Is a Gun Ban, the New ObamaCare?

FrontPageMag.com ^ | January 6, 2013 | Daniel Greenfield

[DownInFlames]

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
——______________
Free state refers to free citizens

[JRandomFreeper]

the fact that many conservatives stayed home or didn’t vote to stop Obama got Obama elected.

And why is that? Because, as has been said so many times that the GOP is running liberal candidates. Deal with it.

Until your party leaves the left, and moves right, you will never win again. I look for the GOP to lose the house in 2014, because of thought processes like yours.

/johnny

[Orangedog]

You really believe that Romney would be making this push and as successfully with the media's help as this Obama communist is for taking away our gun rights?

Not only that, but he would have the GOP leadership backing him and telling you all to shut up and sit down because you have nowhere else to go. I know it's hard to accept that he actually signed a sweeping gun ban into law. Lots of battered housewives believe hubby has changed and will never hit them again...and they end up in the ER again.

[Darksheare]

"I don't care about Romney"

No, you just care enough to snark at Conservatives for not supporting the lying Rino.

You do know this is a Conservative website, not a Republican website?
I know, get tehhe GOP to nominate a Conservative.
Oh yeah, Boehner will cry some more and then punish Conservatives for not going with the flow.

[brownsfan]

“Romney did sign a semi-auto ban as governor. You can’t refute that.

Democrats will continue to beat the GOP because the democrats are better liberals than the wanna-be liberal GOP.

People like you need to own that pushing liberals in the GOP is what cost you the election.

/johnny”

Yeah, because the media would fall in line behind Romney just as they have for Obama? I sort of doubt that one. The media hates ALL Republicans, just as John McCain.

Because Romney was all for legislation at the federal level that would supercede state’s rights? Hmmmm, don’t think so.

Enjoy Democrat rule, because if you stick with the circular firing squad mentality, that’s all you’re going to see. I was in the service, I can live under authoritarian rule, can you?

[Darksheare]

“the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

Refers to the people.
Two parter, the second part means no gun bans.
You DO understand what “Infringed” means, right?

[Orangedog]

Romney promised to repeal Obamacare so that’s just ONE difference.

Of course he would. Along promising you a sack of magic beans and 76 trombones. Sorry, but the rest of us know when we're being lied to.

[Darksheare]

“Yeah, because the media would fall in line behind Romney just as they have for Obama? I sort of doubt that one.”

They fawned over his ROmneycare in Massachussetts, and his “brilliant” governing in appointing liberal judges, introducing homosexual marriage in Massachussetts, his gun ban.
Yes, they’d have been quite content and happy with a liberal.
Especially if he did as president what he did as governor.

You do understand that a choice between evils is still evil?
You also further understand that anything that went south under Romney would have been blamed on Republicans?
Anything happening now, the Dems can own fully.
The Social Security tax rising, the Dems own that.
If Romney had been elected, they’d have tried to pin it on Republicans.
Food for thought that last one.

[JRandomFreeper]

If it involved a firearm ban, you bet the media would support Romney. As would the GOP-E, who would tell you to sit down and shut up, and vote straight party line in 2014.

So you can be as pissed as you like at conservatives that didn't vote for your liberal, but until you change your party, you won't be getting the conservative base votes again.

And yes, I do just fine in a military setting. I served my time during 2 different conflicts, and I was one of those NCOs being authoritarian to the E-1 through E-4 crowd, keeping them in line.

/johnny

[Democrat_media]

Good points. Very well put.

[Darksheare]

“Because Romney was all for legislation at the federal level that would supercede state’s rights? Hmmmm, don’t think so.”

States cannot ignore the Bill of Rights.
*cough* Incorporation Clause *cough*

[Darksheare]

Ah yes, the “high fives” come out.
Wonder if there are any more at some other site...?

[brownsfan]

“You do understand that a choice between evils is still evil?
You also further understand that anything that went south under Romney would have been blamed on Republicans?
Anything happening now, the Dems can own fully.
The Social Security tax rising, the Dems own that.
If Romney had been elected, they’d have tried to pin it on Republicans.
Food for thought that last one.”

You do understand there is a difference between a serious wound and a fatal wound. I see Obama as a fatal wound to America.

As for who owns what? Really? The low information voters have figured out they can impact the vote. And the media blames Republicans for anything bad, whether the Republicans could have impacted the situation or not.

[Darksheare]

“You do understand there is a difference between a serious wound and a fatal wound. I see Obama as a fatal wound to America.”

