• This Forum is for adults 18 years of age or over. By continuing to use this Forum you are confirming that you are 18 or older. No content shall be viewed by any person under 18 in California.

Interesting Take on Possibility of New Firearm Restrictions

INTJ said:
The reality is there is very little that they can do that will stick. We should still be be vigilant and push back at every opportunity. However, assuming that every gun control proposal is going to cause us to lose our ability to exercise our 2A rights is little more than hyperbole and excessive fear--both of which only benefit the Left.
Click to expand...
Who would have figured they could ban the importation of chinese guns and the mfr of high capacity magazines, or ban a bump stock that they already deemed legal, as a machine gun but it doesnt manipulate the trigger in any way? These death by a thousand cuts that are “common sense” are whats going to kill our way of life. How about some states outlawing a vertical grip- what in ghe world does that have to do with anything?
 
Dusty Stevens said:
Who would have figured they could ban the importation of chinese guns and the mfr of high capacity magazines, or ban a bump stock that they already deemed legal, as a machine gun but it doesnt manipulate the trigger in any way? These death by a thousand cuts that are “common sense” are whats going to kill our way of life. How about some states outlawing a vertical grip- what in ghe world does that have to do with anything?
Click to expand...

That's why we remain vigilant and push back. I am just hoping for unity and a call to action vs complaining about how things used to be or crying that the sky is falling--which is what we as gun owners do too often.

We have also had victories. Concealed carry used to be unheard of just a few years ago, now it is common in most places. A three-judge panel from the Ninth ruled against California's high capacity magazine ban, and remember Heller.

I realized a long time ago that we simply cannot take any of our freedoms for granted, and I am never surprised or shocked when the Left tries to take away our rights.
 
Any gun control legislation still faces committees, the filibuster and cloture in the Senate. Anything that gets that far will be watered-down a fair amount. We likely do face magazine restrictions and extended background checks. Hopefully there won't be any big mass shootings before any new gun legislation is introduced.
 
I fear increased tax on firearms, ammunition and components, as well as Gov. lability insurance. Dems love extra taxes!.

I am also watching the UN's position on our 2nd amendment. They already have a UN gun control law...... sorry I don't know exactly what they call it. That might be easier for the Dems to slip through in the dead of night, like NYS did with the SAFE Act.
 
Passing extremely restrictive gun laws, will be a hard sell to some Democrats, especially in the Senate, who come from gun popular states. Joe Manchin from West Virginia is one. He has stated that he will not vote for these measures as well as other popular Democratic measures, such as one payer universal health insurance plan. He not only comes from a state that is very conservative, but is a hunter among other things.
 
Another thing to consider, is that any gun law or executive order, will immediately be taken to court. Most of the Federal Courts are stacked with Trump appointees. If I were anti gun, I would be very careful. The Supreme Court, depending on the language of their decisions, could very well remove most restrictions, in one broad ruling.

Don't worry about Democratic stacking of the court. It was tried by FDR and defeated. Again Manchin has stated he would never vote for a measure increasing the size of the court.

The road may be rocky, but the autos are built to keep on running.
 
Nick Caprinolo said:
Another thing to consider, is that any gun law or executive order, will immediately be taken to court. Most of the Federal Courts are stacked with Trump appointees. If I were anti gun, I would be very careful. The Supreme Court, depending on the language of their decisions, could very well remove most restrictions, in one broad ruling.

Don't worry about Democratic stacking of the court. It was tried by FDR and defeated. Again Manchin has stated he would never vote for a measure increasing the size of the court.

The road may be rocky, but the autos are built to keep on running.
Click to expand...

The SCOTUS has already ruled on hi-cap mags. They are in common use. With probably 50 million AR style rifles in circulation, they are also in common use. That may not stop the power hungry tards in Congress from attempting to pass legislation restricting their ownership but if everyone refuses to comply, what are they going to do?

Now taxes on guns, ammo and components are another thing entirely. Background checks on ammo and components for firearms that one has already passed a background check to own are another thing. Any laws passed in that regard will need to be challenged before the SCOTUS. If The SCOTUS does not back the Constitution then we have yet another problem we will need to deal with. 50 million AR's in the hands of private citizens are an excellent starting point for negotiations with those who perceive themselves as our masters. It is in fact the very reason we have a 2nd amendment. Our founding fathers were very intelligent and well educated individuals. The political hacks on the left side of the isle in Congress today, not so much.
 
Last edited:
Dems,as an over educated elitist;

"Pick and choose" agendas based on,what will it hurt logic. Meaning,save the planet,save the whale,trees whatever. It is longterm, fodder if you will,to use as justification for their holier than thou mantras. Republicans,in an interesting twist find themselves in a shrinking market because of this..... and are too stupid to know how to combat it.

If all you surrounded with are yes men/women..... what's the point. So these two "parties",which I find incredibly if somewhat sad,ironically have a symbiotic relationship. Oh,each side plays their support infrastructure but they don't actually give a hoot.... other than the $$$ they can pull out of a system overwhelmingly skewed by their own agendas. Who else gets to vote for your own pay raise? Or come up with something as completely "targeting" as the '94 crime bill and then run on a platform of helping out "those" people. Trump started getting black folks off the plantation.... in numbers. Both sides saw this as a MAJOR threat to their "party".....
 
Nick Caprinolo said:
Passing extremely restrictive gun laws, will be a hard sell to some Democrats, especially in the Senate, who come from gun popular states. Joe Manchin from West Virginia is one. He has stated that he will not vote for these measures as well as other popular Democratic measures, such as one payer universal health insurance plan. He not only comes from a state that is very conservative, but is a hunter among other things.
Click to expand...
“This bill of ours, the Manchin-Toomey bill, should be the base bill they work off of."

“Manchin co-sponsored a bill in 2013 with Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pennsylvania, following the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. The legislation would have established a database of those prohibited from owning guns while expanding nationwide background checks. He told CBS News last week that changing the loopholes of commercial sales of guns is a good first step to reforms that protects Second Amendment rights.
 
Nature Boy said:
When they talk about expanding background checks and closing loopholes in commercial sales, are they talking about individual face-to-face transactions?
Click to expand...
Yes, which would also affect heirlooms and how or even if, you can allow someone else to use your gun. Such as a loaner program used by some BR clubs.
 
No, face to face or private sales "loopholes" are used as distractions in legislation. It makes anti gun ownership laws appear "common sense" to the undecided. Elected representatives have three groups of constituents in their districts, core supporters, undecided, and the opposition. Any controversial legislation they author or intend to vote for requires them to word the law to sway undecided into the core support for re-election. That's why you often see new legislation, even when existing law isn't enforced. The end game is the World Economic forum's 2030 plan. Biden has already had cabinet appointees inform the WEF that the new administration in "ahead of schedule" for the great reset.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Upgrades & Donations

This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.


Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.

You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.


To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.

Classified Ads

Forum statistics

Threads
166,262
Messages
2,214,871
Members
79,496
Latest member
Bie

Share This Page

Back
Top