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.
This is but one of the dangers of Obamacare. Once the federal government controls healthcare it can then dictate politically what it chooses to make a "threat" to health/welfare.
One sentence in the 2,100-page spending bill stopped taxpayers’ money from being used for sham studies designed to make legal gun ownership seem like a public health hazard. The House GOP included a provision in the Health and Human Services appropriations bill preventing the National Institutes of Health (NIH) from using any of its $30.7 billion funds to “advocate or promote gun control.”
Thanks for posting this OP!
If the Obama administration really wants to promote gun control it should get AG-Holder, BATFE and the DEA out of the international small arms traffiking and drug traffiking business!
The NRA's mission has **** to do with the second amendment. The mission is to sell more guns plain and simple. It's always a boon for the gun sellers when there's a Democratic President cause then their sales skyrocket with the better get'm now when you can panic. The smart ones vote Democratic for that very reason I can assure you. They might be registered Republicans and they might spend the next 4 to 8 years harping about how horrible that he got in but they vote Democratic
Earth to mmjv people are buying guns to protect themselves from the crackheads home invasions to feed their habit here.3 idiots have got shot and killed on my old block the home owners and store owner were within their Rights.Thing is it was registered Republicans holding the guns and low lifes coming through the window...knew two of them [KIA] had trouble with both. The store owner who is a Democrat was tired of being robbed weekly was in the store armed stocking in the back room and confronted the punk who pulled a BB gun that looked like a .22...bad mistake.
I never knew the Dimocratic Party to champion gun rights just hinder them and I can assure you as a Ronnie Reagan registered Republican I would never vote Dimocrat again. Might change my status to Independent since both parties of late do not turn my clock.
This is but one of the dangers of Obamacare. Once the federal government controls healthcare it can then dictate politically what it chooses to make a "threat" to health/welfare.
If the Obama administration really wants to promote gun control it should get AG-Holder, BATFE and the DEA out of the international small arms traffiking and drug traffiking business!
That is right remember Pelosi said you will know what's in the bill when WE PASS IT.Does that sound like a Republic of the people through the Democratic process ? With the 535 Congressional members do you all really feel that your interests,views are truely being served ?
No. That's second or third-hand reporting of supposed conversations. You'll have to do better than that to convince me.
And besides, let's admit there is always going to be SOME kind of gun regulation. There is ample evidence in the past of what we like to call "gun control," and for valid reasons, just as there is today. I personally don't know anybody who would suggest that everybody should be able to own, sell or transfer, any weapon they like. Even the most ardent NRA supporter doesn't want that nut job down the street to get a .50 cal. machine-gun and I doubt you do either. Neither do I. Nor would most of like to know our neighbors have mortars, hand grenades or tanks. The Second Amendment does not say "guns," it says "arms" and that's a pretty broad description which could easily be defined as most anything without some kind of "gun control," no?
The point is that the Obama administration is hardly the first to suggest that weapons availability should be curtailed. Every administration for at least the past century and a half have done so too and so have every state and every city. The country is awash in gun laws which curtail, but do not eliminate, the rights contained in the Second Amendment and there's no reason to suspect that's going to change. I hope it doesn't. Moreover, the Supreme Court ruled a couple of years ago that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right and that's where it stands now, barring the Court deciding to revisit that, which it shows no indication of wanting to do.
Consequently, the only thing we have to argue about is just what "gun control" will look like and what weapons it will affect. You may continue to blame Obama for his part in a long, historic process of gun control, but I don't know what you'll accomplish by doing so, other than to keep yourself upset over phantoms.
Quote:"And besides, let's admit there is always going to be SOME kind of gun regulation."
Agreed, for people who are convicted of certain types of crimes, or are deemed mentally unstable, or are chronically addicted to certain drugs.
Quote:" personally don't know anybody who would suggest that everybody should be able to own, sell or transfer, any weapon they like."
Hello, let me introduce myself. Now you know someone who believes that everybody should be able to own, sell or transfer, any weapon they like (as long as it is done legally, meaning transfer tax, etc).
