Once again NRA supports gun control and gun confiscation legislation

Once again NRA supports gun control and gun confiscation legislation

This is a discussion on Once again NRA supports gun control and gun confiscation legislation within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; House Bill 1840 allows the courts to authorize the confiscation of private property (guns) from anyone who has a no contact or restraining order out ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 24
Like Tree46Likes

Thread: Once again NRA supports gun control and gun confiscation legislation

  1. #1
    VIP Member Array LongRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    2,618

    Once again NRA supports gun control and gun confiscation legislation

    House Bill 1840 allows the courts to authorize the confiscation of private property (guns) from anyone who has a no contact or restraining order out against them. On the surface that may seem great. Keep guns out of the hands of dangerous violent people but that is not the case at all. No contact or restraining orders are notoriously abused and stupid simple to obtain. I know of a girl who got one against her father because he was not going to let her go to her prom. Anyone can get a restraining order against anyone for any reason as long as they claim that person, organization, or group scares them. So any anti self defense fanatic can get a no contact or restraining order against anyone they know who has or carries a gun because the guns scare them.

    In short. Not only does House Bill 1840 allow the confiscation of guns from citizens who have NOT been convicted of a crime. House Bill 1840 allows the confiscation of private property (guns) from those who are not even being charged with a crime. In fact House Bill 1840 allows the confiscation of private property (guns) from citizens who have not even been accused of a crime.

    House Bill 1840 passed with 49 yeas, 0 nays, 0 absent, 0 excused. So much for our representatives actually representing their constituents. Even worse is our complacency and being asleep at the switch allowing this piece of trash to pass. But worst of all is the fact that not only did the NRA fail to notify us about this bill with a call to action. The NRA went out of its way to support House Bill 1840. The NRA supported the legislation to confiscate guns from law abiding citizens without due process.

    The NRA supported Clinton's "Assault Weapons Ban". The NRA opposed DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER. I believe that initially the NRA wrote a brief supporting Washington DC gun prohibition law. It was only after it was obvious that the Second Amendment Foundation was going to win, that the NRA changed their position and came out against gun prohibition.

    I am so done with being screwed and back stabbed by those who are supposed to be defending our rights instead use my money to help get guns confiscated from law abiding citizens.
    Abort the Obamanation not the Constitution

    Those who would, deny, require permit, license, certification, or authorization for me to bear arms are as vile, dangerous & evil as those who would molest, abuse, assault, rape or murder my family


  2. #2
    VIP Member Array Ghost1958's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    6,031
    Is this a state bill or a Fed bill??

    It doesnt make much difference if NRA is supporting it they are on the wrong side of the tracks again but if its Fed then I can hammer my reps to oppose it.

    Sounds good on the surface but as the OP said you can get a restraining order about as easy as you can pickup your mail. And for no reason at all other than your mad at a person and want to cause them grief.
    " It is sad governments are chief'ed by the double tongues." quote Ten Bears Movie Outlaw Josie Wales

  3. #3
    VIP Member Array WrongRecroom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    AZ moutain lands
    Posts
    4,146
    Who buddy slow down you are talking about a state bill in Washington State right ?

    Yes the NRA has done some dumb things in the past .. But they are by the large more focuse and did help galvienize a lot of action agasint things ...

    I have found for the the most part they go after the big picture stuff and let local groups handle instate issues ( Calguns in CA etc) ..

    They by far are not saints but better then nothing ..Heck a lot of people changed since the 94 ban .. I am prety sure the NRA did as did Ruger ...

