The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old December 17, 2012, 12:27 AM   #26
BarryLee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 29, 2010
Location: The ATL (OTP)
Posts: 2,774
Quote:
Look for AR15's and the like to be moved to NFA status. That won't require legislation.

How do you figure?

NFA Title II firearms are specifically defined by law. The only major grey area is the "sporting purposes" test for shotguns with bore diameters over 1/2", but this does not encompass AR-type rifles.
Yes, but could this be the ultimate “compromise” that is reached in Washington concerning the proposed AWB? This way everyone “wins” as the items are still available, but obviously heavily regulated.
__________________
A major source of objection to a free economy is precisely that it ... gives people what they want instead of what a particular group thinks they ought to want. Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.
- Milton Friedman
BarryLee is offline  
Old December 17, 2012, 12:30 AM   #27
cslinger
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 14, 2002
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 953
....and in other news. Arabs hate Jews, water is wet, and the sky has been found to be blue.

Its what these folks do. Its a religion to them. For some them I honestly believe they are doing it for the right reasons, however misguided.
__________________
"Is there anyway I can write my local gun store off on my taxes as dependents?"
cslinger is offline  
Old December 17, 2012, 12:37 AM   #28
TennJed
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2010
Posts: 1,526
I know boards like these thread lightly on politics (which I agree with) but I would like to see some stickies for what we should do. Petitions to sign, politicians to contact, polls to vote on ect. I hope that I am not out if line for suggesting this and apologize if I am.
TennJed is offline  
Old December 17, 2012, 12:52 AM   #29
BarryLee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 29, 2010
Location: The ATL (OTP)
Posts: 2,774
Quote:
politicians to contact
Start with your Representative in the US House and the two US Senators from your state.
__________________
A major source of objection to a free economy is precisely that it ... gives people what they want instead of what a particular group thinks they ought to want. Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.
- Milton Friedman
BarryLee is offline  
Old December 17, 2012, 03:09 AM   #30
gc70
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 24, 2005
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,492
Some politicians will certainly try to use the tragedy in Connecticut to advance a gun control agenda. Although politicians may not have changed much since 1994, Americans have changed a lot with respect to gun control.

Yesterday, the New York Times reported the AR-15 as the most popular rifle in the US, with well over 3 million outstanding. Add to that number all of the other "assault weapons" covered by the former AWB and you have a substantial bloc of motivated citizens/voters today that did not exist to nearly the same extent in 1994.

FBI reports show that between November 30, 1998 and November 30, 2012 there were about 150 million NICS checks for direct firearms sales and permits. While nobody knows exactly how many individual gun owners those NICS checks represent, the number has to be in the tens of millions.

The 1994 AWB was a political miscalculation and politicians were subsequently spanked pretty hard by the electorate. With the growth in gun ownership since 1994, sweeping new gun control laws would result in a much larger voter response today. Politicians may not be the smartest or most trustworthy group of people in the country but, as a group, they are not prone to doing things that threaten their jobs.

Contact your members of Congress - there ARE enough of us to make the difference.
gc70 is offline  
Old December 17, 2012, 04:16 AM   #31
iraiam
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 6, 2012
Location: Lakewood, CO
Posts: 875
Feinstein has been introducing legislation like this for many years, 1000% ammo taxes, bans of various kinds. this is nothing new from her.
__________________
NRA Lifetime Member Since 1999

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few public officials." George Mason
iraiam is offline  
Old December 17, 2012, 05:49 AM   #32
FrankenMauser
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: 1B ID
Posts: 6,931
I've said it elsewhere. I'll say it here.

Donations to your preferred pro-gun groups are a good thing.

Taking action is better.

Spreading the word is even better.

Spreading the word, taking action, and making some donations will go even further.
(The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. / Lead by example. / Etc.)
__________________
"Such is the strange way that man works -- first he virtually destroys a species and then does everything in his power to restore it."
FrankenMauser is offline  
Old December 17, 2012, 07:33 AM   #33
M14fan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 26, 2006
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 775
NFA status

The president has already hinted that whatever steps he feels are necessary will come through executive order and he has certainly demonstrated that he is more than willing to use those.
__________________
"Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."
--George Washington
M14fan is offline  
Old December 17, 2012, 08:44 AM   #34
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by M14fan View Post
The president has already hinted that whatever steps he feels are necessary will come through executive order and he has certainly demonstrated that he is more than willing to use those.
Executive Orders have to be based on an existing law. He can't just invent anything he wants.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old December 17, 2012, 08:54 AM   #35
zincwarrior
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 1, 2011
Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex
Posts: 1,282
Quote:
Just heard on the radio (news) that Senator Feinstein from California is going to introduce a gun control bill very soon. This, with the help of a number of other congressional members.

I believe it is an assault weapons ban.

Told ya!
Its all over. This one will pass. It will make politicans look good. Nothing will be done about the continuing failure of our mental health system that is really causing this.
zincwarrior is offline  
Old December 17, 2012, 08:57 AM   #36
zincwarrior
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 1, 2011
Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex
Posts: 1,282
Quote:
Quote:
I think with the emotions running high after this most recent unspeakable act, the anti-gun proponents are going to have a shot at passing a bill...watered down or otherwise.

