Stop The Ban that is coming!

[Weasel640]

We avoided the cliff.... Meanwhile more craziness coming from California! The legislature that Senator Feinstein intends on introducing this month will treat law abiding citizens like common criminals. This will also expand the definition of "assault weapon" to include the majority of all modern day firearms.
http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/ ... lt-weapons


This is a horrible knee jerk reaction that will punish many for the actions of a few. It needs to be stopped!

You can find your Senators contact information here:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_i ... rs_cfm.cfm


While where banning stuff.... This New Years there was a huge increase in Drunk Drivers. The facts are clear, there have been more vehicle related injuries/deaths than gun related in 2012. So if we're going treat gun owners like criminals then why not vehicle owners? Makes sense right, punish many for the stupidity of a few.

Maybe Washington should work on fixing everything they've broken in the last decade before they start trying to treat innocent people like criminals.

[juniustaylor]

Thanks for posting the link. This is something that I have wanted to get done and keep putting off. I finally did it and copy/pasted the same message to both of my Senators. Glad that's over.

[Weasel640]

juniustaylor, I hope you did not send the my signature block as well.

Here is some more of my rant;

A reply to the above post from a good friend of mine who lives in Ireland where most firearms are banned from the public.:

Yes let's punish the car owners and get better public transportation in place!
The stuff I have been seeing on the news coming from the States is heartbreaking and crazy. I am spared a lot of details but it sounds like there is tons going on there. CA aside, does it appear to you that such a public debate about gun safety and regulation will overall be a good thing?

My reply to her.:

I agree it is heartbreaking, but so are traffic accidents. The reactions we see to those are not to ban cars but to make cars safer. Same thing applies here, but this ban contradicts logic. This ban actually expands the definition of "assault weapon" in such a way that firearms that have features for ease of use would be banned. Ease of use makes the firearms safer on the range, safer for hunters, safer for home and personal protection, safer for any legal legitimate use. This legislature would seek to ban those firearms that had these features.

To what you “have been seeing on the news”; Have you seen this event reported? http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/20 ... 24596.html

Probably not….. The mainstream media typically does not cover stories about law abiding citizens stopping crimes. There are countless other stories like this. The fact is if a criminal wants to commit a crime it will be over before police arrive. However with an armed citizen present the outcome normal turns out much different (for the better), the mainstream media doesn’t want you to know that.

Really with Washington deadlocked right now on so many issues, No a public debate about gun safety and regulation is not going to help anything. I see it as miss-direction of effort. Washington’s failure to solve economic issues is only making the situation worse. Throughout history when the economy falls, crime rises. Focusing on revamping gun regulations is like putting a tourniquet on the wrong arm.

Yes there should be regulation for firearm ownership. But a totally polarized bill like this one is not the answer. Even with this bill there will still be crazy people out there committing crazy acts. There is absolutely no reason for such a bill.

And in case you were wondering I have submitted my photo, and fingerprints to my local Sherriff, because that’s the law in N.C. in regards to a carry permit. Per those laws the Sherriff had also pulled a background check on me and petitioned the local hospital to check my medical history for potential mental problems. I have no problem with this, it’s the law the N.C. has enacted as their local solution to protect the 2nd Amendment while also protecting those whom don’t agree with our freedoms. I do however very much have a problem with the bill that Senator Feinstein seeks to make national law. Although I have followed every gun law in the states I have lived, under Senator Feinstein bill I would be treated as a criminal, and most likely be fined for almost every firearm that I own.

This really is an issue that should be handled at the State level. Senator Feinstein has the audacity to assume that she knows best for us all. Really, should she be fining Alaskans for the so called “assault weapons” they legally own to ward off bear attacks? What about Arizonan ranchers whom corral cattle and encounter heavily armed drug smugglers and threats like coyotes? This bill spans coast to coast border to border, and attempts to be a cookie cutter reaction to a localized problem. It is not the answer.

Again nationally there are more important issues at stake. Senator Feinstein’s choose to introduce her bill will merely polarize an already divided congress, and nation. This discussion distracts people from the fact that congress is failing us at the job that they were elected to do. They were elected to make decisions and find solutions, not to bicker and argue, and that is just what this bill will cause.

[juniustaylor]

I sent my own words to them. All of your info is safe.

[bear34]

Just my opinion, so please don't blow a gasket.

I think gun owners are going as "over the top" as people in favor of stricter gun legislation. Any Congressperson or Senator can propose legislation, it doesn't mean it will pass.

[Weasel640]

Just my opinion, so please don't blow a gasket.

I think gun owners are going as "over the top" as people in favor of stricter gun legislation. Any Congressperson or Senator can propose legislation, it doesn't mean it will pass.

