ATF to Outlaw Shotguns

reply to post by captaintyinknots


My apologies, good sir ! No, guns don,t just go off, I was being flippant in my entire post.
I,m well aware that your constitution allows you the right to " Bear arms " I,m sure the majority of gun owners are responsible, but there must be a huge number who are,nt. If you are sport shooting, ( The only reason for individuals owning a gun ? ) surely a side by side or over and under shotgun, or rifle with tele sights should be enough for larger game ?
Why would you need a pump action or repeater shotgun, or assault rifle? Because someone else might have a bigger, better gun ?
Handguns. Useless at longer range, so why would you have one, other than to shoot each other. This means either everyone has to have one, or nobody has them.
I know someone is going to point out that you Americans like target shooting... I don,t believe that for a minute !
Pretty boring after a while, I would think... I,ll pre empt your comments: " He just does,nt get it ! "

The bill/ATF memo that was posted in the OP has been around for a couple of YEARS. It's been talked about on firearm blogs and forums like ar15.com for a long time now. Nothing has yet come of it and it's just a proposal that has never gained any real traction. The last couple of years have actually seen a major RISE in gun sales and several new laws and pro 2nd amendment clauses by the supreme court. They have said the the 2nd amendment is an INDIVIDUAL RIGHT and some of the state and federal laws have been declared unconstitutional.

reply to post by cavtrooper7


I want one of these

reply to post by scorpiosin


See what I mean? This is just the sort of attitude that gets gun owners a bad name !

You,re a very naughty boy, and you can,t have one !

reply to post by MrJohnSmith


with regard to you position if we remove guns, there would be no violence.
humans succeed in hiding behind the face of Intel and higher being of the planet but here we have on this video the absence of Guns in the animal world


my point is we have not evolved at all, have we?
just smart enough to point fingers and call names
and use tools

reply to post by rebellender

Quite, Mr.rebellender !
Though if we don,t have guns, we,d still beat each other to death with sticks and stones. It,s part of our dark primeval survival instinct, which we seem unable to shake off, despite our being " Civilised " ( ? )

Until people who are against gun ownership start planning policies to revoke the licences of people who text, talk on the phone, eat, read and apply makeup while driving, they are merely being irrational trolls.

The persistence of irrational trolls in their attempts to circumscribe others within their personal moral expectation, opinions and whims is wholly un-American, flies in the face of the basis of Western liberty, and continues to provide concrete reason for allowing arms for the express use of defense of property and individual rights.

The clear and rational reason for the Second Amendment was to forever ensure that citizens possessed the means to enforce and maintain the social contract implicit in the Constitution. It was, after all, written not after a duck hunt but a revolutionary war fought by men who wanted to maintain allegiance to their government but were forced to secede when that government no longer honored them as fully equal citizens.

The ratio of documented firearms in civilian ownership to actual accidents and crimes committed is comical. The vast and overwhelming majority of gun owners have clearly exercised their right (and civil responsibility) for over two hundred years in a manner consistent with incredible control and restraint.

In most other countries, such a rate of gun ownership would have resulted in war and revolution many times over in such a span.

Most American gun owners view themselves as being sentinel in the protection of the concept of community and Social Contract, and live with a very intimate awareness of the rights and human dignity of their fellow citizens. Why? Because for them individual rights and civil responsibility can no longer be a mere theory safeguarded by others, as they must be personally accountable for the power inherent in citizenship every single day.

