First they came for bumpstocks

[ladder13]

Admin Edit-

Read the rules here.
If you want these discussions to stay open, keep it focused. We don't do general political and social commentary.

The rules are here if you have trouble locating them-

Sticky: READ this > RULES on HOW to use the 2A Forum

NOTE these especially:

READ these guidelines before starting a thread or participating in a thread in this 2A Forum. Consider them to be RULES for starting a thread or participating here.

This is NOT:
This is not where you post general political discussion and comments on OTHER issues not related to the 2A. Other issues are the economy, Obamacare, general Lib bashing, tinfoil and black choppers, how to start a revolution, etc, etc.
Keep it focused on the 2A issues.

This is not where you discuss what the 2nd Amendment means to you or a free people in general. We already know that. We understand the philosophy.

This is not where you bash the states/locations that suffer under restrictive gun laws.

This is not where you post your "What If's".

This is not where you swear your "Cold Dead Fingers" oath. Print it out and pin it to your door.

This is not for the latest news about some scumbag shooting someone or getting arrested with a gun.

This is not where you post your latest AR or AK.

This is not for discussing gun and ammo prices or availability.

This is not where you post which movie stars or talking heads are currently bashing the 2nd Amendment.

This is not where you moan about liberalism or the changes in our culture.

This is not for the latest news on a gunowner using a gun lawfully for self dense, unless it is simply an OUTSTANDING situation that we can use in the halls of Congress.

This is not where you will fix everything wrong with our society.
///////////////////////////////////////


original post:


and people were "pleased". Now they're coming for another bite. No new semi auto's, no arm braced "AW's", etc.
Bans 10+ magazines.


Senators Introduce Assault Weapons Ban - Press Releases - United States Senator for California

 

[ladder13]

At least they're going to allow us to keep what we have

 

[Rustyt1953]

At least they're going to allow us to keep what we have

How magnanimous!

 

[Muss Muggins]

At least they're going to allow us to keep what we have

Well, unless you have an arm brace . . .

 

[hoc9sw]

Before someone says "It can't pass", think a second time. These are politicians with agendas, and someone will make a deal for a dam, bridge, base, ....

I've been there.

 

[WCCPHD]

At least they're going to allow us to keep what we have

For NOW.

How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time.

 

[WCCPHD]

I just watched an extremely disturbing documentary on WWII, particularly dealing with the West Coast. Those living in those states became afraid of the Japanese-Americans living amongst them. So-called ordinary people harassed these CITIZENS, many of whom's ancestors had been in the US, and particularly the West Coast States, longer than their "neighbors." The GOVERNMENT took notice of them. FIRST, they were all fingerprinted and forced to register. Then they were given 48 hours to sell their homes, businesses and property. Then they were interned in "internment" camps.

What was telling and quite frankly scary was that the US President at the time openly acknowledged that what was done to these lawful CITIZENS of the US was unconstitutional and violated numerous laws, BUT it was a MILITARY NECESSITY to violate these laws/Constitutional Rights and it was done anyway.

Anyone see the similarities to what is in the works today? NEVER say it can't happen, because history tells us that it has already happened and if the citizens of the US are not careful it will happen again, other constitutional rights will be suspended/violated due to the fear of those whose voices are raised the loudest.

The issue today is akin to how it was in the 1940's. Not enough good people, who love the entire Constitution, spoke (will speak) up and called those in power on their transgressions and demanded the Constitution/Laws be followed.

We have been sensitized to the antics of the anti-gun people because they are only focusing on small issues, one at a time. We allow one thing to be banned/restricted today and we will not speak up when they go one step further in the future.

Be careful of allowing small victories to the anti-gun group as they are patient and never sleep. Every small movement toward their ends are considered victories. Every compromise by US is a victory to THEM.

Please Remember: As I have said many times before:

GUN CONTROL IS NOT ABOUT GUNS, ITS ABOUT CONTROL.

 

[Roller Delayed]

A law is passed. Maybe one that restricts full auto. Maybe about SBRs. What do "law abiding" "conservative" gun owners do? Embrace every loophole and workaround they can come up with to violate the intent of the law.

And then they get pissed when this behavior brings negative attention to guns and the need for more regulation just to maintain the intent of the laws already on the books.

We act like scam artists that keep protesting the negative attention we bring upon ourselves by trying to game the system.


And don't fool yourselves - owning a bumpstock is not an intellectual act of civil disobedience against the '34 NFA, it is just childish hijinks and no one sees it as anything more than that. It's why so many Americans see gun owners as immature clowns with dangerous toys instead of serious adults intent on preserving something of importance.