True people on both sides of the issue can be equally crazy about gun control. However this legislature is over the top. No it doesn't mean it will pass just being introduced. But if it does pass and you haven't voiced your opinion to you senator before the vote then you have no grounds to complain.

Personally I think that there should be a national standard to determine who is fit to own firearms. But the State should be the ones to determine what can be bought and sold within their borders. I.E. the example above just because California might want to ban high capacity mags it doesn't mean that same restriction should be imposed in Arizona where a rancher might need more than ten rounds to deter a coyote pack from attacking his cattle. They do the same thing with alcohol, there is a national standard for who can buy it, but state standards for what and how it's sold.

[bear34]

Just my opinion, so please don't blow a gasket.

I think gun owners are going as "over the top" as people in favor of stricter gun legislation. Any Congressperson or Senator can propose legislation, it doesn't mean it will pass.

True people on both sides of the issue can be equally crazy about gun control. However this legislature is over the top. No it doesn't mean it will pass just being introduced. But if it does pass and you haven't voiced your opinion to you senator before the vote then you have no grounds to complain.

Personally I think that there should be a national standard to determine who is fit to own firearms. But the State should be the ones to determine what can be bought and sold within their borders. I.E. the example above just because California might want to ban high capacity mags it doesn't mean that same restriction should be imposed in Arizona where a rancher might need more than ten rounds to deter a coyote pack from attacking his cattle. They do the same thing with alcohol, there is a national standard for who can buy it, but state standards for what and how it's sold.

I understand your concerns, but how could you keep restricted arms from crossing borders. We would basically have to set up Customs Stations at all state lines. Most of the crap people like Fienstien propose really won't have much effect, and won't pass for that matter. Most people, whichever side they are on, would be OK with legislation that makes sense. Hers does not.

[Ketchman]

Bear34,

I remember an awful lot of people in the early 90's saying that there was no way an "assault weapons" ban would pass and yet it did. Thankfully it had a sunset date which was allowed to happen. And I also remember that there seemed to be much more in the way of public apposition to that bill than I hear now, and yet that bill passed. And it passed because the "people" (read sheep) were promised (by fienstein amongst others) that it would reduce crime, as if by outlawing a tool that those who ignore law's might use that it would magically put a halt to their activities. Very shortly after that law passed there was a big push to pass shall issue carry laws, which as we know was a big success. And after the success of those laws, crime started to go down, and has stayed down, even after the assault weapons ban went away. But in the short memory of "the people" the drop in crime was pinned to the assault weapons ban, not shall issue laws. I know a lot of people who as late as 2 months ago thought the original ban never went away. And now, the lame stream media has molded the recent attacks in Boulder, (another just today, big headlines) and Sandy Hook in such a manner that to NOT support gun control means you support children being murdered, in the eyes of "the people" (remember, sheep?).
If this sounds as if I am jaded, I am. If this sounds as if I have very little faith in the American public at large, I don't. The public has, for the large part, long ago given up thinking for themselves, for being responsible for themselves. They gobble up all the BS fed them by the media, who feed on bad news like so many vultures and all the drivel fed them by politicians who have repeatedly shown that they will lie, cheat, steal and do anything necessary to get / retain their own personal power.
In short, I am very worried that very soon I will be treated like a criminal for what I own and for what used to be considered lawful. And that I will loose the tools to defend myself and family. I have sent my words to my lawmakers already opposing this, but I live in a state that is very pro-gun (Wyoming) but come from a state that has very strong anti gun leanings (Michigan) and I fear that the sheer mass of the sheep's fear will overcome rational thought and strip even more freedom from us. If we are to retain ANYTHING of our current freedom's it will only come from education of those who are currently undecided on this issue, but I fear there are too few of those left.

[wlockridge]

