The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Politics & RKBA => Topic started by: tombogan03884 on October 28, 2012, 11:39:07 AM
-
From NewsMax 10/28
President Obama has been largely silent about gun control during his first term, but many gun owners have expressed concerns that he would address the issue if he is re-elected and no longer constrained by re-election worries.
Gun control advocates who have also stayed relatively quiet during Obama’s first term are already coming forward. The Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research has issued a new report whose recommendations include the regulation of gun designs and banning “problem drinkers” from owning firearms.
The Insider Report disclosed in April that Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association, told the audience at the Conservative Political Action Conference that Obama “intends to destroy the Second Amendment” during his second term.
LaPierre said: "All of our Second Amendment liberty, all of the rights we've worked so hard to defend, all of what we know is good and right about America — all of it could be lost if Barack Obama is re-elected."
And he asserted that Obama has not pursued an anti-gun agenda during his first term because of a "political calculation" aimed at NRA supporters and gun owners who might oppose him in his re-election bid.
In its report, the Johns Hopkins Center, an arm of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, said “there are enormous economic costs associated with gun violence in the U.S.,” claiming that firearm-related deaths and injuries resulted in medical and lost productivity expenses of about $32 billion in one recent year — as well as around 30,000 deaths and more than 335,000 injuries a year.
The Center’s "Case for Gun Policy Reforms in America" argues that the Second Amendment doesn't prevent lawmakers from strengthening gun laws that are already on the books, CNS News noted in an article about the Center’s report.
Among its recommendations:
Increase the number of “high-risk individuals” who are prohibited from possessing guns by extending the ban on firearms ownership to people convicted of misdemeanors involving violence, people who committed felonies as juveniles, and alcoholics and problem drinkers.
Raise the minimum age for buying a gun from 18 to 21.
Regulate gun sales between private individuals who are not licensed gun dealers. The Brady Law requires prospective buyers to pass a background check only if they are purchasing the gun from a licensed firearms dealer.
Boost regulation and oversight of gun sellers.
Eliminate so-called “right-to-carry” laws, which allow individuals who are not legally barred from possessing firearms to carry concealed weapons in public either by making it easy to get a permit to do so or by not requiring permits at all. The laws “do not make us safer and likely increase aggravated assaults,” the Center argues, rejecting research that shows just the opposite, CNS News observed.
Regulate the design of guns. "Not all firearms are created equal," the report states. “Aside from ammunition capacity, other characteristics of firearms that are relevant to public safety include how easily the gun can be concealed, and how prone it is to misfire or fire unintentionally.”
Reintroduce the now-expired 1994 ban on assault weapons and large capacity magazines.
Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has said he does not favor “new pieces of legislation” on guns – “or making certain guns illegal.”
President Obama has called for enforcing the laws already on the books and for reintroducing the ban on assault weapons.
Obama's strategy, according to the NRA’s LaPierre, is to "get re-elected and, with no more elections to worry about, get busy dismantling and destroying our firearm freedom — erase the Second Amendment from the Bill of Rights and excise it from the U.S. Constitution."
-
This from pro-gun Mitt Romney: 1994: backed 5-day waiting period on gun sales
In 1994 Romney pushed some reliably Republican themes, including requiring welfare recipients to work, cracking down on crime, and creating private-sector jobs. But he often strayed from the party plank as he sought to broaden his base of support. He backed two gun-control measures that were strongly opposed by the National Rifle Association: the Brady Law, which imposed a five-day waiting period on gun sales, and a ban on certain assault weapons, saying, "I think they will help."
Source: The Real Romney, by Kranish & Helman, p.185 , Jan 17, 2012
Find common ground with pro-gun & anti-gun groups
Q: You signed the nation's first ban on assault weapons in Massachusetts and steeply increased fees on gun owners by 400%. How can you convince gun owners that you will be an advocate for them?
ROMNEY: We had a piece of legislation that was crafted both by the pro-gun lobby and the anti-gun lobby. The pro-gun lobby said "this legislation allows us to cross roads with weapons when we're hunting that had not been previously allowed." And the day when we announced our signing, we had both the pro-gun owners and anti-gun folks all together on the stage because it worked. We worked together. We found common ground. My view is that we have the second amendment right to bear arms and my view is also that we should not add new legislation. I know that there are people that think we need new laws. I disagree with that. I believe we have in place all the laws we need. We should enforce those laws. I do not believe in new laws restricting gun ownership and gun use.
