guns in america [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : guns in america


mc24
11-29-2011, 19:07
this may be in the wrong place, and if so, sorry. but i was reading today in my nra magazine american rifleman an article that said if our current administration is re-elected in 2012, that by 2016 our right to carry and bear arms would be gone. what is your thoughts on this matter. i personally think there would be a riot if the govt tries to take our weapons.

janice6
11-29-2011, 19:10
I believe it.

huggytree
11-29-2011, 19:14
we only won by ONE vote in the Supreme court a couple of years ago at the 2nd amendment meaning we can own guns (as a right)

swap that one vote and we could lose that right

it should shock everyone how close it is

i doubt they could accomplish it by 2016....Pro Gun is on the upswing from everything i can see.....Dems dont bring it up anymore

i remember during the clinton gun ban times how i felt like that Right was going to dissapear.....antigun was all over the news...and clinton wanted to take his 10 round ban down to 6 rounds........those days are gone...hopefully

rickster916
11-29-2011, 19:15
I am buying as many guns as I can afford ASAP. You never know what tomorrow will bring.

post-apocalyptic
11-29-2011, 19:15
Stack your mags and ammo high and stack em deep, my friends.

Kentucky Shooter
11-29-2011, 19:15
2nd Amendment-- Protecting American gun owners since 1790 or so.

Has been bent a little but far from broken, Will still be standing strong in 2016 no matter who is president.

My opinion.

AK74play
11-29-2011, 19:19
I dont really think our government will do it out right, they been trying forever and cant get it done. That said, our current administration is trying to go through NATO then when they govern it like every other country we will have to fall in line and our administration can go on nation wide TV and look you in the eye and say, it's not me, it's NATO. Our rights are in more danger now than they have ever been quite simply because way to many people think it could never happen here so they do NOTHING about it. If this trend continues much longer it's pretty much a guarentee that it will happen. WE have the power to stop it and it dont have to be done with guns. The pen really is more powerful than the sword (or gun) also the phone and at the top of the list would be the voting booth.

Texcowboy
11-29-2011, 19:26
I dont believe the 2nd amendment will be stricken but there will be so many laws inacted to water it down if the current administration stays in office after 2012.:steamed:

RyanBDawg
11-29-2011, 19:27
Its a great idea if they want 1,000 Timothy McVeigh's on their hands..

bigmoney890
11-29-2011, 19:34
Not only are they trying to do an end around with NATO, my local congresswoman sent me a letter saying that some group is trying to outlaw lead in bullets and fishing weights. They are claiming that it is poisoning the water. What kind of crap is this?! Not only are they trying to take my ability to shoot away, these a-holes are trying to take away my fishing! :wow: Ill be damned! :steamed:

mfm9
11-29-2011, 19:37
If you believe the NRA, this is inevitable unless we do something right now. If you believe the NRA, the best way to fight this is to give money to the NRA. So what else is new?

-Mike

J_P
11-29-2011, 19:39
Stack your mags and ammo high and stack em deep, my friends.

Amen to that brother!!!! Also they are not taking my guns thats that!!

bigleaf
11-29-2011, 19:39
That's just silly.

glock_19guy1983
11-29-2011, 19:43
Not only are they trying to do an end around with NATO, my local congresswoman sent me a letter saying that some group is trying to outlaw lead in bullets and fishing weights. They are claiming that it is poisoning the water. What kind of crap is this?! Not only are they trying to take my ability to shoot away, these a-holes are trying to take away my fishing! :wow: Ill be damned! :steamed:

These morons apparently arent aware that lead is a natural element.

AustinTx
11-29-2011, 19:51
this may be in the wrong place, and if so, sorry. but i was reading today in my nra magazine american rifleman an article that said if our current administration is re-elected in 2012, that by 2016 our right to carry and bear arms would be gone. what is your thoughts on this matter. i personally think there would be a riot if the govt tries to take our weapons.

Can you really visualize a riot against the US Army? I don't think it would last very long.

If every gun owner, joined the NRA, the pure number would panic every politician into repealing GCA 1968. There sure wouldn't be any more anti-gun laws passed. BUT, the majority say it won't ever happen and come up with some lame excuse as to why they don't like the NRA.

The NRA is my lobby, to keep my guns and anything associated with them. I shouldn't need, to have to support a PRO-gun lobby, to keep the Bill of Rights, second amendment, to the US Constitution, from being abolished. It's already being bent out of shape pretty well.

Reaper19
11-29-2011, 19:56
Sounds like 2008 to me. IMHO a BIG part is this is about $$$$$$. Hopefully ammo prices wont go to much higher.:faint:


Pround member of the NRA

Boot Stomper
11-29-2011, 19:59
The Second Amendment will be in trouble if Obama replaces any of the current conservatives (or moderate) judge on the Surpreme Court. Several of the judges are getting up in age. Between 2012 and 2016 it could likely happen if Obama is president.


http://supremecourthaiku.com/blog1/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Supreme_Court_US_20101.jpg

Rizzo
11-29-2011, 20:00
That's just silly.
Yeah. I don't see it. If anything, it's getting better. Seems like every time I read the news, some state is drafting up concealed carry legislation where there was none before. NJ is the latest example. I grew up there, and remember what it's like. I thought I'd be dead in the cold, cold ground before that state ever even thought of concealed carry.

