47 States Revolt Against Obama Gun Control

Originally posted by vkey08
reply to post by TKDRL

 

you're thinking full of hatred and rage for the current Administration

Well, at least you didn't play the "race card", or have I spoken too soon?

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by vkey08

 

*Sigh* God, nature, universe, purple speghetti monster, consciousness, I don't care what you believe in, you are born with the right to defend yourself.

And it is a natural instinct to do so.

reply to post by GoOfYFoOt

i could agree on some levels.
however, their choice to be without was not made by the force of others.
that is a huge difference many won't even touch in conversation.

plenty of guns (even illegal ones) are roaming the streets of the UK region.
when they clean up their own act, i might find some value in their methods, until then pfffft.

as for the Chicago, NY, LA regions of the USA ... well, they got what they asked for ... gun control.

see Chicago gun violence reports for the 1st 2-weeks of 2013 ... that is not a reflection of the country, it's a reflection of their own idiocy and anti-gun policies.

link
The numbers are grim. Unofficially, there were 513 homicides in Chicago in 2012, [color=amber]nearly 100 more than New York City, which recorded 414 killings but which has a population three times larger. Chicago’s body count is 200 more than the number of U.S. troops killed in Afghanistan last year.

During the first 16 days of January, 26 people have been killed by guns in Chicago -- the exact same number as at Sandy Hook Elementary School.

almost nothing proposed this week in Washington, D.C., by your administration will do anything to stem the tide of gun violence in our inner cities. Most of these crimes were not committed with semi-automatic assault weapons, they weren’t committed by the mentally ill, and they won’t be stopped by universal background checks.

hmmmm, even the well-armed, in theatre, soldiers aren't dying as frequently as those subject to gun-controlled regions ... anyone routing for gun contol is just plain confused.

so, even the most stricken cities are declaring the proposed actions won't help ... i would suggest they try what IS working elsewhere in this country, not some other.

reply to post by Chrisfishenstein


I don't disagree. But owning an assault rifle has been illegal since something like 1934. Assault rifles being full automatic and single and select fire (3 round burst). Of course these didn't even exist in 1934, what they did then was outlaw full auto, aka machine guns. Time was you could buy a Thompson submachine gun from the Sears catalog for less than $100. You may be thinking about "assault weapons" which in point of fact do not exist. This was a media creation. To them, any semi auto rifle that looks like an assault rifle but is simply semi auto is an assault weapon.
Just my 2 cents...

Oh, you gotta love it: Beaufort County in NC just passed a resolution after calling a special session to address Obama gun control- and I quote:

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Beaufort County Board of Commissioners, sitting in
duly called session on this day, that:
The Beaufort County Board of Commissioners calls upon the Governor and General Assembly of
the State of North Carolina to immediately pass an act to nullify the implementation within the
State of North Carolina of any Federal law, executive order or regulations restricting the right to
keep and bear arms, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the County Manager be directed to see that no county paid staff
participate in nor allow any county resources be used in the implementation of any Federal law,
executive order or executive directive that infringe on the right to keep and bear arms, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the General Assembly is petitioned to take the appropriate
action to have a constitutional convention called upon concurrence by 2/3 of the state
legislatures for the specific purpose of amending the United States Constitution to strengthen
the Second and Tenth Amendments as applicable against Federal infringement of the
inalienable right of the People to keep and bear arms and prohibit infringement by the Federal
government in the states’ rights to guarantee the protection of the right to keep and bear arms,
and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the General Assembly adopt a proposed Amendment to the
North Carolina Constitution to be submitted to the voters to change Article I, Sec 30 to
guarantee the right of a law abiding citizen to carry unimpeded a concealed weapon in any
place that a duly sworn law enforcement officer may carry a weapon and that any law passed
by the General Assembly, or imposed by any executive official, restricting the right to keep and
bear arms, be subject to the strictest judicial scrutiny if challenged as infringing on the right to
keep and bear arms, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this resolution, properly enacted and executed this the
______day of _____________, 2013 be transmitted to the Clerk of the Senate and House of
Representatives of the North Carolina General Assembly, the Governor, and each member of
the General Assembly as well as to each County Commission in the State of North Carolina and
to the N. C. Association of County Commissioners and to the public.

