1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

Thoughts on gun control victory...

Discussion in 'Off Topic Threads' started by likes-to-shoot, Apr 18, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. likes-to-shoot

    likes-to-shoot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2006
    Messages:
    6,092
    Location:
    Iowa
    Harry Reid's nay vote was only for Democrats selfish purpose of bringing up the gun control issue again at a later date so do you think it will affect our current dilemma of no bullets or supplies?

    Will this particular defeat help restore the supplies we need? Thoughts anyone.

    I don't look for prices to change very much and as far as availability I have no idea.
     
  2. Mdl1261

    Mdl1261 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2007
    Messages:
    348
    DONT let up on the Pressure We gave to Washington !!! "Give no quarter take no quarter"!!!
     
  3. Unknown1

    Unknown1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2009
    Messages:
    3,402
    What victory?

    That had to be the most short-sighted, self-serving vote any legislature ever took!

    Anybody who really believes that it was a victory to encourage psychotics, psychopaths, and career criminals to continue to enjoy unrestrained access to firearms needs to have their own head examined!

    And every Senator who voted against the Bill to better their chances at reelection next term should be recalled to their home State and strung up by the nads in front of their State House as an example of the value of politicians who ignore what their constituents want.

    Keller
     
  4. likes-to-shoot

    likes-to-shoot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2006
    Messages:
    6,092
    Location:
    Iowa
    We all know the fight will never be over....The question is about current and future availability of reloading supplies!!
     
  5. Fla_native

    Fla_native TS Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2012
    Messages:
    96
    Unknown1..... What would that bills impact have been on your "...psychotics, psychopaths, and career criminals...." ??

    EdH
     
  6. halfmile

    halfmile Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    15,642
    Location:
    Green Bay Wisconsin
    unknowing one must have never read a form 4473.

    That was a very moronic statement, right in line with the pathetic liberal crap that has been spewed on this subject for the last 3 months.

    The facts: NONE of the proposed bills would have stopped ANY of the last few years worth of shooting rampages. NONE.

    Taking guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens is the aim of the New World Order leftists.

    It worked for Hitler.

    HM
     
  7. mike Adcock

    mike Adcock Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    182
    Unknown1 is correct that the fight will never be over. We must continue to inform our legislators of our beliefs and should also contact the anti-gun legislators. Join the NRA if you so desire and try our best to elect those who are pro second amendment.

    If you encounter an anti-gun person, respect their views but politely inform them with correct facts. One might also mention that if strict gun laws worked then Chicago would be a safe city to be out in at night.

    Mike Adcock
     
  8. Birddogfella

    Birddogfella Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2010
    Messages:
    381
    Location:
    central Virginia
    Here is my question of the day:
    Who is going to fight for the good ol' Second Amendment after our (65+)
    generation is dead?
    I do not see much chance of an ever increasing urban population having any notion of self reliance or individual responsibility for their poor little socialist a$$e$!


    shoot safely... and while you can,

    ML Johnson
     
  9. RLC323

    RLC323 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    813
    I found it interesting that Obama stated that some legislators were scared by the implications of voting against the NRA and it's money.

    That just indicates that we all need to do our part to be sure that money and support is there for those Senators and Representatives that stand with us, no matter how unpopular that stand may be with the media.

    Obama and his minions are not giving up just because Uncle Joe did not come through this time.
     
  10. Unknown1

    Unknown1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2009
    Messages:
    3,402
    <blockquote><I>"NONE of the proposed bills would have stopped ANY of the last few years worth of shooting rampages. NONE."</i></blockquote>No argument there, halfwit, but the fact remains that the system is screwed up. Does it matter if people are gunned dopwn in bunches or 1 at a time? The "law abiding citizens" go to gun dealers, have their backgrounds checked and buy their guns. The whack jobs and psychos, people with something to hide, can go around to the back door with a fist full of cash and buy at any gun show where nobody even has to know their real name.

    Do you really want me to believe that you think it's OK to have a system that maintains a dual standard where only some of the people buying deadly weapons are even checked to see if they have the basic qualifications to own them?

    Keller
     
  11. Stl Flyn

    Stl Flyn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    8,728
    Is ignorance a mental disease?