The Viking
11-29-2011, 20:03
If the current administration continues for another four years they will have a chance to pack the Supreme Court with liberals radically changing its rulings and outlooks on the second amendment. That will give them control of two branches of government. Saying it could not happen here is the mistake a number of people have made in other countries. It can happen here never doubt it.
I am glad I am an old guy, who has gotten to live most of his life as a free man and not as one told what to do by an oppressive big government.

Made in Austria
11-29-2011, 20:08
I don't believe it's coming that early. But, I make sure to be set for the rest of my live with firearms, ammo (lots of ammo), mags, important spare parts and other stuff. I know that companies make a fortune with guys like me, but I don't care. Even if never need all this crap, (which I hope) I have nice firearms collection which I can pass down to my kids and grand kids someday.

I stock up hard and hide everything deep. That's my hobby.

post-apocalyptic
11-29-2011, 20:25
Its a great idea if they want 1,000 Timothy McVeigh's on their hands..

Hell of a lot more of us than that, my friend. But don't slander those Patriots who would refuse to surrender their arms under any circumstances by using that murderous scumbag's name to refer to us, please. :eyebrow:

RyanBDawg
11-29-2011, 20:36
Hell of a lot more of us than that, my friend. But don't slander those Patriots who would refuse to surrender their arms under any circumstances by using that murderous scumbag's name to refer to us, please. :eyebrow:

He was not much different than these guys..

http://raymondpronk.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/waco_tanks_fire.jpg

IronRonin
11-29-2011, 20:43
Well, if you take an honest look at the situatio, you will notice that the O administration hasn't taken a SINGLE move against gun owners in the last 4 years, and more pro-gun legislation has been passed these past 4 than 8 years under Bush. That's fact. Also, the last attempt at an assault weapons ban was made by 4 REPUBLICANS from anti-gun states. Google it. So I'm thinking the O administration doesn't have this as a priority. The Brady campaign HATES Obama, he doesn't support them. Also, any real "gun ban" or infringement on rights will be so heavily and aggresivly opposed, they wouldn't dare attempt it. No way is ANY administration going to sucessfully pull off a serious ban without all hell breaking loose from gun owners, period.

The Viking
11-29-2011, 21:44
Well, if you take an honest look at the situatio, you will notice that the O administration hasn't taken a SINGLE move against gun owners in the last 4 years, and more pro-gun legislation has been passed these past 4 than 8 years under Bush. That's fact. Also, the last attempt at an assault weapons ban was made by 4 REPUBLICANS from anti-gun states. Google it. So I'm thinking the O administration doesn't have this as a priority. The Brady campaign HATES Obama, he doesn't support them. Also, any real "gun ban" or infringement on rights will be so heavily and aggresivly opposed, they wouldn't dare attempt it. No way is ANY administration going to sucessfully pull off a serious ban without all hell breaking loose from gun owners, period.

The O administration only controls one branch of govt right now and knows it cannot get anything through congress. It knows butting its head against a wall will do no good. Wait until it controls two.

RightGlock1
11-29-2011, 21:55
He was not much different than these guys..

http://raymondpronk.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/waco_tanks_fire.jpg

Big difference. The guys being burned were'nt doing anything but preaching doom and gloom. Aside from stocking up on weapons. McVeigh was getting payback for the Waco fiasco at the Branch Davidian Compound. (At least that's the back story I heard).
ATF was the real SOB's in that one. Just ask the ******* agent that inflitrated BDC and later sued his own agency for mental anguish.

post-apocalyptic
11-29-2011, 22:04
Well, if you take an honest look at the situatio, you will notice that the O administration hasn't taken a SINGLE move against gun owners in the last 4 years...

Are you f'in kiddin me?!

What the hell do you think the true objective of Operation "Fast and Furious" was?

You're right that Obammy won't openly and honestly introduce any "gun control" legislation.. that's not his style. As he told the Brady bunch with a wink and a nod, he's attempting to erode the 2nd Amendment "under the radar". :rant:

Wake the hell up, man.

IronRonin
11-29-2011, 22:06
Well, if you take an honest look at the situatio, you will notice that the O administration hasn't taken a SINGLE move against gun owners in the last 4 years, and more pro-gun legislation has been passed these past 4 than 8 years under Bush. That's fact. Also, the last attempt at an assault weapons ban was made by 4 REPUBLICANS from anti-gun states. Google it. So I'm thinking the O administration doesn't have this as a priority. The Brady campaign HATES Obama, he doesn't support them. Also, any real "gun ban" or infringement on rights will be so heavily and aggresivly opposed, they wouldn't dare attempt it. No way is ANY administration going to sucessfully pull off a serious ban without all hell breaking loose from gun owners, period.

Ender587
11-29-2011, 22:12
Just my opinion, but if the Gov. just started taking peoples guns away there would be riots in the streets. If it ever happens, it will be a slow process and few will really see it coming. They will put 1 fence up.. a fence that we don't really like, but it wont be worth getting in an uproar about. Then another fence will go up.. and a few years later another fence. Sooner or later you look up and your fenced in.

