New Legislation Proposes Gun Confiscation

By Dave Dolbee published on in News

Have you ever heard the one about the politician offering assurances that no one is out to take away your guns? Well, a handful of Democrats from California can’t make that claim any longer. Barbara Boxer and Diane Feinstein are leading a new charge.

In true political anti Second Amendment fashion, and not wishing to waste the opportunity to capitalize on a tragedy, U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) has introduced the “The Pause for Safety Act.”

Barbara Boxer

U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer is leading the charge, but pulling several of her Democrat colleagues with her, to enact new gun control measures.

According to Boxer, The Pause for Safety Act would help ensure that families “and others” can go to court and seek a gun violence prevention order to temporarily stop someone close to them who poses a danger to themselves or others from purchasing a firearm.

It would also help ensure that families and others can also seek a gun violence prevention warrant allowing law enforcement to take temporary possession of firearms that have already been purchased if a court determines that the individual poses a threat to themselves or others.

Last, but not least, it would help ensure that law enforcement makes full use of all existing gun registries when assessing a tip, warning or request from a concerned family member or other close associate. National gun registry?

The shortsighted Democrat’s proposed legislation misses the mark on several levels. First, she recently said the following when discussing The Pause for Safety Act.

“It is haunting that the family of the gunman who committed this massacre in Isla Vista was desperate to stop a tragedy, and yet they lacked the tools to do so,” Senator Boxer said. “My bill would give families and associates who fear someone close to them could commit violence new tools to help prevent these tragedies.”

The speech sounds fine… if you do not care about the facts. First, the family did contact law enforcement. Law enforcement did contact the subject and determined he was a well-spoken young man and not a danger—just acting out. The family did not take away the car he later used to maim over a dozen people!

Second, of the six people the suspected murder killed (not including himself), the first three were stabbed to death. Why doesn’t the Left want to take away sharp objects or find a way to regulate knives? The murderer used his BMW to hit and injure 13 people; Boxer does not have a provision for family members to engage the police to confiscate an individual’s motor vehicle. Why? The answer is simple. As we all know, it is not about saving lives, it is about an agenda bent on taking away our Second Amendment rights.

According to Boxer’s website, the Act would allow family members “or close associates” to obtain the emergency restraining order and then seek law enforcement confiscation. Does this mean one abusive spouse could claim the other was unstable and likely to hurt someone in an effort to nefariously eliminate the tools of self-defense?

Can a nosey neighbor claim they heard you say something that leads them to believe you are a danger to yourself or others and thus the police need to collect data about the firearms you own in preparation for confiscation. How would that be accomplished? Would beat cops be expected to knock on the suspected dangerous person’s door and ask for all of their guns? Or would a SWAT team be kicking in the door with flashbangs, potentially terrorizing anyone in the house in the name of safety?

Senator Dianne Feinstein holding an AR-15

Senator Dianne Feinstein said these weapons are not for hunting deer – they’re for hunting people.

What exactly is a “close associate?” How qualified are these “close associates” and what qualifies them to call in law enforcement to confiscate legally owned items without due process. What is the burden of proof? After all, the California murderer’s videos and subsequent interview was not enough for law enforcement to act or determine him to be a threat. For this Act to be effective, the burden of proof would have to be extremely low and firearms would be confiscated at the slightest accusation.

How far will this proposed legislation go? It is hard to say. The NRA is under fire as always, and the President is showing a willingness to subvert the law by acting unilaterally. He has also threatened to act through Executive Order in cases where he cannot get legislation passed. The danger is real, and the midterm election critical to our future Second Amendment rights.

Of course, it is unlikely the mainstream media will report on this without a heavy anti-gun spin. The responsibility is ours. Please take a few seconds and share this article as widely as possible through email and social media. It is our responsibility to spread the warning and hold any politician endorsing this legislation accountable.

On a related note, Senator Boxer is pleased that similar legislation has been introduced in California by Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner (D-Berkeley), Assemblyman Das Williams (D-Santa Barbara) as well as state Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara).

