1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

Gun-ban bill hiding in Congress, waiting for "the right Columbine moment"?

Discussion in 'U.S. Politics' started by Little-Acorn, Feb 24, 2009.

  1. Little-Acorn

    Little-Acorn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    2,444
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    There's nothing new about gun-ban bills in Congress. They are regularly introduced, half a dozen or more in each session, and are routinely voted down or left to die in committee. Usually they are considered the detrius of legislation - the kind of junk you have to put up with while getting real legislation.

    But there's one that, while it hasn't moved forward, hasn't died either. It's written by the founder of the Black Panthers, now a congresscritter from Illinois (the political environment that spawned Al Capone, Dan Rostenkowski, Rod Blagojevich, Roland Burris, and Barack Obama).

    Is it being held in anticipation of the next mass shooting by some deranged individual, so that its backers can use the victims' death and agony to further their political agenda?

    Wayne LaPierre warned about this during the Clinton administration. Is his prophecy on the way to being fulfilled?

    ---------------------------------------------

    http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=89830

    Is bill lying in wait to ban handguns?
    Activists worry another Columbine will spark end of 2nd Amendment

    By Drew Zahn
    Posted: February 23, 2009
    10:13 pm Eastern

    Tucked away in committee on Capitol Hill is a firearm licensing bill that Second Amendment advocates worry may just be waiting for the right "Columbine moment" to emerge and effectively ban handguns in the U.S.

    As WND reported, U.S. Rep. Bobby Rush, D-Ill., sponsored H.R. 45, an extensive licensure law that creates a national database of current firearm owners, requires psychiatric testing and fingerprinting to obtain a license and places new restrictions on gun use and storage.

    Mike Hammond, legal advisor with Gun Owners of America, told WND that H.R. 45 gives the federal government so much power over gun ownership, that the wrong administration could use it to "bring gun ownership in America to an end."

    "It takes semi-automatic firearms and handguns – the guns people use for personal self-defense," Hammond said, "and sets up a licensure system, that is, the government would have to give you permission to own a gun. The government can therefore also deny that permission, and it would mean an anti-gun administration could use it to effectively ban most guns from private ownership.

    "Even if you are willing to undergo a psychiatric exam, be fingerprinted and do what the bill requires to obtain a license, the law still requires the guns be unloaded and locked up," Hammond added. "It renders the gun practically unavailable for self-defense."

    And even though H.R. 45 has remained dormant in the House Judiciary Committee since it was introduced, Hammond told WND that his organization is worried it may not stay there.

    "Our concern is that Rep. Rush comes from same political machine that Barack Obama comes from," Hammond said. "So we have a real concern that Rush's introduction of this reflects the thinking of an Obama administration. And while we don't think this bill will be the first thing that the president pushes, before the Obama administration uses a Columbine incident to bring the bill alive, while it's still lying on its back [in committee], we want to put a stake through its heart."

    Hammond summarized, "Ultimately if a license system is in place, any anti-gun administration can come after your guns."
     
  2. Mr. Shaman

    Mr. Shaman New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    7,829
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Aw, jeez.....Wayne LaPierre AND World Nutz Daily??!!!

    :rolleyes:
     
  3. Little-Acorn

    Little-Acorn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    2,444
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Looks like no one can refute anything in the article. Just the usual whiner trying to attack the messenger instead.

    Back to the subject:
    The bill, if passed, would be a direct violation of the 2nd amendment to the Constitution. And the Const says that any law that violates the Const, is automatically null and void.

    So, if this bill passes, people who refuse to register as it requires, aren't violating any law at all... because that particular law vaporized as soon as it was signed.

    The 2nd says that since an armed populace is necessary, no government can ban or restrict personal arms. A licensing law like this bill, is a plan to let government do exactly that. As such, it will be null and void as soon as it hits the books.
     
  4. Little-Acorn

    Little-Acorn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    2,444
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    The Constitution does indeed say that such a law is null and void... and if we were really under the Rule of Law, that's all that would be needed.

    But we haven't been under the Rule of Law for a long time. Our brethern of the southpaw persuasion, have been trying hard to turn our legal system into "It doesn't matter what the law says, it matters what the courts say, and you can't count on any particular prediction of that, especially after we get 'OUR' judges in place!". And then proceed to put judges on the bench who rule according to how they think the country SHOULD be, rather than how the Constitution and other laws say it MUST be.

    So there may\\\will be a lot of people who "didn't get the word" about the law being null and void... including the cops who come to arrest you and the court judge who simply declares you violated Federal law, open and shut.

    What the Constitution clearly says, will be of very little interest to them.
     
  5. Bunz

    Bunz New Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    Messages:
    3,215
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Alaska
    As someone who largely voted for Democrats in 2008, I dont in any way, shape or form support any further gun control legislation.
     
