Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've noticed a bunch of posts on here about gun rights and fears that the Obama administration will take away the right to own a gun. However, as the court ruled in Heller v DC last year, the right to own guns is an individual right that cannot be taken away by any government. If you recall, DC had a total ban on guns and that was ruled to be unconstitutional. Given that gun rights advocates have won at the ultimate level, I wonder why there is still so much energy around this issue. For the most part, it's been decided.
Is there a real fear that gun will be taken away or is it that folks don't want ANY regulation of gun ownership (background checks, waiting periods, ban on automatic weapons, etc.). I'm just trying to understand why this issue isn't waning given the Supreme Court's ruling.
Show us the threads in which people are claiming that Obama wants to take away all of our guns.
Most of the gun threads on here are related to gun control legislation. Most often, it's probably discussion surrounding the AWB, which was useless "feel good" legislation that had absolutely no effect on crime whatsoever. All it did was drive prices on certain products sky high, reduce the amount of business that many legitimate dealers did and make criminals out of otherwise law-abiding citizens.
As for your second paragraph, nobody - repeat, NOBODY, is calling for an all-or-nothing approach. I suppose there's a few anti-gun folks calling for the "nothing," but not a single gun rights supporter is suggesting that there be no restrictions whatsoever. That statement is a complete red herring and - as I suspect you already know - there's no validity to it at all.
As for the SCOTUS ruling, it was a close decision, and the scope of its impact is extremely narrow. Yes, it was a "victory" for gun rights advocates, but not as big a victory as we were hoping for or expecting.
Maybe has to with what the Supreme Court will be like in a few years with new Obama appointments. What do you think?
It doesn't matter really. Once matters of such high importance are decided by the Supreme Court, it is usually almost impossible for the Court to overturn it... like Roe v Wade... they have the votes now but out of deference, it won't be overturned.
Show us the threads in which people are claiming that Obama wants to take away all of our guns.
Most of the gun threads on here are related to gun control legislation. Most often, it's probably discussion surrounding the AWB, which was useless "feel good" legislation that had absolutely no effect on crime whatsoever. All it did was drive prices on certain products sky high, reduce the amount of business that many legitimate dealers did and make criminals out of otherwise law-abiding citizens.
As for your second paragraph, nobody - repeat, NOBODY, is calling for an all-or-nothing approach. I suppose there's a few anti-gun folks calling for the "nothing," but not a single gun rights supporter is suggesting that there be no restrictions whatsoever. That statement is a complete red herring and - as I suspect you already know - there's no validity to it at all.
As for the SCOTUS ruling, it was a close decision, and the scope of its impact is extremely narrow. Yes, it was a "victory" for gun rights advocates, but not as big a victory as we were hoping for or expecting.
I don't have the time to look over all the threads and it's not a majority but I have seen folks make statements that this administration will try to take away gun rights... and in the general society, there is certainly that message out there... that's why gun and ammo sales are through the roof.
As for the second point, if folks are on board about those restrictions, why is there such energy behind the issue? I'm not throwing out a red herring at all.
On Heller, it doesn't matter if it was 9-0 or 5-4, it's the law of the land. What do you mean by a narrow victory? It reaffirmed for the first time that the right of gun ownership is an individual right and not attached to the concept of militias.
All they have to do is screw with getting ammo and other laws to make it difficult. BTW there are laws for background checks and such already in place even at gun shows they run a check on you.
Show us the threads in which people are claiming that Obama wants to take away all of our guns.
Most of the gun threads on here are related to gun control legislation. Most often, it's probably discussion surrounding the AWB, which was useless "feel good" legislation that had absolutely no effect on crime whatsoever. All it did was drive prices on certain products sky high, reduce the amount of business that many legitimate dealers did and make criminals out of otherwise law-abiding citizens.
As for your second paragraph, nobody - repeat, NOBODY, is calling for an all-or-nothing approach. I suppose there's a few anti-gun folks calling for the "nothing," but not a single gun rights supporter is suggesting that there be no restrictions whatsoever. That statement is a complete red herring and - as I suspect you already know - there's no validity to it at all.
As for the SCOTUS ruling, it was a close decision, and the scope of its impact is extremely narrow. Yes, it was a "victory" for gun rights advocates, but not as big a victory as we were hoping for or expecting.
You must be high because I've participated (as you know) in three specific threads where you and others have defended easing gun regulations or getting rid of all regulations
All they have to do is screw with getting ammo and other laws to make it difficult. BTW there are laws for background checks and such already in place even at gun shows they run a check on you.
Ok, yeah, I suppose they can try to get cute and nibble around the edges but Obama has not mentioned that and there have been no bill introduced to that effect... most of this stuff is done at the state level and yet I still see a lot of worry and paranoia around it. It's just interesting that coming off that big victory, so many gun rights activists are more worried than before.
"What Next for D.C.'s Gun Laws" by Robert A. Levy and David Kopel (Cato Institute: Commentary)
The Supreme Court ruled in June that provisions of Washington, D.C.'s gun laws are unconstitutional. Unfortunately, the city has responded with new regulations that are a flagraD.C. still requires that weapons in the home be unloaded and either disassembled, trigger-locked or kept in a gun safe. An exception is made for a firearm while being used against a threat of immediate harm within the home. That exception is unconstitutionally vague. According to acting D.C. Attorney General Peter Nickles, a homeowner cannot have an unlocked and loaded gun even when investigating the sound of intruders in her backyard.nt attempt to circumvent the court's decision.
Any rule requiring a crime victim to wait until her attacker has actually entered the home is unreasonable. Congress should bar D.C. from prohibiting or infringing a home use of firearms for self-protection. Within that constraint, D.C. can fashion sensible safe-storage regulations.under federal law, buyers may acquire a handgun only within their state of residence: Out-of-state sellers must first ship the gun to someone in-state who has a Federal Firearms License.
However, because of the District's 1976 gun ban, there are no stores selling guns within the city, and only one or two federal firearms licensees willing to take delivery from outside on a limited basis. It will be months before gun dealers are licensed. Thus, D.C. residents who do not own a handgun cannot obtain one, and cannot exercise their constitutional right, affirmed by the Supreme Court, to defend themselves where they live. Congress should revamp the federal restrictions on interstate handgun sales to allow, at a minimum, District residents to purchase handguns in Maryland or Virginia. Like rifles and shotguns, handguns should be obtainable from an out-of-state licensee if the sale complies with laws applicable where the buyer resides and where the sale occurs.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