Well, I sincerely hope you are wrong. At the end of the day the politicians will have to answer to their constituents. I'm hoping.
I'd proffer their constituents have no problem with taking away rights. NYC can't even have large size drinks thanks to the nanny state.
zincwarrior is offline  
Old December 17, 2012, 08:59 AM   #37
BGutzman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 4, 2009
Location: Frozen Tundra
Posts: 2,414
Part of what is missed on many levels is where do our rights come from? Were did the founding fathers believe these rights they enumerated actually come from? The answer is they believed they came from the divine and were inalienable.

In other words the rights existed and have always existed. It may or may not be a statement of fact as to their origin but it is the very belief the nation was founded upon. In the core what I am getting at is I believe the founding fathers in general would have argued that although the Bill of Rights was changeable they felt the rights they spelled out were the essence of freedom.

Rights do not come from government, they have always existed. So in these words as I read them I also interpret that to mean that regardless of might be added these things were not to be eliminated...
__________________
Molon Labe
BGutzman is offline  
Old December 17, 2012, 09:06 AM   #38
zincwarrior
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 1, 2011
Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex
Posts: 1,282
Where they come from is irrelevant. They are only rights so long as you can protect them.
zincwarrior is offline  
Old December 17, 2012, 09:19 AM   #39
Xfire68
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 31, 2010
Location: Communist State of IL.
Posts: 1,428
Quote:
So in these words as I read them I also interpret that to mean that regardless of might
These rights should not be open for interpretation as it was written in plan English. You should not have to interpret nor should the courts. If we the people feel that any of these rights need to change or be added that is one thing but, not interpreted IMO.
__________________
NRA Life Member, SAF Member

www.aac300blackoutbrass.com A Veteran owned Business.
Xfire68 is offline  
Old December 17, 2012, 09:22 AM   #40
BGutzman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 4, 2009
Location: Frozen Tundra
Posts: 2,414
I'm sorry Zinc but where them came from is what makes them even more important.

The founding fathers knew what they laid out wasn't perfect and they allowed for changes to be made... But as I read it and understand what their thoughts were, was the things that are original to the Bill of Rights must exist and cannot be eliminated...

In the coming days I would not be surprised to see a push to change the 2A. There are lines of thought safety can only come when the government is the only entity that can legally bear arms... I disagree with these lines of thought. I think its important to try to spell out to people why we don't change any line of the Bill of Rights to create "Safety". This doesn't only speak to the 2A but the Freedom of Speech and the Freedom of Religion.

I'm am not even suggesting the votes exist out there to change the 2A, but as part of our interaction with our neighbors and friends it might be good to remind them were these things come from and why they are their. None of us here are immortal, it is important that part of our legacy to freedom that we inform future generations so they too can protect it and understand it.
__________________
Molon Labe

Last edited by BGutzman; December 17, 2012 at 09:39 AM.
BGutzman is offline  
Old December 17, 2012, 09:31 AM   #41
Strafer Gott
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 12, 2011
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 1,135
Address the real problems

This is a very early opinion, but in my view, the crime of enablement, allowing someone with deep mental issues access to weapons, happened first.
We can channel this ban energy to accomplish something meaningful in legislation, that actually makes the public safer, without alienating the lawful population of gun owners. Something along the lines of "Security of American Firearms Act". If you have a black gun, get a safe and lock it up, too.
Secure your weapons. Be responsible. Don't give the combination to impaired family members. Prevent loss from burglaries.
With great power comes great responsibility. This is very early, but it's where my thoughts lead me.
Strafer Gott is offline  
Old December 17, 2012, 09:31 AM   #42
BGutzman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 4, 2009
Location: Frozen Tundra
Posts: 2,414
Quote:
So in these words as I read them I also interpret that to mean that regardless of might
I am talking about interpreting the ideas of the founding fathers that led to the document, not actually the Bill of Rights itself. For myself I agree with you 100%.

I have however learned from others that legal language is different, I leave it to them to explain it. I'm not discrediting the explanations, nor our legal history. I'm just saying for myself, I see it as you do, but I understand the reality of history was different..
__________________
Molon Labe

Last edited by BGutzman; December 17, 2012 at 11:01 AM.
BGutzman is offline  
Old December 17, 2012, 09:32 AM   #43
Hal
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 9, 1998
Location: Ohio USA
Posts: 7,445
Quote:
Nothing will be done about the continuing failure of our mental health system that is really causing this.
Personally I disagree.
Obama's agenda from day one has been energy and health care.
I have no doubts he'd be happy to go along with any and all Democratic party sanctioned gun control, I believe his main focus will be to use the most recent tragedy to further push one of his "pet" agendas - health related issues.
Hal is offline  
Old December 17, 2012, 09:41 AM   #44
zukiphile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 1,655
Quote:
Fact is, there are as many Republicans as Democrats that might sign onto a new AWB bill.
Given history, that seems unlikely, but not pertinent. I would not say it is too early to contact members of the house and senate of both parties, just because we don't have text of a bill yet.
zukiphile is offline  
Old December 17, 2012, 10:01 AM   #45
Carry_24/7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 5, 2011
Posts: 798
@Al Norris; I appreciate the "Cut the party ranting" comment, as its just that. I am a lifetime Democrat, and a serious life-long gun-guy. I know and have worked with untold numbers of Republicans who are just as anti-gun as any of the big DEM names you can throw out there.

