Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 39

Thread: New Gun Laws, When will they be enacted?

  1. #1
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953

    Post imported post

    Playing a little "What If", will an Obama Administration embark on a program of new and restrictive gun laws right away? Or will he wait until he has had the opportunity to appoint one or two Supreme Court Justices that lean as Left as he does?

    Should Obama prevail next Tuesday it is my belief that he will have financial alligators around his ass so deep he might not be able to get on with his agenda of more taxes and more gun control. Even though he will enjoy a Democratic majority in both houses he still has a Supreme Court that recently reaffirmed the 2A and he may wait until he can make changes there before attacking the 2A directly.

    That's my opinion, now what's yours?
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,339

    Post imported post

    I think he will take his time in drafting a bill that, when brought in front of any potential justice appointed, will be just loose enough for them to say that it is constitutional. He knows any gun bills he signs will not be challenged at the SCOTUS level for a few years and that will buy him time to ban now and appoint later. Hell he may even appoint based on thier views of any bills he has passed after taking office.

    But then again I understand that Pelosi is calling in a session to pass and get some bills ready for him to sign on day 1. One of these may very well include an update version of the Clinton ban.
    "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."

    "though I walk through the valley in the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for I know that you are by my side" Glock 23:40

  3. #3
    Regular Member DEROS72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    SEATAC, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,819

    Post imported post

    They are planning to do just that.The way I see it they are going to go after our right to Bear arms right out of the gate.It will be the only to subjugate us to the rest of their insane policies.

    First in will start with the assualt weapons ban and continue from there in small stages untill he can appoint justices that will basically try to repeal the second ammendment.His redistrubution of wealth idea already tells me he is going to strip hard working people of their earnings. He wants to give illegals a free pass .They are already after free speech in that they want to hog tie conservative talk shows and it won't stop there.

    When they do this are all of us just going to sit back andsay well I guess we lost i'll turn in my Ar-15.Are we we all going to be on this site a year from now trying to figure out how to get our gun rights back.As the home invasions and so onwill sky rocket because by then we will have neither the means or the right to defend ourslves in our own homes. The 2nd ammendment is NON NEGOTIABLE.What if 5 or 6 hundred thousand responsible gun owners went toWashington with their families and marched in protest all OC.To let them Know we will not tolerate this anylonger.Or will we all just sit back and let it happen .With excuses well I can't miss work,what would my boss think ,or family think.I can't risk getting fired.

    We need to get moving now and as onebefore it's to late or we won't have any rights left.Much less the right to own and bear arms.



  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , Washington, USA
    Posts
    59

    Post imported post

    In the last year or so Pres. Bush inacted a new bill stating that no changes will be made to the 2nd amendment and it will not be interprited as a manor that has not yet been astablished by the House.

    If you remember Pres. Bush is a hunter and he owns stock in the American guns and ammo Manufactorers.

    I think Obama is only saying those thangs to apease the Anti-Gun people. But for something to be inacted it has to pass Congress.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Moscow, ID
    Posts
    384

    Post imported post

    erich_kopp wrote:
    In the last year or so Pres. Bush inacted a new bill stating that no changes will be made to the 2nd amendment and it will not be interprited as a manor that has not yet been astablished by the House.

    If you remember Pres. Bush is a hunter and he owns stock in the American guns and ammo Manufactorers.

    I think Obama is only saying those thangs to apease the Anti-Gun people. But for something to be inacted it has to pass Congress.
    Cite? I've never heard of this

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    LaConner, Washington, USA
    Posts
    649

    Post imported post

    DEROS72 wrote:
    They are planning to do just that.The way I see it they are going to go after our right to Bear arms right out of the gate.It will be the only to subjugate us to the rest of their insane policies.

    First in will start with the assualt weapons ban and continue from there in small stages untill he can appoint justices that will basically try to repeal the second ammendment.His redistrubution of wealth idea already tells me he is going to strip hard working people of their earnings. He wants to give illegals a free pass .They are already after free speech in that they want to hog tie conservative talk shows and it won't stop there.

