Cuomo close to announce sweeping gun control laws

Originally posted by boymonkey74
But If the majority of people want better control on who can get the guns shouldn't you do the democratic thing and listen to them?

No, they should do the legal thing and push for a constitutional amendment...

Jaden

When there is a democrat in office, the big push is to disarm the people.

When there is a republican in office, the big push is to disarm the authorities.

And this isn't "agenda" or politically driven???

Just curious. When the NY SWAT team arrives on a scene are they limited to 10 rounds in a hand gun? When they form those military units to harass protesters are they limited? When they walk the streets are they limited?

I just don't get the 'you don't need more than 10 rounds' but the people that confront criminals do even though they only confront those criminals AFTER they've victimized someone else.

* New restrictions on assault weapons

Help me out here please.
Assault weapons are banned, so what "New restrictions" can there be?

When will people see, they don't care about saving lives, they care about money.
How will putting a %50 tax on ammo and mags save a life?
How will putting a 10rd limit on a mag save a life?
How will banning another type of gun (based on looks only) save a life?

It's about control and money.

Fear the government that fears your gun!

No, I don't have a gun...
en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by beezzer
When there is a democrat in office, the big push is to disarm the people.

When there is a republican in office, the big push is to disarm the authorities.

And this isn't "agenda" or politically driven???

edit on 9-1-2013 by beezzer because: (no reason given)

I've got news for you beez, the Reps have restricted gun rights as well as the Dems.

The Reps closed the select-fire registry in 1986 and made restrictions on gun imports from overseas just before Clinton was elected!

reply to post by jam321


Well see they dont listen to SCOTUS. SCOTUS is for the people to listen to and is part of the talk down to the people branch. They dont see SCOTUS as something that gets between the people and the government. They dont believe in any balances of power. In fact if they were reading these few lines here they wouldnt understand what I were talking about.

Originally posted by WatchRider

I've got news for you beez, the Reps have restricted gun rights as well as the Dems.

The Reps closed the select-fire registry in 1986 and made restrictions on gun imports from overseas just before Clinton was elected!

I don't see how this restricts gun rights. Please explain.

reply to post by SourGrapes


Limiting access is the very definition of "restriction".

how blind does one have to be to not be able to "see" that?

Originally posted by oasisjack
Most Americans are not for gun control but your being told that to be pro gun you must also be dead children. Which makes you look like a loon if you are pro gun. It's called spin it's Now a trade mark of our government.

Similar to: "If you are against the war you don't support the troops."

The whole "support the troops" thing was a sham.

They played some of his speech on NPR this morning.

He sounded like a fanatic. Offered no specifics and kept screaming about abstractions like "safety" and "children."

Mussolini style stuff.

Allow me to remind Governor "NY Nepotism" about a couple of the Amendments to the US constitution (and to any of you who agree with him):


Tenth Amendment:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Second Amendment:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

What does this mean? It means that the Second Amendment grants the right to keep and bear arms to the PEOPLE, and it shall not be infringed. Since it is in fact a right delegated directly to the People by the Constitution (and not to the states), the states have no power to infringe upon it any more than the federal government does.

Therefore, Cuomo and the state of New York, ALREADY severely infringing on the Second Amendment, have declared that they are going to FURTHER infringe.

Chicago mobsters think they can ban guns, now New York mobsters think they can follow suit. Oh, was I out of line calling them mobsters? Do some research.

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
They played some of his speech on NPR this morning.

He sounded like a fanatic. Offered no specifics and kept screaming about abstractions like "safety" and "children."

Mussolini style stuff.

He's just staying on script.

Mussolini and Hitler got away with it - for a while. But those damn English-speakers had to step in and spoil the fun, didn't they?. Well now the English-speakers are at it, and who is there to stop them this time? Who?

American Gun Owners, THAT is who.

Saddle up, kids. Almost time to ride.

reply to post by lolita64


"No one needs 10 bullets to kill a deer" ?????

Who needs a car that travels 150 mph??????

How many more people deaths are attributed to speed than to guns?

Are they going to ban all autos that travel faster than the speed limit?

reply to post by SammyB0476


I'm an exceptionally poor shot. I need AT LEAST 10 bullets to kill a deer.

30 would be better.

45 is even better than that!

Originally posted by SM2

Originally posted by streetfightingman

Originally posted by boymonkey74
But If the majority of people want better control on who can get the guns shouldn't you do the democratic thing and listen to them?

Democratic is listening to the minority as well and then aggregating a conclusion based on both sides.

Or "two wolves and a sheep arguing what is for supper"

Except we're all wolves and we're being treated like sheep, and we can
actually just eat our surroundings.