What will you do to help spread this message? Tell us in the comment section.

SLRule

Growing up in Pennsylvania’s game-rich Allegany region, Dave Dolbee was introduced to whitetail hunting at a young age. At age 19 he bought his first bow while serving in the U.S. Navy, and began bowhunting after returning from Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm. Dave was a sponsored Pro Staff Shooter for several top archery companies during the 1990s and an Olympic hopeful holding up to 16 archery records at one point. During Dave’s writing career, he has written for several smaller publications as well as many major content providers such as Guns & Ammo, Shooting Times, Outdoor Life, Petersen’s Hunting, Rifle Shooter, Petersen’s Bowhunting, Bowhunter, Game & Fish magazines, Handguns, F.O.P Fraternal Order of Police, Archery Business, SHOT Business, OutdoorRoadmap.com, TheGearExpert.com and others. Dave is currently a staff writer for Cheaper Than Dirt!

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Trackback from your site.

The mission of Cheaper Than Dirt!'s blog, "The Shooter's Log," is to provide information-not opinions-to our customers and the shooting community. We want you, our readers, to be able to make informed decisions. The information provided here does not represent the views of Cheaper Than Dirt!

Comments (619)

  • Muhjesbude

    |

    Gentlemen, (you too, Aging Marine),

    Here’s something that sort of ends the debate on the true ‘meaning’ of the 2nd Amendment. Being a self proclaimed grammarian meister and syntax swami, Aging Marine should appreciate this to an extent possibly in absence of his usual repugnant caustic invective.

    Google “The Unabridged Second Amendment” by J. Neil Schulman. It’s only a few page report but says it all when it comes to the cognitive danger of never perusing Strunk & Wagner, at least. And should also put an end to the psychotic debate Ya’ all are having over one stupid word.

    “It’s not that people don’t know so much, it’s just that so much of what people know, just ain’t so!” –Mark Twain. (That make you feel better, AM?)

    Reply

    • AgingMarine

      |

      Are you really trying to twist Schulman’s article? His interview with Roy Copperud is literary genius. Copperud’ grasp on the common usage in the English language, is well beyond my own, and is required reading of many professors I have heard of, especially in comprehension and composition classes.

      Now, as far as my usual, how did it go, Muhjesbude? “Repugnant, caustic invective”? WOW, maybe you should be careful about spending the bulk of you new found vocabulary in one place, all at the same time, don’t you think? I mean, I know the Government does the majority of your thinking for you, but you do want to.have some self dignity, don’t you? After all, your intelligence and integrity are falling apart, especially in light of your recent revelation concerning your affiliation with the same Government that has been trying to and is STILL trying to violate every right in the Bill of Rights, and indeed, beyond that also. This begs the question, why would I give a shit what YOU say about me? LMAO, especially from some hypocritical piece of shit like you! You are the same one that tells me I’m an idiot for not realizing that Beau and Secundius are shills just trying to get me riled up, and then you let slip about you being an Agent for the Government.

      HELL, I would rather listen to Secundius and his domestic life partner, Beau, rather than put one more second of consideration into ANYTHING THAT YOU SAY. You talk a really good game, but in the end you are worse than these two. And you have the NERVE to call what I say, “repugnant, caustic invective”? You are laughable. I would even call you Sir, but that indicates a much higher level of respect than you deserve. I stand by everything I have said thus far, but I even respect Secundius more than I respect you. And I don’t respect him at all!!!! Do you get the picture, Judas?

      So, in closing, asshole, why don’t you just come and attempt to make good on that threat you issued to me. You know, the one where you told me to make my move “because it would be the last one…..” I ever make? BRING IT, BITCH BOY.

      Reply

    • Secundius

      |

      @ AgingMarine.

      Given up, being on the O.I’s. Donor’s List. Why don’t you try the A.I’s. Donors list, instead! I understand that they come in Model’s that actually look like Single-Cell Organism’s, now.