Source: Fox News debate on MLK Day in Myrtle Beach, SC , Jan 16, 2012
-
Your information is not good, go to http://www.goal.org/ to get the truth .
-
As they say in The Captain and Commander: It's a choice between two weevils; which one is the lesser.
-
jrlobo, If you are going to respond on multiple threads with the same sentiment I can do the same:
It is time to eliminate the pessimism from our lives. I am sick and tired of people "picking from the lesser of two evils!" There is a choice that it better than the other, and we vote for the better of the two. If you can't find a good reason to vote for someone you are no better than Reid and his assertion that he will not work with Gov. Romney if he becomes President.
Chuck Swindal says "Life is 10% what happens to us and 90% how we react to it." You can choose the outcome of your life, and if you are going to be negative I can predict where you will end up.
Now get out and vote for the better of the two choices in each and every section of your ballot!
-
Your information is not good, go to http://www.goal.org/ to get the truth .
How do you you know my information is no good?
-
Because it is not verified by the Massachusetts state gun owners organization.
-
Because it is not verified by the Massachusetts state gun owners organization.
Of which I've been a member for the last 10 years.
Things would be worse than every other state in the union if our current Governor had been in office during that time frame. The legislature was and still is 85% leftist with a few RINO's mixed in to make it look like a democracy. Scott Brown is a perfect example of that.....as to the fees, I'll pay what I have to and yes they went up but the length of time to renew went up by two years as well.
Remember, Romney did cut taxes and increase fees but user fees only affect those that require that service. Everyone else gets a break.
Either way, it's over, done and history. I'll be taking a break from politics until I decide if my vote here matters at all anymore. Even Tom's beloved New Hampshire has been decimated. I think they should take their state motto and change it to "Massholes Go Home!"
-
m58,
Did you mean Sen Reid (from NV), who is the Senate Majority Leader? I used the example from the movies because it was humorous there and was meant to be humorous here. If you don't take it that way, that's your prerogative. I was responding to what I saw as pessimism being expressed to the point of carping. I try not to use color in my comments so as not to belittle the opinions of others, even though I may disagree with them. There is work to be done if we are to survive the next 4 years. We are all frustrated with what has happened in the election and with our fears of what may come. I feel we need to get past this stage and move toward positive actions to better our lives and those of our children and grandchildren. I'm open to positive ideas on what we should do next. I do not even know where to start here in the PRM anymore.
-
Of which I've been a member for the last 10 years.
Things would be worse than every other state in the union if our current Governor had been in office during that time frame. The legislature was and still is 85% leftist with a few RINO's mixed in to make it look like a democracy. Scott Brown is a perfect example of that.....as to the fees, I'll pay what I have to and yes they went up but the length of time to renew went up by two years as well.
Remember, Romney did cut taxes and increase fees but user fees only affect those that require that service. Everyone else gets a break.
Either way, it's over, done and history. I'll be taking a break from politics until I decide if my vote here matters at all anymore. Even Tom's beloved New Hampshire has been decimated. I think they should take their state motto and change it to "Massholes Go Home!"
The last election proves that it's to late, every one of the socialists won. >:(
-
This from Gun Owners of America: :The Second Amendment protects the individual right of lawful citizens to keep and bear arms. I strongly support this essential freedom,” Romney assures gun owners these days.
But this is the same Mitt Romney who, as governor, promised not to do anything to “chip away” at Massachusetts’ extremely restrictive gun laws.
“We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I support them,” he said during a gubernatorial debate. “I won’t chip away at them; I believe they protect us and provide for our safety.”1
Even worse, Romney signed a law to permanently ban many semi-automatic firearms. “These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense,” Romney said in 2004. “They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.”2
Romney also spoke in favor of the Brady law’s five day waiting period on handguns. The Boston Herald quotes Romney saying, “I don’t think (the waiting period) will have a massive effect on crime but I think it will have a positive effect.”3
Mitt Romney doesn’t seem to understand the meaning of “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.”
-
This from Gun Owners of America: :The Second Amendment protects the individual right of lawful citizens to keep and bear arms. I strongly support this essential freedom,” Romney assures gun owners these days.
But this is the same Mitt Romney who, as governor, promised not to do anything to “chip away” at Massachusetts’ extremely restrictive gun laws.
