Gun Ban

R

RL Weikart

Member
Forward or send to every gun owner you know.....
> >>
> >> Gun Law Update by Alan Korwin,
> >> Author Gun Laws of America
> >>
> >> Gun-ban list proposed
> >>
> >> Slipping below the radar (or under the short-term memory cap), the
> >> Democrats
> >> have already leaked a gun-ban list, even under the Bush administration
> >> when
> >> they knew full well it had no chance of passage (HR 1022, 110th
> >> Congress).
> >> 0AIt serves as a framework for the new list the Brady's plan to
introduce
> >> shortly.
> >>
> >> I have an outline of the Brady's current plans and targets of
> >> opportunity,
> >> It's horrific. They're going after the courts, regulatory agencies,
> >> firearms
> >> dealers and statutes in an all out effort to restrict we the people.
> >> They've
> >> made little mention of criminals.
> >>
> >> Now more than ever, attention to the entire Bill of Rights is critical.
> >> Gun
> >> bans will impact our freedoms under search and seizure, due process,
> >> confiscated property, states' rights, free speech, right to assemble
and
> >> more, in addition to the Second Amendment.
> >>
> >> The Democrats current gun-ban-list proposal (final list will be worse):
> >>
> >> Rifles (or copies or duplicates):
> >>
> >> M1 Carbine, Sturm Ruger Mini-14, AR-15, Bushmaster XM15, Armalite M15,
> >> AR-10, Thompson 1927, Thompson M1; AK, AKM, AKS, AK-47, AK-74, ARM,
> >> MAK90,
> >> NHM 90, NHM 91, SA 85, SA 93, VEPR; Olympic Arms PCR; AR70, Calico
> >> Liberty,
> >> Dragunov SVD Sniper Rifle or Dragunov SVU, Fabrique National FN/FAL,
> >> FN/LAR,
> >>
> >> or FNC, Hi-Point Carbine, HK-91, HK-93, HK-94, HK-PSG-1, Thompson 1927
> >> Commando, Kel-Tec Sub Rifle; Saiga, SAR-8, SAR-4800, SKS with
detachable
> >> magazine, SLG 95, SLR
> >> 95 or 96, Steyr AU, Tavor, Uzi, Galil and Uzi Sporter, Galil Sporter,
or
> >> Galil Sniper Rifle (Galatz).
> >>
> >> Pistols (or copies or duplicates):
> >>
> >> Calico M-110, MAC-10, MAC-11, or MPA3, Olympic Arms OA, TEC-9, TEC-DC9,
> >> TEC-22 Scorpion, or AB-10, U zi.
> >>
> >> Shotguns (or copies or duplicates):
> >>
> >> Armscor 30 BG, SPAS 12 or LAW 12, Striker 12, Streetsweeper.
> >>
> >> Catch-all category (for anything missed or new designs):
> >>
> >> A semiautomatic rifle that accepts a detachable magazine and has (i) a
> >> folding or telescoping stock, (ii) a threaded barrel, (iii) a pistol
grip
> >> (which includes ANYTHING that can serve as a grip, see below), (iv) a
> >> forward grip; or a barrel shroud.
> >>
> >> Any semiautomatic rifle with a fixed magazine that can accept more than
> >> 10
> >> rounds (except tubular magazine .22 rimfire rifles).
> >>
> >> A semiautomatic pistol that has the ability to accept a detachable
> >> magazine,
> >>
> >> and has (i) a second pistol grip, (ii) a threaded barrel, (iii) a
barrel
> >> shroud or (iv) can accept a detachable magazine outside of the pistol
> >> grip,
> >> and (v) a semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that can accept
more
> >> than 10 rounds.
> >>
> >> A semiautomatic shotgun with (i) a folding or telescoping stock, (ii) a
> >> pistol grip (see definition below), (iii) the ability to accept a
> >> detachable
> >>
> >> magazine or a fixed magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds, and (iv) a
> >> shotgun with a revolving cylinder.
> >>
> >> Frames or receivers for the above are included, along with conversion
> >> kits.
> >>
> >> Attorney General gets carte blanche to ban guns at will:
> >>
> >> Under the proposal, the U.S. Attorney General can add any
"semiautomatic
> >> rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement
> >> use,20or
> >>
> >> a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not
particularly
> >> suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General."
> >> Note
> >>
> >> that Obama's pick for this office (Eric Holder, confirmation hearing
set
> >> for
> >>
> >> Jan. 15) wrote a brief in the Heller case supporting the position that
> >> you
> >> have no right to have a working firearm in your own home.
> >>
> >> In making this determination, the bill says, "there shall be a
rebuttable
> >> presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States
military
> >> or
> >>
> >> any federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for
> >> sporting
> >>
> >> purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly
> >> suitable
> >> for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in
a
> >> sporting event."
> >>
> >> In plain English this means that ANY firearm ever obtained by federal
> >> officers or the military is not suitable for the public.
> >>
> >> The last part is particularly clever, stating that a firearm doesn't
have
> >> a
> >> sporting purpose just because it can be used for sporting purpose -- is
> >> that
> >>
> >> devious or what? And of course, "sporting purpose" is a rights
> >> infringement
> >> with no constitutional or historical support whatsoever, invented by
> >> domestic enemies of the right to keep and bear arms to further their
> >> cause
> >> of disarming the innocent.
> >>
> >> Respectfully submitted, Alan Korwin, Author Gun Laws of America
> >> http://www.gunl aws.com/gloa.htm
> >>
> >> Foward or send to every gun owner you know.....
>
>:mad:
 
