Obamas executive order gun grab - Page 5

Obamas executive order gun grab

This is a discussion on Obamas executive order gun grab within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by Harryball Adric, I have to ask. Are you making these statements just to piss people off, or do you really believe what ...

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 82
Like Tree129Likes

Thread: Obamas executive order gun grab

  1. #61
    Senior Member Array adric22's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    Posts
    1,146
    Quote Originally Posted by Harryball View Post
    Adric, I have to ask. Are you making these statements just to piss people off, or do you really believe what you are saying? Your in a pro-2A forum, I only hope you remember that.
    No intention of ******* people off. But one of the things I've learned in life is that you can say anything.. I mean anything and somebody, somewhere is going to be pissed off about it. Being that I consider myself a moderate politically, I get the heat from both sides. Some of my friends and family call my a bleeding-heart-hippie-liberal, while other friends and family call me a right-wing-gun-toting-bible-thumping-nut-job. Sometimes I think I'm the only sane one because I don't exist in one extreme or the other. I do have very conservative views on 2A rights, economics, criminal justice system, and foreign policy. But I have very liberal views on other things such as healthcare, environmental issues, and transportation.

    I just tend to speak from a logical perspective. I'm sorry if some people are offended, but that is life. I'm sure if we all jumped on some forum about gun control (does one exist?), all of our views, including mine, would be insulting and unwelcome there.

    The thing is.. I'm always skeptical about the whole disarming of America for the purpose of preventing revolution. Yes, I'm sure there are those that have that goal. But I truly believe most of the citizens and politicians who are behind gun control legislation support it because they truly believe in their minds that it will somehow save lives and prevent crime. Obviously, they are greatly mistaken, mislead, and often ignorant of the facts. But I've learned that society as a whole is like that on many topics. For example, I can't count how many people have given these really nice speeches to me about the war in Iraq and how it was the wrong thing to do putting our young people at risk, etc, etc. But then when I ask them if they can show me where Iraq is on a map, they have no idea. So I have to ask them how they can claim to be an expert on the topic if they don't even know where it is. So that just goes to show that often times people make decisions based on emotion and not on facts and logic.
    "Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws." -Plato


  2. #62
    Moderator
    Array Bark'n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    West Central Missouri
    Posts
    9,917
    Quote Originally Posted by adric22 View Post
    Being that I consider myself a moderate politically, I get the heat from both sides. Some of my friends and family call my a bleeding-heart-hippie-liberal, while other friends and family call me a right-wing-gun-toting-bible-thumping-nut-job.
    You may consider yourself a moderate politically, but you present yourself as a liberal. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

    I don't think anyone here on this forum would consider you a right-wing anything. Just realize, most moderates are people who can't quite bring themselves to call themselves a liberal. But trust me, you definitely present yourself as a liberal. And borderline anti-gun.

    Now regarding the 2A. The sole purpose of the 2A is to protect our freedom from foreign invaders and to protect ourselves from a tyrannical government. It has nothing to do with being able to hunt or even defend yourself against criminals, although that is a benefit. But the sole purpose of the 2A is to protect the rights we are born with as delineated in the Constitution, to protect our sovereign borders, and to have a means to overthrow a tyrannical government if the government becomes out of control, (which the founding fathers feared could happen).

    They feared the government could one day become out of control and tyrannical because the amount of freedom being bestowed upon the individual citizen as they crafted the Constitution was unprecedented in the history of the world, and in any other form of government. The Constitution was laying out the freedoms guaranteed to the people while at the same time, limiting the control the government would have. (They really did look hard into the future).

    And Obama has stated over and over again, he believes, as far as he's concerned, that was a fundamental flaw in the crafting of the Constitution. That it limited the role of government, instead of outlining the what the government could do to the people. (I've posted the video in other threads here of Obama saying just that on public radio. So there's no denying he said it, or believes it!)

    So, of course the government is afraid of it's citizenry having guns. And the bigger the government grows, the more fearful they become of the people. It's a matter of the government fearing they can lose their power. The "collective government" eventually becomes as paranoid of it's citizens as your average banana republic or middle east dictator does. So, you're right in the fact that they don't want us to use them against them. It's why the liberals have been trying to slowly cut away at our gun rights since the days of that great democrat hero FDR.