      Reply

    • AgingMarine

      |

      LOL, Secundius. You keep avoiding the question, refusing to answer, LOL. And yet you keep posting. I applaud your tenacity. Keep it up. Like I said, I like to laugh.
      However, if you are posting in attempts to try and insult me, lol you need to do a better job. Your attempts at insults are just a cover up for your failure to argue your point, just as you fail at everything else you attempt. Your failed attempt to insult me in Gaelic was Absolutely comical, as were the others which are too numerous to mention.

      You need to try and stick to the topic, and find a way to argue your point intelligently. A near impossible feat, I agree, but still, you could at least try to come up with a reason why you believe what you believe.

      Stick to your guns, Secundius. And yes the pun WAS intended.
      Good Day and Good Luck.

      Reply

    • Secundius

      |

      @ AgingMarine.

      You haven’t got a clue too what I’m talking about, do you. Well have fun, trying to look it the “phrase”. My grandchildren , will have died of old age before that happens. GOOD LUCK.

      Reply

    • AgingMarine

      |

      Already did. I posted it the same day you used it to refer to Paul and I, remember, the same day you tried to call me a “village idiot”? God, you must be really retarded. Get a grip, Secundius. Come on man, you gotta do better than this!

      Reply

  • Secundius

    |

    @ AgingMarine>

    I don’t buy it, because if that is True, Then let us replace all the “TO’ words in the the Constitution of the United States and the Declaration of Independence, too the word “FOR”. And then, just stand back and see what happen’s next.

    Reply

    • AgingMarine

      |

      I don’t care whether YOU don’t buy it or you do buy it. Its like any truth, it doesn’t need your belief or approval to be true. The fact of the matter is, that in THAT particular sentence, the words “to” and “for” hold the same meaning.

      Now, if you don’t buy that, then what do YOU believe them to mean? HUH? You can’t tell me because you realize that there is no difference in the meaning. All you have is the argument ” then why was the word changed”.
      That is not a valid argument to argue that there is a change in meaning, that is a question acknowledging no change in meaning and yet a change in wordage. As I have said before, no one knows why they changed the word, and no one but you, apparently, gives two shits, lol.

      I have neither the time, energy or patience to explain this to one as stupid as you. It does no good. I have given you examples, and sources for you to reaearch, I have explained it more times than I care to count! You are incapable of learning, either by choice or by mental defect, and explaining this AGAIN is simply a waste of my time. Once again, I thank you for the laughs, Secundius. Good day and Good Luck. You will need it.

      Reply

  • Muhjesbude

    |

    Twisting Shulman’s analysis?????! what’s up with you aging marine?
    I thought that a rapid full auto burst of reality by a real expert might help ‘reset’ your mental block over a single word and get you back in the realm of sane discourse and back on track?

    But apparently not.

    But I’m not going to kick your ass half way back to hell, as i usually do with rank assholes who desperately need at least a quick ‘tune-up’ to be sociably tolerable because after you revealed the source of your anti-social psychosis–your painful disability–i realized that you are already in the ‘hell’ of being painfully disabled with your situation and meds and mental stress.

    I empathize with you because i had ‘been there’ also. Fortunately for only a relatively brief endurance. i understand that you are not the person you might have otherwise been. I truly understand how frustrating that can be and how it causes people to lash out at others. Every chance i get i council Wounded Warriors with severe PTSD.

    Instead of coming out to kick your ass after you attacked me and pushed my buttons, If you want, instead, I’ll come out and bring you a really good bottle of Scotch to share and maybe we can talk about it, maybe even reach some common ground.

    Your current state of emotional content also causes you to jump to arbitrary conclusions.

    I mentioned my previous life’s work to exemplify the futility and stupidity and waste of value production of restricting ANY type of firearms carry.

    But in your compulsive emotional state of animus you immediately assumed that i was one of the jack booted alphabet agency goons who throws flash bangs into Grandma’s living room while she’s babysitting because they are too stupid to understand correct street addresses.

