Here is a good list.
Sorry to say we need to vote home boy out of office.

http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_obama.html

Seems like its now or never for gun owners and ownership.

Sorry to say we need to vote home boy out of office.

Here is a good list.
Sorry to say we need to vote home boy out of office.

http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_obama.html

i aint sorry to say it

Really?

I just read his op ed and there wasn't anything in there other than "enforce the laws we already have" and "speed up and strengthen the existing background check system."

Seemed more like an obligatory presidential response to Gifford's shooting than a statement of policy to further restrict gun ownership. At least no more than usual. Even if that was his goal A) he'd have a hard time getting much of that through this congress or any he's likely to have and B) he certainly wouldn't advertise it BEFORE he gets re-elected.

There are lots of reasons to question the man but I'm not sure this op ed changes anything. I'd worry a lot more if there are a significant number of anti-gun folks elected to congress, though. If they did manage to get something heinous to his desk he'd sign it.

edit: At least some of that list deals with his representation of Illinois - which has its own unique climate. Important as track record but his policy as president hasn't been anything like that, unless I'm missing something. He was more dangerous as a Senator than in the White House. Though I suppose if he really led a charge on gun regulation as president he might have some sway... but do you really see that flying with the strength of the NRA and general conservatism in this country? Its something to watch for but I'm not sure it something to be overly concerned about.

All Gun Control does is take away the rights from Law Abiding Citizens.  Mexico gets approx 90% of thier illegal guns from other than the US.
and our borders are not protected how they should be. I can see the problem in the the Democrat party is that the law abiding will revolt when
then push more of their draconian measures on the innocent. So they have to take away the guns from the Law Abiding and those of us who are foolish
enough to allow them to make us register our firearms.

Does registration = your guns WILL be taken away?

How does that work, exactly? What enormous force is going to sweep through countryside and disarm everyone - and not meet considerable armed resistance? That sounds like martial law - in which case all these pleasantries about law and order take on a whole different aspect.

From the perspective of the left (assuming a reasonable person, at least) is that registration doesn't affect the right to keep and bear arms - it just makes the owner of a lethal weapon accountable for it.

My experience with the permit and registration process here on the Big Island, while tedious, has been very pleasant. As long as you don't have a record of any of the Thou Shalt Not list of things all you're doing is jumping through some hoops. EVERY aspect of government is like that, not just the one dealing with gun ownership. Try getting a permit for something as non-lethal as a plumbing hookup for your Ohana house... by comparison gun permits and registration are a breeze.

HI's ridiculous CC "process" is another matter. That's just wrong and no doubt about that. Like a lot of other aspects of the State government, really. This kind of thing isn't unique to gun issues.

Is there an instance, or instances, in US history since the 2nd amendment was ratified where guns were taken away from law abiding citizens? Other than the internment of Japanese Americans during WW2? (Which should give you a good idea of just how concrete your constitutional "rights" are, anyway.)

Don't get me wrong - I totally agree that LESS control and red tape around gun ownership is a good thing. I just try to find middle ground if there is any to be found because on hot issues like this the parties tend to retreat to their corners and hurl concentrated ideological spears at each other. That assures that which ever side "wins" the "winning" policy is not going to be affective. Discussion and understanding of the different ideologies can (but doesn't always) lead to reasonable ways of addressing everyone's concerns.

Its not a very common perspective in current American politics, I know. I just get exhausted that the Left assumes the Right just wants to kill everything and the Right assumes the Left wants turn the whole world into a socialist hell where all sharp things are safely locked up. The longer the discussion continues in that vein... the more true it will be for more people and the harder it will be to come to any kind of reasonable resolution.

Registration lists have been used to confiscate firearms in Nazi Germany and the USSR, as well as really totalitarian places like Australia and the UK. If out can happen in the UK or Australia, it can happen here. People like to pretend that there would be armed resistance to confiscation, but there wouldn't be. Just long lines of people waiting to turn in their guns. The few resisters would be painted with the domestic terrorist brush and killed or herded off to prison. Why not register computers, papers, and pens. Communism has killed several hundred million people, and it's just an idea. Let's make people with deadly ideas accountable for them.

Registration lists have been used to confiscate firearms in Nazi Germany and the USSR, as well as really totalitarian places like Australia and the UK. If out can happen in the UK or Australia, it can happen here. People like to pretend that there would be armed resistance to confiscation, but there wouldn't be. Just long lines of people waiting to turn in their guns. The few resisters would be painted with the domestic terrorist brush and killed or herded off to prison. Why not register computers, papers, and pens. Communism has killed several hundred million people, and it's just an idea. Let's make people with deadly ideas accountable for them.