Weikart ...

This is the Centerfire Benchrest Forum. This material is best placed in the General Discussion Forum.
 
gun ban

This is a perfectly valid posting.
All forums should get the latest update.
First they start with the semi auto then what's next?
Sniper rifles ? Any thing that has exceptional accuracy?
A lot of trap shooters in our club say , they don't care about my shotgun.
Guess again. this is just the begining.
Join the NRA . the firearm you save may be your own.
 
BR rifles are inoffensive, probably safe from the government. Politics have no place in the BR community. We should trust our elected officials to do what is right, after all that is why we elected them.
Bob
 
Bob,
Do you think they really care??? One top anti-gunner (can't remember who) said a few years ago, that people don't need a rifle that can shoot under 6" at one hundred yards..... They'll tell you that they don't care about this or that....until.....

But the 2nd admendment as written....isn't there to protect or hunting or recreational firearm, it's there to protect Offensive weapons. That's it's whole purpose. The founding fathers knew that if it became necessary for the people to rise up and throw out the goverment with force. That it would need the proper military weapons to do so. I hear people say all the time....well the founding fathers couldn't imagine the state of the art weapons we have today. Well, that's why they made the 2nd vague and didn't say "Your flintlock". Their weapons were state of the art then and the ones a hundred years from now will make our state of the art look like flintlocks to them. It has to be remembered that they knew the people would have to have ownership and access to the vary arms it takes to fight back. The goverments limiting or removal of the 2nd admendment was specifically designed to be a trigger mechanism for the people to realize that their goverment is trying to suppress them.

Hovis
 
The 2nd amendment

to our Constitution, as I read history and the writing of that document, was placed there for one reason and one reason ONLY! -- that being to protect us, the citizens, FROM our government.

Remember, the saying: "An armed person is a citizen. An unarmed citizen is a subject." I firmly believe that.

Bob, your "probably" bothers me. Ask the citizens of Great Britian and Australia about the safety of "probablies".


... just my $0.02

Glen
 
Bob, I am from Canada.
Those like you are the reason we have a gun registry here, and FAR worse restrictions than you have.
We are ALL in the same boat when it comes to gun rights!
The only way to fight this is to have ALL gun owners united!!(I don`t care if it is an air rifle or a 50 cal!)
If you don't think there are MANY people in power in this world that would like to see ALL citizens be without self protection, then I have some ocean-front property in ALBERTA for you,
Cdog
 
Good News

For the Gun-Ban Folks. Eric Holder was nominated and confirmed as the new AG. Now let's see how long it takes him to take our ammo.
 
The 2d Admendment means exactly whatever a majority of the Justices on the Supreme Court rule that it means. No more, and no less. We as citizens do not get to decide what the Constitution means, or says, or what we think the founders meant it to say. The Supreme Court will, and does, determine what is constitutional, and what is not.

I personally think the 2d Amendment gives "The People" the right to keep and bear firearms,not just the national guard or milita. What I think doesn't matter a hill of beans. What does matter is what 5 or more supreme court justices think. If they rule that there is no constitutional right for the private ownership of firearms, then that is the law.

A majority of the people elected their congressional representatives. If these voters were worrried about, or cared about, gun rights they would have elected gun friendly congress people. If a majority of congress is anti-gun, than a majority of the electorate is to blame for electing them. My congressmen is anti-gun, I didn't vote for him, but a large majority of the voters in the district did. When he ran, he never claimed to be pro-gun, and both the TSRA and the NRA gave him low scores. A majority of the districts voters did not care about his stand on gun owership. Those are the facts.
Bob
 
Pro-Gun

But our two Senators oppossed the nomination of the New AG with outstand commentary as to why, and one reason was his stand on the 2nd ammendment.
 
Land's sake alive, Bob!

