Senators seek back room deal on firearm background checks

[Moped]

Double Post.

Edited February 9, 2013 by Moped

[Moped]

No more compromises! Firearms enthusaists know what compromise means when it comes to the 2A.  It means we get SCREWED!!! I'm tired of being screwed over by my representatives in Washington.  If ANY of my representatives in either house votes for this, I will do everything in my power to make sure they get sent home the next election!  I don't care who their opponent is!!!

[Dolomite_supafly]

What they are going to go after next is the ammunition. California has been the petri dish for all the legislation the country has seen for the last 20 years. From emissions testing, to hunting regulations, to drug laws and also firearms. California recently introduced something to outlaw HP bullets and "assault bullets" as well as a few other nonsense items. But it is those nonsense items that will be made laws on a national level if they are "successful" in California. And for them anythign that limits our rights is a success.

 

Dolomite

[LowBb]

I agree that ammo could be a major problem. However, I remember reading a case, I can't remember the name, where the court declared ammo as part of the 2nd amendment. This isn't saying, of course, that it won't be chocked off.

[Mike.357]

I am sorry I got to laugh at the threats to vote them out etc...  There are not enough of us to vote anyone out of any job basically.

 

If there was some kind of national referendum on banning guns it would be turn them in time.  Thankfully we do not live in an absolute democracy. 

 

Sooner or later it will be turn them in time.  It is inevitable,.  Best we can hope for it to fend it off for several generations.

 

It is not like we are dealing from strength here.

[Oh Shoot]

I am sorry I got to laugh at the threats to vote them out etc...  There are not enough of us to vote anyone out of any job basically.

 

If there was some kind of national referendum on banning guns it would be turn them in time.  Thankfully we do not live in an absolute democracy. 

 

Sooner or later it will be turn them in time.  It is inevitable,.  Best we can hope for it to fend it off for several generations.

 

It is not like we are dealing from strength here.

 

Sadly true methinks. George Orwell's boot on the neck was just off by about 50-60 years.

 

- OS

[Worriedman]

I agree that ammo could be a major problem. However, I remember reading a case, I can't remember the name, where the court declared ammo as part of the 2nd amendment. This isn't saying, of course, that it won't be chocked off.

 

What our Supreme Court said in Andrews v. State, 50 Tenn. 165, 181 (1871).”:

 

 

"The right to keep arms, necessarily involves the right to purchase them, to keep them in a state of efficiency for use, and to purchase and provide ammunition suitable for such arms, and to keep them in repair. And clearly for this purpose, a man would have the right to carry them to and from his home, and no one could claim that the Legislature had the right to punish him for it, without violating this clause of the Constitution."

 

If we had any legislators with honor enough to hold to their oath of office the discussion regarding ammunition would be moot.

 

“I ………. do solemnly swear (or affirm) that as a member of this General Assembly, I will, in all appointments, vote without favor, affection, partiality, or prejudice; and that I will not propose or assent to any bill, vote or resolution, which shall appear to me injurious to the people, or consent to any act or thing, whatever, that shall have a tendency to lessen or abridge their rights and privileges, as declared by the Constitution of this State”.

Edited February 9, 2013 by Worriedman

[RAJTENN]

What they are doing behind cloed doors will likely result in a repeat of the Nancy Pelosi statement on the health care bill, "We have to pass the bill so we can find out what is in it". I see the opportunity for more of this type of political activity in our future.

[1gewehr]

Usually, congresscritters ignore folks that are not in their district.  I like to spice things up by showing them the error of their ways.

 

"Senator Manchin,

I am in Tennessee, but what you are proposing affects everyone in the country.  So, here's the deal:  If you accept ANY infringement in the Right of the People to keep and Bear arms (including magazine limits, ammo limits, background checks, etc), then I will donate $20 to your opponent in your next Primary.  I know that you believe that you are 'safe' since that won't be until 2018.  But firearms owners have long memories.  And I promise that I will do all I can to ensure that this will not be forgotten.

 

If you are looking for a way to 'compromise' on the gun issue, consider re-reading the Oath you swore last month to "...support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same..".  The operative part of the Second Amendment is very simple.  "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".  How can you say that restrictions on private citizens are not an infringement? 

I submit that ALL Federal Gun Control are infringements.  So, a good compromise would be to repeal the 1994 Brady Act as well as the 1986 Hughes Amendment to the FOPA, instead of the 1968 GCA and 1934 NFA as well.

 

Sincerely,

me"

 

They really hate that part of "I will donate $20 to your opponent in your next Primary".  But be prepared to follow-up on it.  Otherwise it's meaningless.  As someone from out-of-state, that's about all you can do.

[mikegideon]

I am sorry I got to laugh at the threats to vote them out etc...  There are not enough of us to vote anyone out of any job basically.