    When they do this are all of us just going to sit back andsay well I guess we lost i'll turn in my Ar-15.Are we we all going to be on this site a year from now trying to figure out how to get our gun rights back.As the home invasions and so onwill sky rocket because by then we will have neither the means or the right to defend ourslves in our own homes. The 2nd ammendment is NON NEGOTIABLE.What if 5 or 6 hundred thousand responsible gun owners went toWashington with their families and marched in protest all OC.To let them Know we will not tolerate this anylonger.Or will we all just sit back and let it happen .With excuses well I can't miss work,what would my boss think ,or family think.I can't risk getting fired.

    We need to get moving now and as onebefore it's to late or we won't have any rights left.Much less the right to own and bear arms.

    +1

    I'm glad to see that someone agrees with me about their run at repealing the Second Amendment. All the evidence in Obama's voting record andhis public statements point to this. I've brought this up in other threads and been mostly ignored. But the threat is real, and we should be getting ready for it.

    Also, it's true that Pelosi is working on a draft for resurrection of the Fairness Doctrine. That is a direct attack on the First Amendment and a blunt-edged swipe at silencing all opposition to the Dems' socialist agenda.

    Cross our fingers, folks: polls today show McCain closing to within three points nationwide (Rasmussen). It's really a long shot, but if he keeps hammering on Obama's weak spots, like the tax issue and his lies about his associations that may be enough sopeople will wake up to make a difference and pull a rabbit out of the hat. VOTE, everybody, VOTEVOTEVOTEVOTE Six days left

  7. #7
    Regular Member DEROS72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    SEATAC, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,819

    Post imported post

    Free speech ,Having you ever tried to get in your point with a dem.They never stop talking or ,"you can't say or that"hate speech"So on.They will abosolutely not allow you to make a point.

    The anti war demonstrations ,a good example.In the 60's(Yep I'm older than dirt like Bear) The ones preaching non violence were the most violent.In Obama's socialist country we will not have the right to disagree or critisize socialist policy.As you said the fairness doctrine especially targeting Fox is an excellent example. In order to do this completely they have to disarm us.The precise thing our founders gave us2A to protect against.

    We will have a country not unlike the communist regimes that we have so hard try to protect ourselves from.Secret police the whole smash.For the public good they will say.Redistribution of wealth is another one.If you notice ,let me know if I'm wrong but I haven't heard anything about that from Obama latley.Just something he will force on us.I'll bet eventuallyhe will even ask Congress for expanded powers because he knows there are those who will not stand for it.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    573

    Post imported post

    Just make sure you buy all your stuff to ensure a good supply by January.

  9. #9
    Regular Member DEROS72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    SEATAC, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,819

    Post imported post

    Exactly.with a Dem controlled house and congress they'll get stuff through pretty quick.But what if they say we are banning assault weapons retroactivly are we just going to give them up.Or allow them to not allow us to even shoot with them.

  10. #10
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    thewise1 wrote:
    erich_kopp wrote:
    In the last year or so Pres. Bush inacted a new bill stating that no changes will be made to the 2nd amendment and it will not be interprited as a manor that has not yet been astablished by the House.

    If you remember Pres. Bush is a hunter and he owns stock in the American guns and ammo Manufactorers.

    I think Obama is only saying those thangs to apease the Anti-Gun people. But for something to be inacted it has to pass Congress.
    Cite? I've never heard of this
    +1 I have never heard of this either. Any time there is an assertion containing information as to what stocks the president owns is immediately suspect as his assets are in a blind trust and not public information.
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Moscow, ID
    Posts
    384

    Post imported post

    deepdiver wrote:
    +1 I have never heard of this either. Any time there is an assertion containing information as to what stocks the president owns is immediately suspect as his assets are in a blind trust and not public information.
    My main thing is that you can't have a bill banning changes to the second amendment without amending the constitution to abolish the ability to amend it, which makes no logical sense - much like half the posts in this forum anymore that don't contain a cite for proof.

  12. #12
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator Gray Peterson's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,238

    Post imported post

    I think all of you are making a tremendous amount of assumptions. Let's go by history.

