assault Weapons" bill if it came to his desk, though he probably knew he was in no danger of having to do so. The congress critters were still wary of how many democrats lost their seats for supporting the AWB in 94 and voting for it. Thus, I don't believe the slippery slope is non existent. We have managed to balance it for now, and we've even made some gains with more CCW states and Heller, though Heller is a luke warm victory in my opinion. We'll see what else it leads to. I'm hoping it leads to a slippery slope in the other direction for a change. We are always on a teeter totter when it comes to political issues. The balance can shift.

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by USAFNoDak
They need more justification.
Quote:
Which they find (as pointed out by 44 AMP above) by the crimes committed with those guns by drug gangs and insane mass shooters that worry the public. THAT is what drives them NOT the NFA or FOPA '86.
Yes, but they also use the NFA and FOPA 86 as pointed out by me, above, several times. They will use whatever they can to push their agenda. Crime, mass shootings, previous control, the collective rights theory, etc. That doesn't mean they are always successful. I've never claimed they have been 100% successful. However, they have had successes in the past, as in a 10 year AWB and the NFA and the Hughes amendment.

Quote:
Also, the Hughes Amendment was just a poison pill for the FOPA which contained a whole bunch of stuff (like FFLs being able to do gunshows) which the antis did not want. I don't think the antis really cared about FA other than they want them along with everything else banned and it certainly had no bearing on the NFA.
They may not have cared about FA, but that doesn't stop them from now using the issue in their attempts to ban SA. They will use the "perceived" ban on machine guns if they think it can help them. We've already seen Pete Stark and his merry men, plus the Bradys, do so.
__________________
"If you love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." Samuel Adams.
USAFNoDak is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.03280 seconds with 8 queries