Subject: No one can sell any ammunition after June 30, 2009

The controlers are testing the waters with this. The democrates have long been supportive about restricting or removing gun rights, and Obama makes no effort to hide his thinking along those same lines. This push is not really all that unsuspected it is just to see how far the can push, It will be resisted, you know, if we give an inch they will take a mile.

The danger is in the slow and progressive chipping away. As with all the freedoms that are but fond memories now. They are taken bit by bit in such a way that arguments just like the one we have going on here are all that ever happens, some people get pissed and some people applaud it but most people accept it with an "it's not that bad" or "it could be worse" attitude. After everyone is adjusted to the new stricter regulations they will chip another bit away. This is the process and it is an easily found pattern repeated across many aspects of our freedoms. After a while the threat of armed resistance to tyranny is further reduced. Even now civilian firepower at it's maximum legal force is hugely outmatched by the military, hell even the cops.

The problem here is in the recording of whose buying what. It is a form of the extremely dangerous and feared "gun database" that is ALWAYS used to track and confinscate the means of resistance during a disarmerment. That is why these small enchroachments have such really huge implications in future incroachments and finally in the disarmerment of the people.

As stated earlier the ruse that this would help track murderers and robbers is crap. Murderers and robbers couldn't care less about the bullets in their (probably illeagal) gun, I can't think of too many criminals use there own legally owned weapon. It would be like leaving your ID card at the scene. No, this effects the larger whole, and is an attempt to further weaken the 2nd amendment and to widen the gap between Our and Their capabilities. The point of the 2nd ammendment is to keep the people on an even footing with the government. To protect us from tyrany and to afford us the right of last resort.

If the NRA is worried about these proposals then so am I.

They have posted alerts here NRA Legislative Alerts

If you are concerned I would recommend checking your area and notifying your representatives. Fortunatly Wisconsin looks ok for now.



[edit on 3/20/2009 by AlienChaser]

I am always amazed in these threads at the comments and way of thinking that come from people in countries with gun bans.

They consistently demonstrate a total lack of perception as to what being a free individual really encompasses.

I am a free individual. I am free because I exist. I do not derive my freedom from government. Our government derives its power because free men and women give it that power to govern ... and we may take away that power should it ever become threatening of our freedom.

The 10 amendments are not our guarantee to these rights. These rights are ours regardless of what anyone may say. The 10 amendments are limitations on the government to not interfere with OUR rights ("shall not be infringed").

I feel sorry for those that constantly turn to government to solve their problems, who feel they are not responsible enough to own a gun and keep it for their own protection. Who feel that their fellow law-abiding countrymen aren't responsible enough to have a gun either. That only the government is trustworthy enough to posses firearms and its citizens are not.

I tell you now -

A GOVERNMENT WHO FEARS IT CITIZENRY POSSESSING FIREARMS IS A GOVERNMENT NOT TO BE TRUSTED. FOR IF THEY UPHELD THE RIGHTS AND FREEDOM OF THE PEOPLE THEY WOULD HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR FROM ITS CITIZENS.

If a government wants your guns (by hook or crook) then I say they will eventually want your other rights as well!

reply to post by Nventual


I guess I have more of a problem with the Fed's knowing how much, of which Caliper and how many rounds I keep in my home.

I also have a problem registering my ammo, requiring my name, BIRTHDAY, Drivers license, etc. to be listed on a Federal database. That is part of the proposal.

I enjoy the Freedom that this Country was originally founded on. I’m not worried about taxes. Will that be considered the next sin tax?

It does sound too strange to be true. It's simply a waiting game. Time will tell. Nothing is ever black and white. Too many gray areas being planned.

[edit on 20-3-2009 by wonderworld]

[edit on 20-3-2009 by wonderworld]

AlienChaser brings up a good point and I understand two issues with this bill.

The first being that 'they' have knowledge of what guns and ammunition you have, meaning if there is such thing as a NWO and if it's as bad as the people here make it out to be then the police will show up and know what weapons each person has so it's easier to confiscate.