Read the whole PDF here:
www.beaufortobserver.net...



Read the article here:
Link

They are even asking to STRENGTHEN the second amendment!

See the video of the session:


And I am hearing it passed overwhelmingly, but the democrats weren't there!

wahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

reply to post by TrueAmerican


Go Beaufort County! We need a whole lot more of this.

Originally posted by Fondue
reply to post by Chrisfishenstein

 

I don't disagree. But owning an assault rifle has been illegal since something like 1934. Assault rifles being full automatic and single and select fire (3 round burst). Of course these didn't even exist in 1934, what they did then was outlaw full auto, aka machine guns. Time was you could buy a Thompson submachine gun from the Sears catalog for less than $100. You may be thinking about "assault weapons" which in point of fact do not exist. This was a media creation. To them, any semi auto rifle that looks like an assault rifle but is simply semi auto is an assault weapon.
Just my 2 cents...

Here is "the deal". The national firearms act of 1934 is more than sufficient and all this EXTRA REGULATION means absolute squat! I am not one of those hypocrites that believes in civilians having access to grenade launchers, nukes, automatic weapons, etc..........but calling any semi-auto rifle an "assualt weapon" is being very ignorant and/or deceptful.

And to take it a step further many states ban short barralled rifles and short barralled shotguns with the supposed reasoning that they are easy to conceal. If that is the case then why are handguns allowed? Handguns are much easier to conceal than SBR and SBS, YET they are generally given more tollerance than handguns and to me it makes no sense. I personally hate all handguns except the .25acp and .32acp type because they offer too much recoil and lack of control for the job they intend to do. If I want a bigger wound I simply use hollow points. It is not rocket science!

reply to post by Fondue

oh fudge, er Fondue, the Thompson platform has a long history.

Tommy guns hit the market around 1921 and were quite popular during prohibition.
they were not 'restricted' in 38 ... they were adopted for military use that year.

just so we're discussing the same fully automatic weapon here ... your Thompson and my Tommy should be this, correct ?
www.militaryfactory.com...
those ^^^^ were still on the streets, legally, even in the 90s and a few still are today.

the reason i'm bringing this info to the conversation isn't just to correct you but to make everyone aware that even this particular [color=amber]machine gun was developed and marketed for CIVILIANS first and then adopted by the military ... not the other way around.

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by cripmeister

 

they = anti Liberty folk ... specifically, those of British influence as they have been pushing this agenda for 200+ yrs.

Anti-liberty folk of British influence doesn't cut it, sorry. You need to be be more precise otherwise one might think that "they" are merely phantoms of your imagination. Someone to put the blame on for everything that's wrong with the world you know.

why ??
your guess is as good as mine.
do you have some inside info you'd like to share ?

Nope, I am still trying to figure things out but I doubt I ever will.

ppl should unite and do something about What, not who.
ie ... ppl should unite and exercise their right to the fullest extent of rationality.

Can I trust your rationality?

what EOs ??
any of these would do ... 2012 Obama Executive Orders

Hey, I found a really bad one

Executive Order 13623
Preventing and Responding to Violence Against Women and Girls Globally

reply to post by cripmeister

what are you trying twist ?
you asked who is 'they' ... you got an answer.
you don't like it, tough.

waaaaaahhhh, would you like some cheese ?

Can I trust your rationality?

that's entirely up to you but guess what ?
you don't have the right to judge my rationality ... again, you don't like it, tough, follow your own.

hmmm, i'd have to read it, i cannot make a rational comment on a 'title'.
did you read it ?? or are you just commenting on a title ?

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by cripmeister

 

hmmm, i'd have to read it, i cannot make a rational comment on a 'title'.
did you read it ?? or are you just commenting on a title ?