Sbh87
11-29-2011, 22:48
I tend to think our guns would not just disappear over night. But, over a long period of time our rights could be chipped away at until there is almost nothing left. It could happen more easily than some think. Just look at some states that have the AWB still on the books, states that are a may issue and require justifiable need for a ccw, states that limit where one can ccw, and states that require guns to have special safety features to be compliant. Now none of these completely take away ones right to have a firearm but severely limits it. All it takes is an anti-gun president and just enough anti-gun congress members to drown out the our voices and slowly chip away at our rights on a federal level. I think our side will always have enough of a voice even if out numbered to keep things from going down the drain too much but luckily I think the majority of this country is pro-gun and interested in preserving the 2nd amendment. Even if Obama is re-elected and there is a pro-gun congress I don't see him being able to do too much when it comes to taking away our rights. I could wrong but I just don't see it being too easy for him even if he is re-elected. Hopefully he will one day pay the price for fast and furious and be locked up for a while but thats wishful thinking.

crsuribe
11-29-2011, 22:56
Can you really visualize a riot against the US Army? I don't think it would last very long.

If every gun owner, joined the NRA, the pure number would panic every politician into repealing GCA 1968. There sure wouldn't be any more anti-gun laws passed. BUT, the majority say it won't ever happen and come up with some lame excuse as to why they don't like the NRA.

The NRA is my lobby, to keep my guns and anything associated with them. I shouldn't need, to have to support a PRO-gun lobby, to keep the Bill of Rights, second amendment, to the US Constitution, from being abolished. It's already being bent out of shape pretty well.

Can you visualize tribesmen armed with old rusted guns from 30 years ago making a stand against the U.S + International armed forces and killing thousands of our guys?

Insurrection from a country's own citizens is quite possibly every army's Achilles heel.

There's simply no way the gvt is gonna wage open war against its own citizens and get away with it.

Hell, the international community would go from seeing us as stupid gun nuts to oppressed saints in 2 seconds after a U.S soldier fires the first round at a U.S citizen because that's what they always do, and since America is always telling other countries to bend over for their citizens no matter what, well everybody would side with our citizens, no doubt about it.

They can't take your weapons. That's why the founding fathers armed you.

Definitely agree about the NRA though. I don't really like them very much because I don't agree with their tactics and the things they neglect sometimes, but I will never not pay my dues.

Sonnytoo
11-29-2011, 23:00
Well, he just destroyed one million 1911 Colt handguns and about a similar number of M1 Garands that I used to carry in Korea. South Korea still has them in storage and offerred them to the U.S., and "we" said no.
And our present administration seems determined to join the UN Assembly mandate of eliminating ALL private weapons.
S2

thinktwice
11-29-2011, 23:28
Well if they take everyone's guns away, just think there will be no more crime. All the violent crimes will go away, and everyone will be safe......... Yeah right, but that really is what some of these anti-gun idiots really do think. How stupid can these people be?????

bigmoney890
11-29-2011, 23:57
Well if they take everyone's guns away, just think there will be no more crime. All the violent crimes will go away, and everyone will be safe......... Yeah right, but that really is what some of these anti-gun idiots really do think. How stupid can these people be?????

Do these of LIBERALS spouting this sort of stuff actually think that? That CRIMINALS will just stop when they are about to obtain an illegal firearm and say, "hey man, guns are illegal, we shouldn't use them to go rob this bank. Instead let's just go home and be productive and responsible citizens to our country and communities." Outlawing guns is just going to make things worse, kind of like the prohibition did nothing, except MAKE CRIMINALS MORE MONEY, AND WASTE THE TAXPAYERS MONEY CHASING AFTER THEM. A very LIBERAL kid in my Physics class decided to tell me that outlawing guns would solve our crime problem, i laughed in his face (this happened to be the same day i was going to pick up my G38). He actually thinks that if we make guns illegal then crime will disappear. Then i pointed out that CRIMINALS break the law, that's what they do.Then I pointed out that crime is throughout in Europe and they also have weapon bans and he stopped talking... But in all seriousness, do people actually think this?!

unit1069
11-30-2011, 05:22
Every one of us needs to vote next November, and we need to drive every like-minded person we know to the polls. What elected Democrats are fearful of doing is precisely what they are counting on an anti-constitution US Supreme Court doing.

We are only a single vote away from being stripped of our individual Second Amendment rights, and it bears mention that in the Kelo vs New London case the loose "conservative" cannon on deck voted with the majority that the State has the right to seize private property from individuals and give it to another private party if that second private party pays higher taxes. I never thought I'd live to see that happen, so nobody should assume our Second Amendment rights are secure.

G36shooter
11-30-2011, 05:35
I dont believe the 2nd amendment will be stricken but there will be so many laws inacted to water it down if the current administration stays in office after 2012.:steamed:
+1, they know how to cook a frog.

Dexters
11-30-2011, 05:53
http://www.prisonplanet.com/senate-rejects-amendment-to-indefinite-detention-bill.html

Senate has overwhelmingly voted down an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act t

Read up on the 'indefinite detention' proposal that was defeated. Like most ideas it will come around again and could get passed.