    Sorry to disappoint you, but my last job was with the DOD in an anti-terrorism intelligence capacity.. I helped protect this country, and the freedom of people like you to say what you want, not support any totalitarian regime. In fact, as one of the more outspoken ones against the violations of the Constitution, i irritated the shit out of a lot of wannabe despots climbing the internal ladders of government advancement. I bulled the fuck out of them based on my rather ‘formidable’ combat training and experience, which is the only thing that such people eventually fear, if i even caught of whiff of the stench of Fascist mentalities.

    I did a lot of good Patriot duty for my country and fellow Patriots.

    So I’m not fighting with you anymore, Aging Marine. As Beau said, we shouldn’t be agonizing among ourselves. We need to support each other in the coming dangerous times.

    The difference between us here, and the masses of the clueless who are drowning in their own apathy, is that we are at least ‘concerned’.
    That’s a start for the restoration of our liberty. But the power of our ‘free speech’ should not be poisoned by our flawed emotional content. We’re better than that.

    If you want to reach out back door on this forum through the administrator go ahead and we’ll talk privately…?

    Otherwise, if you just need to lash out at me, go ahead, you can have the last word here if that makes you feel better. I apologize for any hyper irritation i’ve caused you.

    I’m finished with this forum except for one more article i’m trying to find which might interest incessant ‘debators’ like you and Secundius here, lol! as it has to do with how to address a leftist anti-gun person and buckshot his arguments. It’s well done with good info.

    Thanks and take care, all.

    Reply

    • Secundius

      |

      @ Muhjesbude.

      It’s Mindset and Fear. He wouldn’t admit to the Truth, even if it was staring him directly in the face and came with a bevy of Beautiful Strippers and 100-piece March Band.

      Reply

    • AgingMarine

      |

      LOL, Secundius, you really shouldn’t talk about yourself in the third person like that. I know you have difficulty with reality but try to keep a grasp at least.

      You still have yet to explain the difference you see between the “two versions” of the 2nd Amendment. And you want to talk about not being able to see the truth??? LMAO. Good one. Keep up the comedy, stupid. I enjoy a good laugh.

      Reply

    • Secundius

      |

      @ AgingMarine.

      NEIGHTER HAVE YOU!!!

      Reply

    • AgingMarine

      |

      LMAO, don’t you mean NEITHER?

      And yes I have. I have given you the definition from the dictionary, based on comparative usage. Both of those “versions” mean the same thing, stupid. So says the Merriam Websters law dictionary. You say that the difference in one word makes a significant difference, but you cannot tell me what that difference is. And do you know why you can’t tell me what the supposed difference is? You can’t because there is no difference. Period. You, of course are to stupid to admit it, but that doesn’t change the fact that there is no difference. Good day Secundius. Good luck to you.

      Reply

    • Secundius

      |

      @ AgingMarine.

      MY BAD! In my case I had a STROKE, In YOUR case, one to many shots through the Brain Pan. You must have been Scratching Your Ass for Weeks!

      Reply

    • AgingMarine

      |

      LMAO. Now its a stroke! Before it was one of only 3 diagnosed cases of Chronic pain in the western half of the Globe! That was, wait, Northern, Central AND South America, wasn’t it, Secundius? Now its a stroke! LOL, lie much. Just have SOME honor and admit you are wrong. That’s all. Let’s see some of that U.S. Arny Honor! Oh wait…. THAT was a lie too! Get bent, Secundius. You don’t deserve the effort of acknowledging your idiotic posts, if you were rolling around on the ground burning to death, I wouldn’t waste the time to piss on you to put out the flames.

      The fact is that NONE of these personal issues have any bearing on your comments except one: you had a stroke. That might, I repeat MIGHT make a difference but not once you were given information. It would be a valid reason for you to FORGET the truth, but when it is reintroduced to you, your stroke has no more bearing. You can post, you can put together a sentence, albeit like a 1st grader, but you can still speak with the intellect of a freshman in HS, so your stroke has nothing to do with this issue. Stop with the excuses and just….stop. PERIOD!

