New Gun Bill? Your Neighbor Controls Your Rights

They're not going to stop until either every gun is confiscated or only muzzleloading single shot hunting rifles are legal.

Guess who won't give a # about the government's laws? Criminals. Who really could give a # if his gun is illegal and will continue to use it until he can't anymore at which point he won't go to a gunshow (the FBI said only about 3.96% ever did), he won't go into a gun store (most of the time they're felons), and he won't get a friend/random dude on the street to get his gun(only about a third did this.) He's going to steal it or buy it off the local illegal arms dealer(60 some percent did according to the FBI)

i really hope the government keeps on clamping down harder and harder. When all of the tension and pressure on the millions of pissed-off veterans and gun owners finally breaks the proverbial camel's back, it'll be all that much sweeter when Feinstein and her bunch are all rounded up and dropped off into Flint Michigan or deep in the ghetto Detroit butt naked. We'll see how much they care about those poor criminals. I give em 2 hours before they're in ditches

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

Essentially, yes. You would have to be a fool to think that you can meet force with force when it comes to the popo.

You are better to give them the rope they are asking for, then following up in court.

I am waiting for the day that the ACLU steps in on the gun rights side of the argument.

a reply to: jude11

It has become obvious there is a wolf among the chickens. This creature would eat her own young.

originally posted by: verschickter
a reply to: Wrabbit2000

Ah a "only from my dead cold hands"-comment. We´ll see, we´ll see. None of you would do this if they have family in the back. None. You would be dead in an instant, you would leave your family behind and maybe, some of them would die also after all the rounds fired at you penetrate the paper walls that most homes are build of.

It´s just a cowboy fantasy in my eyes, nothing else. How about leaving your guns at home and go protesting instead of playing constitutional warriors behind the keyboard. THAT would change something.

No fantasy. I guarantee there would be millions of people hiding behind every blade of grass. I still LOL when I think of the gov, or anyone else, trying to take guns from Mountaineers here where I live. lol Most people here are born snipers(hunters) and make up for a large number of snipers in the military. It would be the bloodiest war ever fought. They don't have the balls to come and try and take anybody's weapons, other than passing "gun control" laws in inner cities. The 2nd amendment is clear. TPTB do not have the authority to change it and no anti-gun wussie will ever strip a gun from a gun owner. Ever. Never.

originally posted by: Fylgje

originally posted by: verschickter
a reply to: Wrabbit2000

Ah a "only from my dead cold hands"-comment. We´ll see, we´ll see. None of you would do this if they have family in the back. None. You would be dead in an instant, you would leave your family behind and maybe, some of them would die also after all the rounds fired at you penetrate the paper walls that most homes are build of.

It´s just a cowboy fantasy in my eyes, nothing else. How about leaving your guns at home and go protesting instead of playing constitutional warriors behind the keyboard. THAT would change something.

No fantasy. I guarantee there would be millions of people hiding behind every blade of grass. I still LOL when I think of the gov, or anyone else, trying to take guns from Mountaineers here where I live. lol Most people here are born snipers(hunters) and make up for a large number of snipers in the military. It would be the bloodiest war ever fought. They don't have the balls to come and try and take anybody's weapons, other than passing "gun control" laws in inner cities. The 2nd amendment is clear. TPTB do not have the authority to change it and no anti-gun wussie will ever strip a gun from a gun owner. Ever. Never.

I've been saying this for a long time. The proverbial cat is already out of the bag....not a chance they can take guns out of our hands.

One man shutdown a naval shipyard last year, two men shutdown Ft. Hood in different incidents, 2 men shutdown Eastern Massachusetts and practically brought the state under martial law. Nineteen men hijacked and crashed planes into two buildings and changed the world overnight. Don't ever underestimate what a few well-trained (or not) men can do if they've decided to act.

I live in Kalifornia and I call my representatives regarding these measures all the time, however, the real protest is simply not complying with their laws. You're seeing the same thing in New York and Connecticut. The vast majority of gun owners will ignore registration completely. In regards to the latest thrust for control from the Progressives, I'm sure they'll round up some guns but a lot of us have already taken care of that problem - with shovels. Good luck Progs!

a reply to: Fylgje

Ha. I was going to say. Folks in West Virginia, Tennessee, Nevada, New Hampshire and a bunch of other states wake up every morning ready for the government boys to try and take their rifles.

