Skip to main content
Help Center Community Shop

AWB 2008 or H.R.6257 its here (c&p)

Comments

72 comments

  • tr fox
    If we gun people could work together for a change, instead of fighting with, insulting and criticizing each other, about 42 million of us (that would only be half of the gun owners in the USA) would flood the offices of any idiot legislators who propose or support such worthless laws. Most legislators have come to love their privileged position and if that position was seriously threatened by, say, 42 million complaints from gun owners, those worthless legislators would quickly crawl back into their hole from which they came.

    But sadly, instead of us taking such concentrated and effective action, all we will do will be to discuss it, argue about it, rant on and on how it violates the constitution (it does, but that won't stop them) and find and/or create enemies from among our fellow gun owners who have a different view of EXACTLY what should be done.

    Watch and observe my predictions come true.
    0
  • Werwolf
    If the communist liberal democratic party gets elected to the presidency and takes control of congress, we are under absolutely no obligation to cooperate with ANY un-Constitutional and illegal legislation that would ban any firearms whatsoever, we have every right to own what we like within reason and if it takes a civil war to achieve then so be it. The democrats see fit to afford rights for baby murderers and queers, but wont allow gun owners to have firearms or the selection thereof which is astronomically stupid and beyond comprehension. Like I have said in another post I and several others which are growing in numbers will absolutely not follow these communist and totalitarian laws and neither should you and if you do you are empowering them by doing nothing, the more people revolt the better, if they want civil war then lets oblige them.
    0
  • tr fox
    Well, to my happy surprise my prediction of us gun owners arguing,insulting, etc. did not happen. Maybe there is hope we can find a way to work together because all we really have is each other.
    0
  • tr fox
    quote:Originally posted by Wolverine
    If the communist liberal democratic party gets elected to the presidency and takes control of congress, we are under absolutely no obligation to cooperate with ANY un-Constitutional and illegal legislation that would ban any firearms whatsoever, we have every right to own what we like within reason and if it takes a civil war to achieve then so be it. The democrats see fit to afford rights for baby murderers and queers, but wont allow gun owners to have firearms or the selection thereof which is astronomically stupid and beyond comprehension. Like I have said in another post I and several others which are growing in numbers will absolutely not follow these communist and totalitarian laws and neither should you and if you do you are empowering them by doing nothing, the more people revolt the better, if they want civil war then lets oblige them.


    What you claim has a lot of truth to it, but I am bothered by how quickly and easily you welcome civil war. Wouldn't it make more sense to "go to war" against our enemies by better use of the courts, swaying public opinion to our side, forcing through legislation favorable to our side, etc? If you have no concern for yourself, what about your loved ones who depend on you? Would you quickly and willingly plop those loved ones down in the middle of some third world country that could barely function just because of your beliefs? Because if it comes to civil war here in the USA, for awhile anyway, that is what us common citizens will be living in.

    To my knowledge, never in modern times have more than a few million gun owners and constitutional supporters combined their might and focused it on anti-constitutional politicans. Before we welcome a shooting war between us and our government, shouldn't we at least first try and unite even 1/4 of America's gun owners (about 20 some million people)? Then try and use THAT force to get back our constitutional rights before we tear this country down the middle with a shooting war? A shooting war will always be there waiting for those who must have it.

    Or maybe some of my fellow citizens just want to have some excitement and actually be a participant in a shooting war instead of playing a video game.
    0
  • trapguy2007
    quote:Originally posted by tr fox
    Well, to my happy surprise my prediction of us gun owners arguing,insulting, etc. did not happen. Maybe there is hope we can find a way to work together because all we really have is each other.

    Just give it time .
    Some are still in bed !
    0
  • Werwolf
    quote:Originally posted by tr fox
    quote:Originally posted by Wolverine
    If the communist liberal democratic party gets elected to the presidency and takes control of congress, we are under absolutely no obligation to cooperate with ANY un-Constitutional and illegal legislation that would ban any firearms whatsoever, we have every right to own what we like within reason and if it takes a civil war to achieve then so be it. The democrats see fit to afford rights for baby murderers and queers, but wont allow gun owners to have firearms or the selection thereof which is astronomically stupid and beyond comprehension. Like I have said in another post I and several others which are growing in numbers will absolutely not follow these communist and totalitarian laws and neither should you and if you do you are empowering them by doing nothing, the more people revolt the better, if they want civil war then lets oblige them.