    First, was the DC Handgun ban repeal. 265 House Representatives, including 85 Democrats, voted for the Childers Amendment. Travis Childers is a Democrat from Mississippii. Almost very speaker on the House floor in the debate over the amendment, which I watched the entirety of, were Democrats. Out of a dozen speakers on the amendment, only ONE was a Republican.

    Second is the fact that last time an Assault Weapons ban passed, it radicalized gun owners against the Democrats and caused the overthrow of 40 years of Democratic rule. They are not stupid enough to have 2010 be another 1994, and if they ARE stupid enough, we'll need to hit them again.

    The Republicans were in total control for 4 years, from 2002 until 2006, with the Legislative and Executive Branches. Where was the National Parks Ban Repeal? Went nowhere. Where as the DC Handgun Ban repeal? Went nowhere. Heck, the Assault Weapons ban was in effect for 18 months during that rule. They could have repealed it in a spending bill where no one dared filibuster, but they didn't do it. Why not?

    They gave scraps to us only in the last 3 years. Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which has so many loopholes that you can run a truck through it. The "Emergency Confiscation Bill" which generally has no teeth, and the NICS Improvement Bill, which honestly did not change things a whole lot.

    The problem is that the "brand recognition" of the Republican Party is one of "stay away and run away". Way too many people are pissed off at the Republican party right now, for a bunch of issues OTHER than guns.

    All this hand wringing isn't going to amount to a hill of beans. There's not going to be a saving grace, a court case making Obama ineligible to be president, or some other such thing. Every one of us needs to gird ourselves for a battle in Congress, and we all need to prepare ourselves in that John McCain isn't going to miraculously win this election. A President Obama cannot institute legislation himself.

    Read this again:

    HE NEEDS CONGRESS TO PASS LEGISLATION

    Ok?

  13. #13
    Regular Member thebastidge's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    2519 E Fourth Plain Blvd, Vancouver Washington, USA
    Posts
    313

    Post imported post

    "Pres. Bush inacted a new bill "

    When did the President gain this power? Geez people, get your BASIC facts straight at least, not to mention +1 on the request for *cough*bullsh!t*cough* citation of both the President's stock assets and the supposed bill "inacted". Not to mention, how could anything derived under authority of the constitution (presidential power OR congressional leghislation) ban changes to the constitution? The amendment process cannot be abrogated except by amendment.

    On the matter of drafting a bill. While it's true that anybody can help draft a bill, the President can't introduce squat for consideration. He needs someone to sponsor it on the floor. Undoubtedlyu, there would be plentyof candidates for that, but they don't need Obama to do it. People, CONGRESS enacts laws. NOT the president.

    The big concern for 2nf Amendment rights is definitely the appointment of SCOTUS justices. There are a couple who seem likely to retire, if not immediately, then during the next Presidential term. These are the ones who are already activist judges without a shred of loyalty to the Constitution anyway. So the situation could be slightly worse or status quo with an Obama presidency.

    As for banning retroactively- specifically states in the Constitution it can't be done. It would be immediately challenged and defeated. Even in the most liberal SCOTUS, it is very clear that this is prohibited. On top of that, enforcmenet would be impossible. Too many people for a police force which is what, half a percent of our population? Evenif the police could be convinced to go along en masse.

    OK: so legitimate concerns..

    With Obama to provide 'moral support' to Congress it is likely that the Democrats would become emboldened about attempting to enact more authoritarian legislation which advances their ideologies. They also have confidence that anything which passes both houses will be very unlikely to be vetoed. This still does not protect them from voter backlash in th enext electionif they go too far. Additionally, our country seems more comfortable when Congress and the executive aren't TOO cozy, so Obama being elected prez could very conceivably cause a Republican majority in the next congressional elections: Congress being reasonably well balanced as it is, it wouldn't take too much to swing back to a slim Republican majority.

    Additionally, IF he wins, Obama will have executive authority, which already has been abused by organizations likethe BATFE and IRS, which essentially write their own procedures and have little accountability to Congress in the execution of their "duties". This is harder to fight, because it isolates the individuals affectedand makes them have to find funding to defend themselves alone, rather than enflaming the electorate at large.