It would be a massacre if they tried to confiscate guns

Right-Wing Terrorists Kill Las Vegas Policemen

Two Las Vegas police officers were killed Sunday in what appears to be a politically motivated ambush in a pizza restaurant that spilled over to a nearby Wal-Mart, where the two shooters committed suicide after killing a man in the store.

Details are sketchy, but Metropolitan Police Department sources close to the investigation say the shooters shouted that “this is the start of a revolution” before opening fire on the officers, and draped their bodies with cloth showing a Revolutionary War-era flag. Investigators have also found paraphernalia associated with white supremacists.

Sunday night, Metro homicide investigators and FBI agents cordoned off and were searching a small apartment complex at 110 S. Bruce St., about four miles from the shooting scene. A resident of the complex said he had spoken with a man who lived in the apartment being searched. He said the man appeared “militant,” and often talked about conspiracy theories.

An explosion was heard at the apartment complex at about 9:30 p.m., but no information was immediately available Sunday night.

Sheriff Doug Gillespie said officers Alyn Beck, 41, and Igor Soldo, 31, were shot while they ate lunch at CiCi’s Pizza, 309 N. Nellis Blvd., at about 11:20 a.m. Sunday. In a late afternoon news conference he said no motive for the attack has been determined.


“It’s a tragic day,” the sheriff said. “We have lost two officers with young families.”

Beck was a senior patrol officer who had taught Advanced Officer Skills Training and at the Metro academy. He was hired by Metro in 2001 and had a wife and three children.

www.reviewjo... urnal.com/news/las-vegas/shooters-metro-ambush-left-five-dead-spoke-white-supremacy-and-desire-kill-police

Naaw nothing to see here chirp chirp listen to crickets as bodies piled up and extreme right winged paranoid nut jobs with nothing but time and plenty of ammo worked out their dooms day fantasies.
www.usatoday.com...

CUMMING, Ga. — Authorities killed a man Friday whom they say shot a sheriff's deputy in the leg outside the Forsyth County Courthouse.

The man, gun trader Dennis Ronald Marx, 48, drove up on the sidewalk in front of the courthouse at about 10 a.m. ET, threw spike strips and explosives out his car window to keep officers from reaching him then began shooting through the windshield of his SUV with an assault rifle, Forsyth County Sheriff Duane Piper said. Deputies returned fire, shooting Marx multiple times.

It was unclear whether the deputy who first encountered Marx killed the suspect.

"When the deputy engaged him outside, it saved lives," Piper said. "The entire situation was solved by that deputy's actions."

Authorities later identified the officer as James Rush, 46, of Cumming. He's been a Forsyth County deputy since February 1990 and is expected to make a full recovery.

MARCH: Del. courthouse shooter's family fights cyberstalking charges
OCTOBER: Ex-cop killed after firing at W. Va. federal courthouse

Officials say Marx had planned the attack for a long time. He was carrying grenades, homemade explosive devices, water, zip ties and several magazines of ammunition and had rigged his body with explosives.

Court records show that Marx filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the sheriff's department in 2013.



In August 2011, Marx was arrested on charges of possession of marijuana with intent to distribute and firearm possession during a felony, among other counts, said his lawyer, Ann Shafer.

www.usatoday.com...

Under pressure from far right politicians the Obama administration cowardly backed off looking into activities of Right wing nut jobs and focus only on Islamic nutjobs calling one terrorist while the other get to keep the name patriots and wave DONT THREAD ON ME FLAGS despite the fact that these groups or individuals actually carried out more terror attacks than Islamic nut jobs ever did on U.S soil if the meaning of terrorist remained as I remembered it as violent actions associated with political ideology.

But that's ok we don't need any form of gun regulations such as back ground checks as one head gun nut said

In an interview last week with Stan Solomon, the GOA executive director reacted to Rodger's shooting spree the way he reacts to every mass shooting – by finding anything to blame other than guns.

Solomon ripped into Richard Martinez, who criticized the NRA after losing his son in the shooting, calling the bereaved father a “stupid son of a bitch” and asking “what the hell is wrong with you?” Mistakenly thinking that Martinez lost a daughter in the shooting, he added, “If you had taught your daughter how to have and use a weapon, she might still be alive.”

- See more at: www.rightwingwatch.org...

So the answer to gun violence is to arm everyone.

A lot of us in a lot of nations that have pretty strict gun control laws think that America should keep their guns. The land of liberty is kind of a beacon for us. If you give up your remaining liberties you not only cost yourselves but all of us around the world as a result. Many of us came up in nations where the British Empire has only just left direct control. Disarming the population has been on the royal agenda for quite some time now.

a reply to: jude11

Hold it.

