The Gun Thread

[Rmc]

LIST OF TRAITORS - - - ALL DEMOCRATS, NO REPUBLICANS
Over the weekend, we came four votes away from the United States Senate giving our Constitutional rights over to the United Nations. In a 53-46 vote, the senate narrowly passed a measure that will stop the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.
The Statement of Purpose from thebill read:
To uphold Second Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.
The U.N. Small Arms Treaty, which has been championed by the Obama Administration, would have effectively placed a global ban on the import and export of small firearms. The ban would have affected all private gun owners in the U.S., and had language that would have implemented an international gun registry on all private guns and ammo.
Astonishingly, 46 of our United States Senators were willing to give away our Constitutional rights to a foreign power.
Here are the 46 senators that voted to give your rights to the U.N.
Baldwin (D-WI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bennet (D-CO)
Blumenthal (D-CT)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Coons (D-DE)
Cowan (D-MA)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hirono (D-HI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kaine (D-VA)
King (I-ME)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murphy (D-CT)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schatz (D-HI)
Schumer (D-NY)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Warner (D-VA)
Warren (D-MA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)



Hello All, here is the list of all the TRAITORS in the U. S. Senate-Thank God there was none listed for OK, AR, TX


People this needs to go viral. These Senators voted to let the UN take our guns. They need to lose the election. We have been betrayed.
46 Senators Voted to Give your 2nd Amendment Constitutional Rights to the U.N.

[Agui-E7TE]

I don't see how they were "taking your guns", metaphorically maybe but definitely not physically. It sounds more like they were concocting a scheme to try to keep people from buying imported guns and from exporting them as well in effect controlling future sales (a bad idea IMO).


Why is it that I keep hearing about people freaking out and buying up shit tons of ammo... is there some kind of red dawn invasion they're preparing for or what?

[robertcrav]

I don't see how they were "taking your guns", metaphorically maybe but definitely not physically. It sounds more like they were concocting a scheme to try to keep people from buying imported guns and from exporting them as well in effect controlling future sales (a bad idea IMO).

Why is it that I keep hearing about people freaking out and buying up shit tons of ammo... is there some kind of red dawn invasion they're preparing for or what?

They weren't taking them yet, but the thinking is, with the expanded scope of background checks, on all transactions, that would intrinsically create a registry, and that registry could be used for future confiscation...

People are purchasing guns and ammo now before laws potentially change, and the potential registry, and potential ammo permits/registration. The panic buying now is people "preparing" for the possibility they may not be able to purchase semi-automatic rifles and bulk ammo ...

Before Sandy Hook, you could find a nice AR for less than $1k, post Sandy Hook that same rifle was selling for over $1,800, and ammo started flying off the shelves.

There is legislation flying around in every state, and level of government to try and limit ammo sales, expand registration, "close loop holes" etc...

there are all kinds of different conspiracy theories or doomsday theories like Obama is going to force the legislation thru using Executive Order, in order to confisgate all of our firearms so he can continue to weaken the public and drive the country further into crapper...theoretically speaking

[Agui-E7TE]

I just don't see any of that happening. Not every state requires people to register their guns so even if they did try to take people's guns, I'm sure it would be met with great opposition. I don't think anything will change, they'll never be able limit anything on weapons. As long as there's money being made they will always bow to corporate interests.

[johncharlesb]

I just don't see any of that happening. Not every state requires people to register their guns so even if they did try to take people's guns, I'm sure it would be met with great opposition. I don't think anything will change, they'll never be able limit anything on weapons. As long as there's money being made they will always bow to corporate interests.

I have to agree here.

All of those Democrats were elected. To call them traitors for supporting regulation would be as effective as me calling Mike Rogers a traitor for supporting CISPA without fourth amendment protections. It might get some people worked up , but it will not really further the discussion. To suggest that the US is giving sovereignty to the UN is misguided hyperbole. What we are talking about is increased regulation of guns as allowed in the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution. There is already gun regulation: some people think there should be more; and some people think there should be less. With the 2nd Amendment, the government has an increased threshold of scrutiny, but regulation is constitutional.