    Which is why Glockman is so adamant about not having any gun restrictions at all. And I'm with him on that!

    We don't need to protect the public from dangerous weapons. We need to protect the public from dangerous people.


    Which means, if you want to have a heavy machine gun, or a 20mm Vulcan Gatling gun, no problem. You want to play around with C-4 explosives? Have at it. Just don't commit any crimes with those tools because punishment will be swift and merciless. But it's kind of hard to protect yourself from a tyrannical government if we can't have access to the same weapons the governments army has. Which is what the 2A intended not restrict.

    To borrow a post, in part, from another forum:
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    (We need to take a serious look at the fabric of Gun Control, to kill a tree, you must remove the roots.

    It has always been my belief that the Second Amendment was largely instated to give us the ability to

    1) protect the other rights and freedoms, and
    2) Protect our sovereignty, both as States and Country. So in that, should be recognized, that the arms required to do such should be of equal ability and mechanical function as the common soldier of the time.

    Historically speaking, this has always held true for us, until the days of prohibition, the great depression. These firearms were spun as "Gangster Weapons" of the time, and thus became heavily regulated, eventually ending up in the regulation of the ATF, created in 1972.

    Should it not be noticed that the three things the government desires to regulate out of existence are lumped into one Bureau? Lets also note that it started in large as the Bureau of Prohibition. When do we take appropriate measure to get the 34 and 68 acts removed, and the ATF disassembled)


    Disband / Repeal: 1934 NFA - 1968 GCA - ATF
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This is all spelled out in great detail in the Federalist Papers, which were written by the founding fathers to explain what is in the Constitution, why it was put there and what it means.

    Now I can understand why no one wants to read the Federalist Papers. It is a very difficult document to read and comprehend because of the language at the time. I have it downloaded on my Kindle and pick at it a few pages at a time, every few weeks, taking the time to reflect, and understand what is being written. I don't just skim over it and say I've read it.

    There's no doubt in my mind that 90% of Congress hasn't read it. Let alone understand it. It's obvious in how they treat, misconstrue and bastardize the Constitution in the laws they make and how they defend what the do in public.
    -Bark'n
    Semper Fi


    "The gun is the great equalizer... For it is the gun, that allows the meek to repel the monsters; Whom are bigger, stronger and without conscience, prey on those who without one, would surely perish."

  3. #63
    VIP Member
    Array 64zebra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Panhandle of Texas
    Posts
    6,452
    Quote Originally Posted by adric22
    I do have very conservative views on 2A rights
    not reflected in this thread

    Quote Originally Posted by adric22
    I just tend to speak from a logical perspective

    The thing is.. I'm always skeptical about the whole disarming of America for the purpose of preventing revolution. Yes, I'm sure there are those that have that goal. But I truly believe most of the citizens and politicians who are behind gun control legislation support it because they truly believe in their minds that it will somehow save lives and prevent crime. Obviously, they are greatly mistaken, mislead, and often ignorant of the facts.
    the logical perspective on this would be to a)look at other countries that went down this same path, some a step at a time with registration, restricting one or 2 things at a time until the next thing you know you can have a cork gun, and b)look at what the politicians say about the gun control topic including pres, cabinet, and congress
    .....which is what I've done in previous posts....its all there on record what other countries have done and what our politicians have said, and anyone that thinks they are "just" looking to prevent crime isn't looking at this from a logical perspective, they are kidding themselves, oh sure the politicians will say they are only wanting to prevent crime and they will parade crime victims in front of the tv to illicit emotional responses to get their votes or get re-elected, but logic is nowhere to be found

    and you said
    "...I'm always skeptical about the whole disarming of America for the purpose of preventing revolution. Yes, I'm sure there are those that have that goal. But I truly believe most of the citizens and politicians who are behind gun control legislation support it because they truly believe in their minds that it will somehow save lives and prevent crime.
    in this post, but in post #53 you said:
    "I don't see that this type of weapon is ever used much in any sort of crime. So that makes it hard for me to see why the government would want to ban them. So that leaves only one logical explanation. The government does not want the weapons used against the government itself.
    so which is it? which logic are you going to follow? you are contradicting yourself in these posts
    LEO/CHL
    Certified Glock Armorer

    "I got a touch of hangover bureaucrat, don't push me"
    --G.W. McClintock

    Independence is declared; it must be maintained. Sam Houston-3/2/1836
    If loose gun laws are good for criminals why do criminals support gun control?