  6. Pandora

    Pandora Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2008
    Messages:
    11,790
    Likes Received:
    257
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The people's republic of Eugene
    You will look so noble when they do gun bans and you stand up to say

    Though I voted for them knowing their feelings on guns, I do not agree with what has been done.


    My boss who voted all democrat often tells me things like

    I disagree with what they are trying to do with the census
    or I dont agree with the fairness doctrin

    as though some how that makes it all better


    If gun laws are passed, I hope they take yours first bunz :)
     
  7. Mr.Dysfunctional

    Mr.Dysfunctional New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2008
    Messages:
    271
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    The Future World order of China
    Considering those are the same exact arguments given to those who voted Bush in "any" of his last 8 years but did not support some of his policies put in place...

    I would say that is exteremly hippocritcal of you Pandora.
    You state it as if voting should completely be based on a leader reaching absolute prefection before taking the job...

    While I don't see Jesus standing around awaiting his turn at the oval office.. i guess our democratic process will just have to do...
     
  8. Mr.Dysfunctional

    Mr.Dysfunctional New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2008
    Messages:
    271
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    The Future World order of China
    As for Gun legislation....


    You can have my gun when you pry it from my cold dead fingers.
    End of discussion!
     
  9. Pandora

    Pandora Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2008
    Messages:
    11,790
    Likes Received:
    257
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The people's republic of Eugene
    I am the first one to call myself a spade if I see Im being one. And I have been on a number of issues

    but here I am confused

    what arguments were given about voting for bush? I was not here then so I am unsure of what you mean

    I personally know of no one who voted for bush but were against core ideas of his.........actually I only know a handful who did vote for bush. Hell I did not even vote for him the first time and I voted against John Freaking Kerry (who served in vietnam) the second time, not for anyone.

    Please explain to me (in small words, so I can understand) where I am being a hypocrate on this particular issue
     
  10. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    There were only two elections with Bush in the last 8 years.

    I supported Bush because he planned to privatize social security. He supported cutting taxes. He was for a strong military, and tough on terrorism. He dealt with Saddam and was going to finish what we started in Iraq.

    I was only against the Amnesty bill, the funding for 'green' energy, and for his passing the bailout.

    Only one of those was during his first term. If I had known about the other two before the second election, it would have been harder, but I likely would have still voted for him because I honestly don't trust a democrat with a military issue. I wager any of the possible replacements would have screwed up Iraq far worse, possibly even losing the war instead of winning.

    Unless you know she is one of those that said those things, you are making broad assumptions and pre-judging.

    I'm still waiting for Obama to get ANYTHING right. I don't expect perfection, but it would help if there was at least one single good trait in a leader.
     
  11. Bunz

    Bunz New Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    Messages:
    3,215
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Alaska
    I have never found a candidate that supports my views 100percent. Voting for me is a matter of compromise and a lesser of two evils. But your last sentence is quite telling. I guess I never realized how mean spritited you can be. Sure I saw it towards Obama, and the rest of the elected democrats, but hoping my guns get taken first is pretty shallow. Especially considering they are the tools that I primarily use to feed myself and family. Whats next do you want to have my fishing boat taken away, my main source of income as well?
     
  12. pocketfullofshells

    pocketfullofshells Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Messages:
    12,009
    Likes Received:
    203
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    land of 10,000 lakes and 2 senators again
    see I would fight to let NoObama have a gun..but of course she would just wish ours taken away...but we are the liberals...odd.
     
  13. Depeche Toad

    Depeche Toad New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    91
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You nailed it. Liberals live in a world where their way of dealing with flaws in their ideology is to merely exempt themselves from them.

    You can't take away their free speech, or guns, or private healthcare.

    And taxes are for other people to pay.
     
  14. Pandora

    Pandora Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2008
    Messages:
    11,790
    Likes Received:
    257
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The people's republic of Eugene
    I don’t even know where to begin with you,
    So let’s try my actual words.

    I said
     
  15. Pandora

    Pandora Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2008
    Messages:
    11,790
    Likes Received:
    257
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The people's republic of Eugene
    If you were to read my actual post you would notice that I said
    “IF” gun laws passed.

    Like I said to bunz, “IF” gun laws passed and obama confiscated guns why would I want someone who had the foresight not to vote for him get their guns taken first?

    The people who caused the problem (OBAMA VOTERS) should be the first to suffer; though we would all suffer I don’t think its fair to make some real patriotic person who had way to much respect for the second amendment to vote in a joker like this be the first to lose their right to own a gun.

    As for you fighting for my right to have a gun, or my right to do anything..... First off it takes back bone and a spine to fight for anything like that and second I can picture abortion ending world wide (isn’t gonna happen!) before I can picture you going against obama on policy he has legally passed into law.
     
Loading...

Share This Page