Is onslaught of 'gun show loophole' legislation--and worse--about to begin?

St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner ^ | 15 March, 2011 | Kurt Hofmann

[marktwain]

In the wake of President Obama's guest editorial in the Arizona Daily Star Sunday (discussed here yesterday), calling for a "new discussion" about "gun control," some forcible citizen disarmament advocates are incensed that Obama didn't go far enough for their tastes. Washington Post blogger Greg Sargent, for example, comes just short of wailing and tearing his hair over Obama's disinterest in talking about magazine bans:

Throw in the political class’s inability to address high-capacity magazines, and it’s all another mark of how decisively conservatives have won the gun control wars, and of how far off the rails the national conversation about guns has strayed.

The fact of the matter is that a magazine ban bill's chances of passage are remote indeed, with Rep. Carolyn "What's a Barrel Shroud?" McCarthy's (D-NY) H.R. 308 (magazine ban bill) still strictly monopartisan (I know that's not a word. Get over it.), and of the minority party in the House, to boot. This, therefore, reduces Obama to going after what the Huffington Post's Sam Stein describes as the "low-hanging fruit":

The principal debate, then, will likely center around the application of background-check standards to private dealers.

Yep--the outright ban of private sales of firearms is what is apparently considered an unambitious gun-hater's aspiration. And yes--if a requirement for an FBI check of one's legal records (and increasingly, one's medical records) for any gun purchase is not a ban of private firearms commerce, the word "private" has taken on a new, Orwellian meaning.

[scott7278]

I was all ready to fight until I read your post, but I changed my mind - you’re right, might as well give up now. /s

[trapped_in_LA]

“I was all ready to fight until I read your post, but I changed my mind - you’re right, might as well give up now. /s”

I’m not saying that you shouldn’t fight, just that the odds are stacked against you. Fighting the culture and political forces will slow the progress of decline and enable you to live in peace a little longer. Thinking that you’ll be able to fight with small arms a tyrannical government is crazy, you’ll stand no chance and most of the brainwashed masses will be standing against you.

But as long as we are talking about fighting the culture war how many people on this board have pulled their kids out of public school and sent them to either private or home-school? Damn few I’ll bet but that is where we are loosing the war, they’ve got 8 hours a day to brainwash your kids. If you think that you can counter that with a few minutes a day that they may be interacting with you you’re nuts.

[trapped_in_LA]

“I will be ok, you are still a pussy, no vaginas were harmed in this post...

I may have to die... so?... I live for liberty.. you will die on your knees... Your grandchildren will ask why, mine will not...”

Oooook, I’ll be sure to leave some flowers on your grave. By the way I would suggest the you read the Prince by Machiavelli it may at least enlighten you on what you’ll be facing. Otherwise I’ll let you go back to obsessing about vaginas.

[RC one]

They aren’t the national republican army, they’re the national rifle association. They serve the second amendment of the constitution, not the Republican party and; what’s more, they have been highly effective at defending the rights of gun owners over the past 10-20 years. I don’t know who you are but anytime I see a supposed conservative bashing them for doing what they’re supposed to do, I think I’m looking at an infiltrator trying to undermine the second amendment by driving some BS wedge issue into the minds of conservatives. Furthermore, I want more Dems getting on board with gun rights. I don’t want this to be exclusively a Republican versus Democrat issue so I have no problem with the NRA endorsing strong 2A Dems over weak 2A Republicans.

[RC one]

I fully support GOA but I think the NRA is far too effective to abandon.

[Still Thinking]

Throw in the political class’s inability to address high-capacity magazines, and it’s all another mark of how decisively conservatives have won the gun control wars, and of how far off the rails the national conversation about guns has strayed.

This is a confusing sentence. First he says conservatives have won decisively, then he turns around and says the nation has strayed! Try to keep a coherent thought for at least one complete sentence, dude....

[Still Thinking]

Best you can do is prepare to hide your guns and ammo but what good are they then? Kind of like the Scots that hid their swords in the roof thatching only to be found hundreds of years later when they re-roofed.

...and the roofer was just darn lucky he didn't get arrested!

[Still Thinking]

Wouldn’t I be vulnerable to big, bad wolves once the wymen and homos take my black carbine and .45?

Well, just keep the EBR and .45 and you needn't fear womyn, homos, OR wolves of whatever size! (If it don't start with "4", don't go to war!)

[Still Thinking]

What is this thing called, love?

What's that in the road, a head?

[chainsaw56]

This has been posted around a few places, but it’s a good run down on what we’re facing, It’s a response to E.J. Dionne’s use of the term ‘baby steps’ in creeping towards more gun control:

“What Obama endorsed were, well, baby steps toward strengthening background checks”

You know it’s kind of dumb for Mr. Dionne to use a term like baby steps – the clear implication is that this is just the beginning of a plan that certainly will have confiscation as it’s end goal in mind.

The disarm the law-abiding crowd’s way over used term commonsense at least implies that at least this initiative won’t be part of a ongoing scheme or scam.

As someone else posted on another site pointed out, this commonsense baby step means that the sale of your private property will now fall under the influence of the Feral Government.

A measure to control ALL gun transaction by the government along with the ‘registering’ of this information in a database means that Gov. will now have a proto-registration system.