I didn't read it, I just found the title amusing to post as a response to your blanket statement Anyway, my original point in response to stjarna1 was that there are no Executive Orders on guns post Newtown. I mentioned it on page 4 in this thread.

reply to post by cripmeister

pg 4 was awhile ago and if you were just 'picking at the word Orders', very well, carry on.
you asked questions, i answered, that's generally what we do here

the Executive Actions suggested are just that, suggested.
while everyone should be in an uproar and speaking openly, they should be equally aware that if this progresses beyond suggestions, the ppl have every right to object openly and honor their duty as Americans.

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by Fondue

 

oh fudge, er Fondue, the Thompson platform has a long history.

Tommy guns hit the market around 1921 and were quite popular during prohibition.
they were not 'restricted' in 38

... they were adopted for military use that year.

just so we're discussing the same fully automatic weapon here ... your Thompson and my Tommy should be this, correct ?
www.militaryfactory.com...
those ^^^^ were still on the streets, legally, even in the 90s and a few still are today.

the reason i'm bringing this info to the conversation isn't just to correct you but to make everyone aware that even this particular [color=amber]machine gun was developed and marketed for CIVILIANS first and then adopted by the military ... not the other way around.

The tommy gun is awesome. It shoots .45acp rounds that have much better range and accuracy than shot from a handgun. Isn't it technically a SBR? You can legally buy the semi-auto variant in some/many states after paying the feds the $200 tax stamp.

The full auto originals made on or before 1987 can only be transferred between owners and you need to pay $200 transfer tax to the feds.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07

couldn't confirm or deny ownership details as i don't own one.
i remember seeing them in the local Hardware growing up tho.
i had family that was experienced with them but i'm not one of them.

and yes, they are awesome and they should still be as available today as they were, then.
that was one concession, we the people, should have avoided.

maybe if we had, we wouldn't be in this position, today.

Originally posted by HopSkipJump

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by HopSkipJump

 

Wow, I can not believe the way you think........
So you believe the government is god then?
LEt's try another way of putting it then. It is a right given to us by nature itself. Better?

edit on Fri, 18 Jan 2013 18:05:55 -0600 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)

No, I don't think the government is God, where in the world would you get that?

No, it's not a right given to us by nature itself or we would be born with it. It's a right given by the government, period. You have no "god-given rights" to anything other than death and the opportunity for salvation if you seek it. Everything else is granted or not granted by your government. You may not like it, but that's the way it is.

No, we were not born with guns, but then we were not born with bread, cheese, tortillas, or fire, arrowheads or iron pots for cooking.

But we still have a god-given right to eat don't you think? Would you eat rabbit raw? Man learned to make fire, he wasn't born with it, but he was born with a brain to discover things.

Every living thing on this planet has a God given right to defend itself. Some creatures were born with tusks, sharp teeth, claws, horns, poison stingers, camoflage, etc, and humans were just born with fists and a brain to learn how to make weapons using sticks, rocks, metal, etc.

The whole liberal argument that govt gave us the right to have weapons is patently absurd. And what is govt but a bunch of men who make laws to control other men. So whose right is it for man to control other men arbitrarily?

reply to post by cripmeister

Hey, I found a really bad one

It would be wise to check the fine print on these EO's before deciding that just because something sounds right, it must be right. Hey the PATRIOT ACT fooled a lot of people into thinking it was really patriotic. When the UN uses the word "sustainable", they mean killing off all but 500 million people('it's in their literature so you best look it up before telling me it's not the truth).

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by cripmeister

 

pg 4 was awhile ago and if you were just 'picking at the word Orders', very well, carry on.

Picking? It is no accident the word action was substituted for order by the right-wingers right after the press conference. Why? Because they want to set the tone of the debate and drum up support for their agenda.

reply to post by cripmeister

dude, IF they were Orders, they would be recorded, they are not.
of those Actions listed, i do believe several will be woven into Orders, however that hasn't happened just yet. we are having our temperature taken at the moment to see just how far the Orders can reasonably reach without major blowback.

btw, Monday's corporate shindig should shine some light on what was actually signed (probably earlier this evening) but then again, considering the current climate of State legislative actions, such an announcement may be put off for a few months or at least until the SAT comes up for discussion again.