      Reply

    • Secundius

      |

      @ AgingMarine>

      In 2002, I was diagnosis’d with a very rare kind of Rheumatoid Arthritis, that effect the Finger, Hands, Arms, Toes and Feet. Because of complications caused by the Rheumatoid Arthritis, causing me severe chronic pain, 24/7/365. This Chronic Pain, cause’d my Blood Pressure to spike in 2006, too the point, 278/185. And anyone with High Blood Pressure will know that’s its not good. In, 2010. I had my First Stroke.
      I am currently taking 13-different medications, just to stay alive. three of which control my High-Blood Pressure, three for my Rheumatoid Arthritis, two too control the Pain. And, the rest to cover open sores, lesions and ulcers. Any other question’s about my Health Do You Want Too Know.

      Reply

    • AgingMarine

      |

      Again, nothing there prevents you from seeing the truth.

      With that said, I never ASKED about your failing health. I simply don’t care if you live or die. You are a liar who spews false information like it were air to breathe. You don’t care what false information you spread because you don’t think your gonna be around for much longer, so what difference does it make to you? You are just repugnant.

      I DON’T care about your health problems, if they even exist. Stop spreading false information. That’s all. Your PERSONAL issues have NORHING to do with the topic at hand.

      Reply

    • Secundius

      |

      @ AgingMarine.

      You know, your a Shadow Image In the Works!!!

      Reply

    • AgingMarine

      |

      LMAO, Secundius, if only you knew what a shadow image even is, lol!

      So far, you are the shadow image, a fake sent here to confuse the issues, to spread false information to anyone who will listen.
      That’s why I don’t let you. I expose your lies every time you post, and it is quite fun. Although I admit I am curious about what possible “meaning” you could even try to make up for the word change in the two 2nd Amendment “versions”.
      Call it a Morbid sense of curiosity, if you want. I am always interested in how warped minds work, how they think. You are the perfect study. Your neurosis is deep, and given the things you say about your health, if true then I can see why. But as I said before, your health does not excuse your behavior.
      Anyways, keep posting. I enjoy the levity. Good Day and Good luck.

      Reply

    • AgingMarine

      |

      You are a liar, first and foremost. YOU attacked ME, with your veiled threat. I don’t take ANY threat lightly, jackwad.

      Next , you say in one post, identifying yourself as an Agent of the Government, and now in this post you say “former job” You say you aren’t An “alphabet agency jack booted goon”. And then Identify yourself as DoD. Working anti terrorism intelligence….the heart of the thug brigade! You are full of hypocrisy, and I am done with you. Go ahead, make more veiled threats. I implore you, PLEASE. Abuse your Governmental powers and go ” back door to the modeelrator, get my info. You want my Email? Hell I’ll give it to you. For once ply your bs Government trade out in the open, oh that’s right, if it was that blatant, there would be rioting in the streets, and your masters would be out on their collective asses! Here it is, fool: davew0351@gmail.com. I got nothing to hide or to fear, so there it is. Now its time to make your move, let’s see if my move was really my last, like you threatened me it would be.

      Reply

  • TwoDrinkMinimum

    |

    zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzOh Sh@t.

    Reply

  • AgingMarine

    |

    LOL, this is been dead and gone

    Reply

  • ThisSideUP^

    |

    CIRCULAR LOGIC, right? Well, “What Goes Around, Come’s Around”, I guess.

    Reply

  • NBG.FORREST

    |

    “Life Like A Box of Chocolates, Sometimes, You Get the AgedM-Nuts, And Sometimes, You Get Your P-Nuts.”