  4. #64
    Member Array MikeNice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    283
    But I truly believe most of the citizens and politicians who are behind gun control legislation support it because they truly believe in their minds that it will somehow save lives and prevent crime.
    Do you really think that guys like Bloomberg believe making it illegal to own a gun if you get caught speeding will stop crime? Do you think guys like Schumer don't have access to all of the same facts that we do? The truth is they have the facts and they either refuse to believe them or willfully ignore them.

    If they refuse to believe the facts that means there is a defect in their ability to think logically. In my opinion that makes them unfit to lead. If they willingly ignore the facts then that implies an ulterior motive.

    Do I think it is a quest to stop revolution? Probably not. I believe it is simply a matter of control. If they can disarm you, you become property. You are no longer a soveriegn person capable of the ultimate defense. You are merely a plow horse, a cog in the mechanism. When they can strip away your naturual born rights they can take anything from you.

    So that just goes to show that often times people make decisions based on emotion and not on facts and logic.
    Yes some people do. We should expect more from our elected officials.
    Bark'n likes this.

  5. #65
    Senior Member Array adric22's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    Posts
    1,146
    Quote Originally Posted by 64zebra
    not reflected in this thread
    Well, I find it hard to believe that anyone could look at me, a person who owns numerous guns and has a CHL and carries everyday could possibly have any sort of anti-gun sentiment.

    Quote Originally Posted by 64zebra View Post
    so which is it? which logic are you going to follow? you are contradicting yourself in these posts
    In one case I was talking about assault weapons and in the other I was talking about gun control in general. I was simply pointing out that the assault weapon ban has no other logical conclusion.. Actually, I take that back. it could be simply a stepping stone to banning all guns since the assault weapons are an easier target and more people would be likely to vote against them since the average citizen thinks those guns are evil.

    I still don't understand why there is so much opposition to something like a gun buyers license. It would basically serve the same function as the NICS does right now, except it would be easier to implement especially when dealing with private sales. Outside actually getting the license, it would make buying a firearm much more convenient. For example, if I wanted to buy 20 guns this month, I'd currently have to do a NICS check each time, fill out all of the paperwork and even more if I were buying more than one gun at a time. My thought was if we had the ID card, I could walk into the store and they could check that the ID was still valid and then from that point on it would just be like buying soda at the grocery store. It would actually eliminate paperwork and actually give the government even less information about what guns I buy. All they would know is that my ID was checked a certain number of times. As it is currently with the NICS system, they get the serial# of the gun I am buying.
    "Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws." -Plato

  6. #66
    VIP Member
    Array 64zebra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Panhandle of Texas
    Posts
    6,452
    Quote Originally Posted by adric22
    Well, I find it hard to believe that anyone could look at me, a person who owns numerous guns and has a CHL and carries everyday could possibly have any sort of anti-gun sentiment.
    because of some of your statements, and the license part you are talking about below

    Quote Originally Posted by adric22
    In one case I was talking about assault weapons and in the other I was talking about gun control in general. I was simply pointing out that the assault weapon ban has no other logical conclusion.. Actually, I take that back. it could be simply a stepping stone to banning all guns since the assault weapons are an easier target and more people would be likely to vote against them since the average citizen thinks those guns are evil.
    exactly, now you're talking, this is the logic used to implement the "assault weapons" ban in the first place....."oooooh it has a bayonet lug, we better ban that if it has a pistol grip also, those things will lead to more crime"
    ....so manufacturers quit making them with baynet lugs and collapsible stocks......assault weapons ban didn't prevent the same type of firearms firing the same bullets from getting into civilians hands, but it was a stepping stone