In effect, you will now need the government’s ‘Permission’ to obtain a means of self-defense, from anyone and anywhere. Instead of being able to simply sell your own personal property, you will now have to turn it over to an FFL so that they can charge you a nominal fee and have the government grants it’s blessing over the sale.

So much for property rights.

A parent won’t be able to hand down some of their property to their children – it’ll have to run its course through the federal bureaucracy.

Does anyone really believe that once the Feds have a hand in any lawful firearm transaction and a database of such a transfer, that the won’t start to us such device to pare down the numbers of people who can defend themselves?

Does anyone believe that they won’t start abusing this device to control your 2nd amendment rights?

Does anyone believe that they won’t start intimidating gun owners with threats of publishing this registration data as they are in Illinois?

Does anyone believe that they won’t start requiring periodic taxation of your guns?

Does anyone believe that they won’t start requiring periodic registration of ALL of your guns?

Does anyone believe that they won’t eventually use this registration database to confiscate guns?

[redgolum]

Thinking that you’ll be able to fight with small arms a tyrannical government is crazy, you’ll stand no chance and most of the brainwashed masses will be standing against you.

And that has always been the truth.

[GYL2]

Another oldie but goodie: Registration is the same as Confiscation, the only difference is where the guns are stored.

Banning private sales of firearms is a step well on the way to national registration.

That has to be repeated.

The fact is that the forcible disarmament cretins see Federale authority over every gun transaction as the one BIG step to confiscation through the intermediate step of registration.

If the gun grabbers can pull this off, they immediately have a way of permanently recording the possession of every occurring gun sale from now on AND the means to turn every other gun owner into an outlaw.

Make no mistake: This baby step is that powerful.

Some don’t want to think about this too hard and don’t want to oppose this commonsense move by the gun grabbing Fascists.

Is EVERY freaking new infringement on our rights termed commonsense?

It’s a cold hard fact of life that the bad guys don’t wear signs that let you know who they are.

It’s also a cold hard fact of life that Socialists will outright LIE about their true intentions and make you think this is just a minor change in how things work, that it’s just “Commonsense” and it won’t be a burden.

But if you examine the true implcations of what Obama and the gun grabbers want to do here, you will understand the danger to your freedom this really is.

[cayuga]

They aren’t the national republican army, they’re the national rifle association. They serve the second amendment of the constitution, not the Republican party ...

The Republican Party has nothing to do with this.

My first reply to you was Until they learn that endorsing ANY Democrat at ANY level is wrong, they will not get another dime from me.

I didn’t write that I expected the NRA to endorse all Republicans, but that they should never endorse a Democrat. There are plenty of bad Republicans, but there are no good Democrats. When push comes to shove, they will follow Nancy and Harry.

When I started to write this reply, I intended to try to explain to you why electing any Democrat is dangerous. Then I read your Free Republic homepage, and decided to quote you. The italics below are your own words:

The Democratic party has secured absolute power in America now. They will use their new power to entrench themselves in their seats of power. Their policies will ensure that their committee chairs and majority positions are safe forever...

This is the party that sees baby killing and sodomy as constitutional rights but does not consider the right to keep and bear arms as such…

This is the party that extols the virtues of marxists likes Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro, and Che Guevara yet openly calls men like Ariel Sharon and George Bush criminals and worse...

…the longer these ticks have to dig in, the harder they will be to dig out...

And yet, you have no problem with the NRA endorsing some of these “ticks”, as long as they’re “pro-gun ticks”.

I’m not an infiltrator trying to undermine the second amendment by driving some BS wedge issue into the minds of conservatives.The infiltrators are those willing to elect Democrats, the mortal enemies of conservatives, on the basis of a pro-gun claim or record. The Rat can be elected as a “pro-gun moderate”, but in reality that might just mean he is a little to the right of Stalin.

I don’t know who you are… I’m a Life Member of the NRA, and in the last 30+ years have contributed a fair amount to NRA-ILA, NRA-PVF, Second Amendment Task Force, Golden Eagles and others. But that was then, and this is now. I will contribute to no organization, no matter what they stand for, if in any way they help elect a Democrat. My money, my rules.

As for Republicans, to get back to where we started this, I see them as little more than “Democrat Light”. The country is in deep trouble.

[RC one]

The NRA endorsed Ted Strickland (D) over John Kasich (R) in the 2010 Ohio election because Kasich supported the AWB and Strickland didn’t. Strickland had an A+ rating and Kasich had a B-. Everyone knew that Strickland was going to lose anyways so ikt didn’t matter in the least that the NRA endorsed the candidate with the better rating (as they should). I wasn’t even a little bit upset that the NRA endorsed Strickland because I knew it didn’t matter. At the same time, I would be highly skeptical of any organization that purports to represent the second amendment and then endorses political candidates based on their political affiliation as opposed to their second amendment voting record. that just doesn’t make sense.

What really sucked in that Ohio election is that Mike Dewine (Rino) got elected as Ohio AG thanks to the wave. I didn’t vote for him because he has an NRA F rating. I didn’t vote for Strickland either though despite his A+ so I supported both the second amendment and the conservative movement by being aware of who stood where on the issues thanks, in large part, to the integrity of the NRA.

Elections are complicated especially when you’re voting on the issues instead of the party.