    Do I trust them no not a 100% but they are one of the bigest meanest dogs in the fights right now and I am pretty dern shure more then a few fed bills got stop by them
    MesillaGuy likes this.
    “Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.” H.L. Mencken
    "Vous ne les laisserez pas passer, mes camarades"
    "We're surrounded. That simplifies our problem of getting to these people and killing them."Chesty Puller

  4. #4
    Member Array BMcPhe44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Texas South Plains
    Posts
    278
    The way I understand it is the Lautenberg federal law (Lautenberg Amendment) is already in place allowing LE to take away guns from people who have DV restraining orders against them. The legislation in Washington state was opposed by the NRA until special wording was added to appease them. I believe the federal law is a more serious threat to innocent gun owners than the Washington bill as written. I also believe that the citizens of Washington (especially Seattle) are more to blame for these ridiculous laws than the NRA. (What is with the window stickers in Seattle indicating gun free zones in more than a 100 businesses and growing) I believe the NRA is a large organization dedicated to the 2nd Amendment. Do they screw up? Yes in some instances but they are the best bet we have in defending the RTKAB. If you know a better organization who uses your dues better then join them. I support all of them that are honest in their efforts but NRA will continue to get my support as long as I believe they are making an effort to do what their Charter says.
    "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
    - William Pitt

    {NRA Benefactor Member and proud supporter of the 2nd Amendment}

  5. #5
    VIP Member Array Ghost1958's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    6,031
    Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
    The way I understand it is the Lautenberg federal law (Lautenberg Amendment) is already in place allowing LE to take away guns from people who have DV restraining orders against them. The legislation in Washington state was opposed by the NRA until special wording was added to appease them. I believe the federal law is a more serious threat to innocent gun owners than the Washington bill as written. I also believe that the citizens of Washington (especially Seattle) are more to blame for these ridiculous laws than the NRA. (What is with the window stickers in Seattle indicating gun free zones in more than a 100 businesses and growing) I believe the NRA is a large organization dedicated to the 2nd Amendment. Do they screw up? Yes in some instances but they are the best bet we have in defending the RTKAB. If you know a better organization who uses your dues better then join them. I support all of them that are honest in their efforts but NRA will continue to get my support as long as I believe they are making an effort to do what their Charter says.

    I am pretty certain that amendment you are speaking of only concerns folks convicted of DV. Having a no contact order or restraining order is a totally different thing.

    You dont have to live with someone to get a no contact or restraining order and usually the person you are getting it against doesnt have to be convicted in court of anything.

    This bill if it is the case as the OP presents it is a totally different kettle of fish
    gatorbait51 and LongRider like this.
    " It is sad governments are chief'ed by the double tongues." quote Ten Bears Movie Outlaw Josie Wales

  6. #6
    Senior Member Array acepilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    NW WI
    Posts
    562
    Quote Originally Posted by LongRider View Post
    The NRA went out of its way to support House Bill 1840. The NRA supported the legislation to confiscate guns from law abiding citizens without due process.

    I believe there IS due process simply by the fact that any restraining order (at least here in WI) involves a court case with a real judge. Both sides get to tell their sides to the judge. My daughter has one against her now ex-roommate's boyfriend who spent more time trying to get into my daughter's bed than into his "girlfriend's" bed. My daughter has the lowest level restraining order (harrassment) and it specifically says that he is NOT banned from owning firearms. Of course, I put some blame on the ex-roommate for meeting the creep in an on-line chat room and driving across the state to pick him up and bring him back here. To me, that shows ZERO brains in her head. The good news is that he's now back in the other far corner of the state. He's only 18 and he already has 6 or 7 run-ins with our court system (drug possession, drug paraphernalia, trespass, resisting arrest, etc.) Seems he gets in trouble about every 2 months. The part that chaps me is that, so far, the DA down there has gotten all the charges dismissed. How many run-ins does he get before they put the hammer down?
    gatorbait51 likes this.
    Ace
    Gotta Fly or Gonna Die

  7. #7
    Member Array BMcPhe44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Texas South Plains
    Posts
    278
    Quote Originally Posted by Ghost1958 View Post
    I am pretty certain that amendment you are speaking of only concerns folks convicted of DV. Having a no contact order or restraining order is a totally different thing.

    You dont have to live with someone to get a no contact or restraining order and usually the person you are getting it against doesnt have to be convicted in court of anything.

    This bill if it is the case as the OP presents it is a totally different kettle of fish
    You may be right. I based my comment on a quick review of the law and comments made by news sources about why the NRA reversed its opposition.
    gatorbait51 likes this.
    "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
    - William Pitt

    {NRA Benefactor Member and proud supporter of the 2nd Amendment}

  8. #8
    VIP Member
    Array archer51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    21,555
    I see a post with no link to the bill, or links to where the NRA supported the bill. Without something more substantial than just the OP's opinion, I'll with hold judgement.
    Freedom doesn't come free. It is bought and paid for by the lives and blood of our men and women in uniform.

    USAF Retired
    NRA Life Member

  9. #9
    VIP Member Array LongRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    2,618
    Quote Originally Posted by WrongRecroom View Post
    Who buddy slow down you are talking about a state bill in Washington State right ?

    Yes the NRA has done some dumb things in the past ..
    Correct Washington State law it just passed. I get folks make mistakes but take the NRA's name out of it for a second. Lets make it an organization that
    Advocated supported, campaigned for and co signed Clintons Assault Weapons Ban
    Filed an Amicus Brief in support of Washington DC gun ban against the Second Amendment Foundation in Heller vs Washington DC.
    Opposed the Second Amendment Foundations argument that 2A is an INDIVIDUAL right.
    Advocated, campaigned and spoke in support of confiscating private property that is not illegal, was not used in any crime because no crime has been committed, no criminal charges filed, no trial by jury and no criminal convictions.
    Does that sound like an organization that is pro second amendment?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ghost1958 View Post
    Is this a state bill or a Fed bill??
    State bill sorry if my post was confusing.

    Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
    The way I understand it is the Lautenberg federal law (Lautenberg Amendment) is already in place allowing LE to take away guns from people who have DV restraining orders against them.
    In the portions relevant to this conversation of the Lautenberg Amendment. the Lautenberg Amendment is about Domestic Violence CONVICTIONS. Huge HUGE difference between penalties for criminal convictions and confiscating property / denying an Inalienable God Given Right due to unsubstantiated accusations.

    Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
    The legislation in Washington state was opposed by the NRA until special wording was added to appease them.
    Personally I do not care when or why the NRA switched sides and sold us out. the point is they switched sides to support confiscation guns from Law Abiding citizens. It makes their promise to me a lie. Bottom line it is contrary to what they claim to do with my membership money. The so called special wording is so much nonsense as it only requires the judge issuing the no contact or restraining order to say the party being restrained is a potential danger. Well duh he just issued a no contact / restraining order because the he determined that the party being restrained to be a danger to another.

    Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
    I also believe that the citizens of Washington (especially Seattle) are more to blame for these ridiculous laws than the NRA.
    Valid point except that I did not claim the NRA is responsible for the asinine law only that they supported an unconstitutional asinine ANTI GUN law. Which is going to further drain resources from organizations that actually support 2A. You are correct Seattle is a city of liberal morons that gives the rest of the state a bad name but the fact remains that it is only one city. Despite Seattle Washington State remains one of the most pro gun states in the union, much more so than say Texas.
    One of the first if not the first Right To Carry States
    Stand your ground and the Castle doctrine have always been the rule.
    The standards for the use of lethal force in defense of life, property, to stop a felon, and/or a fleeing felon is much broader than many other states. As an example Joe Horn or Zimmerman would have never occurred in Washington. I believe we are the only state that requires the state to pay for ALL legal expenses if someone is charged in a shooting and proves that it was justified. But yes we have ALOT of work to do we are far from being a FREE State. Which is why I am upset. An organization I support to protect my gun rights used my money to strip me of my rights.

    Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
    What is with the window stickers in Seattle indicating gun free zones in more than a 100 businesses and growing.
    Again Seattle is only one city. That said that phenomena is nation wide. People have a right to determine what is acceptable on their private property. Don't like the rules don't shop there.

    Quote Originally Posted by BMcPhe44 View Post
    If you know a better organization who uses your dues better then join them.
    I do the Second Amendment Foundation it has been effectively protecting gun rights in the courts for about 40 years.
    Last edited by LongRider; March 10th, 2014 at 05:03 PM.
    gatorbait51 likes this.
    Abort the Obamanation not the Constitution

    Those who would, deny, require permit, license, certification, or authorization for me to bear arms are as vile, dangerous & evil as those who would molest, abuse, assault, rape or murder my family

  10. #10
    Senior Member Array CWOUSCG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Left Coast
    Posts
    923
    Advocated supported, campaigned for and co signed Clintons Assault Weapons Ban
    I have not been a fan of NRA since then.
    LongRider and gatorbait51 like this.

  11. #11
    VIP Member
    Array OldVet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    S. Florida, north of the Miami mess, south of the Mouse trap
    Posts
    16,475
    "allows the courts to authorize the confiscation of private property (guns) from anyone who has a no contact or restraining order out against them."

    It is my non-legal opinion that a challenge to this in the higher courts as a violation of 2A rights will be swift and upheld.
    Retired USAF E-8. Lighten up and enjoy life because:
    Paranoia strikes deep, into your heart it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid... "For What It's Worth" Buffalo Springfield

  12. #12
    VIP Member Array pipedream's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    2,251
    While many of us may be unhappy with things the NRA has done or not done. Where would we be without them?
    gatorbait51 and ppkheat like this.
    NRA Patron Member
    GOA Life Member
    Never look down on anybody, unless you're helping them up.

  13. #13
    VIP Member Array Ghost1958's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    6,031
    Quote Originally Posted by pipedream View Post
    While many of us may be unhappy with things the NRA has done or not done. Where would we be without them?

    Not bash the NRA because for the most part they have changed their stripes since then, but history is history and the NRA has a pretty long one of supporting gun control. NFA in the 30s Gun Control Act in the 60s. And a host of other lesser infringements until not so very long ago. Had they stood up to Senator Kennedy then as they probably would do now we likely would not have the GCA of the 60s though thats not certain. It certainly didnt help us that they did support both NFA and GCA. So they have some bad history to undo.

    Now blaming the NRA as we know it now for the past is wrong. But they still do occasionally land squarely on the other side of the fence from 2A. Im not sure if it is bending to political pressure and trying to appear "responsible" to the antis in a teetering balancing act or what really.

    They do make some very weird choices about who they give A ratings too at times also. But by and large they do help us a great deal. And I do support them.

    I tend to devote more of my support to GOA and NGOA and 2nd Amendment foundation. GOA isnt as large but not as wishy washy as NRA and they are very active in flooding reps emails mailboxes and switch boards with pro gun support from voters when the need arises. 2nd Amendment foundation record speaks for itself. When it moves usually major things happen.

    JMO....except the historical facts portions
    tdave, Aceoky and gatorbait51 like this.
    " It is sad governments are chief'ed by the double tongues." quote Ten Bears Movie Outlaw Josie Wales

  14. #14
    VIP Member Array peckman28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    2,085
    Do any of you have actual proof that the NRA supported the 1994 AWB? I tried the googles and I got this:

    The 1994 Assault Weapons Ban
    gatorbait51, BMcPhe44 and Aceoky like this.

  15. #15
    VIP Member
    Array PEF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    3,779
    Quote Originally Posted by LongRider View Post
    Correct Washington State law it just passed. I get folks make mistakes but take the NRA's name out of it for a second. Lets make it an organization that
    [INDENT]Advocated supported, campaigned for and co signed Clintons Assault Weapons Ban
    Filed an Amicus Brief in support of Washington DC gun ban against the Second Amendment Foundation in Heller vs Washington DC.
    Opposed the Second Amendment Foundations argument that 2A is an INDIVIDUAL right.
    Advocated, campaigned and spoke in support of confiscating private property that is not illegal, was not used in any crime because no crime has been committed, no criminal charges filed, no trial by jury and no criminal convictions....
    Huh?

    http://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content...amicus_nra.pdf

    Section I of the Brief: The Second Amendment Guarantees an Individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms

    Can you substantiate your claims with some evidence? I'm not seeing that from the NRA brief file in support of Heller.
    -PEF, a Framer with a Steelie...
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    1. All guns are always loaded.
    2. Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy.
    3. Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target.
    4. Be sure of your target and what is beyond it.

Page 1 of 2 12 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

arizona law on drug possession and property confiscation

,

gun confiscation

,

gun control

,

guns confiscated in crimes came from just 3 local gun stores nra

Click on a term to search for related topics.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors