• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Democrats launch 4 anti gun ownership bills in Congress

L

LeagueOf1291

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
328
Location
Buffalo Valley, Tennessee, USA
imported post

vermonter wrote:
I agree about giving more fuel to the anti's. But can you imagine what fuel it will give them when some 15 year old is shot dead b/c he was just acting stupid with a look alike?I am all for paint ball, just make the shape like a paintball gun for airsoft. There has been a hell of a lot of stupidity with kids playing "stick em up" with these. It's only a matter of time until a CCW or OC shoots one by accident. I blame the evil corporate manufacturers. They don't care about anything but stuffing their pockets.
Click to expand...

It's really up to the parents to teach the 15-year-old some good sense. "Look, Johnnie, don't pull out a toy that looks like a gun and threaten a crowd with it. You'll get shot."

My kids play with look-alike guns. Why should they be deprived of that fun just because an idiot gets himself shot for being stupid?

And I don't follow you to the conclusion about the "evil corporate manufacturers." What if they're family-owned manufacturers? What if it's a family business, but they incorporated?

What about you? Do you aim to make a profit when you work? Or is it your duty to produce at a loss?
 
G

gotarheels03

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
62
Location
Hockessin, , USA
imported post

cloudcroft wrote:
I also will carry regardless of "the law"...after all, self-defense is a right and one needs the "tool" to exercise said right.

So at the very least, civil-disobedience is in order.

-- John D.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Even if the Democrats were ever successful in passing a full-scale gun ban, I wonder if they'd be able to actually enforce it. If the millions of gun owners simply ignored it, what would they do? I don't think they'd actually send out the military to come and disarm every American. If it ever did come to that then we're clearly not living in a free democracy. I think if there were ever full-scale confiscations like what happened in New Orleans they would NOT end peacefully.
 
L

LeagueOf1291

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
328
Location
Buffalo Valley, Tennessee, USA
imported post

gotarheels03 wrote:
Agreed. Even if the Democrats were ever successful in passing a full-scale gun ban, I wonder if they'd be able to actually enforce it. If the millions of gun owners simply ignored it, what would they do? I don't think they'd actually send out the military to come and disarm every American. If it ever did come to that then we're clearly not living in a free democracy. I think if there were ever full-scale confiscations like what happened in New Orleans they would NOT end peacefully.
Click to expand...
I think I can already establish that we don't live in a free democracy. When the federal government tells you -- without any constitutional authority -- how much water you can flush in your toilet, you don't live in a free democracy.
 
P

pingdashf

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
12
Location
Alexandria, Virginia, USA
imported post

cs9c1 wrote:
I wonder where "The Donkey" is now? So much for his party being for gun rights.
Click to expand...
This bill was introduce by a single person, not an entire party. It has no co-sponsors. To say the democratic party is "for gun rights" would be too simplistic. The democratic party is "for rights", all of them. There are plenty of pro-gun democrats out there fighting the good fight.
 
B

badmonkey

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2006
Messages
152
Location
Princeton, West Virginia, USA
imported post

pingdashf wrote:
cs9c1 wrote:
I wonder where "The Donkey" is now? So much for his party being for gun rights.
Click to expand...
This bill was introduce by a single person, not an entire party. It has no co-sponsors. To say the democratic party is "for gun rights" would be too simplistic. The democratic party is "for rights", all of them. There are plenty of pro-gun democrats out there fighting the good fight.
Click to expand...
If the dems are "for rights", all of them, then why are the vast majority of them anti-gun rights?
 
B

badmonkey

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2006
Messages
152
Location
Princeton, West Virginia, USA
imported post

Also, to say any party is pro "all-rights" is ridiculous. What about worker's rights v business rights? You can't be both. Woman's right's v unborn child's rights? Not a thread hijack but making a point.

The majority of the people in the Democratic party are pro-gun control. Period. There are some that are not (such as almost all of them in my state), but nationally, no.
 
P

pingdashf

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
12
Location
Alexandria, Virginia, USA
imported post

badmonkey wrote:
Also, to say any party is pro "all-rights" is ridiculous. What about worker's rights v business rights? You can't be both. Woman's right's v unborn child's rights? Not a thread hijack but making a point.

The majority of the people in the Democratic party are pro-gun control. Period. There are some that are not (such as almost all of them in my state), but nationally, no.
Click to expand...

Uhm, I was specifically talking about the rights outlined in the Bill of Rights.
 
A

apjonas

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2006
Messages
1,157
Location
, ,
imported post

Quite true. However I've noticed that the same people who justifiably oppose federal intervention in such cases seem to have no problem letting the feds in when it suits their purpose (e.g. "National Right to Carry"). Some 2A supporters are either so lazy (to work on multiple state levels) or frustrated that they're willing to sell their birthright for a bowl of porridge.