+1

History tells us that it has happened in the past and can happen again.

Katrina was an example of a gun grab.

As far as armed resistance. Im no good to my family dead.

Katrina? I hadn't heard that one, yet. That's eff'ed up. Really eff'ed up. That was New Orleans police according to an article I just read. That should be a rallying cry for defending the 2nd amendment as the local police simply do not have the jurisdiction to do that. That explains the recent Hawaii law forbidding the state from confiscating weapons during an emergency. I wondered what prompted that since the law didn't say they could in the first place. I'm not sure how I let that one slip by. Thanks.

I'm glad that happened, in a way. What a terrible way for LE to respond. Huge mistake. Now we can point to both Katrina and the Japanese internment of WWII as clear evidence that it not only can happen by HAS happened here. WWII was federal and Katrina looks like it was local.

No good to family dead. Good point. When I think of large scale gun grabs I also tend to assume we'll ~know~ it is large scale. That could (but might not) facilitate a resistance to it. Regardless of policy there are many, many people who don't agree that the government has that power. But... in reality if there is an emergency the world gets very small and its down to you, possibly your community, and the people saying "Ok, now it is time to hand over your guns" and you have to chose to load or unload.

Anyone know if and what role registration played in the New Orleans gun grab?

Katrina was a huge eye opener not only for Louisiana, but many other states as well. Hawaii was the latest in a string of other places that made it a law to prevent confiscation in an emergency. I don't believe there was any registration in New Orleans and the police went door to door looking for people who wouldn't evacuate.

Old lady run over by LE, taking her rights.


 
Good job , Stick an old lady and take her pistol.  She wasn't even holdong the gun in a threatening manner.
 
These have been around for a while, as well as other horror stories of the death of 2A during Katrina.

Even if it was just local police,who you going complain to. The national guard? Your legislature?  Not much you can do when there already knocking.  Hopefully nothing like that ever happens.

Also does anyone have backup plans?

my backup plans include 230gr JHP moving at 1000fps

my backup plans include 230gr JHP moving at 1000fps

Where are you getting this backup plan from? You reloading that yourself or relying on factory +P. Not trying to be a smart@ss, just wondering if you have an actual recipe or are you rounding up?

^^^^

I was thinking of asking the same question. That would be a nice recipe to have!

Quote from: Aegis808 on November 25, 2011, 12:50:35 PM

my backup plans include 230gr JHP moving at 1000fps

Where are you getting this backup plan from? You reloading that yourself or relying on factory +P. Not trying to be a smart@ss, just wondering if you have an actual recipe or are you rounding up?

^^^^

I was thinking of asking the same question. That would be a nice recipe to have!

lol you got me with my horrible math skills. i'm quite certain i'd be getting calls from all sorts of manufacturers if i did find a secret blend for that exact power.

Registration inevitably leads to confiscation, even though its stated purpose is for crime-solving.

Civil rights have often been suspended in this country in "emergency" conditions, just by executive fiat.  If you want to be scared, just look at all the Executive Orders relating to what the President can do in national "emergencies.," including forcing you to move from one place to another.  Confiscation would be (and has been) a breeze in a national "emergency."

Moreover, the definition of national "Emergency" is left up to the President in many instances.   One of my favorite examples of this is the seizure of gold bullion by President Roosevelt in 1933.  Viz:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102

The Executive Order is a very dangerous thing.  One of President Clinton's aides was heard to comment that executive orders were cool.  You write an order, and if nobody objects, you publish it in the Federal Register, and voila! it becomes law!  Or words to that effect.

http://dmc.members.sonic.net/sentinel/gvcon5.html

I point out that the Governors have used the Executive Order concept, as well.

..........

I agree that there will be no effective generalized armed resistance to a confiscation.  Just look at the weapons and protective devices used by the LEOs on that little old lady in the video.  You want to go up against them with what you have in your collection?  For her, that little revolver maybe would have been OK to protect her against a looter or a rapist, but against trained LEOs and military personnel?  Forget it.


(I was amused by the insipid comments about water in that video.  What, you don't have a jug of Clorox^TM in your house?  What a thin justification for evacuating her to a "safer" area. Egad!)


I think Obama is just setting up a situation where he can position himself as the "good guy," offering olive branches which are either refused, or on which the "other side" will not compromise.  After all, if "they" aren't receptive to "common sense" firearms laws, they therefore do not have any "common sense."

Unfortunately, he's the one behind the "bully pulpit," and can define what is "common sense," and has a choir loft full of adoring reporters and editors to holler "Amen!" to his appeals.

Do I hear a "Hallelujah" from this congregation?

Terry, 230RN