Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is the NRA becoming the next PETA?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Re: Is the NRA becoming the next PETA?

    Originally posted by ToUtahNow View Post
    I highly doubt, short of a Constitutional Amendment, gun rights will disappear. There is a history with the Supreme Court and their decisions which makes that clear. The States have limited ability to restrict certain weapons but not to completely ban guns.

    An interesting new twist to federal enforcement is some state and local agencies are now refusing to enforce federal laws. It appears to have started with the Arizona immigration rulings where the feds claim only they can enforce federal immigration laws. Now states that have approved marijuana are telling the feds to enforce their laws on their own. Many agencies have sent letters to Obama, in advance, saying they will not enforce any new gun laws he has proposed. There are not enough federal agents available, who would go after otherwise law abiding citizens for their guns.

    Mark
    That's simple Mark, the authories could use criminals! Think about it, they are well armed, have no fear of the law and no one is stopping them from owning weapons. Failure to properly prosecute violent criminals and those who use illegal firearms is the bigger side of this whole argument. disarming law abiding gun owners will have little affect on firearm deaths.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Is the NRA becoming the next PETA?

      Originally posted by ToUtahNow View Post
      I highly doubt, short of a Constitutional Amendment, gun rights will disappear. There is a history with the Supreme Court and their decisions which makes that clear. The States have limited ability to restrict certain weapons but not to completely ban guns.

      An interesting new twist to federal enforcement is some state and local agencies are now refusing to enforce federal laws. It appears to have started with the Arizona immigration rulings where the feds claim only they can enforce federal immigration laws. Now states that have approved marijuana are telling the feds to enforce their laws on their own. Many agencies have sent letters to Obama, in advance, saying they will not enforce any new gun laws he has proposed. There are not enough federal agents available, who would go after otherwise law abiding citizens for their guns.

      Mark
      First off, I don't think a lot of police officers who say they won't enforce the law. Do they get to choose what laws they will enforce and which they won't? Second, Mark, you forgot one small group of people who could be used to enforce the law.--The US military.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Is the NRA becoming the next PETA?

        I believe law enforcement in some areas refused to conduct lawful evictions on mortgage defaults, so there is the possibility of such complications. I doubt such action will ever take place so we are just arguing about nothing.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Is the NRA becoming the next PETA?

          About the time the U.S. military would be asked to inforce such a law, it would definitely be line then crossed over, that I and everyone else in the country would then "take up arms". It is my understanding that there are laws which prevent the use of the military from enforcing laws on the civilian population, even for use in going after illegal immigrants. You can't use the U.S. military as a police agency to regulate, arrest, enforce, or investigate the civilian population.... except under extreme national emergencies and even then, they are regionalized to that sector of the disaster on a temporary basis. National Guard troops are under the jurisdiction of local governors, but certain circumstances does make them available to serve "actively" and we've all seen that with Iraq, Afganistan, etc. We also see that "call" being made in disasters like NJ, etc.

          I've stayed away from this argument, but I think it's becoming quite ridiculous. So, here's my one and only comment and I'll leave you all to continue your arguement. So, my only comment is that I think the 2nd amendment is being twisted. In my opinion, the banning of high-capacity magazine sales, and even military assault weapons DOES NOT infringe on your right to "keep and bear arms" as nobody is talking about handguns, hunting rifles, shotguns, etc. Doing background checks and/or enforcing a waiting period, and tracking arms sales DOES NOT infringe on the 2nd Amendment either. There is NOTHING in the 2nd Amendment that says the government (at any level) doesn't have a right to know, to license, or to restrict types of arms... it simply says that you and I have a right to keep and bear arms. Given that, the government could well define such types, and once defined would be within the confines of the 2nd Amendment. In other words, if "arms" are determined to be (by the Supreme Court) nothing more than a 12-gauge shotgun and/or a simple handgun, then they could well restrict that to everyone. It would meet 2nd Amendment needs, and that would be that... except for the enforcement!

          Moreover, the 2nd Amendment attaches a certain rule and it puts that first and foremost in its statement: "a well-regulated militia". Interpretation of that would of course fall to the Supreme Court, but I do think that our forefathers had no clue as to the future of weapons technology; anymore then any of us today can forecast the state of weapons 200 years from now. At the time of the writing, this country was still a loosely engaged set of villages and townships and the national military was almost non-existant. WE relied on the "states".. we really weren't even "The United States"; instead we were the "United States".. that is "States" on the North American continent that were "united" in a somewhat common enterprise and in that organization, it was individual "States" that provided citizens soldiers to a united cause. To that end, almost every adult male kept a gun at hand. In the corner or over the fireplace, or wherever. That gun was used not only for food, but for defense of the house, the family, and when called by the local leaders, the community. Hence the "well-regulated" militia. Things have changed dramatically since those times and certainly they have changed technologically.