LeagueOf1291 wrote:
It's not just whether the law is a good one -- we should be greatly concerned that the federal government has no jurisdiction on this issue. We should not happily permit the federal government to exercise its lawmaking power outside the bounds of its lawful authority.

The constitution determines the authority of the federal government. If we just let it act unlawfully with impunity, we lose our handle on its power.
Click to expand...
 
P

pingdashf

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
12
Location
Alexandria, Virginia, USA
imported post

badmonkey wrote:
If the dems are "for rights", all of them, then why are the vast majority of them anti-gun rights?
Click to expand...
I don't think the majority are anti-gun. A small but vocal section is anti-gun, and the vast majority are apathetic. There are a good number that are pro-gun, but unfortunately they aren't very vocal. Then there are those of us that are working their tail off within the democratic party to educate the apathetic ones and silence the anti's.
 
L

LeagueOf1291

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
328
Location
Buffalo Valley, Tennessee, USA
imported post

apjonas wrote:
Quite true. However I've noticed that the same people who justifiably oppose federal intervention in such cases seem to have no problem letting the feds in when it suits their purpose (e.g. "National Right to Carry"). Some 2A supporters are either so lazy (to work on multiple state levels) or frustrated that they're willing to sell their birthright for a bowl of porridge.
Click to expand...


How does a national right to carry infringe the right to bear arms?
 
P

pingdashf

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
12
Location
Alexandria, Virginia, USA
imported post

cs9c1 wrote:
pingdashf wrote:
Then there are those of us that are working their tail off within the democratic party to educate the apathetic ones and silence the anti's.
Click to expand...
Please give us an example, please!
Click to expand...
I was specifically referring to the people like me who are democrats but very active for the gun lobby. I attend Dem meetings (while carrying). I speak every opportunity I get about the importance of civil liberties and make sure I mention that the 2nd is just as much a civil liberty as the rest. I contact my representatives at all levels of government from the local district and school board up to the president.

If you want examples of politicians, just take a look through the NRA's ratings. There are plenty of example of A rated democrats. I'm not a fan of the NRA ratings in general, but they at least illustrate that there are pros and antis in both parties.
 
The Donkey

The Donkey

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2006
Messages
1,114
Location
Northern Virginia
imported post

cs9c1 wrote:
I wonder where "The Donkey" is now? So much for his party being for gun rights.
Click to expand...
My comments are way up there under February 9, but Pingdashf seems to be doing a fine job on gun rights without anything further from me -- as are the pro gun dems in Congress.

The mugwumps introduce this kind of thing in every Congress: but these bills are going nowhere.

Save an elephant: ride a Donkey!
 
C

cs9c1

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2006
Messages
548
Location
Mechanicsville, Virginia, USA
imported post

The Donkey wrote:
but Pingdashf seems to be doing a fine job on gun rights without anything further from me -- as are the pro gun dems in Congress.
Click to expand...

OK, I say it again. Show me what progress these "pro gun dems" have had.

I learned a long time ago, that the most important thing in politics is "win the election" period.

Now that the Dems who ran as pro gun are under very powerful anti gun Demsthey will have to follow the party line if they have any desire to make the "right committees". Which ends the so called pro gun Dems power to help our cause.

Please prove me wrong, It would be great if we could increase our voice in all parties, I just don't see it happening.
 
T

Tomahawk

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
5,117
Location
4 hours south of HankT, ,
imported post

hlh wrote:
Hey Donkey, The donkeys have done more damage to our rights than the elephants over the years.
Click to expand...
As a recovering conservative, I'd have to say that's debatable. Who's worse, the adversery you know, or the ally who repeatedly betrays you?
 
M

mlands

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2006
Messages
152
Location
Centreville, Virginia, USA
imported post

cs9c1 wrote:
The Donkey wrote:
but Pingdashf seems to be doing a fine job on gun rights without anything further from me -- as are the pro gun dems in Congress.
Click to expand...


Most of the Democrats that lead the party that are in powerful leadership positions are the very left wing liberal anti-gun socialists like Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, Ted Kennedy, and a host of other big left wing liberals. They set their party's priorities and agenda. As most of you recall, under the Bill Clinton Administration we has to put up with lots of anti-gun crap. Now imagine the future with a President Hillary Clinton along with the present Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. All are very left wing socialist anti-gun politicians. God help us. These people want us to be just like England or Europe and our country would take marching orders from the UN. Hopefully more people will wise up to see these core views and more of us will become politically active.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top