Stick with the issue rather than FOX News talking points.....attack the issue, not an entire voting block (how smart is that?). Believe me, I work it behind the scenes with my fellow Democrats, but do get frustrated when I see such comments from "supposed" gun advocates.

Republicans are not alone in this fight.



Marc
Carry_24/7 is offline  
Old December 17, 2012, 10:42 AM   #46
NJgunowner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2009
Location: NJ
Posts: 1,095
I agree with Tom, there are plenty of democrats who won't support this legislation along with plenty of republicans who will. It isn't a Republican vs Democrat issue.

I'll have to find the article again, but the real issue seems to be the doping of america's children. By that, I'm talking about the so called mood modifiers that are getting prescribed to children at a young age. Instead of recognizing and dealing with children's problems and teaching them how to cope, the schools and doctors are instead doping them up to mask the issues. If memory serves and the article was right, all of these mass school shooting have been committed by people who were doped up early in life to deal with "issues" instead of being taught how to cope with every day life.

Long story short, it's a society problem of masking mental health issues instead of fixing them. Not a gun control issue
__________________
Sig 1911 Traditional reverse two tone, Sig p226 .40, Sig 556 Swat patrol, Baby Eagle/jerico steel .45
NJgunowner is offline  
Old December 17, 2012, 11:01 AM   #47
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,800
I don't want to be political - sigh but I cite this as a risk to the RKBA.

It's the blah, blah sporting use argument:

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2...r-gun-control/

Here is a supposed gun rights advocate who immediately falls back on that mantra

Quote:
“I don’t know anybody in the sporting or hunting arena that goes out with an assault rifle,” Mr. Manchin said, speaking on the MSNBC program “Morning Joe.”
So you can support the Right to shoot ducks and bambi and that's it.

I have little respect for that. Last night, the wife and I drove home through a herd of the cutest little deer. About 15 of them, we just drifted through them slowly. Why should I care about a guy who wants to shoot them when he can eat tofu (actually I like tofu in the local Chinese restaurant - they have a great dish)?

So he's a sportsman and a hunter. Who gives a crap about that? That's not the purpose of the 2nd Amendment.

We elect unthinking idiots of all parties to our government. They only care about getting in office for their own greed, IMHO.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old December 17, 2012, 11:09 AM   #48
hogdogs
Staff In Memoriam
 
Join Date: October 31, 2007
Location: Western Florida panhandle
Posts: 11,069
Glenn, What I see worse about...
Quote:
“I don’t know anybody in the sporting or hunting arena that goes out with an assault rifle,” Mr. Manchin said, speaking on the MSNBC program “Morning Joe.”
...is that there are many who routinely hunt, and very well, with their AR's and other modern rifle designs also used in military type applications...

For them to say that either shows them to not really have the expertise to speak of sporting or hunting disciplines or he is a liar and knows these designs can make a right fine repeating hunting weapon...

PS... I just heard Rick Leventhal on FOX call the "Bushmaster" one of the most powerful rifles in America... Granny would laugh her self to death in the grave reflecting on her arguments with grampa regarding her .30-06 being so much more powerful than his little .30-30
Brent
hogdogs is offline  
Old December 17, 2012, 11:18 AM   #49
BarryLee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 29, 2010
Location: The ATL (OTP)
Posts: 2,774
Yes, I saw CNN Reporter Don Lemon today and he made the point that no one hunts with an AR 15. He went on to say that if they did they could not use the meat because the animal would be destroyed.

So, why would he say that? It can’t just be lack of knowledge it has to be part of a bigger planned offensive. Yes, I know tin foil hat stuff, but someone is feeding all these talking heads this false information that they are to intellectually lazy to research for themselves.
__________________
A major source of objection to a free economy is precisely that it ... gives people what they want instead of what a particular group thinks they ought to want. Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.
- Milton Friedman
BarryLee is offline  
Old December 17, 2012, 11:19 AM   #50
zukiphile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 1,655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glenn E. Meyer
It's the blah, blah sporting use argument:
That one annoys me too, but it is a smart way to argue a restriction of the right.

Principled defense of a right is literally abnormal. Normal people go about their lives and so long as someone doesn't bother them pretty directly, they don't worry about it much. This makes it easy for a fellow with a shotgun who only shoots a couple of geese a year to run for an illusory middle ground of banning almost everything else.

The NRA likes to tell us how many americans own firearms, but a lot of those people don't perceive their use as part of the same right as other peoples' uses. It is somewhat like the phenomenon of people supporting free speech rights for those with whom they agree. It is a natural but regrettable reflex, and arguments that play on that reflex work.
zukiphile is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.17733 seconds with 10 queries