    What you claim has a lot of truth to it, but I am bothered by how quickly and easily you welcome civil war. Wouldn't it make more sense to "go to war" against our enemies by better use of the courts, swaying public opinion to our side, forcing through legislation favorable to our side, etc? If you have no concern for yourself, what about your loved ones who depend on you? Would you quickly and willingly plop those loved ones down in the middle of some third world country that could barely function just because of your beliefs? Because if it comes to civil war here in the USA, for awhile anyway, that is what us common citizens will be living in.

    To my knowledge, never in modern times have more than a few million gun owners and constitutional supporters combined their might and focused it on anti-constitutional politicans. Before we welcome a shooting war between us and our government, shouldn't we at least first try and unite even 1/4 of America's gun owners (about 20 some million people)? Then try and use THAT force to get back our constitutional rights before we tear this country down the middle with a shooting war? A shooting war will always be there waiting for those who must have it.

    Or maybe some of my fellow citizens just want to have some excitement and actually be a participant in a shooting war instead of playing a video game.


    Actually I do not easily nor quickly welcome civil war, far from it in fact and I hope and pray that it will not come although I will stand by my duty and honor to the Constitution as did my Fore Fathers to defend and uphold the Constitution from any enemy foreign or domestic. The other means of trying to get the courts and lawyers to intercede has proven time and time again to have failed or to have been corrupted in such a manner that the ignorant sheep populace will go right along with whatever their "friendly neighbor hoods government" tells them and they believe it as well, the military is also included in this like it or not, as they use the same types of tactics as their overlord beast government paying no mind to the Constitution. If the government were all so concerned about our Constitutional Rights then that would have manifested itself by now, but it is always the same thing from the same types of politicians, just talk and no action at least none that true Patriots would approve of anyway.
    My concern for myself is that I am a Patriot that will do whatever is necessary to defend and uphold the Constitution from any enemy foreign or domestic, for without it there would be nothing but sorrow and tyranny.
    I could ask the same of you, would you endanger your family, well I would like to think not, as I certainly would not and would give my life gladly to defend them if necessary as any good Christian person would.
    Yes, a civil war would be bad and hopefully it will not go there although Patriots are not just common citizens and have an obligation to do what is necessary should it befall them at such a time.
    Thomas Jefferson said it well when he stated that:
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
    Even though it seems somewhat futile, apparently there may be a slight chance that these things might be worked out possibly under jurisprudence with allowance to our so called elected officials to actually perform their respective obligations and such to attempt to secure our rights, but only if our Constitutional Rights are not compromised in any way whatsoever would this be acceptable, I hope that it will be that easy, but from prior experience with these types I have serious doubts.
    I am quite sure that video games while fun are not playing any role in this very serious and possibly grave situation.
    0
  • tr fox
    Wolverine, your position is thoughtfully stated but until everything has been tried, I am not attracted to it. One thing I mean by trying everything else is to find a way to organize as many of the 84 million gun owners in America into a political "army" and focus and use that army to take back this county. With even half of America's gun owners working together, we could own this country. I can't think of a larger group of potential allies on any other subject than the 84 million gun owners that, to one degree or another, should care about their constitutional gun rights.

    Even without a constitutional right to gun ownership, with a potential of 84 million gun owners working together, we should still be able to own this country. And that organization of those gun owners has never be accomplished. The largest gun rights group in America has, to my knowledge, never done much more than barely make it to 4 million members. The second largest gun rights group only had about 650,000 members at last count. Then the numbers drop off from there with just a couple of other gun rights groups.

    The first step, if anyone was interested in getting those 84 million gunowners organized, would be to see some activity from the various gun sites. and to see numerous gun owners urging their fellow gun owners to find a way to join together and for once use some of that immense power we have but for some reason have chosen not to use. But instead all I see is a total lack of interest from gun owners from wanting to support any organization. Plus I often see infighting among gun owners when they should be spending their efforts fighting the liberal, anti-gun side.