Obama knew the gun legislation would not pass. He also knew, since he is not running again, it would require no political capital to push for legislation to appease his base. If he did not push it, the far left would cry foul. Instead he just puts it up for a vote and lets it fail. There were never enough Dems in the Senate to get it through without even discussing the House. I am just an idiot on the sidelines and I know this, they knew it as well.

I oppose gun legislation and strongly support the 2nd amendment. From my perspective as a historian, the amendment is to guarantee the right of all people to own guns to maintain a free state. If the government wants to limit the 2nd amendment, it should be done by amendment. It is the extension of the right of a just revolution as proposed by John Locke if one looks to Madison's writings. Interestingly, the Founders in Madison, Hamilton, Jay, Washington and the Federalists opposed the Bill of Rights as unnecessary and only accepted them as a condition of New York agreeing to ratify the Constitution.

All of that being said, what do we do about these shootings? I personally think it is associated with poverty and lack of mental health care. There will always be nuts for certain, but the root causes seem here. I certainly could be wrong, but that is my guess.

The Republican-Democrat divide is a farce. They both laugh all the way to the bank. They just pivot around the central issues and divide us. After WWII the country moved left, and after Vietnam the country moved back right - and they just screwed us along the way. Gun legislation is thwarted by the 2nd amendment and the rise of the NRA as a populist movement against regulation. If it was not for primary challenges on both sides of the aisle, our pistols and semi-auto guns would have been long gone twenty years ago.

[MOSS2]

They already have a registry if you have bought a gun recently. It is at the Franchise Tax Board. Serial numbers and all. Since they seem obligated to 'respond' to tragedy and crisis instead of their real job Im sure we will see a bill about registering pressure cooker buyers now.

[Rmc]

That was a repost of an email sent to me. Excellent responses btw way guys, as u know I side with freedom, if the sovereignty of the U.S. being undermined it is worth a repost. I don't agree with the fact that the U.n. has no accountability and is a farther reaching more powerful arm of world leader consensus opinion and a global enforcer of the money trail inspite of the global good they claim to have as a goal. Who's to say if the USA entered the small arms treaty there wouldn't be a massive arms collection all in the name of global security. I simply feel I should have the right to defend my family's security.

[Agui-E7TE]

The U.N. bows down to whatever the U.S. says. This is something I heard from one of my college professors who worked at the U.N. for a long time. If countries don't vote in favor of what the U.S.'s agenda is, they usually end up getting voted out of the group. The U.N. didn't approve of going into Iraq and the U.S. did it anyway with no consequences from the U.N. That to me says the U.N. has no real power over any country.

[SteveG]

An interesting thought.... I know we have a few people here that are either OK with or on the fence about magazine limits and such. I'd like to hear their thoughts on the following.

How many "Assault Rifles" and high (read: standard) capacity magazines do you guys suppose were on the streets of Massachusetts looking for ONE criminal? I wonder if the average anti-gun citizen is OK with all those nasty guns and magazines running around the streets as long as they are in an LEO's hand.

[hobbyturnedobsession]

I feel that everyone should have a choice to carry a weapon at all times. Im not saying its the safest or best option but people would think twice to rob someone if everyone else had a gun. It takes their upper hand out of the equation. As far as magazines go i really dont think it matters much. If someone is good or great with a specific gun it only takes one shot as it is. Most shootings happen with hand guns anyway. Its harder to hide a larger ar-15 than it is a .45 or 9 mm.

[robertcrav]

I personally think that 30rd mag or 10rd mag or 90rd drum is inconsequential ....push a button and reload...

I have no problem with everyone having the option to own a firearm. However I do think there should be a mental health screening, training and certification program as well a requals.... We all have to learn to drive, take a test and eventually a retest. Why not with firearms.