 

If there was some kind of national referendum on banning guns it would be turn them in time.  Thankfully we do not live in an absolute democracy. 

 

Sooner or later it will be turn them in time.  It is inevitable,.  Best we can hope for it to fend it off for several generations.

 

It is not like we are dealing from strength here.

 

It's kinda laughable, 'cause gun owners in general, can't organize a decent pub crawl. But, most elections are won/lost by pretty small margins. Pissing off 10% of the voters is usually more than enough to do you in.

 

When is sooner or later? An AWB passed in .94, and isn't going to pass this time. Gun ownership is growing. I agree that liberalism is being pumped to our kids, but also realize that those ideals are going to have to prove themselves. They won't. 

 

I'm not saying there won't be an all-out ban someday. Just saying that once they pass a universal background check law, it will prove itself to be as useless as the other gun control laws. We KNOW the goverrnment won't enforce it. It's what they do. Besides, the thug hatcheries aren't getting any smaller either.

 

Now, I'm going to the range with my cat lady friends. They have a new (to them) G19, and need to know how to shoot it. I'm gonna do what I can to keep the culture alive.

Edited February 9, 2013 by mikegideon

[RED333]

I am sorry I got to laugh at the threats to vote them out etc...  There are not enough of us to vote anyone out of any job basically.

 

If there was some kind of national referendum on banning guns it would be turn them in time.  Thankfully we do not live in an absolute democracy. 

 

Sooner or later it will be turn them in time.  It is inevitable,.  Best we can hope for it to fend it off for several generations.

 

It is not like we are dealing from strength here.

I disagree, we can vote them out, we just HAVE to do it.

laugh if you will, but I am serious.

Edited February 9, 2013 by RED333

[mikegideon]

I disagree, we can vote them out, we just HAVE to do it.

laugh if you will, but I am serious.

 

Enthusiasm is good, but it ain't the whole game. Besides, it's kinda hard to do as much damage to the Democrats as they're doing to themselves right now.

[Worriedman]

I am sorry I got to laugh at the threats to vote them out etc...  There are not enough of us to vote anyone out of any job basically.

 

If there was some kind of national referendum on banning guns it would be turn them in time.  Thankfully we do not live in an absolute democracy. 

 

Sooner or later it will be turn them in time.  It is inevitable,.  Best we can hope for it to fend it off for several generations.

 

It is not like we are dealing from strength here.

 

Ask Maggart how that worked for her.  There are absolutely enough of us to put up the money to beat Manchin, we may not get them all, but we can get any one of them, if we get riled up and put our money and our time into the game.

 

Talking with Sheriff Guy Buck last night, he said if the Feds or the State require registration or confiscation, he will simply deputize the entire adult population of his county.

There are not enough of "them" to beat all of us into submission if we stand together.

[Randall53]

In government, nothing good happens behind closed doors.

[wjh2657]

Usually, congresscritters ignore folks that are not in their district.  I like to spice things up by showing them the error of their ways.

 

"Senator Manchin,

I am in Tennessee, but what you are proposing affects everyone in the country.  So, here's the deal:  If you accept ANY infringement in the Right of the People to keep and Bear arms (including magazine limits, ammo limits, background checks, etc), then I will donate $20 to your opponent in your next Primary.  I know that you believe that you are 'safe' since that won't be until 2018.  But firearms owners have long memories.  And I promise that I will do all I can to ensure that this will not be forgotten.

 

If you are looking for a way to 'compromise' on the gun issue, consider re-reading the Oath you swore last month to "...support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same..".  The operative part of the Second Amendment is very simple.  "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".  How can you say that restrictions on private citizens are not an infringement? 

I submit that ALL Federal Gun Control are infringements.  So, a good compromise would be to repeal the 1994 Brady Act as well as the 1986 Hughes Amendment to the FOPA, instead of the 1968 GCA and 1934 NFA as well.

 

Sincerely,

me"

 

They really hate that part of "I will donate $20 to your opponent in your next Primary".  But be prepared to follow-up on it.  Otherwise it's meaningless.  As someone from out-of-state, that's about all you can do.

 

Your letter will be read and then tossed by a high school senior "intern" who has been instructed by the chief of staff to deep six anything from" those gun nuts". You don't give him thousands of dollars for his re-election fund so he doesn't give a **** about what you think.

[Oh Shoot]

In government, nothing good happens behind closed doors.

 

Yet that is where legislation really happens.

 

- OS

[Guest 270win]

Way back in the day the NFA was supposed to fix crime.  Then banning mail order of firearms was a cure all.  So was the 86 machine gun ban.  Those instant background checks at the dealers would cure crime too.

 

All of this garbage to keep guns out of the 'wrong hands'.  Well the truth is the 'wrong hands' are everyone that owns a gun.  None will ever keep a gang banger or a suicidal nut who murders his mother from working hard at it and getting a gun and the jerk politicians paid for by us know it.