    So cool the "sky is falling rhetoric" and do something practical, like keep writing letters to your local papers, write on your blogs, talk to your neighbors, and try to convince them of the reasonableness of your position. Most of all, VOTE.


    Be prepared. Be very prepared.

    http://swwsurplus.com/ *** 2519 E Fourth Plain Blvd Vancouver WA 98661 *** 360.314.6687
    http://www.facebook.com/SouthWestWashingtonSurplus *** https://twitter.com/SWWSurplus

  14. #14
    Regular Member jbone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    2,241

    Post imported post

    IMO Obama and the Obama Nation Followers will quickly forget about Joe the Plumber and the economy and move swiftly on hisAnti-Gun platform, with his wealth distribution in close tow that will add fuel to worsen the poor economy.
    Im proudly straight. I'm free to not support Legalization, GLBT, Illegal Aliens, or the Islamization of America.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    205

    Post imported post

    “As for banning retroactively- specifically states in the Constitution it can't be done. It would be immediately challenged and defeated. Even in the most liberal SCOTUS, it is very clear that this is prohibited. On top of that, enforcmenet would be impossible. Too many people for a police force which is what, half a percent of our population? Evenif the police could be convinced to go along en masse.”

    Have you not heard of the Lautenberg Bill? Of COURSE they can pass retroactive laws; they’ve done it before, and Constitutional challenges to it went nowhere!

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    149

    Post imported post

    A Secretary of Firearms...that'll do it

  17. #17
    Regular Member jbone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    2,241

    Post imported post

    BlaineG wrote:
    A Secretary of Firearms...that'll do it
    Would have been a great posistion for the Late Charlton.Heston.
    Im proudly straight. I'm free to not support Legalization, GLBT, Illegal Aliens, or the Islamization of America.

  18. #18
    Regular Member DEROS72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    SEATAC, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,819

    Post imported post

    Or Ted Nugent.

  19. #19
    Regular Member just_a_car's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Auburn, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,558

    Post imported post

    DEROS72 wrote:
    Or Ted Nugent.
    Nah, he needs to be Secretary of the Interior: http://www.doi.gov/secretary/officials.html
    :celebrate
    B.S. Chemistry UofWA '09
    KF7GEA

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    Lonnie is right. The Republicans were worthless and destructive, as predicted. The Democrats will win the White House and the Congress, and they will try some anti-gun stuff, but they will meet resistance, not to mention history has not been kind to gun-banning politicians (see 1994) so get used to it and get ready for a legislative fight and activism.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    LaConner, Washington, USA
    Posts
    649

    Post imported post

    Tomahawk wrote:
    Lonnie is right. The Republicans were worthless and destructive, as predicted. The Democrats will win the White House and the Congress, and they will try some anti-gun stuff, but they will meet resistance, not to mention history has not been kind to gun-banning politicians (see 1994) so get used to it and get ready for a legislative fight and activism.
    Tomahawk is spot on about getting ready for a fight. It will begin almost right away and continue as long as Obama is in office. Where the greatest battles will happen is in the Senate where there are several members who share Obama's radical notions, notably Dianne Feinstein, but also the likes of Chuck Schumer (sp?) and a few other hard-core anti-gunners. For whatever time he has left, if he is able to get into the act, Ted Kennedy will likely lead the charge.
    I worry that if the Demsgain that super-majority they will go for the whole enchilada and try to repeal the Second Amendment. I'm not under any illusions about the process to do that: I know the constitutional requirements (Article V) The big question is whether there is enough support in the Congress. PLEASE tell me I'm wrong -- I hope to God I am, because if I'm not we will be in for decades of fighting to get it back.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Union, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,256