    What surprises me is that with the 84 million gunowners, we have kind of a overwhelming "land army" that if used corrrectly could and would eliminate all our gun rights problems and probably other constitutional problems as well. Yet many gun owners, many of them right here, seem to want to fight a shooting war but do it as a "sea war" using a "Navy" that we don't really have. But we DO have a potentially huge "land army" (those 84 million gun owners) and to me that is our biggest, best and, most importantly, our FIRST source of strength.

    Until we find someway to at least try and use that "strength" I am not attracted to the idea of welcoming a shooting war with my government. One reason for that, which is not thought of much by those who advocate it, is that once that shooting war starts, if it looks like our government is loosing, then other nations armies, armies of our already existing enemies, will probably join in fighting against us.
    0
  • Werwolf
    I have often thought the same that if a civil war does occur that our foreign enemies could very well stage an attack/invasion of our country in order to take control of the U.S. or whatever we possibly change the name to (preferably the C.S.A. acknowledging its change, however that is my personal preference and opinion).
    Like I said before if this can all be resolved peaceably and without compromising our beloved Constitution then I am sure that most if not all true Patriots would of course welcome it, but again we are under absolutely NO obligation to accept any illegal and un-Constitutional bans whatsoever no matter who tries to issue them as legislation, which would prove to be very foolish as that would promote the black market of banned weapons and people would just go through those channels in order to get what they want just as during prohibition.
    0
  • jpwolf
    Gee fox, that alone should tell something about how worthless the NRA is. I prefer to keep my money from them and do my own no compromise lobbying. My reps probably have a list that I am at the top of. The NRA is worthless and it looks like 80 million by your own numbers, understand this.
    0
  • tr fox
    quote:Originally posted by jpwolf
    Gee fox, that alone should tell something about how worthless the NRA is. I prefer to keep my money from them and do my own no compromise lobbying. My reps probably have a list that I am at the top of. The NRA is worthless and it looks like 80 million by your own numbers, understand this.


    Who mentioned the NRA? Or are you just looking for an argument as usual? If so, where are your other asses to help you by chiming in?
    0
  • jpwolf
    Let's see...
    #1) Yea, I'm looking for a fight, putz
    #2) Don't need 'em to deal with a putz like you
    #3) As if you weren't referring to NRA when you quoted 4 million members. Man, what a putz

    Way to refute what I said. Defended like a true putz

    For you:

    "If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsel or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands of those who feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you. May posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." - Samuel Adams
    0
  • rkba4ever
    I see #9 needs no assistance from the rest of the brethren - he can clearly defend himself [:D] But I am sure he knows the rest of us are around should the need arise..........
    0
  • Werwolf
    Apparently it has already developed into a shooting war.
    0
  • wsfiredude
    Who mentioned the NRA? Or are you just looking for an argument as usual? If so, where are your other asses to help you by chiming in?


    I'm here tr, but jp did such a magnificent job leveling you, the only thing I had to do was sit back and watch from my ringside seat.[:D]
    0
  • shootuadeal
    i always hate to start trouble...but

    were you invoved in the supreme courts recent decision on heller vs d.c.?

    i know you dont like the nra, but they alone fought the ban and set a minor precedent.

    one of you CAs even has in your sig line "supreme court votes 5-4 constitution still valid" sad, yes it is. where was the goa, jpwolf, highball, wsfiredude on that one. did YOU GUYS kick in money for the lawyers to fight that one, i doubt it.

    now i will here about you guys doing "other" things to help. yeah i bet you are doing a damn thing to help me or anyone else besides yourself out on this one. vote ron paul and think you are doing something. i would love to think like you that voting for him will make everything better, but i know better. the masses dont care what we think.

    the nra has the money and resources to fight for our rights.

    forget project excile and whatever you guys call the "veteran disarment act", what has the GOA done?

    i dont have a problem with drug dealers with a gun being held without bail because of a firearm involved.

    if a person has a firearm and doesnt commit a crime there is no problem right?

    any lawful person should be able to exercise his right to self protection

    man i am gonna catch heck for this post.
    0
  • shootuadeal
    i enjoyed the posts about what feemind is doing about it, a group of people ready to go to save the constitution. he should network? with other groups in other areas to strengthen his group.
    0
  • jpwolf
    quote:the nra has the money and resources to fight for our rights

    Yea, it's too abd they waste it on 1 million dollar a year salary for Wayne, huh?