HexHead
11-30-2011, 06:31
Hell of a lot more of us than that, my friend. But don't slander those Patriots who would refuse to surrender their arms under any circumstances by using that murderous scumbag's name to refer to us, please. :eyebrow:

One man's terrorist is another man's patriot.

Chesafreak
11-30-2011, 07:22
FUD.

I seem to remember a run on guns and ammo after President Obama took office. A neighbor of mine was buying ammo by the case to stockpile. Were any of those fears realized? No. Go ahead and flame me but its still just FUD.

Dogpatch06
11-30-2011, 07:29
FUD.

I seem to remember a run on guns and ammo after President Obama took office. A neighbor of mine was buying ammo by the case to stockpile. Were any of those fears realized? No. Go ahead and flame me but its still just FUD.

^ I agree.

TangoFoxtrot
11-30-2011, 07:41
2nd Amendment-- Protecting American gun owners since 1790 or so.

Has been bent a little but far from broken, Will still be standing strong in 2016 no matter who is president.

My opinion.

I agree! No one will take away our guns. There would diffinitley be a revolution this country. Do you know how many guns are purchased every year in this country? Millions! Believe me it ain't gonna happen brothers! :supergrin:

Numismatist
11-30-2011, 08:08
It will likely sneak up on us all like the tobacco industry's issues:

They'll figure out how to tax ammunition and reloading supplies so that it becomes ridiculously expensive. They'll continue to limit areas of carry making it difficult to move around in society carrying, they'll place heavy OSHA-like costly restrictions on Ranges so that the small ones disappear, lower magazine capacities, increased 'safety' features making it difficult to even shoot when needed, etc.

Before we know it, we'll be like smokers, hiding in the corner shivering in the cold smoking our $2.00 cigarette while everyone else is warm inside the restaurant having a nice meal wondering why we are outside.

automan
11-30-2011, 08:17
Unfortunately, our civil rights are whatever the Supreme Court interprets them to be at a given time. Seems like rulings of Constitutional law really amount to the personal opinions of the judges, rather than precedence or historical accuracy or what Congress really meant when the law was passed.

pizza_pablo
11-30-2011, 08:46
http://www.nrapublications.org/index.php/11920/obamas-secret-plan-to-destroy-the-second-amendment-by-2016/
From the story:
-Ask Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy, D–N.Y. Before Obama’s inauguration, she pressured Obama’s transition team to back her ban on ammunition magazines. But, as she later confided to Newsweek, “They told me that’s not for now, that’s for later.”

-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has signaled the administration’s support for the Organization of American States gun control treaty, and Obama has urged the U.S. Senate to ratify it.
The Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) is currently in the works, so look for that, as well.
Together, these two treaties could effectively ban or severely restrict civilian ownership of firearms worldwide.
If that surprises you, it shouldn’t. After all, according to the United Nations, there is no such thing as a human right of self-defense. In their view, only governments have rights.

-Motive for Conspiracy
You might be asking yourself, “Why do they want to do all this? Why do they hate and fear the Right to Keep and Bear Arms so much?”
But if you look at their motives and their ultimate goals, their conspiracy makes perfect sense and serves several overlapping and interlocking objectives.
By convincing gun owners that their freedoms are secure, and neutralizing the NRA as a force in national elections, they hope to win a second term in the White House.
From there they plan to use their power to take America down the same path as England, Australia, South Africa and Canada, where gun owners have suffered crushing gun ban defeats in the last 20 years.
Without the Right to Keep and Bear Arms to unite, inspire, empower and activate America’s 90 million gun owners, they hope to profoundly alter the political landscape of our country forever.
After all, election after election has proven that in some of the most closely contested Election Day battles in American history, the NRA has been the single most decisive game-changer in politics.
Why? Because of the passion and vision of patriotic NRA members and gun-owning voters all across America … 4 million NRA members like you … and 25 million more Americans who identify themselves with the NRA … and 90 million American gun owners who share our passion for freedom.
More than anything else, that’s what makes us an impediment to the likes of President Obama.

Scary stuff, indeed, but I believe it.

125K9
11-30-2011, 09:39
I don't really see that happening, especially as polarizing as that object that's playing President is. I remember when Janet Reno was the U.S. Attorney General and said that she wouldn't rest until she had every gun owner's gun destroyed. That didn't happen, thanks in part to the NRA. I think that what they will do is continually raise prices on guns and ammo to the point that they'll be pretty hard to afford. That, along with tighter restrictions on their importation.
One thing I DO know is this. If, as a LEO, I'm ordered to start collecting responsible gun owners' guns they can have this badge. I'm a legal gun owner first, LEO second.

Nightrain
11-30-2011, 11:24
For me these words sum it up pretty well. "I'll give up my gun when they pry it from my cold dead hands"!

JS2878
11-30-2011, 13:16
I would think that if Americans were told they could not arm themselves anymore, they would arm themselves IMMEDIATELY.

AK74play
11-30-2011, 16:03
Well, if you take an honest look at the situatio, you will notice that the O administration hasn't taken a SINGLE move against gun owners in the last 4 years, and more pro-gun legislation has been passed these past 4 than 8 years under Bush. That's fact. Also, the last attempt at an assault weapons ban was made by 4 REPUBLICANS from anti-gun states. Google it. So I'm thinking the O administration doesn't have this as a priority. The Brady campaign HATES Obama, he doesn't support them. Also, any real "gun ban" or infringement on rights will be so heavily and aggresivly opposed, they wouldn't dare attempt it. No way is ANY administration going to sucessfully pull off a serious ban without all hell breaking loose from gun owners, period.