 

[fordson]

The proposed bill will ban folding or adjustable stocks. So that means that M1A1 Carbine Paratrooper stocks would be banned as well as M4 ARs with the collapsible stocks? Hmm........

 

[Muss Muggins]

And your action plan to combat this bill is . . . ?

A law is passed. Maybe one that restricts full auto. Maybe about SBRs. What do "law abiding" "conservative" gun owners do? Embrace every loophole and workaround they can come up with to violate the intent of the law.

And then they get pissed when this behavior brings negative attention to guns and the need for more regulation just to maintain the intent of the laws already on the books.

We act like scam artists that keep protesting the negative attention we bring upon ourselves by trying to game the system.


And don't fool yourselves - owning a bumpstock is not an intellectual act of civil disobedience against the '34 NFA, it is just childish hijinks and no one sees it as anything more than that. It's why so many Americans see gun owners as immature clowns with dangerous toys instead of serious adults intent on preserving something of importance.

 

[CalmerThanYou]

Sometimes people have to "game the system" because the system is increasingly prohibitive.
I guess i fall into the not serious, adult clown profile then. Although this clown remains legal at all costs, I just wonder where the concessions end?

 

[Telecaster]

AWB introduced in Senate

SB66: "A bill to regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes."

Text not yet available.

A bill to regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes. (S. 66) - GovTrack.us

On a more positive note, there's a rumor that RB Ginsberg is resigning tomorrow.

 

[WCCPHD]

Sometimes people have to "game the system" because the system is increasingly prohibitive.
I guess i fall into the not serious, adult clown profile then. Although this clown remains legal at all costs, I just wonder where the concessions end?

To the anti's the concessions will NEVER end. When they talk about compromise its always the pro-gun people losing something. The anti's idea of compromise is not getting everything they want, all at once.

Anybody that thinks they won't take away our Second Amendment rights by force has only to look at the Japanese-American (US Citizen) internment in "internment" (i.e. concentration) camps during WWII. This was a blatant violation of state laws, Federal Laws and of the US Constitution. The FACT that it was illegal was acknowledged by the sitting US President at the time, BUT it was allowed due to "military necessity."

Remember: GUN CONTROL IS NOT ABOUT GUNS, ITS ABOUT CONTROL.

 

[Roller Delayed]

It can't pass. Clearly just a gesture.

 

[WCCPHD]

The full title of this bill should really set off alarm bells from the citizens of the US.

"...to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited..."

All I can say is at least now those who would openly violate the US Constitution and hate liberty are no longer trying to hide it.

Can you imagine if similar bills were introduced with subtitles substituting:

Free Speech
Freedom of Religion
Freedom of the Press
The Right to be Secure in Person and Papers
etc

for "the right to keep and bear arms?"

Folks, this is scary and it seems no one is upset about a blatant attempt (no matter how likely it is to pass) to undermine the US Constitution and the basic rights of the Citizens.

 

[Telecaster]

There are 28 co-sponsors plus Di Fi, for 28 Demz and Bernie Sanders (I) behind it. The Senate has 45 Demz and 2 Indies, for 47% control.

I'm sure Pelosi will follow up with the House bill, where they control 54% of the votes.

 

[Muss Muggins]

Can you imagine if similar bills were introduced with subtitles substituting:

Free Speech
Freedom of Religion
Freedom of the Press
The Right to be Secure in Person and Papers
etc

for "the right to keep and bear arms?"

In all fairness, the rights you enumerate above are not unlimited either . . .

 

[fordson]

Ok, so what can we do about it? Organize some kind of National Movement?

 

[ladder13]

The full title of this bill should really set off alarm bells from the citizens of the US.

"...to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited..."
.

It should, but bolt action FUDDS, and like minded others, simply don't care.

 

[10ring]

It should, but bolt action FUDDS, and like minded others, simply don't care.

I understand your feelings, but perhaps we should avoid alienating and dividing gun owners. The other side is pretty united and we need to try and be more so.

May I suggest that calling someone a fudd or rino isn't going to change their viewpoint or garner their support. It may just harden them against reasonable arguments pointing out why they need to revise their position. Pushing people closer to the other side is not a winning strategy. Granted, we may never convince some gun owners to understand the issues the way we do, but let's at least try not to push them even farther into the other camp. It is going to be a rough few years ahead and we will need all of the support we can muster.

More than ever, we need to be more sophisticated about how we fight this political battle.

Just something to think about.