    Here ya go....read this, then tell me what ya think,k?

    http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=263795
    0
  • shootuadeal
    its too long to read it all tonight, i gotta ge tto bed but i will read it when i get the time. tomorrow night probaly.

    could you please give me some CONCRETE evidence of what the nra has done to counteract the 2nd. a link or something, not the canary ass opinion of it, to show me what the hell you guys are always are talking about.

    i like these forms but i just get sick of you guys trashing the only gun rights group that has a record of actually doing something. i have not seen anything contrary to the second out of them.
    0
  • pickenup
    quote:Originally posted by shootuadeal
    were you invoved in the supreme courts recent decision on heller vs d.c.?

    Were YOU involved?

    Since there were only 3 parties ALLOWED to be involved in this case, which were Heller, SCOTUS, and the DC government, I will ADMIT that I had NOTHING to do with this case. I am sure that the canary asses will admit this as well.

    i know you dont like the nra, but they alone fought the ban and set a minor precedent.

    The NRA had NOTHING to do with fighting this ban. (thankfully) The three attorneys that were on the "District of Columbia v. Heller" case, were Alexandria attorneys Alan Gura, Clark M. Neily III, and Robert A. Levy of the Cato Institute, "who also personally bore all the expenses of the litigation".

    did YOU GUYS kick in money for the lawyers to fight that one, i doubt it.


    Did YOU?

    ALL three of these attorneys were working on a PRO BONO basis. NO ONE COULD "kick in" ANY funds for this case, even if they wanted to. Including you, me, OR the NRA.

    The NRA tried to STOP this case from going before the SCOTUS.

    The case was originally labeled the "Parker v District of Columbia."

    First, a meeting was set up on August 29, 2002 in a Cato conference room. Levy and Neily said the NRA representatives tried to talk them out of filing the case AT ALL.

    They refused to drop the case, and on Feb. 10, 2003, Levy and Neily filed the "Parker v District of Columbia" case. In a legal manoeuvre, usually frowned upon by attorneys, seven weeks later, on April 4, 2003, Holbrook (an NRA attorney) filed Seegars v. Gonzalez. (a very weak case) Followed shortly by Holbrook filing for consolidation of the two cases. In the hopes that BOTH cases would be thrown out, due to the weakness of the Seegars v. Gonzalez case. Holbrook's filing to consolidate was denied.

    Through the ongoing legal manipulations by the NRA attorney, which almost destroyed the "Parker v District of Columbia" case entirely, eventually leading to all but one plaintiff being removed from the "Parker v District of Columbia" case. Because of the NRA's filings etc., out of the original SIX plaintiffs, the ONE remaining plaintiff was Dick Anthony Heller. Even though they TRIED, the NRA didn't have the ammunition to shoot Heller out of the saddle. We all know what transpired next.

    Once the case came before the SCOTUS, the ONLY thing the NRA did was file an amicus brief, as did a "LONG LIST" of other organizations. Both pro and con.

    *******

    Before you try to defend the NRA, and attack members here for their stance. Maybe YOU should get YOUR ducks in a row first.


    what has the GOA done?

    I will not go into detail now, but suffice it to say that they have done quite a bit. You might want to line your ducks up on this organization as well, before you try criticizing them again.
    0
  • codenamepaul
    You can't get half of the eligible population to do something as simple as vote! Now you want to get half the gunowners to vote in a particular way? Rest assured, the sheeple (gun owners included) need a wake up call. If that comes in the form of a civil war, so be it.
    0
  • tr fox
    quote:Originally posted by jpwolf
    Let's see...
    #1) Yea, I'm looking for a fight, putz
    #2) Don't need 'em to deal with a putz like you
    #3) As if you weren't referring to NRA when you quoted 4 million members. Man, what a putz

    Way to refute what I said. Defended like a true putz

    For you:

    "If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsel or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands of those who feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you. May posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." - Samuel Adams



    Your pitiful little keyboard (or perhaps your mind) seems stuck on the term "putz." And as I predicted, you will notice that a couple of your other asses could not help but to chime in. That was predictable because that is how a childish gang operates. I have seen it many times.
    0
  • wsfiredude
    originally posted by trfox:

    Your pitiful little keyboard (or perhaps your mind) seems stuck on the term "putz." And as I predicted, you will notice that a couple of your other asses could not help but to chime in. That was predictable because that is how a childish gang operates. I have seen it many times.