    Reply

  • CherokeeScot

    |

    Gun Ban Results In Dozens of Tragic Deaths

    BOSTON — National guard units seeking to confiscate
    a cache of recently banned assault rifles were ambushed on
    April 19th by elements of a paramilitary extremist faction.
    Military and law enforcement officials estimate that 72
    were killed and more than 200 injured before government
    forces were compelled to withdraw.
    Speaking after the clash, Massachusetts Governor
    Thomas Gage declared that the extremist faction, which was
    made up of local citizens, has links to the radical
    right-wing tax protest movement.
    Gage blamed the extremists for recent incidents of
    vandalism directed against internal revenue offices. The
    governor, who described the group’s organizers as
    “criminals,” issued an executive order authorizing the
    summary arrest of any individual who has interfered with
    the government’s efforts to secure law and order.
    The military raid on the extremist arsenal followed
    widespread refusal by the local citizenry to turn over
    recently outlawed assault weapons. Gage issued a ban on
    military-style assault weapons and ammunition earlier in
    the week. This decision followed a meeting earlier this
    month between government and military leaders at which
    the governor authorized the forcible confiscation of
    illegal arms.
    One government official, speaking on condition of
    anonymity, pointed out that “none of these people would
    have been killed had the extremists obeyed the law and
    turned over their weapons voluntarily.”
    Government troops initially succeeded in confiscating
    a large supply of outlawed weapons and ammunition. However,
    troops attempting to seize arms and ammunition in Lexington
    met with resistance from heavily-armed extremists who had
    been tipped-off regarding the government’s plan.
    During a tense standoff in Lexington’s town park,
    National Guard Colonel Francis Smith, commander of the
    government operation, ordered the armed group to surrender
    and return to their homes. The impasse was broken by a
    single shot, which was reportedly fired by one of the
    extremists.
    Eight civilians were killed in the ensuing exchange.
    Ironically, the local citizenry blamed government forces
    rather than the extremists for the civilian deaths. Before
    order could be restored, armed citizens from surrounding
    areas had descended upon the guard units. Colonel Smith,
    finding his forces overmatched by the armed mob, ordered
    a retreat.
    Governor Gage has called upon citizens to support
    the state/national joint task force in its effort to restore
    law and order. The governor has also demanded the surrender
    of those responsible for planning and leading the attack
    against the government forces. Samuel Adams, Paul Revere,
    and John Hancock, who have been identified as “ringleaders”
    of the extremist faction, remain at large.
    * * *
    Oh, I forgot to give the date including the year (but you
    already know, don’t you?). It was April 20, 1775.

    Reply

    • ThisSideUP^

      |

      At CherokeeScot, I find it interesting that not one of them, or anyone, one’s in the group even tried too take back the government. That everybody say’s that they are Entitled to do under the Constitutional Guidelines. I find that very interesting, don’t you!

      Reply

    • TAIN

      |

      Response to CherokeeScot.

      You mention, Your Words: Assault Rifle in the First Paragraph. The First Usage of the word Assault Rifle (actually Sturmgewhr or Storm Rifle). Didn’t make make its debut until July of 1944, by Adolph Hitler. My question is what constituted as a Assault Rifle in April 20, 1775. That’s a “stumper” for me. If all possible, please identify the 18-century Brand, Make and Model, the qualified it as an “Assault Rifle”. 169-years, before its inception. I’d really like to see a picture of an 18th century Assault Rifle, and I’m sure many other would be interested in seeing it too!

      Reply

  • AgingMarine

    |

    That was just Awesome to read. So many claim there can be no parallels between back then and now. Glad to see someone else can see there are still parallels and correlations from then to now.

    Reply

  • Muhjesbude

    |

    Tain, I think you’re over reacting to Cheroke’s clever situation analogy of then and now. Obviously he, and anyone else by now, should understand what an ‘assault’ rifle really is. And why the corrupt and devious radical left insists upon using that term in their fear frenzy. He was just using ‘literary license’ to inject the drama terminology to flash to current 21st century reference, which worked pretty well to keep you attentive until the last part.

    But the interesting part is that the muskets and cannon they used back then as the standard of their conventional military warfare were, indeed, the same thing the civilians and militia had and would use!

    In other words, the ordinary citizen civilians used exactly the same weapons as the regular armies. And were NOT restricted in any way as to the private ownership of them, unless, of course, as is the rationale today, there was an agenda based tactical effort to mitigate a potential advantage of rebellious citizens in the face of a fascist despotic government–which was the comparative point of his essay here.