In fact, gun ownership is one of the most clear signs that the freedom and responsibility allowed by the American Experiment, stemming from the Enlightenment progression, does work. Because millions of Americans wake up day after day, with not only the right but the means to dissolve their bond of community, and they still choose to stand with their fellow citizens and their body of government and compromise.

while I whole heartededly support gun ownership
to be fair to the situation
as it is said guns don't kill people... people kill people,
so it may also be said about the maintenance of freedom

guns don't make people free...people make people free
waiting for the guns to do it may be a tragic mistake..and exactly what the PTB want
they afterall are all about the arms trade


odds are they aren't worried about guns..they know they are there
they have a plan for it too I'm sure


star for the chimp clip Reb

reply to post by NightShift


I,ll have to politely disagree with you, NightShift. Either everyone has a gun, or no one has them. Mostly, they have only one purpose...I would only permit the forces of law and order to carry weapons, and then only in specialist trained firearms teams, as in the uk, rather than all L.E.O.s being armed .....
I,d rather live in a country like the uk, where limited gun ownership is very strictly monitored,and the range of weapon types permitted is very small.

crime rates go up when the population isn't armed and go down when they are

Compared with the United States of America, the United Kingdom has a slightly higher total crime rate per capita of approximately 85 per 1000 people, while in the USA it is approximately 80

en.wikipedia.org...

I hear you folks are thinking of outlawing steak knives now
what will be illegal next
hands?

reply to post by MrJohnSmith


I respect that popular British sentiment relative to a Briton's perspective of modern history.

The concept of law as understood in Britain is/was understood in the same way in the States, with the wrinkle here being unfair taxation without representation......creating a real and pressing need to consider what resort there is when the spirit of law is usurped by the whim of tyranny.

To put it fairly, you didn't have that problem! Our experience is different and I would not criticize your view relative to your country and history. I see no reason why a British subject/citizen would be impressed with the concern in the same way as an American. Consider this: our Constitution implies little continuity in the way that British government does, and in fact is a volatile, ever-changing contract. Americans have a need to be wary and watchful that is unique. Not good, or bad, just another way of being.

In no way do I mean this to be condescending, but I think our cultural heritage demands more a more direct individual involvement. That is NOT a slight, as obviously our government and law derives heritage from Britain. It is just to say that the balance of power here is different in subtle ways that reflect the fact that we had to rebel against our culture, heritage and government because it did not respect us as peers.

reply to post by Danbones


Hmmm ! Point taken, But, Mr.Danbones, I would,nt mind betting there are far, far fewer deaths, as a result of crime here in the uk, compared with the U.S of A ?

reply to post by NightShift


Thank you, NightShift. It must be that some of us Brits really don,t understand WHY the right to bear arms is written in to the American Constitution. I think I understand it better now, thanks to your explanation, not sure that I would agree with it though.....

reply to post by MrJohnSmith


You should consider, however, that we are six times as populous and a nation with a large flux of immigration at low levels of income.

# ATF realy

reply to post by MrJohnSmith


Thank you. I think your view, from your perspective, is rational and admirable.

reply to post by NightShift


A fair point, which had not occurred to me....

Nvm

reply to post by MrJohnSmith


You raise a fair point though. The potential for sectarianism in the US is very real and has multiple fault lines...

I am sure many people feel adding guns to this mix is a recipe for disaster. Cultural differences, the role of religion in government, cheap immigrant labor marginalizing the native lower class.....

We would do well to work harder to ensure that we abide by our contract, using peaceful means now rather than violent means later, which I think Danbones was saying as well.

I will not lie, it takes effort and patience to hold such a wide array of differences together under our ideals of government.......and not everyone bothers to make this effort anymore.....native born or immigrant alike.

reply to post by seabag


Not to worry. I've nowhere authorized them to determine what sort of shotgun I am "allowed". The Constitution specifically and clearly refuses them that authorization. It's fine - my shotgun breaks every single one of their criteria, and they STILL can't have it. Should they decide to proceed with a Constitutional violation, then when they come for mine they can have it in 1 1/8 oz increments.

No problem. There's only one of me for them to get, but it will take several of them to do it, so I reckon it would be a fair trade on my part. People just look at the odds wrong when they say "they'll overwhelm you with men and firepower if you refuse". Bollocks. The way to look at it is they will HAVE to expend several of them for every one of me...

There's a "fair trade agreement" for ya!