[Wingshooter]

Gentlemen, with all due respect, I believe we will have to make some compromises. That is how politics works. There are two sides to this matter. It is not Obama and the liberals vs. us. In recent polls, a majority of Americans believe in some form of "control". Background checks on all fire arms sold seems to be the one that has the most support among Americans. In my opinion, the key is to continue what we are doing. Write to congress, attend rallies, create new and informed gun owners that want to act responsibly. We can't let them see us sweat and above all, we must stay cool.
Enclosed is a link to a poll from Reuters.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/07/us-usa-guns-poll-idUSBRE9160LW20130207

There is NO COMPROMISE on the Constitution nor any of the amendments. If you accept a compromise on the 2nd, then be prepared to compromise the 1st, 4th, 22nd, etc. We are not debating some lame law here, and it really doesn't matter what the polls or the majority of the population thinks. It's not up for negotiation... well, it shouldn't be. I write/call my reps all the time, and my vote for them rests on this issue.

[Wingshooter]

Usually, congresscritters ignore folks that are not in their district. I like to spice things up by showing them the error of their ways.

"Senator Manchin,
I am in Tennessee, but what you are proposing affects everyone in the country. So, here's the deal: If you accept ANY infringement in the Right of the People to keep and Bear arms (including magazine limits, ammo limits, background checks, etc), then I will donate $20 to your opponent in your next Primary. I know that you believe that you are 'safe' since that won't be until 2018. But firearms owners have long memories. And I promise that I will do all I can to ensure that this will not be forgotten.

If you are looking for a way to 'compromise' on the gun issue, consider re-reading the Oath you swore last month to "...support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same..". The operative part of the Second Amendment is very simple. "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". How can you say that restrictions on private citizens are not an infringement?
I submit that ALL Federal Gun Control are infringements. So, a good compromise would be to repeal the 1994 Brady Act as well as the 1986 Hughes Amendment to the FOPA, instead of the 1968 GCA and 1934 NFA as well.

Sincerely,
me"

They really hate that part of "I will donate $20 to your opponent in your next Primary". But be prepared to follow-up on it. Otherwise it's meaningless. As someone from out-of-state, that's about all you can do.

Maybe we're being too honest with these politicians.

A liberal would take a play from their playbook to use the Internet to find the names and addresses of a couple of people in a Senator's district. Then send that senator daily emails from the NRA's website using their "constituent's" address. We could call in "adopt a constituent", lol. Edited February 10, 2013 by Batman

[bayouvol]

By the way, have you ever noticed where these polls are conducted? Never do you hear of them happening in the south or real rural areas. And only using a 1000 or 2000 people. As a teacher this is what we call a biased sample and misleading graphs. Go to people who have the most guns and use them, then see what the polls say!

[RED333]

By the way, have you ever noticed where these polls are conducted? Never do you hear of them happening in the south or real rural areas. And only using a 1000 or 2000 people. As a teacher this is what we call a biased sample and misleading graphs. Go to people who have the most guns and use them, then see what the polls say!

My take on them as well.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Well, I wonder how influential those four senators are with the House? I also wonder the same even with their own fellow senators?

[LowBb]

It's true. Polls are conducted with varying sample sizes and in different regions throughout the country. some are local and some are national. It is up to us to filter through data and make a decision based on our own needs and values. IMHO the worst thing one can do is rely on a small sample size of news outlets to gather information. It is good to perspective take.

[Mike.357]

It's kinda laughable, 'cause gun owners in general, can't organize a decent pub crawl. But, most elections are won/lost by pretty small margins. Pissing off 10% of the voters is usually more than enough to do you in.

 

When is sooner or later? An AWB passed in .94, and isn't going to pass this time. Gun ownership is growing. I agree that liberalism is being pumped to our kids, but also realize that those ideals are going to have to prove themselves. They won't. 

 

I'm not saying there won't be an all-out ban someday. Just saying that once they pass a universal background check law, it will prove itself to be as useless as the other gun control laws. We KNOW the goverrnment won't enforce it. It's what they do. Besides, the thug hatcheries aren't getting any smaller either.

 

Now, I'm going to the range with my cat lady friends. They have a new (to them) G19, and need to know how to shoot it. I'm gonna do what I can to keep the culture alive.

 

Can't organize a pub crawl but can organize a vote?  I ain't falling for it.

 

As for sooner or later I made that very clear, 3 or 4 generations.  And don't count on an AWB not passing.  It will not come for a vote until after the next midterm elections.

 

Non of their tactics will fix things, duh,  but they will claim that just a little more gun control will fix things.  Same thing they do now.

[Mike.357]

I disagree, we can vote them out, we just HAVE to do it.

laugh if you will, but I am serious.

 

 

that worked real well this time around,  The Big O is still in the white house.  How many gun owners voted for him?