Are you saying that you are willing to lay down and take whatever the Supreme Court says as the Gospel?
Do you not have an understanding of what the stripping of the Second Amendment means to all of our freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution?
I seriously doubt that the Fathers of our Constitution would look upon your belief with any respect. They all risked their lives for their beliefs of freedom, and that of future generations.
If this is what you truly believe, then perhaps you should send all of your guns to someone that is willing to use them for the purpose intended, and that is not "strictly for target shooting".
 
Bob are you really that naive? Do you remember Germany and what Hitler did to the Jewish? The very FIRST thing he did was to disarm the people. If the 2nd Amendment falls so will everything else!:eek:
Sorry, I got carried away.....this should go to General discussion.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
They are going to say that it has the ability to shoot long
range so it to will be outlawed, it starts small and spirals
out of control:(
 
Liberal gun ban

Guys,
I was in Reno Nv. a couple of weeks ago on family business. During this time the Safari Club International event was going on.

While at the continentinal breakfast at my motel a gentleman walks in with his SCI creditionals hanging from his neck. We began talking and of course the conversation got around to the current political climate regarding guns.

I probably said something about death from a thousands cuts and used the example of the 50 cal. ban in California to which the gentleman said, "I didn't own a 50 cal", as if to say, Didn't bother me. After more conversation it was obvious it did not bother him.

We must stand up for each individuals choice of fire arm or we will surely loose them all. DON'T GIVE AN INCH.

Unjust laws, Liberal liberals, Supreme court, all must be resisted.

BE INTOLERANT (oops, I surley hope the supreme court has not banned THAT)
 
Gentlemen ...

Now that you've had an opportunity to vent, what's you next move ??? What concrete initiatives have you undertaken to ensure gun bans don't happen ??? All the rhetoric in the world, on a site such as this, or others, is nothing more than preaching to the choir. Unless you can come up with a viable plan to influence those who make the decisions, your back and forth arguments, are just like pointing an open hose into a gale force wind. Gear back the emotions. What's the master plan ??? :confused:
 
bob harrison said:
The 2d Admendment means exactly whatever a majority of the Justices on the Supreme Court rule that it means. No more, and no less. We as citizens do not get to decide what the Constitution means, or says, or what we think the founders meant it to say. The Supreme Court will, and does, determine what is constitutional, and what is not.

I personally think the 2d Amendment gives "The People" the right to keep and bear firearms,not just the national guard or milita. What I think doesn't matter a hill of beans. What does matter is what 5 or more supreme court justices think. If they rule that there is no constitutional right for the private ownership of firearms, then that is the law.

A majority of the people elected their congressional representatives. If these voters were worrried about, or cared about, gun rights they would have elected gun friendly congress people. If a majority of congress is anti-gun, than a majority of the electorate is to blame for electing them. My congressmen is anti-gun, I didn't vote for him, but a large majority of the voters in the district did. When he ran, he never claimed to be pro-gun, and both the TSRA and the NRA gave him low scores. A majority of the districts voters did not care about his stand on gun owership. Those are the facts.
Bob
Click to expand...


Bob,
Getting you to accept whatever they say is exactly what the anit-gun crowd, anti-republic crowd wants. Just because the Supreme Court rules one way or the other doesn't change what the constitution is and that's is the point of the constitution. It's to limit the power of goverment over the people and that includes the Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court ever rules against the intended purpose of the 2nd amendment, then that is the trigger I was talking about. We have a series of protections against goverment and the supreme court is the last in line....when it fails....then it's time for a change. The ability of removing a goverment that no longer follows the constitution is exactly what our founding fathers was giving us with the 2nd. It's not really as much as protecting your firearms as it is letting you know the goverment wants to control you and that is unconstitutional and is cause for removal of the goverment. The people are the goverment...not the goverment making us what they want (sheep). The proproganda machine of the U.S. media is doing the same thing as Hitler was able to do.....influence and control.

Hovis
 
gun ban......

AMEN...........HovisKM. That hit the nail on the head. That pretty well sums it up in a nut shell!:):)
 
abintx said:
Now that you've had an opportunity to vent, what's you next move ??? What concrete initiatives have you undertaken to ensure gun bans don't happen ??? All the rhetoric in the world, on a site such as this, or others, is nothing more than preaching to the choir. Unless you can come up with a viable plan to influence those who make the decisions, your back and forth arguments, are just like pointing an open hose into a gale force wind. Gear back the emotions. What's the master plan ??? :confused:
Click to expand...

How long do you think it will be for the first "Million Gun Owner March" to the Capitol Hill, Washington D.C.?

A million guns/owners at the Washington Monument, kicking in the doors to Congress, demanding to be heard/dealt with, will be about the only message that our present politicians will seriously respond to.

Should not be too hard for the NRA to organize, and I am pretty sure that there would be more than enough eager participants to show up at this little gathering, to make it very clear as to what the 2nd amendment is all about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top