Quote:"Even the most ardent NRA supporter doesn't want that nut job down the street to get a .50 cal. machine-gun and I doubt you do either. Neither do I. Nor would most of like to know our neighbors have mortars, hand grenades or tanks. "
But if they are not considered a 'nut job', then they should be able to own almost anything they want. I can post a picture of my .50BMG if you want to see it (seriously).
Quote:"Nor would most of like to know our neighbors have mortars, hand grenades or tanks."
Then there are quite a few states you do not want to live in. Here in NH, you can get any of those, legally.
Quote:"Moreover, the Supreme Court ruled a couple of years ago that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right"
Well, not really. Try to be a civilian and own a handgun in NYC, DC, or a long list of other places.
Quote:"And besides, let's admit there is always going to be SOME kind of gun regulation."
Agreed, for people who are convicted of certain types of crimes, or are deemed mentally unstable, or are chronically addicted to certain drugs.
Quote:" personally don't know anybody who would suggest that everybody should be able to own, sell or transfer, any weapon they like."
Hello, let me introduce myself. Now you know someone who believes that everybody should be able to own, sell or transfer, any weapon they like (as long as it is done legally, meaning transfer tax, etc).
Quote:"Even the most ardent NRA supporter doesn't want that nut job down the street to get a .50 cal. machine-gun and I doubt you do either. Neither do I. Nor would most of like to know our neighbors have mortars, hand grenades or tanks. "
But if they are not considered a 'nut job', then they should be able to own almost anything they want. I can post a picture of my .50BMG if you want to see it (seriously).
Quote:"Nor would most of like to know our neighbors have mortars, hand grenades or tanks."
Then there are quite a few states you do not want to live in. Here in NH, you can get any of those, legally.
Quote:"Moreover, the Supreme Court ruled a couple of years ago that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right"
Well, not really. Try to be a civilian and own a handgun in NYC, DC, or a long list of other places.
THe problemI have with people like you is that you jump straight into the the FULL AUTOMATIC machine guns, and mortors and tanks and all this other BS just to advance your agenda...period.
Really? Please enlighten me, as I obviously don't know. What IS my agenda?
Quote:
There are laws that protect even the average citizen form getting these weapons you speak of. Can you get them legally? Yes you can, but you will have certian aspects of the government up your a$$, and I agree with that, it will also cost you lots of $$$ to aquire these types of weapons legally.
Yeah...that's....um,....uh....GUN CONTROL! And, you're obviously for it, right?
Quote:
However, there is a difference between an automatic and a fully automatic, I hope you know and understand the difference. But when the new talks about an automatic rifle, they show a machine gun, when they are not actually talking about that. The new is tlaking about a semi-auto, not a fully auto.
(snicker, snicker) Yeah, I probably know the difference. I spent 15 years in the US Army and even carried an "automatic" weapon (See: M-60) around Quang Nam Province in Vietnam for quite some time. Heck, I even knew how to load it, clean it, disassemble and reassemble it in the dark and shoot it! Wow! Can you imagine? (snicker, snicker)
Quote:
The other problem I have is, no matter what laws are in place, lets enforce them...not make new laws that nobody is going to enforce, cause lets face it...they do not enforce the current laws on the books anyway.
Yes, I agree, but I also understand that in a representative democracy such as we have, changing public opinion results in changing laws. That's how it's supposed to work. Democracies, and the laws they produce, are not static.
For instance, when Congress believed a majority of our citizens favored restrictions on so-called "assault weapons," they crafted new laws about them. Later, when public opinion changed, so did the law.
If all existing laws are enforced before new ones are passed, you'd still have those restrictions on "assault weapons," wouldn't you? How would you like that?
Quote:
the criminals will ALWAYS get them, cause guess what, THEY ARE CRIMINALS!!!!!!!!!!
No need to enforce something on me or others that a criminal is not going to follow anyway.
No argument here, except to note that government has no way of knowing who might become a criminal in the future, so it can't craft laws affecting just criminals, can it? Even if it did, what good would that do since, as you say, it would apply to criminals who will be...well...criminals!
Agreed, for people who are convicted of certain types of crimes, or are deemed mentally unstable, or are chronically addicted to certain drugs.
Those are the only ones?