One of the main points against gun-control by pro-gun advocates is that "Guns dont kill people, people do". That the gun is just a tool, it is how it is wielded that matters. That the problem isnt guns, it is irresponsible, crazy and distraught people with access to guns is the real problem.

Basically, what you are alarmed about is the community, neighbours and family having the ability to raise the alarm to authorities before a mass-shooter goes on his rampage?

It would appear that you are saying that we have to accept mass-shootings as part of life now.

a reply to: Leonidas
Amen!

a reply to: Leonidas

If you operate under the false assumption that yet another law will stop someone from carrying out a "mass shooting", I guess you are correct. That this law will work.

Now, coming back to reality, and accepting truth. Everyone here knows that laws have yet to curtail someone from performing a killing.
The latest person in CA killed people by stabbing.


SO.........what was it about this new law that will work again?

a reply to: macman

Of course a single law will not solve the problem. If the problem of mass-shootings is going to be solved, it will require any and all potential solutions be on the table.

You can't say that you care about the problem and are serious about fixing it if you aren't willing to discuss all possible solutions.

You are well aware what my post was talking about. Willfully pretending you didn't understand the message is pointless.

originally posted by: Leonidas

Of course a single law will not solve the problem. If the problem of mass-shootings is going to be solved, it will require any and all potential solutions be on the table.

You can't say that you care about the problem and are serious about fixing it if you aren't willing to discuss all possible solutions.

The removal of rights is not an option.
With this crap bill, it opens up a world where people performing SWATING of persons they don't like will look like kids play.
This bill is a direct assault on an individuals 2nd Amendment right.

Serious or not, placing such things on the table is not a solution. This bill , and ever other one like it are about building a feel good false sense of security to a voting block, that is ignorant to reality based facts.
Laws have yet to stop anyone. Enacting more shows what stupid does....the same thing over and over expecting a new result.

originally posted by: Leonidas
You are well aware what my post was talking about. Willfully pretending you didn't understand the message is pointless.

I am???? Well, assume that I don't please do explain this.

originally posted by: Leonidas
Of course a single law will not solve the problem.

Are you saying that we need more laws?

I propose we more stringently enforce the multitude we already have on the books.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Agreed. Poor wording on my part. It was a response to someone else. "There oughta' be a law" is a poor response to pretty much anything.

The point was that solving the problem of mass-shootings requires all options to be available for discussion. People can't say they are serious about wanting to fix this problem if they aren't willing to discuss everything involved.

originally posted by: Leonidas
You are well aware what my post was talking about. Willfully pretending you didn't understand the message is pointless.

I am???? Well, assume that I don't please do explain this.

I apologize. I have assumed a level of reading comprehension that is apparently not present.

originally posted by: Leonidas
Agreed. Poor wording on my part. It was a response to someone else. "There oughta' be a law" is a poor response to pretty much anything.

The point was that solving the problem of mass-shootings requires all options to be available for discussion. People can't say they are serious about wanting to fix this problem if they aren't willing to discuss everything involved.

Understood. My initial proposal is to more diligently pursue criminals who obtain firearms and prosecute them and anyone who uses a firearm in the commission of a crime more vigorously.

We also need to be able to identify and treat mental illness more effectively. My opinion is if you have received treatment and are deemed recovered you should not be precluded from exercising your Constitutional rights.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Leonidas
Of course a single law will not solve the problem.

Are you saying that we need more laws?

I propose we more stringently enforce the multitude we already have on the books.

Over 20,000 and counting. Can someone remind us what the definition of insanity is again?

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

i agree with most of what you are saying. the difference is when you say "if you have received treatment and are deemed recovered you should not be precluded from exercising your Constitutional rights.". i would go further and state that not all "mental illness" makes a person incompetent to own a firearm, and that only those who are a currant danger should be disallowed from owning firearms. just because someone is depressed for example does not automatically mean they will go out and shoot people, or even themselves for that mater. even because someone is suicidal does not mean they will try to kill themselves with a gun. i've known a few people who owned guns who were suicidal, and NONE of them ever tried to use their guns to kill themselves. in fact i have known quite a few people who suffer from mental illness of different varieties and NONE of them has ever used a gun inappropriately. just having a "mental illness" has no real bearing on someone using a gun inappropriately, just as the lack of mental illness in no guarantee that they will not use a gun inappropriately.