          I know none of you will agree, but when we start shouting that the 2nd Amendment is there so that we can defend ourselves from our own government, we have gone way too far and that is where I feel the NRA has done us all a great disservice. Only in the last couple of decades have they gone so far to the right that they use "the government" as the reason we should be allowed to have any weapon system that we want. They have gone to such extremes that even reasonable restriction, background check, or questioning a person's mental abilities is tremendously TABOO.

          When things are taken to such extremes, and we see ever increasing death to the innocent, there is a backlash by "we, the people". If the NRA wishes to ensite, rather than be reasonable with regard to screening, waiting periods, oversight on sales, or any possible rule which keeps guns out of the hands of criminals or incompetant people... WE, well, here WE are! People get upset, start calling their Congressmen and Senators, state legislators, local mayors, and the police with "something has to be done".

          If we cannot stand the pressure of honest oversight, and some restriction on those who are less responsible... then we will all suffer for it. This is still a Constitutional country in which a majority rules... and we gun owners are NOT the majority. The 2nd Amendment does not guarantee anything with regard to total freedom of weaponry and it doesn't even guarantee absolutely that any single individual has the right. The 2nd Amendment is up to intrepretation, and so far it's been a very wide interpretation that allows us to have the "arms" technology that we do.

          Sad I think is when we make the argument that we need such weapons to defend ourselves against our own government. Have you seen what our military capability is? You and an arsenal of assault weapons and a million rounds of amunition cannot defend against even a small squad intent on taking your position. At best you'll go down with maybe a couple... that is, IF they decided to take you alive. If that task might be determined a bit risky, all they'd have to do is call in a strike and someone sitting at a computer console a thousand miles away would simply push the button and your position would be no more.

          I think we make argument when we should be banning together to ensure that only us law-abiding, sane, people can keep our guns and to that end we'd stand up to any waiting period, background check, and we'd be looking to see where the holes in the system are, like those dealers and traders who only care about selling thier goods and it doesn't matter to who! (Should we view that any different today, than we did on the indian frontier of the 1700 and 1800's?)

          CWS

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Is the NRA becoming the next PETA?

            Don't know if this is true or not but I just heard that senator Feinstein is introducing a bill to limit the amount of ammunition you can buy. AND she wants a national gun registry. So everyone will have to register EVERY gun we have. What happens next? The government will ban certain guns one at a time and come for them. Either you give them up or show a receipt that you sold them or give them up. What are you going to do?

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Is the NRA becoming the next PETA?

              CWsmith, do you own a gun?
              Last edited by ironranger; 01-24-2013, 08:05 PM.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Is the NRA becoming the next PETA?

                Originally posted by ironranger View Post
                In reply to you CWSmith, I feel like throwing up. That's all I have to say. OMG, OMG.
                American history and why the framers created the 2nd amendment isn't his strong suit that's for sure. He forgets this country wasn't founded on "progressive" ideas.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Is the NRA becoming the next PETA?

                  You're not taking my guns. You're not taking my ammo. Let's make it clear, you will not take away my freedoms. If you try, you will die trying. Can I make it any more clear?

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Is the NRA becoming the next PETA?

                    Originally posted by Flux View Post
                    Ever see the movie Braveheart Tony? You will see the 2013 version of that movie if what you say comes true.
                    Yes and wasn`t Mel looking good sober or was he? but that was a vary different time where real kings had a God given right to rule and democracy wasn`t apart of life and I know what you are getting at but be honest if your government ever turned on the people and the army was with them just what could you and the people do nothing you would be slaughtered and all your bravado and your AK and bushman semi and auto guns wouldn`t help at all so dream on at least it keeps you of the streets and occupied which the government wants its like bread and circus.

                    Tony

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Is the NRA becoming the next PETA?

                      I have to agree with CWS, you legal gun owners don't stand a chance when the authorities decide to take your guns, ammo and whatever the heck else they want. I on the other hand own illegal weapons, so they won't be knocking on my door. I suggest you file all identifying marks off of your guns, score up the barrels a bit so the bullets can't be traced, report they have been stolen, and trade with friends who do the same. If the government doesn't know what you have they can't take it away. Your choice.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Is the NRA becoming the next PETA?

                        I think I'm done with this thread, before I get a deserved "time out".

                        This is just too touchy of a subject for me, and I'm going to take the high road before I say what's really on my mind.

                        Have fun guys, see you in a different thread.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Is the NRA becoming the next PETA?

                          Originally posted by ironranger View Post
                          CWsmith, do you own a gun?
                          Yes, I own four. Got my first when I was 14, a Coltster 22, single shot. Still have that and have added three other weapons since then including two semi-auto's.... No assault rifles though.