    'Childish' huh? It is interesting that would would choose to label those who support the Constitution 100% as 'childish'. It says a lot about you.

    Well, tr, I have a label for you. Since you seem to mock/belittle those who believe in individual liberty, and choose to align yourself with organizations that have attempted to undermine the rights of the people, I give you the label of traitor. That's right. I said it. T-R-A-I-T-O-R. I meant it, and you earned it, for you have proven yourself deserving of the title.[:(!]
    0
  • jpwolf
    It would appear to even a person of lower than average intelligence, that my brothers addressed me, not you. Stroking yourself again, eh? Congratulations.

    And again, you address nothing from either my original post, or the second. It just sucks when your wrong, doesn't it? Leaves one with no reality based defense. Putz
    0
  • Permanently deleted user
    quote:Originally posted by tr fox
    If we gun people could work together for a change, instead of fighting with, insulting and criticizing each other, about 42 million of us (that would only be half of the gun owners in the USA) would flood the offices of any idiot legislators who propose or support such worthless laws. Most legislators have come to love their privileged position and if that position was seriously threatened by, say, 42 million complaints from gun owners, those worthless legislators would quickly crawl back into their hole from which they came.

    But sadly, instead of us taking such concentrated and effective action, all we will do will be to discuss it, argue about it, rant on and on how it violates the constitution (it does, but that won't stop them) and find and/or create enemies from among our fellow gun owners who have a different view of EXACTLY what should be done.

    Watch and observe my predictions come true.


    quote:Posted in Politics by tr fox, reference another GB member: "I think he is off somewhere undisclosed doing advanced infantry training preparing for the "big one." Either that or he overloaded his keyboard and it burned out on him."

    Hypocrisy knows no bounds when dealing with a collectivist-tool.[;)]
    0
  • jpwolf
    yes, but the required modicum of intelligence required to realize one is making hypocritical statements, is completely absent here. I used to cut him slack because of that. But after his lack of trustworthiness was exposed regarding a friend, I have zero tolerance for his willfull ignorance, or for him in general. Class A putz
    0
  • Permanently deleted user
    quote:Originally posted by jpwolf
    yes, but the required modicum of intelligence required to realize one is making hypocritical statements, is completely absent here. I used to cut him slack because of that. But after his lack of trustworthiness was exposed regarding a friend, I have zero tolerance for his willfull ignorance, or for him in general. Class A putz


    Yep, that pretty much says it all jp.
    0
  • wsfiredude
    Ever notice how tr runs into the room and nips at the ankles, and then when his snout is firmly swatted, he scurries off.

    My hunch must be correct. He is an invertebrate.
    0
  • pickenup
    OK, enough with the name calling guys.
    This means EVERYBODY.








    I know, I fell of the wagon a while back, and I am not proud of that fact.
    0
  • Permanently deleted user
    quote:Originally posted by pickenup
    OK, enough with the name calling guys.
    This means EVERYBODY.








    I know, I fell of the wagon a while back, and I am not proud of that fact.


    Spoil-sport.[:o)][:D]
    0
  • Mk23
    Just like all the other AWBs in every single congress SINCE the sunset, it's been proposed by no more than 4 co-sponsors, and was referred to the same committee where it will probably be ignored, and die.

    It's no more of a genuine threat than Ron Paul's sponsored bills are any genuine hope of getting our rights BACK at this point.

    I'm more worried about SMALL bills that are named something else, or add-ons that are tacked onto unrelated bills. Something that might slip past.
    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Recent Activity

Didn’t find what you’re looking for?