So a gun ban from Romney would be less serious how?
Homosexual marriage, liberal judges, higer taxes if he followed his Massachussetts pattern would be less serious how?

[brownsfan]

“Ah yes, the “high fives” come out.
Wonder if there are any more at some other site...?”

Building some conspiracy to go along with your self destructive behavior?

I couldn’t give a rip less, except that your delusion is dragging me down with you.

Oh well, like I said, I’ll adapt. Will you?

[Darksheare]

No conspiracy needed.
Just two posters giving each other high fives for making useless points like highschoolers or frat boys.
Again, wonder if they’re going on at some other site...?

[DTogo]

Obama wrecked his first term by ramming through nationalized health care by any means necessary...

He wrecked it so badly that he was re-elected.

[lacrew]

I think they’ll use Obamacare to enforce a gun ban.

All the ‘we are only the 27th best healthcare system in the world’ talk originates from international studies, which assign a low grade to nations which allow private gun ownership. What’s the best way to climb in this rating system? Ban guns.

It will be done by edict, like the contraception mandate....for the children, for our health, for the common good, whatever.

[Delmarksman]

I wrote my legislators and here are the two responses that I received. Here's the stock letter I got from Carney and Carper. Just another typical liberal(s) who knows what's best for everybody...... uuugghhhhh -----Original Message----- From: Senator Carper Subject: Responding to your message January 4, 2013 Dear Mr. Delmarksman: Thank you for contacting me to express your concerns about gun control measures following the tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut. I appreciate hearing from you about this important matter. Let me first say that my thoughts and prayers go out to the victims at Sandy Hook Elementary School in the wake of the December 14, 2012 shooting. As parents of two sons, my wife Martha and I can only imagine the pain that these families are going through. I firmly believe that in the wake of such a horrific event—and a number of other recent shootings—we must learn the facts about what happened and look to the law enforcement community to make recommendations to Congress. Not too long ago, I was talking with one constituent who was a long-time hunter and member of the National Rifle Association. He raised the issue of gun-control with me and said, "we just need to use common-sense." I couldn't have agreed more. We need a common-sense approach that strikes the right balance between our Second Amendment right to bear arms and ensures that our law enforcement personnel have the tools they need to keep citizens safe. As you know, I am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, and I believe that law-abiding citizens have the right to bear and own arms. I have a long family history with firearms. My ancestors were craftsmen who developed a firearm known as the Carper rifle 150 years ago in West Virginia. My father was an avid outdoorsman and gun collector. I 'm a gun owner, myself, and have taken my sons trap shooting as part of their introduction to firearms training in the Boy Scouts. My family also has a great deal of admiration for law enforcement personnel. My father worked most of his life as a claims adjuster for Nationwide Insurance, and he had the opportunity to interact with law enforcement officers throughout his career in the insurance industry. During that time, he gained a great deal of respect for those men and women who were willing to risk their lives every day for their fellow citizens. Having an appreciation for law enforcement is just one of my father's values that I carry with me to this day. Just as importantly, my father taught me to use common sense in all aspects of my life, and I believe this credo should be followed when debating gun control legislation as well. I've long supported common-sense efforts to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the severely mentally ill. In 2004, I voted to renew the Assault Weapons Ban, prohibiting these weapons that serve no legitimate hunting or sporting purpose. I also support closing the 'gun show loophole,' which allows individuals to purchase guns without undergoing a background check that is normally required by law. The loophole allows felons, the severely mentally ill, and other individuals who would otherwise be prohibited from owning a gun to avoid background checks and records of their purchases and and permits them to walk out of gun shows with thousands of guns each year. As you may know, President Barack Obama's announced on December 19, 2012 that he will take immediate steps to address the issue of gun violence. He has asked Vice President Joe Biden, a primary sponsor of the 1994 Brady bill, to coordinate an effort, comprised of members of his Cabinet, law enforcement agencies and others to develop concrete proposals to prevent further mass shootings. Over the next few weeks, President Obama expects to develop a multifaceted approach to reduce gun violence and will provide legislative recommendations to Congress in January. As you also may know, there are a number of measures of gun control legislation that were introduced in the 112th Congress, and I expect to be reintroduced in the 113th Congress. I want to take this opportunity to inform you about a few of them: ?—?Prior to 1994, federal law prohibited semiautomatic assault weapons and ammunition feeding devices that hold more than 10 rounds. In 2004, this ban expired and has not since been reauthorized by Congress. On January 25, 2011, Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) introduced S. 32, the Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act. This legislation would reinstate the assault weapons ban and prohibit the possession of ammunition feeding devices that hold more than 10 rounds. ?