                          CWS

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Is the NRA becoming the next PETA?

                            Originally posted by Flux View Post
                            American history and why the framers created the 2nd amendment isn't his strong suit that's for sure. He forgets this country wasn't founded on "progressive" ideas.
                            On the contrary there Flux, I have a very well-read sense of History and specifically American History. I think you have a very warped sense of American History, which you seemingly have twisted to meet your personal views.

                            You keep pushing these "labels" but I've come to understand that you rarely understand the meaning (did you ever really figure out what a "dictator" is?). For example, you just stated "this country wasn't founded on progressive ideas"..... Now I know you're not kidding when you stated that and it appears that you totally believe it, which just shows how very little you know about history and specifically American history. In the last quarter of the 1700's, WE the colonists were absolutely in the extreme of progressive ideas. What the heck do your thing the American revolution was all about? Freedom, self-worth, equality, rights for all men, no-servitude to "the Crown"... all of that was "progressive" for the time. It would appear once again, that you don't know either history or the simple meaning of your labels.

                            Regarding the seconce ammendment: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

                            That is not the title to some chapter or further explanation; It is a simple sentence stating the right. However in 2008, the Supreme Court ruled that the right to keep a weapon was in fact an individual right and should not be tied to membership or affiliation with "a militia". But, it also said that such right is " within many longstanding prohibitions and restrictions on firearms possession listed by the Court"

                            So, "the court" does define restrictions and it can therefore place restrictions.

                            The "backlash" of statements to my earlier post just demonstrates the extreme that I've referred to. This is no logical reasoning here. You've let the NRA define what the 2nd Amendment means to you and in response you leap to the conclusion that it is our Government that is the evil. And once again, the response is that you'll use your guns to keep your guns; as if that is a much better choice than using your head and your citizenship to curb the violence, push for better policing of the industry, and keep weapons out of the hands of criminals and the insane. So, it appears that you are not so much for protecting your rights and your weapons, as you are ensuring that everyone has them at thier disposal, for whatever use they may want to put them to.

                            Now, what we really need to do is have the NRA take up model airplane rights... maybe we could incorporate guns into that. How would you feel if we started overflying your backyard with cameras and weapons on a purely unrestricted level. Hey, there's nothing in the 2nd Amendment or any other bill that says I can't do that is there?

                            CWS

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Is the NRA becoming the next PETA?

                              CW, I want to thank you for your first post and this one also. Unfortunately this issue often becomes very emotionial for some folks and as you said, many of the points made are erronious at best. Particularly the "progressive" comment. I have been hearing this bandied about for about the last four years now and I believe it got started by guys like Sean Hannity who have no problem bending and subverting the truth in order to gin up their ratings. The other term often slapped on Obama is "socialist" which again, if the folks calling him that had any idea what socialism was they would realize ther error of their ways (or....maybe not) Of course in the world we live in the mantra seems to be that if you say something often enough it must be true. The supreme court has already made several decisions regarding gun ownership and of course the ban on fully automatic weapons goes back many years, but the reality is that the legislature and the court do have the constitutional rights to determine which types of weapons will be legal or not. I was an NRA member for many years. I believe if I remember correctly as far back as 1968 was when I joined. I let the membership drop a couple years ago because I no longer feel that the organization represents the responsible gun owner and in fact is really much more interested in representing gun manufacturers who will donate millions to the organization. Maybe not a bad thing but I have found that when big business gets involved in organizations that are supposed to be for the membership, things rapidly go south and the stench of corruption sets in. For those of you that have been brainwashed into believing that "progressive" is a bad thing I would ask you just how far this nation if not this world would be had we adhered to regressive policies? We'd still be slogging around in the middle ages. Kind of like a good many have been doing in the middle east for generation upon generation now.
                              Last edited by NHMaster3015; 01-25-2013, 01:28 PM.
                              sigpic

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Is the NRA becoming the next PETA?

                                CWS, I understand some of your objections to what Flux has said about keeping his guns at all cost, and your words that he/we should work towards keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and the insane. I am positive the access to guns, crimes committed with illegal guns, and the prosecution and conviction of criminals seem to favor the criminals and most likely will continue to do so. We keep murderers alive at a cost to the taxpayers, and sometimes release them in the hopes they won't kill again. Correct me if you think I am wrong but there is a justifiable need for law abiding citizens to be armed. The response time in my town varies from several minutes to about twenty.
                                Our national debt will soon close in on 17 trillion dollars, states and local communities are struggling financially, how or where do you suppose the funding for needed mental health screening, treatment and if necessary secure housing will come? I'm all for the things you suggested, I just don't see those things coming to pass without a stable economy. Even with mental health screening and all that, tragic events will happen, the science cannot predict future behavior based on present behavior well enough. Right now good people need to be able to protect themselves.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X