    Post imported post

    Richard6218 wrote:
    Tomahawk wrote:
    Lonnie is right. The Republicans were worthless and destructive, as predicted. The Democrats will win the White House and the Congress, and they will try some anti-gun stuff, but they will meet resistance, not to mention history has not been kind to gun-banning politicians (see 1994) so get used to it and get ready for a legislative fight and activism.
    Tomahawk is spot on about getting ready for a fight. It will begin almost right away and continue as long as Obama is in office. Where the greatest battles will happen is in the Senate where there are several members who share Obama's radical notions, notably Dianne Feinstein, but also the likes of Chuck Schumer (sp?) and a few other hard-core anti-gunners. For whatever time he has left, if he is able to get into the act, Ted Kennedy will likely lead the charge.
    I worry that if the Demsgain that super-majority they will go for the whole enchilada and try to repeal the Second Amendment. I'm not under any illusions about the process to do that: I know the constitutional requirements (Article V) The big question is whether there is enough support in the Congress. PLEASE tell me I'm wrong -- I hope to God I am, because if I'm not we will be in for decades of fighting to get it back.
    Even if Congress pass a repeal of the 2A, it has to be ratified by 2/3rds of the states to happen and that would not be likely to happen.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    I agree, a repeal of the 2A would be way too much for the Dems to bite off politically; it would mean political suicide. Even many antis don't want to completely do away with the 2A and all gun ownership.

    But there will be a lot of anti-gun legislation introduced. The toughest part of this is that our success at the state level with grass roots activism hasn't yet translated to the national level, at least not completely. Congressmen, especially senators,breath rarified air and think themselves above listening to their constituents. That's how a tool like John Warner manged to stick around until retirement. Guys like Schumer come from anti-gun states and just do whatever they want; they have no fear of the likes of us at all, and they are in charge of many committees.

    We're going to have to step it up. And we can't rely on the NRA to do it all for us: grass roots means grass roots. Ride your congressmen like you're in the Kentucky Derby and don't let up.

  24. #24
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    Richard6218 wrote:
    Tomahawk wrote:
    Lonnie is right. The Republicans were worthless and destructive, as predicted. The Democrats will win the White House and the Congress, and they will try some anti-gun stuff, but they will meet resistance, not to mention history has not been kind to gun-banning politicians (see 1994) so get used to it and get ready for a legislative fight and activism.
    Tomahawk is spot on about getting ready for a fight.* It will begin almost right away and continue as long as Obama is in office.* Where the greatest battles will happen is in the Senate where there are several members who share Obama's radical notions, notably Dianne Feinstein, but also the likes of Chuck Schumer (sp?) and a few other hard-core anti-gunners.* For whatever time he has left, if he is able to get into the act, Ted Kennedy will likely lead the charge.*
    I worry that if the Dems*gain that super-majority they will go for the whole enchilada and try to repeal the Second Amendment.* I'm not under any illusions about the process to do that: I know the constitutional requirements (Article V)* The big question is whether there is enough support in the Congress.* PLEASE tell me I'm wrong -- I hope to God I am, because if I'm not we will be in for decades of fighting to get it back.
    Even if Congress pass a repeal of the 2A,* it has to be ratified by 2/3rds of the states to happen and that would not be likely to happen.
    Hey, look, I agree with Bear. That makes, what, twice now?

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Union, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,256

    Post imported post

    marshaul wrote:
    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    Richard6218 wrote:
    Tomahawk wrote:
    Lonnie is right. The Republicans were worthless and destructive, as predicted. The Democrats will win the White House and the Congress, and they will try some anti-gun stuff, but they will meet resistance, not to mention history has not been kind to gun-banning politicians (see 1994) so get used to it and get ready for a legislative fight and activism.
    Tomahawk is spot on about getting ready for a fight. It will begin almost right away and continue as long as Obama is in office. Where the greatest battles will happen is in the Senate where there are several members who share Obama's radical notions, notably Dianne Feinstein, but also the likes of Chuck Schumer (sp?) and a few other hard-core anti-gunners. For whatever time he has left, if he is able to get into the act, Ted Kennedy will likely lead the charge.
    I worry that if the Demsgain that super-majority they will go for the whole enchilada and try to repeal the Second Amendment. I'm not under any illusions about the process to do that: I know the constitutional requirements (Article V) The big question is whether there is enough support in the Congress. PLEASE tell me I'm wrong -- I hope to God I am, because if I'm not we will be in for decades of fighting to get it back.
    Even if Congress pass a repeal of the 2A, it has to be ratified by 2/3rds of the states to happen and that would not be likely to happen.
    Hey, look, I agree with Bear. That makes, what, twice now?
    Scary huh?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •