Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: hussein ag holder - new aggressive gun control response

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    , ,

    Post imported post

    -hussein ag holder - new aggressive gun control response

    is this why the feds did nothing before the killings ? they knew prior to the killings and did nothing .... just let it happen over dozen killed and tens wounded .... just so they would have a BS excuse to start aggressive gun control ?

    let a few die for the commie perception good of many ..... ?

    Attorney General Holder Reveals Aggressive Gun Control In Response to Ft. Hood Terror Attack

    WASHINGTON, Nov. 19 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Before the Senate Judiciary Committee November 18th, 2009, Attorney General Eric Holder revealed a stunningly broad and aggressive anti-gun agenda.

    "The President of the United States asked that politicians notuse the Ft. Hood attack to engage in 'political theater.' It appears those committed to attacking gun owners and the Second Amendment simply can't help themselves and are engaged in blaming guns and gun owners on the heels of this terrorist attack. Sadly it looks like 'politics as usual,'" said LEAA's spokesperson, Ted Deeds.

    After explaining and defending his decision to give enemy combatants constitutional protections and the right to public trial in civilian courts, Attorney General Holder revealed his support for a national gun owner registration scheme and authorizing the government to ban firearm possession for any person by merely adding that person's name to the terror watch list.

    Drawing reasonable conclusions from what Holder publicly said, we now know:

    • Holder wants a national, permanent gun registration system administered by law enforcement. A registration of honest citizens that have cleared the federal background check for gun purchases with those records permanently retained by and shared among law enforcement.
    • Holder wants new federal authority to prohibit any person on the federal watch list (reported to be 400,000 names) from buying guns and supports confiscating guns from those on the list who possess them.

    Transcribing General Holder: "The position of the Administration is that there should be a basis for law enforcement to share information about gun purchases." "... [It's not] inconsistent to allow law enforcement agencies to share that kind of information, for that information to be retained and then to be shared by law enforcement." "It seems incongruous to me that we would bar certain people from flying on airplanes because they are on the terrorist watch list and yet we would still allow them to posses weapons." {Emphasis added}

    LEAA's Executive Director Jim Fotis said, "Those behind the badge don't believe more restrictions on honest gun owners is a reasonable, practical or constitutional response to acts of terrorism. As a retired officer, I know that America's men and women in blue want to fight terrorism, to stop terrorists; not waste time keeping records on innocent gun owners!"

    SOURCE Law Enforcement Alliance of America

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Rio Rancho, New Mexico, United States

    Post imported post

    What do you expect from the democraps they'll try to get gun control anyway they can
    A gun Owner Is A Citizen
    Anyone Else is a Subject

  3. #3
    Regular Member KansasMustang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Herington, Kansas, USA

    Post imported post

    Just another reason for me to buy another one of those EBG's. WE THE PEOPLE must be vigilant and keep these progressives from demonizing us and confiscation of our freedom.
    ‘‘Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.’’ Thomas Jefferson

  4. #4
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA

    Post imported post

    The interesting thing is this is completely and totally illegal. Under the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, any state could simply refuse to adhere to or carry out any such federal law and they would be not only correct in doing so, they would be required to do this according to these two superior documents.

    However I would not for a moment, bet my life on this taking place.

    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Near Lapeer (Hadley), Michigan, USA

    Post imported post

    "made in montana:"

    I bet that state doesn't cave in to this illegal attack on the 2a. tennesee signed their made in tn into law as well. Michigan has drafted made in michigan legislation, but it has not been adopted yet.

    It basically says that any firearms made in that state, designed to stay in that state, do not fall under the authority of the AFTE, including registration and background checks. Automatic weapons are still illegal under state law. Suppressors are now legal in montana.

    I wish michigan would hurry up and pass it's legislation. We have plenty of empty factories that would be perfect for making firearms and ammunition.

    Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (who will watch the watchmen?)

    I am not a lawyer. Nothing in any of posts should be construed as legal advice.

Posting Permissions

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