• 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.

Why worry about the Dems. when republicans are trying to take your guns

Savage.Detroit

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2010
Messages
151
Location
Southwest Detroit, Michigan, USA
Kind of late on this but take a look at HB 6139. I think this could be dangerous especially to open carry because of the immunity it gives local LEA if they sell or destroy your firearm unlawfully.

Here is the text of the house bill: http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2009-2010/billintroduced/House/pdf/2010-hIB-6139.pdf


Why worry about the Dems. when republicans are trying to take your guns
by David A. Dudenhoefer on Tuesday, September 21, 2010 at 1:05am

Hello gun owners and liberty activists,

I can't believe it's happening. Just before the election when it's the Republicans game to lose, they make the bonehead move of the year.

I thought Paul Opsommers introduction of HJR MMM, calling for a national constitutional convention, at a time when Pelosi and Reed would be running the show was the bonehead move of the year.

But I was wrong.

The Senate will be hearing testimony in the Judiciary committee on SB 212, a brand new gun confiscation law.

Sponsored by Republican Senator Roger Kahn, and sponsored by Republican Alan Cropsey, and Republican Wayne Kuipers,

The House version, HB 6139, was introduced by Republican Marty Knollenberg, and sponsored by Republican Rick Jones, Democrat Richard Lablanc, Democrat Joel Sheltrown, Democrat John Espinoza, Republican Matt Lori, and Republican Kim Meltzer.



Campaign for Liberty State Coordinator David Dudenhoefer will be meeting up with activists from our organization and Gun Owners of America to voice our opinion of this gun grab at the Senate Judicial Committee.



If you can here are the details:

Senate Judicial Committee Hearing

Tuesday, September 21st1:00 pm

Room 210, Farnum Building,

125 W. Allegan Street,

Lansing, MI 48933



If you cannot make it, Please look call these members of the committee and voice your opposition.

Senators Kuipers (C), Cropsey (VC), Sanborn, Patterson, Stamas, Whitmer (MVC) Clarke, and Basham



This legislation provides for the confiscation of a firearm under any infraction and then the possible destruction of that firearm. At the same time it provides total immunity from any liab

If this legislation is enacted, police will be able to confiscate your firearm, and by the time you are cleared of the offense, destroy it. Once confiscated, you will never see your firearm again and will have no recourse because this legislation has provides total immunity.

Not only that, it also stipulates that they can keep the firearm for their own use. Leaving it open to just confiscate and keep, then telling you "Sorry, you can't have your lawfully owned firearm back, we destroyed it" or "Sorry, you can't have your lawfully owned firearm back, we sold it".

This is not about criminals. We have laws on the books that deal with criminals and the police have full authority to confiscate firearms from criminals. This is about money and gun confiscation from lawful citizens.

Ironically, it has a primarily republican backing by which they apparently feel that that setting up the transfer of property, via gun confiscation, to benefit the state or local authorities is something to hold them in good standing with the conservatives.

With Republicans like these, who needs Democrats.





Tony DeMott

Interim Michigan State Coordinator, Campaign for Libertywww.campaignforliberty.com/usa/MI/
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Obvious violation of the 5th Amendment:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. (emphasis added by Citizen)

Not that being an obvious violation of an enumerated right stopped them before.
 
B

Bikenut

Guest
No a complete CCC system. Command control contain, even Ron Paul is despite his words one of them. He is "controlled opposition". Ross Perot was the same..

I see someone else understands the current system is built and maintained by the powerful for the purpose of keeping the powerful in power while offering the illusion of choice and ... the most important illusion of all... for average folks to think that casting a vote for a choice gives a degree of influence in the elections themselves.

There are "think tanks" out there that have perfected the science of elections to a "T". Those "think tanks" have also perfected the science of manipulating how people vote... hell, how people think even.... with carefully chosen rhetoric by candidates and carefully chosen sound bites, articles, ads, and campaign slogans.

And the media only gets what is carefully chosen to be released to them... by the managers of the election process for the purpose of manipulating folks into casting a vote for a false choice because.... no matter who the votes choose those choices were already chosen by the powerful as candidates that will further the power of the powerful.

All that to say....

Folks... it's been a rigged game. No matter who got in we would get screwed. Ever wonder where candidates (for any level of office) come from? Who paid their expenses.. and expect to be paid back? Who did favors... and expects favors in return?

That isn't to say it can't be changed.. and I suspect it will be changed if only because more and more people are waking up and realizing that not only have they have been had.... but folks are beginning to understand just how the system is rigged to make sure the folks always get had.

And folks are finally seriously looking at the records and backgrounds of candidates before the elections..... and not just listening to the "rah, rah, rah" BS promises born in a "PR think tank" and spoken by the most recent snake oil salesman.
 

Big Gay Al

Michigan Moderator
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
1,944
Location
Mason, Michigan, USA
Kind of late on this but take a look at HB 6139. I think this could be dangerous especially to open carry because of the immunity it gives local LEA if they sell or destroy your firearm unlawfully.

Here is the text of the house bill: http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2009-2010/billintroduced/House/pdf/2010-hIB-6139.pdf

Did you actually read the bill? It's an amendment to a law ALREADY in effect. They still have to return recovered firearms that were originally lost or stolen, but the amendment let departments dispose of UNCLAIMED firearms in a manner that would benefit the local department.
 

autosurgeon

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
3,831
Location
Lawrence, Michigan, United States
Did you actually read the bill? It's an amendment to a law ALREADY in effect. They still have to return recovered firearms that were originally lost or stolen, but the amendment let departments dispose of UNCLAIMED firearms in a manner that would benefit the local department.


Exactly versus melting them down and only claiming scrap minus melting fee.
 

The Expert

Regular Member
Joined
May 25, 2010
Messages
118
Location
Taylor, Michigan, USA
The continued dominance of the two-party system in this nation is a joke. The politicians that really call the shots (the entrenched, powerful ones, not the idealistic first-termers) for both the Democrat and Republican party are on the same team.

They are dominated by the Ruling Elite Class of Corporate Bankers. They get their lines fed to them and often go out after a "heated" debate on the floor for a beer or such.

I don't vote for either of them anymore for the most part. Mike Cox will be an exception.
 

Big Gay Al

Michigan Moderator
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
1,944
Location
Mason, Michigan, USA
The continued dominance of the two-party system in this nation is a joke. The politicians that really call the shots (the entrenched, powerful ones, not the idealistic first-termers) for both the Democrat and Republican party are on the same team.

They are dominated by the Ruling Elite Class of Corporate Bankers. They get their lines fed to them and often go out after a "heated" debate on the floor for a beer or such.

I don't vote for either of them anymore for the most part. Mike Cox will be an exception.
What's he running for this time? Anything? I know he was running for governor, but lost the primary to that other guy I'd never heard of before.
 

DrTodd

Michigan Moderator
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,272
Location
Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
The continued dominance of the two-party system in this nation is a joke. The politicians that really call the shots (the entrenched, powerful ones, not the idealistic first-termers) for both the Democrat and Republican party are on the same team.

They are dominated by the Ruling Elite Class of Corporate Bankers. They get their lines fed to them and often go out after a "heated" debate on the floor for a beer or such.

I don't vote for either of them anymore for the most part. Mike Cox will be an exception.

Why should Mike Cox be given an exception?

Like I've stated many times here before, because visitors to this state can't protect themselves or their loved ones unless they have a permit from their home state, Michigan's pistol registration should be found unconstitutional. Mr Cox has refused to address this issue... and many others.
 
Last edited:
Top