Secondly, in case of some sort of civil war it may be harder to create a militia to defend your area.


Wonderworld, do you mean to tell me that your drivers license and name isn't already listed when you buy weapons or get a license? You do need a license to own a gun in America, right?

reply to post by Nventual


A right does not need a license.

see what I mean!

No owning a gun does not require a license, but buying a handgun requires a permit - if it is purchased from a dealer.


Would you need a license for your other rights?

[edit on 20-3-2009 by 2 cents]

reply to post by Nventual


Yes my 44 mag is registered on the database. That is all they will know. I dont kiss and tell anyone what I have. I dont want my other ammo or ANY ammo listed with ID. Good point on the NWO.

the government is officialy making all of our rights "privliges" (listen to some of Rahm Emanule's comments). they fear free speech, gun RIGHTS, and the peoples ability to craft a 1960's or 1770's style revolt. if congress passes these bills, we will be forced into opresion...this is happening at light speed and we need to do something about it

reply to post by wonderworld


I can understand your concern over this, and I don't think it is unwarranted. Nor do I think it signifies any good in terms of any other future legislation coming "down the barrel" (excuse the pun). But what I do EXTREMELY dislike is that you dismiss Andre18's comments so quickly. Especially when the title of your article is COMPLETELY misleading, which I think was one of his major points. Not even you, several posters on here proceeded to almost mock him for his stance.

First off, just because he's from Australia doesn't make his viewpoints any less valid then yours. Did you stop and think that people from other countries with even more strict gun control could have valid input? And he shouldn't be castigated for Australia's laws, but he is completely free to state how he feels those laws have affected him.

I will agree that this legislation is WORSE than pointless, but that doesn't mean anyone with an opposing viewpoint is automatically wrong, either.
And like I said, this is necessarily directed at you alone.

reply to post by invisibleman11


I'm with you!

Obama had to find a bad ass and Rahm Emanule is the man. No one messes with him. They know better.

You have a great point about the 1960's or 1770's style revols, however there are new terrorist laws. Things will be quite different in 2010 than they are now.

reply to post by wonderworld


exactly, new terrorist laws and reports like the recent MIAC report are incrementaly disabling the American citezenry to change their government. this is disgusting and before people relize it, it will be far too late........this new administration WILL push more tyranical laws than weve ever seen but theyu will be thinnly veiled to look like they are trying to help the people and the masses will fall for it like a bucnh of drones....we are watching one of the most important times in american history

reply to post by Nventual

Wonderworld, do you mean to tell me that your drivers license and name isn't already listed when you buy weapons or get a license? You do need a license to own a gun in America, right?

You do need a photo ID to buy a rifle or shotgun, that and you must be 18, In order to buy a handgun I think the age is 21 and you will be subjected to an ATF check before it is allowed. Most citizens of age are able to buy either but handguns usually have a "cooling off" period to prevent heat of the moment gun assaults. Felons or domestic abusers are not allowed.

Gun laws are micro managed and complex, and they vary by state. but in general the average citizen can walk out of a store with a rifle or shotgun that day, or come back and pick up a handgun in a few days. I am not an expert but this is my understanding.

I own a 357 lever action rifle, a 12 gauge shotgun and a steyr 40 S&W. I did have to wait for the pistol. but the shotgun and rifle were gifts from my parents, I have never told big brother about them, nor am I required to.


[edit on 3/20/2009 by AlienChaser]

reply to post by ThoughtMachine


I wasnt aware I dismissed anything.

If I remember correctly people were bashing him saying he had no right to speak on this American topic. (If I’m thinking of the right guy?) I invited him to stay and participate.

I owe him no defense. I posted properly and gave links. I also added a few more along the way if you have been reading. I’m not claiming this is the LAW of the land. I put it out there as a general information.

I’m up for some negativity or difference of opinion. Were not a bunch of clones yet.. I enjoy a good debate. That’s the American way, as I see it

The proposition of such a law is unfathomable to me. Some say it should be re-named. I can think of several but by no means am I out of line. Did you see my state proposition here is the link again. This thread is not about me, rather all of us.