I also agree that criminals would feel less comfy doing what they do if they knew there was a greater chance of their victims being armed.

[Rmc]

There's an old quote: God made man and Sam Colt made them equal.

[hobbyturnedobsession]

I am all for prescreening. That quote ive heard before and i believe that 100%. The iasue with taking guns in my opinion only takes them away from law abiding citizens.

[robertcrav]

10000000% agree

[Dust]

An interesting thought.... I know we have a few people here that are either OK with or on the fence about magazine limits and such. I'd like to hear their thoughts on the following.

How many "Assault Rifles" and high (read: standard) capacity magazines do you guys suppose were on the streets of Massachusetts looking for ONE criminal? I wonder if the average anti-gun citizen is OK with all those nasty guns and magazines running around the streets as long as they are in an LEO's hand.

Frankly there are too many magazines in circulation to pass a restriction and have it mean anything. If just 1% are 'accidentally' retained there will still be millions in circulation even if there was a complete 50-state ban.
Everything thus far proposed is Feel-Good-Politics and that is (well it should be) criminal!
What we need to do has nothing to do with Firearms!
We absolutely must restrict who can have 'children'; background checks, DNA, Training, Certification, re-qualification, the whole works and if you screw that up: removal of all reproductive organs without anesthetic.
The guns don't bother me but society's children scare the shiite out of me!
It only takes a single idiot to create one, and we are breeding villages of them!

Dust

[hobbyturnedobsession]

100% Agree! I was talking to my wife about people having to take tests in order to have kids.

[Agui-E7TE]

So you guys are cool with the government telling you if you can or cannot have kids so long as you can own all the firearms you want

All kidding aside, the way they went about finding that guy in Boston, searching people's homes to make sure he wasn't hiding there, that's kind of like giving the government the right to do an illegal search of your home with no warrant. It's was like martial law took over. I'm glad they got the guy but I don't know that I'd be willing to let a bunch of LEO's tear up my house to see if they can find a fugitive that may or may not be hiding there.

I'm actually mostly over the fence now towards the side that says there shouldn't be any guns that are banned. Simply because of the right to stand up to a tyrannical government or to defend your homeland should you need to. I do however still think that a mental competency test should be done before people can own firearms. What's the harm in having to wait a bit to own a gun? Also, I'd vote to tell California to F' off with all their one up laws on certain guns being illegal here.

[Rmc]

California laws in general are bs, between unelected air quality boards and restrictions, bs codes, gun laws, proposed plastic bag bans, outlawing footballs and frisbee's on la beaches, proposed removal of beachside fire pits, it will never end until a part time legislature is established the california constitution rewritten and the bribes and money laundering of public sector union money into the pension obligations of sell out political promises is negated. I'm not anti union I am however anti " this is what were gonna tax u and this is our slice" sounds like a filthy monopoly with public schools as hostages. I'm sick n tired of a nanny government. Why the hell should a Californian pay tax to have a public road built ( carpool lanes) to have them reassigned to toll roads to further fatten the schemers? We already paid for them! Yes this is reality in this utopian paradise. God I love California. As far as guns it's one more scab to pick at. Pensions are unsustainable as a whole due to people living longer and a$$ hole politicians thinking its a grand idea to gamble it away in the stock market while u and I are stuck holding the supposed legal obligation. Sry right winger rant lol. Guns and ammo are not the issue. Pissed off out of work people and the glamorizing of violence in society as a norm while creating a government dependent society ( welfare state) is the real issue. What the hell happened to family? all in combination with a failing healthcare system due to further government restriction. If lawsuits weren't rampant it would be a nice place to start. Somebody has to say this stuff n say it like it is.... As the public sector worker says I earned my retirement lol. So did I it's called a 401k, when my plan loses value I don't call my congressman n say u still owe me this.

[Rmc]

I love the fact that I can still voice an opinion in the United States of America.

[Rmc]

All n all I hope you guys recognise the diversion tactics from all angles to mask greed.