White House to Push Gun Control

[zeezee]

". . . in the next two weeks, the White House will unveil a new gun-control effort in which it will urge Congress to strengthen current laws, which now allow some mentally unstable people, such as alleged Arizona shooter Jared Loughner, to obtain certain assault weapons, in some cases without even a background check."

Magazines are going to be the first to go, then black rifles and then? Maybe handguns in general and rifles holding no more than three rounds.

[Selectedmarksman]

Two things to watch here:

1) How they define "Mentally unstable" and if they will mandate government access to medical records
2) "...in some cases without even a background check" Expect a revised attack on the 'gunshow loophole' and all other private transfers.

[700PSS]

zeezee,

Where did you get this?

[chrismartin]

http://www.newsweek.com/2011/01/27/whit ... ntrol.html

[bakerjw]

It's been going around on a couple of boards. Anyone who votes for it is basically cashing in their chips for 2012. All their constituents need to do is point out the results of 2010. I think that a lot of politicians, mainly dems, realized what a pissed off electorate can do.

That is not to say that we can relax. Keep their feet to the fire.

[700PSS]

Well, as Rahm Emanuel said: “Never let a crisis go to waste.” Or, in this case, a tragedy.

..current laws, which now allow some mentally unstable people...to obtain certain assault weapons, in some cases without even a background check.

“current laws which now allow?” WTF?

And so now, a G19 is now a dreaded "assault weapon"?

...the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, the nation’s largest gun-safety group.

The term "safety", especially when used politically in combination with the term "gun", has been completely hijacked and twisted into something that most sheeples are supposed to feel good about. "Gun safety? Well, golly. That's sure sounds like a good thing. How could that be bad?"

I am immediately suspect of anyone who says "gun safety" in a political context. Like "Georgians for Gun Safety" (“Advises how to fight for more restrictive gun laws, discourage gun ownership…”) AKA: GA wing of Americans for Gun Safety/George Soros.

[Hush]

It's been going around on a couple of boards. Anyone who votes for it is basically cashing in their chips for 2012. All their constituents need to do is point out the results of 2010. I think that a lot of politicians, mainly dems, realized what a pissed off electorate can do.

That is not to say that we can relax. Keep their feet to the fire.

+1 Use a blowtorch.

[doubloon]

Two things to watch here:

1) How they define "Mentally unstable" and if they will mandate government access to medical records
2) "...in some cases without even a background check" Expect a revised attack on the 'gunshow loophole' and all other private transfers.

+1

Also keep your eye on the MAIG pushing to close the "gunshow loophole" and pushing to integrate medical records into NICs ... useless bastards.

[Blaubart]

All this bullshit just goes to prove one thing. There really is an "Us" and "Them" attitude, from both sides of the potomac.

You can shoot all the school kids and college students you want, but when someone shoots one of "theirs", then they really go into high gear introducing new gun laws.

[Libertarian_Geek]

Two things to watch here:

1) How they define "Mentally unstable" and if they will mandate government access to medical records
2) "...in some cases without even a background check" Expect a revised attack on the 'gunshow loophole' and all other private transfers.

Watch for this too:
3) Secret black-lists/no-buy-lists with no information about how people get added to or removed from said lists.

[Libertarian_Geek]

It's been going around on a couple of boards. Anyone who votes for it is basically cashing in their chips for 2012. All their constituents need to do is point out the results of 2010. I think that a lot of politicians, mainly dems, realized what a pissed off electorate can do.

That is not to say that we can relax. Keep their feet to the fire.

+1 Use a blowtorch.

And a pair of pliers... you can't have good blowtorch fun without the pliers!
(figuratively speaking)

[Speed-Racer]

Obama appears to be mentally unstable.......I'm sure he doesn't personally own any firearms.

[smcharchan]

All this bullshit just goes to prove one thing. There really is an "Us" and "Them" attitude, from both sides of the potomac.

You can shoot all the school kids and college students you want, but when someone shoots one of "theirs", then they really go into high gear introducing new gun laws.

Thank you for pointing out the sham.

Check your history books folks. In no case has controlling the citizen's possession of arms by the state been about protecting the citizenry. It has always been about protecting the state.

[crang11]

There are roughly 2x as many guns in this country as there are cars and trucks, yet vehicles kill more Americans every year then guns. Perhaps they should ban my truck because the tires are too big and it has some evil features like a brush guard...oh and its black. No law abiding citizen has a need for a big black truck with no sporting purpose. Fucktards.

[benfranklin1787]

LET TYRANNY REIGN!!!!! When are people going to wake up in this country and realize that once our right to defend all other rights are gone, it's all over. The 2nd amendment is not in constitution for sporting or hunting purposes, it's there to keep an out of control government off our backs.

[PTK]

It may be bad of me, I rather enjoy these death rattles of big government. Trying to restrict anything "evil" like AR15, AK47, etc., would be nearly impossible. There are MILLIONS of these rifles in the USA. Millions. Tens if not hundreds of millions of magazines. THEY AREN'T GOING AWAY, PERIOD.

[psp7]

Congress wont pass anything substantial. Maybe strengthen existing laws on mental cases having guns, which is fair and sound. If the Repugs in congress go along with the muslim in-chief and the Senate Dims with an infringing bill then its the end of the GOP as a major party. Most Americans are sick of the corrupt & hypocritical nature of the GOP and the good-old-boy system of bandits, so good riddance if they want to join Obuma and Dems on trampling on the constitution. Its our quickest way to get a fresh new party that cares about the American future and the Constitution by witnessing that indeed we do have a one party system that pretends to be two by acting as opposition of one another . I'm so sick of the two choices bought and paid for from the same source~ Coke and Diet Coke.

[GlocksInMySocks]

although it does sound like a good idea to keep crazy ass bastards from getting their hands on guns, the thought that it could turn in to a slippery slope is a scary one

[Selectedmarksman]

although it does sound like a good idea to keep crazy ass bastards from getting their hands on guns, the thought that it could turn in to a slippery slope is a scary one

Potentials for the 'mentally ill' list:
1) Members of the Tea Party (paranoid extremists)
2) Any Religious individual claiming to have a direct connection with his/her God (schizophrenics)
3) Ex-military (look for PTSD diagnosis to rise, even when unjustified)
4) ?

If there is a solid definition of "Sane" I didn't come across it in my Psych studies. Everyone has tendencies towards one thing or another and can have ups and downs throughout their lives. Pick up the latest edition of the DSM, in most cases the recommendations for diagnosis depend on 1) duration of symptoms and 2) whether or not the symptoms pose significant impairment to the person's daily life/happiness/success. Lose your job? Wife leave you? Been feeling down and unable to find a job for 6 months or more? Congratulations, you're a candidate for being labeled "Clinically Depressed". Diagnosed as ADHD as a child? No guns for you. OCD? No guns for you. This is what I expect to see if the Government gets its hands on medical records.

Doesn't matter if you pose a threat to yourself or others.

I have no degree in Psychology, but the more I studied it the more I saw Clinical Psychology is not as scientific as we'd like to think it is. Yes, there are some clear cut cases, but that is not the norm.

[GlocksInMySocks]

that's why I added the slippery slope part...

[lilfuzzybuny]

so whose going to say it with me " gun controll doesnt keep guns out of anyones hands " ?

[Blaubart]

It may be bad of me, I rather enjoy these death rattles of big government. Trying to restrict anything "evil" like AR15, AK47, etc., would be nearly impossible. There are MILLIONS of these rifles in the USA. Millions. Tens if not hundreds of millions of magazines. THEY AREN'T GOING AWAY, PERIOD.

I tend to agree with that, BUT, with the stipulation that *standard* capacity magazines cannot be transferred, not even by inheritance, then anyone born after the passage of the legislation wouldn't be able to legally own a *standard* capacity magazine. In 100 years, the police could safely assume any *standard* capacity magazine they come across to be illegal.

When it doesn't benefit us, I tend to agree that magazines aren't guns/arms and shouldn't be regulated by the ATF. However, I believe that magazines, together with ammunition, are necessary to the functioning of the weapon and as such, should be protected by the 2nd Amendment.

...and this is why I believe this bill is unconstitutional and the authors and sponsors of it should be brought up on charges. (No, seriously!)

Edit - Sorry, I was confusing this thread with the other thread about the magazine ban. But I'm sure there will be some things in Obama's proposal that will be straight up unconstitutional too.

[Blaubart]

...with the stipulation that *standard* capacity magazines cannot be transferred, not even by inheritance, then anyone born after the passage of the legislation wouldn't be able to legally own a *standard* capacity magazine. In 100 years, the police could safely assume any *standard* capacity magazine they come across to be illegal.

Maybe this belongs in the other thread, but I had another thought about this.

What if my corporation owned a bunch of *standard* capacity magazines? Then, when I finally tip over, my kids inherit the corporation and all that it owns. I guess I'm pondering that more for everyone else, not so much for myself. My kids are already born, I'm not having any more, and as far as I know, it's still "legal" for a kid to own *standard* capacity magazines.

[misfit762]

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."-Thomas Jefferson

[Blaubart]

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."-Thomas Jefferson

Ironically, that's also the strongest reason for the government to take away your guns.

It doesn't help when most people say "Yeah, but it'll never happen here..." when you refer to what's happening in Egypt, or Haiti, or Chicago . Most people believe all of Haiti's problems were from the earthquake and must have been fixed by now, what with all the donations and international aid.

I like to ask these people: Why not? What is it, specifically, that would prevent our government from ruling with an iron fist once the people have been turned into subjects? What is it that would prevent them from taking away a right that you actually care about, like your freedom of speech? Or your right to a fair trial? Or your religious freedom (i.e. to practice the religion of your choice, or to not observe any religion, or to not have a religion forced upon you) I haven't received any intelligent answers to those questions yet. Just the standard "It won't..." or "It can't happen here." Most of these people also believe that the US Government is a democracy. ...and somehow, that once a country is a democracy that it can't transform into a dictatorship. All it takes is for them to do something that pisses the majority of people off and when they all realize they are all going to be elected out of office come election day, then they vote amongst themselves to change the laws so they can't be voted out of office. Then when it gets challenged in court, they change the laws again, and again, and again. Eventually, they take away all the power from the people and the courts and they can rule unopposed. Within a few years, anyone with a spine will get out of the military while they can and they'll be replaced by people that will execute whatever order comes their way.

I explain this to people and after assuming I'm a nutjob, they revert back to the original "It can't happen here..."

I simply tell them you never know what's going to happen in 5, 10, 50 years from now and I just don't think it's a good idea to have absolute trust in the future of politics and government. The *ONLY* thing that is certain in life, and especially politics and government, is that things change. Sometimes for the worse, sometimes to the unthinkable.

What's also scary is a lot of these people I talk to are utterly unaware of current events outside of what Obama is talking about. I like to quiz them sometimes. Who is the president? "OBAMA!" (They all get that one right) Vice president? Suprisingly, some of them don't know that. Speaker of the house? I've asked three people in the past two weeks and all three said "Nancy Pelosi". WRONG! Remember that thing I said about "Change"? Who represents our state in DC? (I love to phrase it like that because some people know who are senators are, or who our representative is, but some people can't match the names with their purpose.) Hardly anyone knows who our Lt. Governor is. I laugh sometimes, but it's actually kinda sad...

Sorry, I guess that turned into a bit of a rant.