This mentality is exactly what Big O wants you to beleive. You need to stop looking on the surface and closly examine what Big O has Hillary doing in the back ground with NATO. They have tried for way to long to do it out in the open and proved to themselves that it just wont work. There has been a hush order on gun control issues in Big O's administration for a couple years now. His administration dont want (gun control) they want (confiscation) and through NATO they dont have to do a thing and wont even take credit for it.

ghr1142
11-30-2011, 16:18
They might not take our guns !! but they could put restrictions on ammo mfg's that would drive the prices up to the cost most of us can't afford.
The prices are on a slight increase now for some reason !

AK74play
11-30-2011, 16:26
I agree! No one will take away our guns. There would diffinitley be a revolution this country. Do you know how many guns are purchased every year in this country? Millions! Believe me it ain't gonna happen brothers! :supergrin:

And do you understand that NATO dont care about a revolution in this country. There will be no need for a revolution. Our government wont be able to do anything about if we fall under NATO rule. Sir I sincerly hope I dont live long enough to see the United States rights and freedoms guaranteed us by the Constitution Of The United States fall apart under NATO control. The mind set you are pouring out here makes absolutely no sense. If history hasn't taught you any more than that about our gun rights and individual freedoms you should do a little reading. I may not agree with everything the NRA does or the way they do it but if it wasn't for them we would have lost our second ammendment rights LONG ago. They go to court every day battleing anti-gunners and corrupt state and federal agencies that try to attack out gun rights and freedoms. THAT TAKES MONEY and a LOT of it. Closing your eyes to the truth will NOT make it go away. Please sir this is NOT any kind of personal attack, it is simply my opinion on your (beleive me it aint gonna happen) statement. If everyone thought like that no one would fight these court battles for your rights and freedoms and if that happened do you REALLY think you would still have them??

pizza_pablo
11-30-2011, 17:45
I would think that if Americans were told they could not arm themselves anymore, they would arm themselves IMMEDIATELY.

One would think so and hope so... but there are many sheep, in this great country.

You can tell this issue is huge and worth discussing, because, though it is off topic, it is not locked, after 50 posts!

AustinTx
11-30-2011, 18:02
Can you visualize tribesmen armed with old rusted guns from 30 years ago making a stand against the U.S + International armed forces and killing thousands of our guys?

Insurrection from a country's own citizens is quite possibly every army's Achilles heel.

There's simply no way the gvt is gonna wage open war against its own citizens and get away with it.

Hell, the international community would go from seeing us as stupid gun nuts to oppressed saints in 2 seconds after a U.S soldier fires the first round at a U.S citizen because that's what they always do, and since America is always telling other countries to bend over for their citizens no matter what, well everybody would side with our citizens, no doubt about it.

They can't take your weapons. That's why the founding fathers armed you.

Definitely agree about the NRA though. I don't really like them very much because I don't agree with their tactics and the things they neglect sometimes, but I will never not pay my dues.

Well, if you take an honest look at the situatio, you will notice that the O administration hasn't taken a SINGLE move against gun owners in the last 4 years, and more pro-gun legislation has been passed these past 4 than 8 years under Bush. That's fact. Also, the last attempt at an assault weapons ban was made by 4 REPUBLICANS from anti-gun states. Google it. So I'm thinking the O administration doesn't have this as a priority. The Brady campaign HATES Obama, he doesn't support them. Also, any real "gun ban" or infringement on rights will be so heavily and aggresivly opposed, they wouldn't dare attempt it. No way is ANY administration going to sucessfully pull off a serious ban without all hell breaking loose from gun owners, period.


People, y'all had better get your head out of the sand. It CAN happen. The International community don't give jack, about your gun rights. They just get free money from the people that are going to take your guns.

crsuribe, thanks for your NRA support. Please don't ever drop that.

Marked3
11-30-2011, 18:36
I just joined the NRA today, and glocktalk. Hello everyone! I own a fish gill G17, Mossberg 500; and Smith & Wesson 422. Love to shoot.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

CrackerKen
11-30-2011, 19:20
This could happen much faster than most anyone realizes. All it takes is for one, just one, of the conservative judges to die while the O is still in office. It could be a heart attack, a stroke, a car crash, or (God forbid) an assassination. The O would then nominate another ultra-lib for the Supreme Court. If the O keeps a Dem majority in the Senate, they would rubber stamp his nominee. BANG! - there we have a leftist control Supreme Court. Then, all it takes is for someone to push a gun rights case to the Supreme Court, and we have had it.

I've heard it said that the Supreme's have said that Roe v Wade will never been overturned, simply because it has been the law of the land so long and could never be reversed. Well, if that's the case, I don't think outlawing guns should happen either, using their logic. Folks have been free (in most instances) to own guns in this country since the first white man set foot here. I'd call that legal presidence, wouldn't you?

RGbiker
11-30-2011, 21:06
I was a NRA member for over 15 years and dropped out in late '80's due to never ending cries from the NRA citing the anti gun crowd were attacking in full force..........and they needed more money from me to win this on going fight.

In early January I decided I needed the NRA and rejoined one week following the Giffords shooting. Next year I plan to become a life member.

Back to topic - Could our government take our guns by force? Perhaps they would try, but there's plenty of Korean war, Vietnam war and desert war combat vets who are pretty damn good at 400-500 yards with an M1 Garand or hunting rifle.

I just pray our government wakes up to realize these combat vets are everywhere.

Jerry
11-30-2011, 21:09
I just posted this in another thread but it looks like this one needs it too.

What people seem to forget is neither the Congress the Supreme Court nor the President run this country. The People do! It doesn’t make a rats backside what the Supreme Court says if The People don’t agree and show them where to shove their "minority” opinion.

"The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." Thomas Jefferson :patriot:

pizza_pablo
12-01-2011, 10:00
Back to topic - Could our government take our guns by force? Perhaps they would try, but there's plenty of Korean war, Vietnam war and desert war combat vets who are pretty damn good at 400-500 yards with an M1 Garand or hunting rifle.

I just pray our government wakes up to realize these combat vets are everywhere.
Precisely why Napolotano put veterans on the terror watch list. :steamed:

CrackerKen
12-01-2011, 10:29
I believe this worthy organization will be beneficial to us all, should the need arise:

http://oathkeepers.org/oath/

AustinTx
12-01-2011, 12:28
I just posted this in another thread but it looks like this one needs it too.

What people seem to forget is neither the Congress the Supreme Court nor the President run this country. The People do! It doesn’t make a rats backside what the Supreme Court says if The People don’t agree and show them where to shove their "minority” opinion.

"The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." Thomas Jefferson :patriot:

Where have you been for the last 60 years? We no longer have a school system, that turns out educated graduates, we have porous borders (the rest of the world is sneaking in) and about half the population is, on welfare.

There is a law, in the works, right now, that would allow the US Army to arrest any U.S. Citizen, that is a suspected terrorist and hold them as long as they want to. You would NOT be allowed to have any legal representation, at all. McCain (R) and Feinstein (D) are both pushing this bill. THAT IS SCARY, TO ME!!!!!

Acujeff
12-01-2011, 15:28
Four US Supreme Court Justices are now over the age of 70 and three of them will be over the age of 80 by the end of Obama's second term. He could likely appoint 3 more Justices if he is re-elected. An anti-gun Court would be free to re-define and dismantal the RKBA out of existence. The current anti-gun Justices have already stated their intention to do exactly that.

Anti-Second Amendment Justice Ginsberg has stated that the majority opinions in this case are “grievously mistaken” and that minority opinions would be used to rewrite legal history and create a purely “collective right connected to the militia” once they had a majority.

Obama and the Democratic majority Senate appointed anti-Second Amendment Justices Sotomayor and Kagan (replacing Stevens). All they need is one more like minded Justice to get a majority of five anti’s and implement their stated agenda through the courts.


In addition, Obama and a Democrat Senate would likely sign on to the UN global gun ban treaty and the OAS gun control treaty.

In the very least, if Obama is re-elected, gun control will no longer be "under the radar" and we'd see more regulations and executive orders governing every aspect gun and ammo ownership and commerce.

In the long run, if we want to protect the Second Amendment, we need to get a Republican in the White House and a pro-RKBA Republican majority and leadership in the Senate.

pizza_pablo
12-01-2011, 15:55
^^ Right on, Acujeff! I totally agree!!

Jerry
12-01-2011, 18:15
Where have you been for the last 60 years? We no longer have a school system, that turns out educated graduates, we have porous borders (the rest of the world is sneaking in) and about half the population is, on welfare.

There is a law, in the works, right now, that would allow the US Army to arrest any U.S. Citizen, that is a suspected terrorist and hold them as long as they want to. You would NOT be allowed to have any legal representation, at all. McCain (R) and Feinstein (D) are both pushing this bill. THAT IS SCARY, TO ME!!!!!

Let me see…. Where have I been for the last 60 years? I can tell you exactly where I’ve been for last 61. More importantly I can tell you what I've been doing the last 40 or so… I’ve been fighting against every bit of antygun legislation since they restricted us from purchasing rifles through the mail.

Yes there are some ”MORONS” coming out of the school system and far too many on welfare yada yada yada. But there is whole bunch of crazy old men out here with guns that are close enough to grave to not give a hoot about putting holes in blue helmets black helmets or helmet warn by any tarter to the constitution trying to take our firearms. Remember every member of the military and every law enforcement agent swears an oath to protect and uphold the constitution. The Supreme Court does not have the power to change the constitution, only Congress has the power to do that. If the Supremes rule against what is clearly written in the constitution their decision is null and void according to the words of the men that wrote it.

"Arms in the hands of the citizens may be used at individual discretion for the defense of the country, the overthrow of tyranny or private self-defense."
--John Adams

"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 . . . . No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms in his own hands."
--Thomas Jefferson

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword, because the whole of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops."--Noah Webster, 1787


I really don’t think our government will be that stupid in my lifetime. If they try after we are dead… oh well… there really isn’t much we’ll be able to do… much less care about it.

Now don’t misunderstand. I’m not ready to start or advocating a revolution. However if the government tries to take a clearly written constitutional right a revolution will start and I won’t be the one to start it. However, I’m willing to stand shoulder to shoulder with the other patriots. :fred: :patriot:

Edited to add: http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=qtjfMjjce2Y make sure you watch until the end. It makes my point for me.

NMPOPS
12-05-2011, 01:30
The Second Amendment will be in trouble if Obama replaces any of the current conservatives (or moderate) judge on the Surpreme Court. Several of the judges are getting up in age. Between 2012 and 2016 it could likely happen if Obama is president.


http://supremecourthaiku.com/blog1/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Supreme_Court_US_20101.jpg

I totally agree. If reelected thisx would be his way to bypass congress and whittle away at our rights.

Sent from my Ally

kirgi08
12-05-2011, 08:07
NATO is not as much of a threat ta our gun rights as the UN is.


The SCOTUS is our last saving grace,If the POTUS seats one more of "his" Justices than all bets are off and it'll get ugly.'08.

bcowen22001
12-08-2011, 21:19
The US govnt may not try to do a "round up" of our guns, but they can always tack on more taxes on ammo and taxes on buying guns in general. They could also make it more difficult in the ways of paper work. Some countries require that you pass a phycological evaluation, police department approval, etc on owning even a 22 cal. I could see Obama passing a AWB, but I see them going a tax and more background check route. Think if it is so expensive to shoot nobody would ever shoot or own as many rounds of ammo, or as many guns.

automan
12-09-2011, 04:58
The US govnt may not try to do a "round up" of our guns, but they can always tack on more taxes on ammo and taxes on buying guns in general. They could also make it more difficult in the ways of paper work. Some countries require that you pass a phycological evaluation, police department approval, etc on owning even a 22 cal. I could see Obama passing a AWB, but I see them going a tax and more background check route. Think if it is so expensive to shoot nobody would ever shoot or own as many rounds of ammo, or as many guns.

People forget, including the U.S. Supreme Court "that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".

polyman305
12-09-2011, 06:21
It won't happen. It would be pure mayhem. They would come at gun owners from another angle. Like for example they could impose a legislation on the amount of gun power production due to some bullcrap fabricated story with reports - "recent discoveries of lead deposits found in the atmosphere". Then it would mean less ammo is produced. So less boxes are on the shelf. Manufactures have to raise prices in order to compensate lost revenue due to less production abilities. A $14 box of 40sw or 9mm of that cheap walmart ammo would then probably jump to $27. You can only imagine what 45acp,10mm,44mag,357mag,41mag,454 cassull,etc would cost. That right there would force many to sell their guns. And take the notion of owning a gun out of your head. Or they would require us to have some special lead environment possession license in order to buy ammo which would probably cost about $799 to apply for with a 6 month wait period. In which they would only give out so many a year. The Gov is sneaky, very freakin sneaky. Trust me I know. But as far as a complete confiscation process, or door to door thing...hell no. For one there are a lot of gov. employees who are NRA members and love guns. Not to mention legally owned & armed citizens like myself whom will let off before I give off. Then you got the damn thugs/crooks/gangbangers whom are NOT in any database as a gun owner. So THEIR houses would get skipped over. No way in hell would U.S. citizens stand for that. From what I hear on New Years eve night...you'd be a damn fool to knock on somebody's door and tell them to let you in so you can confiscate their guns. Remember, the U.S. Gov is sneaky as hell...

Numismatist
12-09-2011, 07:27
It won't happen. It would be pure mayhem. They would come at gun owners from another angle. Like for example they could impose a legislation on the amount of gun power production due to some bullcrap fabricated story with reports - "recent discoveries of lead deposits found in the atmosphere". Then it would mean less ammo is produced. So less boxes are on the shelf. Manufactures have to raise prices in order to compensate lost revenue due to less production abilities. A $14 box of 40sw or 9mm of that cheap walmart ammo would then probably jump to $27. You can only imagine what 45acp,10mm,44mag,357mag,41mag,454 cassull,etc would cost. That right there would force many to sell their guns. And take the notion of owning a gun out of your head. Or they would require us to have some special lead environment possession license in order to buy ammo which would probably cost about $799 to apply for with a 6 month wait period. In which they would only give out so many a year. The Gov is sneaky, very freakin sneaky. Trust me I know. But as far as a complete confiscation process, or door to door thing...hell no. For one there are a lot of gov. employees who are NRA members and love guns. Not to mention legally owned & armed citizens like myself whom will let off before I give off. Then you got the damn thugs/crooks/gangbangers whom are NOT in any database as a gun owner. So THEIR houses would get skipped over. No way in hell would U.S. citizens stand for that. From what I hear on New Years eve night...you'd be a damn fool to knock on somebody's door and tell them to let you in so you can confiscate their guns. Remember, the U.S. Gov is sneaky as hell...


Shhhh, don't give them the ideas!:steamed:

Seriously, this is EXACTLY how gun ownership would be reduced in this country. Slowly, carefully, and by increasing financial means on the ranges, the courses, the ammunition, the sellers, the parts. This way they aren't touching the actual guns, so your 2A rights aren't in question. All the other stuff is.

Sure you can own a gun - as many as you want; it'll cost you $2,000 per year per gun...each year.

TexasFats
12-09-2011, 13:20
They're already trying to limit ammo, and have been for several years. The first attempt, a few years ago, involved forcing primers to no longer be made with lead compounds. Lead styphanate or similar lead compounds are an active ingredient in most non-corrosive primers. The lead-free replacements have a limited shelf life. Also, just outlawing lead ammunition would make ammo much more expensive. Combine that with primers that have limited shelf life, and you have the makings of an ammo shortage that would make 2009 look like a surplus of ammo. Also, a couple of years ago, OSHA tried to limit the amount of ammo on the shelves of stores, like Wally World and gun shops, under the guise of ammunition being "explosive". It's going to take 360 degree awareness to keep our rights.

Numismatist
12-09-2011, 13:22
Exactly, it's not the guns they'll go after, it's all the stuff around guns they'll get to.

Jerry
12-09-2011, 15:21
I’ve been saying that for many, many, years. It seems very few have the intellect to realize it’s true. The fed already have taxed firearms. I’m to aggravated about it to find out how much it actually is. I’m PO’ed enough just knowing it exists. HAZ Mat fee of powder, primers etc. It already started... years ago! :steamed:

AustinTx
12-09-2011, 19:13
Machine guns were originally restricted by taxation in 1934 (The National Firearms Act) . The $200 tax, to own, was a big wad, in 1934. We were in a real depression and the average person couldn't ever afford that. My daddy was lucky to get a job that paid $1.00 a day. The tax was ruled to be legal because it was in interstate commerce.

They are now not allowed to be owned by civilians, so I heard.

WarCry
12-09-2011, 19:42
I'm always fascinated to see how few people understand how the government, let alone POLITICS, actually works.

First, everyone keeps saying "If Obama replaces a few Justices..." as if they're appointed by decree. There have been few fights as big as those over Supreme Court nominees in the Senate. Do you HONESTLY think anyone that's that radical is going to make it through a Senate confirmation? The names that would do that won't even be mentioned because they would go nowhere, and they'd get there faster than a Zombie thread!

Next is politics. Barack Obama doesn't like guns. It's not a secret. As a state senator, he worked for the people in Chicago, and he voted how they wanted him to: Against guns. As a US Senator from IL - essentially (sadly) representing the views of Chicago - he voted the same way. But as President of the United States, he's not that stupid. Whatever his PERSONAL beliefs, he knows he works for the WHOLE country. Does that mean he's going to make everyone happy? Of COURSE not. Especially since some people would argue with him if he said the sky was blue. Whether he likes guns or not doesn't matter. He's a politician first, and won't make that sort of waves. Besides, he's got enough fights on enough fronts that he won't add that one. And besides all THAT, his #1 guy in the Legislative branch - Harry Reid - doesn't support more gun control. It wouldn't make it to the floor for a vote.

For those that think a president has that much power, why didn't President Bush issue an executive order that struck down the AWB his first day in office? The answer has nothing to do with President Bush, it's simply that that's NOT THE WAY IT WORKS.

And finally, for the UN/NATO treaty thing, it's all a bunch of hogwash, and for the exact same reason that strict gun control will fail in Washington. The Executive doesn't make decisions to join groups or sign treaties. The Legislative does. Congress has to approve treaties by a 2/3rd majority approval in the Senate, even those with NATO and the UN. And even if Congress, through some freak miracle of nature, did authorize such a treaty, in 1957 the Supreme Court ruled that, within the US, the Constitution supersedes any international treaty or agreement.


Watching the imaginations run without any sort of basis in fact is all kinda fun, though.

Jerry
12-10-2011, 11:48
I'm always fascinated to see how few people understand how the government, let alone POLITICS, actually works.

First, everyone keeps saying "If Obama replaces a few Justices..." as if they're appointed by decree. There have been few fights as big as those over Supreme Court nominees in the Senate. Do you HONESTLY think anyone that's that radical is going to make it through a Senate confirmation? The names that would do that won't even be mentioned because they would go nowhere, and they'd get there faster than a Zombie thread!



Time to come out from under your rock. The Obomination just "nominated" a socilist woman, Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. The Democratic controlled Senate gave her the seat. He may as well have appointed her by decree.

AustinTx
12-13-2011, 21:46
Time to come out from under your rock. The Obomination just "nominated" a socilist woman, Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. The Democratic controlled Senate gave her the seat. He may as well have appointed her by decree.

AND NOW, we have a Supreme Court Justice that has never been a judge, of any sort. Of course, that would be impossible.

NEOH212
12-14-2011, 03:05
I wouldn't doubt it one bit given the current mentality of most of the people in this nation.

NEOH212
12-14-2011, 03:05
I’ve been saying that for many, many, years. It seems very few have the intellect to realize it’s true. The fed already have taxed firearms. I’m to aggravated about it to find out how much it actually is. I’m PO’ed enough just knowing it exists. HAZ Mat fee of powder, primers etc. It already started... years ago! :steamed:

+1 :thumbsup:

AustinTx
12-14-2011, 21:44
I see y'all have been paying attention, for the last several years.