    Quote Originally Posted by adric22
    I still don't understand why there is so much opposition to something like a gun buyers license. It would basically serve the same function as the NICS does right now, except it would be easier to implement especially when dealing with private sales. Outside actually getting the license, it would make buying a firearm much more convenient. For example, if I wanted to buy 20 guns this month, I'd currently have to do a NICS check each time, fill out all of the paperwork and even more if I were buying more than one gun at a time. My thought was if we had the ID card, I could walk into the store and they could check that the ID was still valid and then from that point on it would just be like buying soda at the grocery store. It would actually eliminate paperwork and actually give the government even less information about what guns I buy. All they would know is that my ID was checked a certain number of times. As it is currently with the NICS system, they get the serial# of the gun I am buying.
    here's why there is so much opposition to a gun buyers license:
    license.....for purchasing something spelled out as a right to bear in the constitution = slippery slope, and a huge stepping stone
    I'd rather go through the hassle of filling out paperwork than getting a federal gov't license to buy something I have a right to get under the constitution, the whole NICS check and brady bill are against the 2A
    hence the reason some say you're not as conservative on the 2A as you profess....not saying we hate you, etc, just that you are giving off the "signals"
    LEO/CHL
    Certified Glock Armorer

    "I got a touch of hangover bureaucrat, don't push me"
    --G.W. McClintock

    Independence is declared; it must be maintained. Sam Houston-3/2/1836
    If loose gun laws are good for criminals why do criminals support gun control?

  7. #67
    Member Array mlkx4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Southwest Iowa
    Posts
    110
    Quote Originally Posted by adric22 View Post
    I still don't understand why there is so much opposition to something like a gun buyers license.
    And you never will because you trust your government to always do whats in your best interest. The BATFE should not exist, and any gun control legislation goes against the second amendment

  8. #68
    Senior Moderator
    Array HotGuns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,961
    I hate the idea of a license. They always have qualifiers or strings attached.

    First, its no big deal.

    Then with each administration, it gets increasingly more complicated.

    One only has to look at the liscensing procedures of the anti-gun states, that make it virtually impossible to obtain one for self defense.
    Some of them purposely have so many hoops to jump through that most people dont have the time, inclination or patience to do it.

    An anti-gun politician, or an anti-gun administration can make it more difficult without much effort.

    It starts out being purposely cheap. As time goes by it becomes more expensive.

    The Second Amendment says that the rights to bear arms SHALL NOT be infringed. What is so hard to understand about that?


    Here is another thing. Anyone that infringes upon my right to protect myself in any way,shape or form is not my friend...in fact, I consider them to be less than honorable, because an honorable man would not want me to compromise.

    I dont care if its a Democrat,Republican,Conservative, Liberal,President of the New World Order,my Preacher,my Brother, a member of this forum, my best friend or my Mother. Make me infringe upon my right to bear arms and protect myself or my loved ones and I will hate your guts and look forward to the day that I can piss on your grave.

    Yeah, it may sound harsh to some of the weenies out there, but that is the way it is.
    64zebra, msgt/ret, tkruf and 1 others like this.
    I would rather stand against the cannons of the wicked than against the prayers of the righteous.


    AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
    Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
    http://bobbailey1959.wordpress.com/

  9. #69
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,004
    But of course only lazy bad guys would be getting reported on anyway. The requirement is multiple sales per dealer within five days. If I wanted five ARs or whatever tomorrow, I could run down to Gander Mountain for one, then up Rt 6 to Fountain for another. Up 6 to " A Gun Shop" on my way to another Gander Mountain. That's four right there and I can grab another at Bass Pro at the mall and another at Tactical Firearms up the street from my house.
    I could do all that before lunch time. There are four more dealers I could hit in the afternoon.
    So really I could run out and grab twenty rifles a week with little effort and never be a blip on their radar. Oh yeah, and my mother in law and wife could too.
    And then we could also hit about dozen pawn shops in the area too.
    It really isn't that hard to out smart our government.
    MikeNice likes this.
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  10. #70
    Senior Member Array SFury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    757
    The worst part about this is that Obama (even though he denies it) ordered Holder to do the F&F gun sell to the cartels to enact the tracking. Not just to do that, but that had to be one of the end goals. The timing of it all just can't be that perfect. Call me cynical, but hey, it's what makes me keep my eyes open to all sorts of things politicians do. Liberal and conservative alike. Too many of them are corrupt, or get corrupted, to be trusted.