“We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I support them,” he said during a gubernatorial debate. “I won’t chip away at them; I believe they protect us and provide for our safety.”1
Even worse, Romney signed a law to permanently ban many semi-automatic firearms. “These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense,” Romney said in 2004. “They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.”2
Romney also spoke in favor of the Brady law’s five day waiting period on handguns. The Boston Herald quotes Romney saying, “I don’t think (the waiting period) will have a massive effect on crime but I think it will have a positive effect.”3
Mitt Romney doesn’t seem to understand the meaning of “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.”
Kind of a moot point now, isn't it? LOL!
-
You of course are correct, in the context of the election. The point now is that both candidates were anti-gun Marxists. I will never support an anti-gun Marxist even if he is a Republican, and even if the other candidate is the Anti-Christ.
-
Here's an example of how your information is crap and why I never pay attention to your posts unless I have independent confirmation.
First, Gun Owners of America is in no way affiliated with the Gun Owners Action League, the Ma Commonwealth gun rights organization, it is a national group with a poor record of accuracy when compared to other groups .
This from Gun Owners of America:
Even worse, Romney signed a law to permanently ban many semi-automatic firearms. “These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense,” Romney said in 2004. “They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.”2
http://www.downrange.tv/forum/index.php?topic=20853.msg261712#msg261712
http://www.goal.org/newspages/romney.html
Chapter 150 of the Acts of 2004: An Act Further Regulating Certain Weapons
This is a perfect example of don’t believe in titles. The bill was the greatest victory for gun owners since the passage of the gun control laws in 1998 (Chapter 180 of the Acts of 1998). It was a reform bill totally supported by GOAL. Press and media stories around the country got it completely wrong when claimed the bill was an extension of the “assault weapon” ban that had sunset at the federal level. They could not have been more wrong. Unfortunately for the Governor, someone had also wrongly briefed him about the bill. As a result the Lt. Governor and the Governor made statements at the bill signing ceremony that angered GOAL members. The following is what the bill actually did:
1. Established the Firearm License Review Board (FLRB). The 1998 law created new criteria for disqualifying citizens for firearms licenses that included any misdemeanor punishable by more than two years even if no jail time was ever served.
For instance, a first conviction of operating a motor vehicle under the influence would result in the loss of your ability to own a handgun for life and long guns for a minimum of five years. This Board is now able to review cases under limited circumstances to restore licenses to individuals who meet certain criteria.
2. Mandated that a minimum of $50,000 of the licensing fees be used for the operation of the FLRB so that the Board would not cease operating under budget cuts.
3. Extended the term of the state’s firearm licenses from 4 years to 6 years.
4. Permanently attached the federal language concerning assault weapon exemptions in 18 USC 922 Appendix A to the Massachusetts assault weapons laws. This is the part that the media misrepresented.
In 1998 the Massachusetts legislature passed its own assault weapons ban (MGL Chapter 140, Section 131M). This ban did not rely on the federal language and contained no sunset clause. Knowing that we did not have the votes in 2004 to get rid of the state law, we did not want to loose all of the federal exemptions that were not in the state law so this new bill was amended to include them.
5. Re-instated a 90 day grace period for citizens who were trying to renew their firearm license. Over the past years, the government agencies in charge had fallen months behind in renewing licenses. At one point it was taking upwards of a year to renew a license. Under Massachusetts law, a citizen cannot have a firearm or ammunition in their home with an expired license.
6. Mandated that law enforcement must issue a receipt for firearms that are confiscated due to an expired license. Prior to this law, no receipts were given for property confiscated which led to accusations of stolen or lost firearms after they were confiscated by police.
7. Gave free license renewal for law enforcement officers who applied through their employing agency.
8. Changed the size and style of a firearm license to that of a driver’s license so that it would fit in a normal wallet. The original license was 3” x 4”.
9. Created stiffer penalties for armed home invaders.
-
Kind of a moot point now, isn't it? LOL!
This is not a laughing matter! That post shows the stupidity of Americans. The election was over last Tuesday night, and we are still arguing about the stance of the candidate who lost.
If we are going to continue driving forward while looking in the rear view mirror we will both total the nation and kill ourselves.
We have a hard four years ahead of us with this President, we have a major election in two years, and we need to finish the deal in four! We do not have the time or energy to continue to tear ourselves apart from the inside.
-
Don't mean to laugh about the subject, m58. It's just the fact that I don't expect this country to last until the "Muslim Messiah" retires from office on our dime! If runstowin wants to help give the bastard another term, our opinions won't sway his thinking anyway. It was hard enough for us to beat it into Qaucker's head, runstowin is just too far gone already!