Things in 2010 will change. You will see. This bill is not off the table yet and I expect worse to come. I am an Optimist in general. Things like this are Spooky!





[edit on 20-3-2009 by wonderworld]

reply to post by wonderworld


Actually, I probably should have directed my previous post at others, but you still failed to address Andre18's post and mine in regards to the title of your thread being misleading.

That's like me posting a thread saying that "No Retailer Can Sell Mature Video Games After April 1, 2009", except that they can, but have to ID anyone purchasing such games. And it hasn't been made into law yet.

While the topic is certainly a great one for debate, that doesn't make the title any less misleading, especially for something that has not yet come to fruition. There's a lot of questionable and certainly unconstitutional bills in circulation at any time (hey, lots have already been passed, especially recently), but your title smacks of sensationalism, and borders on being spurious.

The title was misleading, It dropped my jaw as I had just got home and I was just about to lock and load, so yeah it is sensentionalized, but lets not make the thread about the title. The thread itself is valid. my 2 cents.

By the way, 2 cents, why can you sum it up like this and I end up rambling?
Great post

A GOVERNMENT WHO FEARS IT CITIZENRY POSSESSING FIREARMS IS A GOVERNMENT NOT TO BE TRUSTED. FOR IF THEY UPHELD THE RIGHTS AND FREEDOM OF THE PEOPLE THEY WOULD HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR FROM ITS CITIZENS.

Here in FLorida, the laws differ county by county.
My home county, I can buy any thing I want, short of full auto, and walk out in 3 "business" days.
Fortunately, I work next county up and can buy anything, short of auto, and go home that day with my newest best friend.
I do have to pass background check and not be a felon, in all counties, as Federal Law requires, but I can get what I want.
I also have been saying for years that the ammo is the next thing for the do-gooders to go after.
Wish I could pick LOTTO numbers like that.
EDIT to add, I wonder what is going to happen when they come for the word programs of the journalists that have backed tis blasphemy?
Who did those idiots think was protecting them?

[edit on 3/20/2009 by LAUGHING-CAT]

[edit on 3/20/2009 by LAUGHING-CAT]

reply to post by wonderworld


OK. Let's see them shut the hunter's who reload their own ammo in their basements. (Shot shells, hard point's, etc.)

Like to see the "tax" on that. ( short of "mass tax" on projectiles).

Might as well tax pea's. (HEY... YOU ALL have done pea shooter's, popped best friend in the back of the head......)

~D~

reply to post by wonderworld


Please check your facts a little more before you post. Alabama's bill if passed would have enacted this policy on January 1st of this year. People are still selling ammunition in my state. Nonetheless it is alarming that this has even been going on. You get a S&F for that.

[edit on 20-3-2009 by DragQueen4Peace]

reply to post by donavias

edit, not info I want to put out.

[edit on 3/20/2009 by LAUGHING-CAT]

Hmmm, why would the government try to disarm and/or tighten up ammunition/gun regulations on its' citizens?

Does it really have to do with reducing crime, like they might trumpet to the masses?

Think about this. Big Pharma regularly kills people with some of its' drugs, but they still keep pumping out drugs that kill.

So, wait a minute? The government is supposed to care but they aren't "disarming" Big Pharma. Who is regulating criminal activity with Big Pharma? On the contrary, Big Pharma pumps out more and more crud, but some how, we as citizens are deemed the "dangerous" ones, and restrictions on guns and ammunition "must get tighter."

Sounds more like we are being made into docile, blind, and controllable sheep. I've got news for ya. I have eyes, and I don't walk on all fours.

Troy

And I am sure that the crack dealer down the street from me will check and make sure that his glock is registered and legally obtained. Oh ya, he will also put the pipe down for a couple minutes to make sure all of his ammo is encoded. As for me, I wont be able to defend myself when he breaks into my house and tries to steal my tv because I cant afford a gun or ammo.

I can not stand this anymore, I have had it !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!