  11. #71
    Moderator
    Array Bark'n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    West Central Missouri
    Posts
    9,917
    Quote Originally Posted by mcp1810 View Post
    But of course only lazy bad guys would be getting reported on anyway. The requirement is multiple sales per dealer within five days. If I wanted five ARs or whatever tomorrow, I could run down to Gander Mountain for one, then up Rt 6 to Fountain for another. Up 6 to " A Gun Shop" on my way to another Gander Mountain. That's four right there and I can grab another at Bass Pro at the mall and another at Tactical Firearms up the street from my house.
    I could do all that before lunch time. There are four more dealers I could hit in the afternoon.
    So really I could run out and grab twenty rifles a week with little effort and never be a blip on their radar. Oh yeah, and my mother in law and wife could too.
    And then we could also hit about dozen pawn shops in the area too.
    It really isn't that hard to out smart our government.
    You'd be flagged so fast your head would swim. 5 NICS checks at 5 locations in an hour or two.... You'd have NSA satellites and CIA drones coordinating with the FCC and ATF to triangulate your coordinates. Sensors from every alphabet soup agency would be smokin'. You can buy 5 guns before lunch and snatched up off the street and be in Club Gitmo by dinner.

    -Bark'n
    Semper Fi


    "The gun is the great equalizer... For it is the gun, that allows the meek to repel the monsters; Whom are bigger, stronger and without conscience, prey on those who without one, would surely perish."

  12. #72
    Distinguished Member Array BadgerJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Mid-Atlantic
    Posts
    1,514
    Pretty ironic that a guy surrounded by big dudes with Uzis is promoting gun control.

  13. #73
    VIP Member Array Eagleks's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    7,837
    Quote Originally Posted by BadgerJ View Post
    Pretty ironic that a guy surrounded by big dudes with Uzis is promoting gun control.
    No different than Mayor Daley. Maybe he's following his example.
    I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts. --- Will Rogers ---
    Chief Justice John Roberts : "I don't see how you can read Heller and not take away from it the notion that the Second Amendment...was extremely important to the framers in their view of what liberty meant."

  14. #74
    Member Array MikeNice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    283
    It starts out being purposely cheap. As time goes by it becomes more expensive.
    A good example of this is the NC CCHL. You pay $75 for a class (if you find a cheap one) then you pay $86 for the administration of the application process. After that you pay $10 for finger prints. Then you have to pay for medical records checks. For me the total was $22. So, to excercise my right cost me $193 before you count in fuel, ammunition and vehicle wear. It quickly becomes $200+ just to get your foot in the door.

    That eliminates CCHL as an option for some lower income folks. Basically the license would cost them as much as a Kel Tec P-32. So, they are paying for two guns to get one for defense. Does anybody else see why this is considerred an infringement by some?

    What is out there to stop the general assembly from raising the price on the permit process to $186? All it takes is 50% +1 to start pushing it out of the reach of all citizens.

    I know you get what I'm saying HG. This wasn't directed at you in anyway.

  15. #75
    VIP Member Array farronwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,817
    Quote Originally Posted by Bark'n View Post
    You'd be flagged so fast your head would swim. 5 NICS checks at 5 locations in an hour or two.... You'd have NSA satellites and CIA drones coordinating with the FCC and ATF to triangulate your coordinates. Sensors from every alphabet soup agency would be smokin'. You can buy 5 guns before lunch and snatched up off the street and be in Club Gitmo by dinner.

    Texas doesn't do NICS checks on folks that have their CHL's, whether for pistols or rifles.

    He would have to find someplace to put all them guns. I have a few spots left in the safe when he goes on the buying spree.

    Oh, and as far as requiring the 4 southern states to report the multiple transactions, I did talk to my gun shop guy when this first hit the radar, but as of yet, I don't think there is any reality to it yet. I haven't talked to him in a couple of days, but he probably would have called about it if it did happen.
    Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.
    www.ddchl.com
    Texas CHL Instructor
    Texas Hunter Education Instructor
    NRA Instructor

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

2013 gun ban list
,
2013 gun grab
,

2013 gun laws

,
2013 gun legislation
,
executive order 13581
,
gun grab 2013
,

gun laws 2013

,
new gun law 2013
,

new gun laws 2013

,

new gun laws for 2013

,

new texas gun laws 2013

,

proposed gun laws 2013

Click on a term to search for related topics.