POTUS plea to respectable gun owners to support "common sense" gun laws

[IUprof]

I'm a little late to this party, but want to weigh in anyway. Sunday I read about four articles in the NY Times (don't judge, I also read the WSJ) calling for more "common sense" gun laws and just wanted to throw up. That whole discussion is wrong in so many ways as many here have pointed out.

I also am tired of hearing about UK, Australia and other "civilized" western European countries. Absolutely NONE of those countries had a RIGHT in their constitution for citizens to bear arms. What is completely missing in this discussion is that is exactly the reason our founding fathers wrote the 2nd amendment so that the government could not disarm the people! Their fears have been confirmed by the very actions that some are touting we should follow.

Rant over. Out.

 

[jamil]

Well, if we're going to experiment with rights... how about experimenting with..
Quartering troops?
Free speech?
Self incrimination?
Trial by jury?

...waiting for problems that those will solve.

 

[1775usmarine]

Ok, let's say I walked off of Ft. Benning with my M240B, the gun is signed-out to me. I sell it to some low-life for $25,000. I walk back on and First Sergeant asks me where the gun is, and I say "I don't know." And he says "sounds legit, don't worry it's just lost." And I live happily ever after.

Yeah right. The fact that I'm signed for that gun means it is my personal responsibility, I'm the last know owner so obviously something shady happened.

My point is, if we made no exceptions for background checks, the last know owner would have some questions to answer if firearms registered to him started showing up in criminals hands, or if he had guns "stolen and lost" very often.

I'd appreciate if you did not question my patriotism or support of the second amendment, I have an Iraq Campaign Medal saying I put my life on the line for our rights to keep an bear arms.

1Sgt would NJP your butt for losing a weapon like that and you would be getting brig time.

 

[printcraft]

Well, if we're going to experiment with rights... how about experimenting with..
Quartering troops?
Free speech?
Self incrimination?
Trial by jury?

That stuff was great for back then but it was clearly based on racism and outdated. The world is different now.

 

[actaeon277]

...waiting for problems that those will solve.

Do you think the media couldn't focus on them and come up with something?

 

[actaeon277]

That stuff was great for back then but it was clearly based on racism and outdated. The world is different now.

So I hear.
I'm a fossil.

 

[jamil]

Do you think the media couldn't focus on them and come up with something?

First things first. They have to be rid of the 2A before they get to the others.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Some MotherJones guy has a slightly less confrontational way to get the guns. A mandatory buy-back.

The entire notion that we can't do a gun-buy-back program bc gun owners would refuse to follow a law saying so is hilarious

https://twitter.com/bendreyfuss/status/650833828941037568

 

[chipbennett]

....and badges (sadly). Just following the judge's orders, probably after a 5-4 SCOTUS decision -- (you know, because if the supreme court says it's constitutional, it just is).

750,000 badge-wearing persons. Let's assume, based on recent polls, that 2/3 of them, being supportive of the rights protected by the second amendment, would refuse to carry out such orders. That leaves 250,000 JBTs to try to carry out such orders.

If they can get past the other 500,000 of their badge-wearing brethren (being outnumbered 2:1), they then face 100,000,000 law-abiding gun owners, whom they would attempt to disarm. If Connecticut is a representative sample, the vast majority of those 100,000,000 would resist those attempts to disarm. If the Cliven Bundy ranch incident is indicative, there would be plenty of those 100,000,000 who would present armed resistance to those attempts to disarm.

As I sit here in Lexington, MA, I can't help but be reminded of the spark that set off the Revolutionary War. The first time the blood a law-abiding citizen is shed by JBTs attempting to carry out disarmament orders will be the start of the second Revolutionary War. There will be no real attempt to use armed JBTs to disarm law-abiding Americans. And that is the most fundamental reason for the existence of the second amendment.

 

[jamil]

Some MotherJones guy has a slightly less confrontational way to get the guns. A mandatory buy-back.



https://twitter.com/bendreyfuss/status/650833828941037568

While looking at that thread I found this entertaining link:

Boston Mayor Wanted to Buy Back Guns ? Here?s How Well That Worked Out

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

750,000 badge-wearing persons. Let's assume, based on recent polls, that 2/3 of them, being supportive of the rights protected by the second amendment, would refuse to carry out such orders. That leaves 250,000 JBTs to try to carry out such orders.

If they can get past the other 500,000 of their badge-wearing brethren (being outnumbered 2:1), they then face 100,000,000 law-abiding gun owners, whom they would attempt to disarm. If Connecticut is a representative sample, the vast majority of those 100,000,000 would resist those attempts to disarm. If the Cliven Bundy ranch incident is indicative, there would be plenty of those 100,000,000 who would present armed resistance to those attempts to disarm.

As I sit here in Lexington, MA, I can't help but be reminded of the spark that set off the Revolutionary War. The first time the blood a law-abiding citizen is shed by JBTs attempting to carry out disarmament orders will be the start of the second Revolutionary War. There will be no real attempt to use armed JBTs to disarm law-abiding Americans. And that is the most fundamental reason for the existence of the second amendment.

Let's hope we never find out. But I'm not as confident as you are.

 

[actaeon277]

Some MotherJones guy has a slightly less confrontational way to get the guns. A mandatory buy-back.



https://twitter.com/bendreyfuss/status/650833828941037568

Some people were calling him out.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

While looking at that thread I found this entertaining link:

Boston Mayor Wanted to Buy Back Guns ? Here?s How Well That Worked Out

“We need to make sure we double our efforts on that, I’m asking any family members out there that you know have a gun in the house — or you might know that one of your kids has a gun — we will come and pick it up. We will take the gun out of the house.”

I bet you would.

 

[jamil]

Some people were calling him out.

Kinda looks like they shut him up.

 

[Lowe0]

Do you think the media couldn't focus on them and come up with something?

Not really, no. The media can only sell what people are buying.

 

[jamil]

Not really, no. The media can only sell what people are buying.

Not always. They've been pushing gun control pretty hard and have been visibly dismayed that people aren't buying it.

 

[actaeon277]

Mass Shootings -- ?Common Sense? Won?t Stop Them | National Review

 

[Lowe0]

Not always. They've been pushing gun control pretty hard and have been visibly dismayed that people aren't buying it.

Are they? Not to be too cynical, but if new shootings keep coming, they keep getting viewers.

 

[actaeon277]

She Was Critically Injured In Oregon Massacre- What She's Saying About Guns Now Shocks Many

 

[BugI02]

While some people are suggesting "common sense" registration, why not advocate for common sense RFID to be installed on each person? And a database of each person.

(said in the same spirit of sarcasm, act) Yes and perhaps we could tattoo their identification number on a body part, say an arm, for those times when a reader isn't readily available