Quote:
Hello, let me introduce myself. Now you know someone who believes that everybody should be able to own, sell or transfer, any weapon they like (as long as it is done legally, meaning transfer tax, etc).
That's gun control. I assume you're all for it, right?
Quote:
But if they are not considered a 'nut job', then they should be able to own almost anything they want. I can post a picture of my .50BMG if you want to see it (seriously).
Umm...I said .50 cal. machine-gun. You do know the difference, don't you?
Quote:
Then there are quite a few states you do not want to live in. Here in NH, you can get any of those, legally.
Really? You can freely own a fully-functional tank or mortar in NH, without any restrictions at all? I'd really like to see THAT law!
Quote:
Well, not really. Try to be a civilian and own a handgun in NYC, DC, or a long list of other places.
Yeah, that's right. The Court ruled that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right, but it also ruled (I think correctly) that right is not absolute and that government entities have the perfect Constitutional right to control your guns within it's jurisdiction however it wanted. Just as with the right of free speech, there are appropriate limits which government can dictated and enforce.
Really? Please enlighten me, as I obviously don't know. What IS my agenda?
So, you agree, that it's O.K. to show a news program that talks about banning all automatic weapons, but then show a hunting rifle....
Quote:
Originally Posted by stillkit
Yeah...that's....um,....uh....GUN CONTROL! And, you're obviously for it, right?
Uh, yea, gun control....instead of adding more ignorant laws, how about we enforce the ones already in place....oh wait, the criminals don't care....
Why, should stricter laws be enforced, on law abiding gun owners when the criminals are not going to follow them anyway? I mean, if everyone followed the law there would be no criminals....
Quote:
Originally Posted by stillkit
(snicker, snicker) Yeah, I probably know the difference. I spent 15 years in the US Army and even carried an "automatic" weapon (See: M-60) around Quang Nam Province in Vietnam for quite some time. Heck, I even knew how to load it, clean it, disassemble and reassemble it in the dark and shoot it! Wow! Can you imagine? (snicker, snicker)
I don't really give a rats ass about what you know, the average person only believes what they see or hear on tv/internet....
again, you agree that when the the news talks about banning automatic weapons, they show a hunting rifle.....
Snicker...you can buy them down at the local store if you're that hungry...
Quote:
Originally Posted by stillkit
Yes, I agree, but I also understand that in a representative democracy such as we have, changing public opinion results in changing laws. That's how it's supposed to work. Democracies, and the laws they produce, are not static.
Agree, but how about enforce them....enforce them then lets talk, don't tighten up laws that do nothing to restrict the criminal....you know the criminal who does not care about the law....
For instance, when Congress believed a majority of our citizens favored restrictions on so-called "assault weapons," they crafted new laws about them. Later, when public opinion changed, so did the law.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stillkit
If all existing laws are enforced before new ones are passed, you'd still have those restrictions on "assault weapons," wouldn't you? How would you like that?
Oh, you mean someone actually wised up, and actually learned the difference between fully automatic assault rifle and a hunting rifle
Quote:
Originally Posted by stillkit
No argument here, except to note that government has no way of knowing who might become a criminal in the future, so it can't craft laws affecting just criminals, can it? Even if it did, what good would that do since, as you say, it would apply to criminals who will be...well...criminals!
Your right, you will also never who will drink and drive and kill someone either....so just ban everyone right?
So, you agree, that it's O.K. to show a news program that talks about banning all automatic weapons, but then show a hunting rifle....
Huh?
I quote: "THe problemI have with people like you is that you jump straight into the the FULL AUTOMATIC machine guns, and mortors and tanks and all this other BS just to advance your agenda...period."
What is my agenda?
Quote:
I don't really give a rats ass about what you know, the average person only believes what they see or hear on tv/internet....
You weren't talking about the average citizen. You questioned whether I knew the difference. Me, personally:
"However, there is a difference between an automatic and a fully automatic, I hope you know and understand the difference."
Well...I do know the difference.
The rest of your post was just rehashing what you said before.
Of course! She is my little (well really big) girl. Not exactly good for home defense, but there are plenty of others for that.
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.
(seriously). 