Ketchman and other readers,good day,
I did follow the link to the post you gave me and realized that I had read it before. I thought it was well written and that you made some excellent points. The "people" who I tend to refer to as “the sheeple” on my less than congenial days, tend to react out of fear, the majority of which is stoked by the government, for their own benefit, and the media who simply want to increase their readership by any means necessary. Remember a couple years back, when swine flu was going to become a pandemic and decimate the country? Of course it failed to materialize but people have short memories. Now the media headlines again shout “code red flu season” with some doctors actually advising their patients to stay home if they suspect they have the flu and treat it themselves rather than coming into the office and infecting other patients????? Although it's hard to resist, I think we need to be careful of denigrating people for being fearful as they are fed a steady diet of dire catastrophes that are just around the corner almost daily. They feel helpless and vulnerable and will latch onto any idiotic, knee jerk idea that they think will make them “safer”. They have never been taught to think critically and calmly asses the threat, they just panic. For example I (and I imagine yourself as well) know that the airport “security” and I use the term loosely, that is administered by our selfless and brave TSA agents, is nothing more than a dog and pony show designed to calm the sheep while making it look as though the government is actually doing something useful other than pounding untold billions of dollars down another government created rat hole. I said when the TSA was first established, that this job was going to be a child molesters wet dream and I've been proven right time and again. Men will stand by obediently as their wives, mothers, and daughters are pawed and groped by a minimum wage security guard more for their own prurient interests than security purposes. It's a civil rights violation as well as a sex crime and yet continues unabated. When I saw how many people were willing to stand for such defilements I knew then what you know now, the public at large will not defend themselves from any threat no matter how heinous.
You and I hail from another generation when children, especially young men, were taught to shoot and handle firearms safely by our fathers and even in the Boy Scouts. We were taught to defend ourselves from the bullies of the world rather than run crying to the nearest authority figure. The right to self defense was ingrained in us. Today children are taught to run and hide. When I choose a career in Law Enforcement my motivation was to defend and protect those that couldn't or wouldn't defend and protect themselves. It was an eye opening experience, I had no inkling that there would be so many. Sadly, when I attended the police academy in the early 80's, more than half of my classmates had never handled a firearm in their lives and fully 80% had never even seen a shotgun let alone fired one. While it was quite funny to watch at the time, I also knew then that it was a portend of things to come. While I know it is frustrating we, as citizens must attempt to educate the public while resisting the oh so powerful urge to chastise them for their weaknesses. Confrontational attitudes don't serve us well and only reinforce the notion that we are gun toting lunatics. We are sometimes our own worst enemies. I have friends that love nothing more than to show off their weapons and brag about how many thousands of rounds of ammunition that they have stockpiled for the coming apocalypse. I think that we ourselves sometimes are complicit in breeding the publics fear of us. We need remember that a good many of the current crop of people have never been called upon to actually defend the constitution or our rights as Americans as that last war we fought for those principles was WW2 and most of those gallant folks have long since passed from this world. While not questioning the bravery or patriotism of the young men and women of our armed services deployed around the world, the wars we fight today are for political and financial purposes. Were that not the case, we would not be losing or rights here at home. As I have often told my friends who think that they are making themselves ready for the coming insurrection by bragging about the things I mentioned above, what they have effectively done is to compromise their security. The may as well place a sign on their front doors that read “guns and ammo here” so that the government won't have to go to the trouble of searching for them. In my humble opinion, stealth is the friend of he truly prepared. Stay safe.
___________________________________________________________
Shoot first, shoot straight, and hit what you're aiming at, if you can do these things with 6 rounds, you'll have two thirds more ammo than you need to prevail.
____________________________________________________________
Bill Lockridge

[dfunk]

Sadly the day is here again where fear and capitalizing on a tragedy push more agenda down the pipe. Part of me wants to participate in the madness and buy up as many 30 rounders as I can afford, while the sensical side of me realizes that it doesn't do me or you any good. The fact that we as gun owners and shooters have to deal with this (again) is just part of the society we live in now. Sad but true, I guess. The best thing we can do is arm ourselves and friends and family with factual information and not politically motivated bullshit.

Ketchman and other readers,good day,
I said when the TSA was first established, that this job was going to be a child molesters wet dream and I've been proven right time and again. Men will stand by obediently as their wives, mothers, and daughters are pawed and groped by a minimum wage security guard more for their own prurient interests than security purposes. It's a civil rights violation as well as a sex crime and yet continues unabated.

I'm not sure where you fly, but in every airport I've been in, men don't touch women and women don't touch men. I do agree with you that TSA is a 'visual deterrent' and not an effective security force, but to imply that they are child molesters and that they routinely grope the opposite sex indicates that you don't know what you're talking about. Nobody would stand by/for that.

[wlockridge]

dfunk,
Respectfully, I don't and won't ever fly again regardless of cause or need. A line in sand must be drawn somewhere and that one is mine. Each must make his own choice. I belong to several watchdog groups that monitor TSA activities and gather reports on same. I will try and provide the links. As to your statement with respect to men searching men and women seaching women, that works in theory however contingency plans are in place for the times when no women employees are available. I would further point out that pedophiles many times don't make a distinction with regard to the sex of their victim of choice. Time after time TSA agents, the majorrity of which have been male, have been caught, tried, and convicted of having child porn on their computers and I would again respectfully point out that it's unlikely that they leave their predilictions at home as they leave for work. I worked sex crmes for many years and and know that these people will take any and all opportunities to further their interests. Of course the media does little reporting of these facts beyond the local market. I will attempt to post a link for you to look at, it will be an eye opening experience. And for the record, the law makes no distinction with respect to the sex of the offender or the victim. Just because it happens to be a woman with her hands down your daughter's pants makes it no less a crime. On this point we will simply have to agree to disagree. Here is the link, http://fttusa.org/ Subscribe to their newsletter for more information, it's quite eye opening. We as a group support and defend our 2nd ammendment rights and I would offer that we should be supporting and defending ALL peoples rights even those with regard to unlawful search and seizure. Calling it an "administrative search" is simply an attempt to circumvent the 4th ammendment. When we allow one groups rights to be violated we allow ALL of our rights to be violated. Stay safe.