    And, of course, until the tyrannical confiscatory registration format of the 1968 gun control act (which had no basis or justification warranting its creation except that the Johnson cartel feared what the organized citizenry–then in the form of war protesters–could do if they got organized enough and eventually exercised their citizen’s militia rights)
    which was preceded by a weaker attempt in 1934 NFA by the government power elite to disarm the populate by starting with the full auto, et al weapons– ‘We, the People’ could, indeed, purchase a current modern individual military combat weapon such as a real full auto ‘assault machine gun’ or even platoon level heavy weapons, such as mortars and artillery. if we could afford it. No paper work, right over the counter!

    Back then there was no rapid hyper social obsession with extremely invasive police state efforts at ‘Crime Prevention’ under the specious notion of ‘Public Safety’. You didn’t abrogate your inalienable Constitutional rights as a free person of America, just for the ‘potential aspect’ of something bad happening. That’s a universal absurdity!

    What also was forgotten in this psychotic Islamist style government tyranny with their assumptions concerning what a private person ‘needs’ to protect themselves is that what an individual ‘needs’, is also supposed to be strictly none of the business of the government power elite, according to our Bill of Rights!

    In 1931, for instance, If you purchased a 40 mm cannon from your local Army/Navy surplus store and started pumping rounds at a shopping mall, you would be caught and punished severely for your abuse of your rights. But if you just used it for your own entertainment safely somewhere remote on your own land, there’s no reason why you couldn’t do that? And the Constitution agreed.

    The only one’s who don’t ‘agree’ with the Constitution are those who have a guilt complex because of their eventual totalitarian agenda.

    You see, back in the early days, they weren’t trying to subvert the Constitution, like they are doing now, the were seriously Upholding it. And that meant that the free American citizens in the Constitutional status of being potential future defenders of egalitarian liberty in the form of armed citizens
    Militias, should have the EXACT same individual weapons as would be used against them in tyrannical dominance.

    Otherwise, LOL, it would be a pretty stupid and disadvantaged liberty defending group, now wouldn’t it?

    Reply

  • AgingMarine

    |

    What additional WHAT may WHO want,??? Whomever you are. You need to present your thoughts and questions in an intelligent manner so people can respond likewise.

    Reply

  • AgingMarine

    |

    You need to focus your brain power and put forward an intelligent thought. Your post makes absolutely no sense. It has nothing to do with the topic of this thread.

    Reply

  • Beau

    |

    It’s not what you think folks. It’s not a human and it ain’t gonna respond. This blog is being tested by a screwed-up bot designed to find flaws in logic and security.

    While there are logic flaws on this blog, they’re mostly posted by ill-informed, or panic-stricken morons who wrongly believe adding more guns is a solution to all of Americas problems. Not the logic flaws sought by this bot, yet.

    Ironic eh?

    Reply

  • Paul

    |

    Nice strawman there, Beau.

    Adding more guns? Who suggested that?

    Reply

  • Beau

    |

    Just about everybody online here. For one.

    Then there’s the open-carry fools who are trying to find some courage by strapping on a sidearm before heading out to Target for some new panties.

    Are you telling me you’re disagreeing with the aims of the NRA in their attempt to enable open carry in schools, bars and everywhere else?

    Yea, I thought not.

    Reply

  • Paul

    |

    Caught in his lie, Beau changes the subject from “more guns” to “open carry”.

    No facts back his fear of that issue, either.

    Reply

  • Beau

    |

    Afraid to state his position clearly, Paul changes the subject. Again.

    First, find your balls, then engage what’s left of your brain and simply answer the question –

    Do you agree OR disagree with the aims of the NRA in their attempt to enable open carry in schools, bars and everywhere else?’

    Reply

Leave a comment

Your discussions, feedback and comments are welcome here as long as they are relevant and insightful. Please be respectful of others. We reserve the right to edit as appropriate, delete profane, harassing, abusive and spam comments or posts, and block repeat offenders. All comments are held for moderation and will appear after approval.


two + 1 =