    Sick'em Keller, Sick'em! LOL
     
  12. Catpower

    Catpower Molon Labe TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    10,241
    Location:
    In the Cabana
    If you think subjecting legal people to back round checks is going to slow down crime you have a lot of faith in criminals obeying the law
     
  13. Unknown1

    Unknown1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2009
    Messages:
    3,402
    Legal people are subjected to background checks now! Nothing would have changed!

    Keller
     
  14. Catpower

    Catpower Molon Labe TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    10,241
    Location:
    In the Cabana
    Then what would it have gained?

    There has been a large number of people trying to illegally buy guns with a super small fraction of them being prosecuted, all the info to go after them was on the 4473 they filled out

    It would just put a burden on legal owners
     
  15. Stl Flyn

    Stl Flyn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    8,728
    Show me the law, and the sentence for trying to obtain a weapon, and being denied it through an FFL? I understand the possession law, for once possession is enforceable. There are many, many, many prosecutions for that.

    Would it stop criminals that have a record, people under restraining orders, or if people have known mental problems, and those are known because of new laws that expose them, make a difference? Maybe. Why because people that are of that description right now can go anywhere other then a FFL dealer, and buy a gun, including those denied in the first paragraph. If those options are minimized, do you think it is tougher for these individuals to obtain a gun?

    If you make the criminals, buy guns from criminals, instead of law abiding citizens, would that not narrow down their access?

    Is it going to stop a law abiding citizen from obtaining a gun, and becoming a criminal with it's use? NO! At least he will have to get a gun from his new friends he made in prison to do it again though.
     
  16. cyduster

    cyduster TS Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2013
    Messages:
    21
    It was the RECORD KEEPING Unknown (548). We need to get after A rated Mary Landrieu neighbors in LA. Larry - Texas
     
  17. Greevesman

    Greevesman Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2012
    Messages:
    87
    Yes, In California we are subject to all kinds of checks and restrictions, and are about to get more. It's all about making gun ownership more difficult and costly for everyone. A little at a time, more and more legitimate citizens will cease to be interested because it's just to much trouble.
    It's a lot easier to prohibit and tax then it is to do the difficult work of catching and penalizing criminals and loonies. And you just might infringe on their rights.
     
  18. Stl Flyn

    Stl Flyn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    8,728
    So, 80,000 people where denied buying a gun because of a criminal background check, through an FFL, which I still don't see where that is illegal, please show me this law, but were still able to obtain a gun anywhere else, afterwards. Does that make sense? Of those people that were prosecuted, I would bet that they where convicted felons, stupid enough to try and get a gun through an FFL. The rest where denied for other reasons, that where not actual convicted felons.

    Again, is it a crime for ANYONE to fill out a form 4473, and go through a background check, and be DENIED the purchase of a gun? So you are saying that it is a crime to be denied a gun through a failed background check. What would be your feelings if you where prosecuted the next time you fill out an application 4473, and are denied? Though it may be a paper mistake, or record mess up, of a name, could be any false recording. You are now in line to be prosecuted! Understand what I am saying?
     
  19. Fla_native

    Fla_native TS Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2012
    Messages:
    96
    Stl Flyn .... If i wish to buy my neighbors Parker, its a private sale, why should I be forced to have a background check done?
    That sale would be between my neighbor and myself.... none of uncle sams business and none of yours. Its a liberty thing...you wouldnt understand.

    EdH
     
  20. Unknown1

    Unknown1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2009
    Messages:
    3,402
    <blockquote><I>"There has been a large number of people trying to illegally buy guns with a super small fraction of them being prosecuted, all the info to go after them was on the 4473 they filled out....It would just put a burden on legal owners."</i></blockquote>First, you're assuming that techniques for conducting background checks would remain the same as it is now when it's expanded to mobile operations like gun shows. With the smart phone technology available now, that could easily change.

    Second, you talk about a burden on legal owners? For crying out loud, man, how much of a "burden" could you possibly be talking about? Why would it be any more of a burden than it is doing things the way they are now? At least the expansion of backgrounds checks will help plug a huge loophole in the laws we already have. Not new laws, just close the gaps in the ones we have... make the existing laws more effective.

    Keller
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.