[Weasel640]

The actual numbers are pretty clear. There is absolutely no reason to limit self-loading rifles or pistols and their magazines. It's pretty transparent that by giving them a false names "assault weapon" that instills fear your goal is to attack the rights of legal gun owners.

The 2nd Amendment is pretty clear too. It guaranties the right to own firearms of equal capacity to what the government has access to. If congress disagrees with this right given to the people, then they should vote to reform the 2nd Amendment. But they haven’t because they know any such attempt would fail. Instead they have cowardly been trying to re-define it and terms aimed at instilling false fear.

In 2011:
323 people were killed by rifles.
496 people were killed by blunt objects.
726 people were killed by "personal weapons" (hands, feet, etc.)
1,694 people were killed by knives.

(http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/cr ... a-table-11
)

Traditionally "Assault Weapons" are used in a fraction of a percentage of murders(.6% in 2011). Research has also show that high capacity magazines are almost immaterial to the number of people killed. Virgina Tech remains the deadliest school shooting and he averaged 10 rounds per magazine. "Assault Weapons" across the board are used at a significantly lower rate than their rate of ownership. In reality this new assault weapons ban is just a stepping stone for them to continue pushing more gun control.

Another thing to add to the numbers;
Think about how many public schools there are in the U.S. According to the U.S. Department Of Education (http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/pub_overview.asp
) on average there were close to 50 million elementary and secondary school students in 2000 through 2009. Of those 50 million students according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)( http://www.nhtsa.gov/School-Buses
) there were 123 fatalities of elementary and secondary (ages 5-13) school students involving school busses in 2000 through 2009. So 0.000246% of elementary and secondary (ages 5-13) school students have died due to the use of school busses. Now let’s look at firearms (we’ll even play devil’s advocate and expand the time frame to 2000-2012, this includes Sandy Hook) in elementary and secondary schools; according to Slate News (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_ ... 0_map.html
) there have been a total of 40 (39 elementary, and 1 middle school) fatalities due to school shootings. So that’s 0.00008% children and adults in elementary and secondary schools have died due to firearms. So in comparison, 0.000246% school bus related fatalities, to 0.00008% firearm related fatalities. An elementary and secondary school student is 0.000166% MORE likely to die in school bus related accident. So where is the public outcry to ban school busses? There is none, because we all know that those statistics are so minute that a school bus ban is ridiculous.

Now let’s look at firearms; In 2007 the number of Privately Owned Firearms in the U.S. was an estimated amount of 270,000,000 (http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/united-states
). Over the last 12 years there has been an average of 30,511 firearm related deaths in the U.S. So 0.0113003703703704% of the Privately Owned Firearms have been involved in a firearm related death.

Now let’s compare that to school shootings; In 2007 (this includes the Va. Tech numbers, still the highest of all fatalities) there were a total of 45 school shooting fatalities. Again in 2007 the number of Privately Owned Firearms in the U.S. was an estimated amount of 270,000,000. So 0.00001667% of the Privately Owned Firearms have been used in school shootings.

Let’s recap here; An elementary and secondary school student is more likely to die in a bus accident than from a school shooting. The likely hood of my/your firearms being used in a School shooting or a shooting at all is less than a percent, so small that in might as well be null.

Again the actual numbers are pretty clear. There is absolutely no reason to limit self-loading rifles or pistols and their magazines. To claim that a ban or restriction will protect innocent lives is total misinformation.

[Ketchman]

Weasel,

Nice job with the number crunching. I would suggest that you should also make sure ALL your elected representative's and officials, receive them as well.

[Weasel640]

Oh another thing I didn't mention. Even without guns, crazy people will still do crazy things. Yes the Va. Tech attack had the highest fatalities for a School shooting. But the Bath Bombing in 1927 still holds the record for School fatalities, and no guns were involved.

[Curly1]

These are nothing but feel good laws for the sheeple to get re-elected because they know they can not solve the real problem of bad/mental peeps getting access to weapons.

Law enforcement doesn't have the people power or in many cases the will to enforce them.

Prohibition didn't work and it led to the rise of organized crime.

We are unable to stop the flood of drugs and illegals from entering the country.

Confiscation doesn't work either as we have seen in other countries. The baddies have no problems getting guns.

The wolves are at the door and our representatives want to hinder the sheep dogs.....we the law abiding gun owners.