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Oh, you gotta love it: Beaufort County in NC just passed a resolution after calling a special session to address Obama gun control- and I quote:

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Beaufort County Board of Commissioners, sitting in
duly called session on this day, that:
The Beaufort County Board of Commissioners calls upon the Governor and General Assembly of
the State of North Carolina to immediately pass an act to nullify the implementation within the
State of North Carolina of any Federal law, executive order or regulations restricting the right to
keep and bear arms, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the County Manager be directed to see that no county paid staff
participate in nor allow any county resources be used in the implementation of any Federal law,
executive order or executive directive that infringe on the right to keep and bear arms, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the General Assembly is petitioned to take the appropriate
action to have a constitutional convention called upon concurrence by 2/3 of the state
legislatures for the specific purpose of amending the United States Constitution to strengthen
the Second and Tenth Amendments as applicable against Federal infringement of the
inalienable right of the People to keep and bear arms and prohibit infringement by the Federal
government in the states’ rights to guarantee the protection of the right to keep and bear arms,
and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the General Assembly adopt a proposed Amendment to the
North Carolina Constitution to be submitted to the voters to change Article I, Sec 30 to
guarantee the right of a law abiding citizen to carry unimpeded a concealed weapon in any
place that a duly sworn law enforcement officer may carry a weapon and that any law passed
by the General Assembly, or imposed by any executive official, restricting the right to keep and
bear arms, be subject to the strictest judicial scrutiny if challenged as infringing on the right to
keep and bear arms, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this resolution, properly enacted and executed this the
______day of _____________, 2013 be transmitted to the Clerk of the Senate and House of
Representatives of the North Carolina General Assembly, the Governor, and each member of
the General Assembly as well as to each County Commission in the State of North Carolina and
to the N. C. Association of County Commissioners and to the public.

Read the whole PDF here:
www.beaufortobserver.net...

Read the article here:
Link

They are even asking to STRENGTHEN the second amendment!

See the video of the session:

And I am hearing it passed overwhelmingly, but the democrats weren't there!

wahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

edit on Fri Jan 18th 2013 by TrueAmerican because: (no reason given)

I may have to start saving money to move, I am pretty sure MA will follow suit and be like NY. That does not bode well if I do decide I want to own a firearm for incase the SHTF.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by Fondue
reply to post by Chrisfishenstein

 

I don't disagree. But owning an assault rifle has been illegal since something like 1934. Assault rifles being full automatic and single and select fire (3 round burst). Of course these didn't even exist in 1934, what they did then was outlaw full auto, aka machine guns. Time was you could buy a Thompson submachine gun from the Sears catalog for less than $100. You may be thinking about "assault weapons" which in point of fact do not exist. This was a media creation. To them, any semi auto rifle that looks like an assault rifle but is simply semi auto is an assault weapon.
Just my 2 cents...

Here is "the deal". The national firearms act of 1934 is more than sufficient and all this EXTRA REGULATION means absolute squat! I am not one of those hypocrites that believes in civilians having access to grenade launchers, nukes, automatic weapons, etc..........but calling any semi-auto rifle an "assualt weapon" is being very ignorant and/or deceptful.

And to take it a step further many states ban short barralled rifles and short barralled shotguns with the supposed reasoning that they are easy to conceal. If that is the case then why are handguns allowed? Handguns are much easier to conceal than SBR and SBS, YET they are generally given more tollerance than handguns and to me it makes no sense. I personally hate all handguns except the .25acp and .32acp type because they offer too much recoil and lack of control for the job they intend to do. If I want a bigger wound I simply use hollow points. It is not rocket science!

I think it is more to do with the fact that at very short ranges a sawed off shotgun obliterates the target.