—?Under current law, licensed firearms dealers have been required to maintain records of all gun sales and to check their customers' backgrounds for criminal records before completing a sale. These requirements, however, do not apply to the unlicensed dealers that often do business at gun shows, a loophole that remains open in 32 states. On January 25, 2011, Senator Lautenberg introduced S. 35, the Gun Show Background Check Act. This legislation would require background check procedures at gun shows. ?—?All states provide concealed carry licenses to citizens. Requirements for obtaining a license, however, vary across states. Some states, for example, require applicants to show good cause for requesting the license, while others do not. To bring more uniformity to the concealed carry system, Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) introduced S. 176, the Common Sense Concealed Firearms Permit Act, on January 25, 2011. This legislation would require applicants to be at least 21 years of age and demonstrate good cause for requesting the permit. ?—?Since the passage of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System Improvement Act in 2007, the Attorney General of the United States has had the power to withhold up to 3 percent of states' grant funding from the Department of Justice if they fail to report at least 50 percent of their records about serious mental illness, domestic violence, and drug possession to the federal database. Attorneys General, however, have failed to exercise this power consistently. Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) introduced S. 436, the Fix Gun Checks Act, on March 2, 2011, which would automatically cut federal Department of Justice aid to states by 15 percent if that state does not provide at least 75 percent of its records to the federal data base. Should these measures of legislation be reintroduced in the coming weeks, I expect my colleagues to do what is right—to put partisan politics aside—and focus on common sense solutions to gun violence. I believe that we have a duty to do all that is in Congress' power to make these tragedies less likely to happen. I stand ready to work with the President and my Senate colleagues to help prevent future tragedies, like those in Newtown, Connecticut, Aurora, Colorado, and others before from happening again. Please be assured that I will keep your views in mind should I have an opportunity to consider measures of gun control legislation in the future. Thank you again for contacting me. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future about this or other matters of importance to you. Sincerely, Tom Carper United States Senator To send another message please visit my website at http://carper.senate.gov/contact and fill out the webform for a prompt response. Thank you. Please do not respond to this email. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Responding to your message Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2013 16:54:12 -0500 From: Representative John Carney January 2, 2013 Dear Mr. Delmarksman, Thank you for taking the time to contact me about the horrific shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. I appreciate your input and thoughts on this matter. The tragic murder of 20 children and six teachers in Newtown is unfathomable. There is simply no way to explain the senseless act of violence perpetrated on such young and innocent children and their teachers. As a parent, I cannot imagine the pain the families of Newtown are feeling right now. Like Americans across the country, I am overwhelmed with sadness and grief. I offer my deepest condolences to the families affected by this horrific tragedy. As you know, this is not the first time we've seen such carnage and we need to take serious action in Congress to help protect our citizens, our children, and our law enforcement officials. I will continue to support efforts to immediately pass legislation to get extended magazine clips and military assault weapons off our streets and away from our classrooms in order to help prevent another tragedy like this from occurring again. With that said, I fully realize that gun control can be a very complex issue. Like many of you, I enjoy hunting. The 2nd amendment grants us the right to bear arms, but I believe this right must be exercised responsibly. For instance, as Lieutenant Governor, I implemented Delaware's gun trigger lock education and distribution program, which distributed more than 80,000 gun trigger locks in the state. We must also continue working to prevent guns from ending up in the hands of people who are emotionally disturbed or engaged in criminal activity. Implementing common sense measures that do not affect law-abiding citizens will help stop the proliferation of illegal guns on our streets and in our communities. I appreciate your taking the time to share your thoughts with me regarding this devastating tragedy. I take seriously the trust Delawareans have placed in me and my responsibility to represent them in Congress, and I look forward to serving you in the coming years. Sincerely, John Carney Member of Congress My reply to Carney, I didn't even bother with Carper. Dear Representative Carney, I would like to thank you for taking the time to respond to my email. Your form letter was very thought provoking and I would like to take a minute to respond. I honestly hope that you will take the time to read through my reply. The 2a is not and never has been about hunting. The AR 15 found at the scene was not used in the Conn. shooting. It is coming out that, yes, as originally reported, the AR was left in the car's trunk. Please take some time and research that this misinformation, which was being reported as fact, is not. So now let's look at some honest facts. Even if it had been, as Conn. already has an AWB, it would have been illegal to: a) even be in possession of the AR 15, b) by someone under 21 in any state, c) in a gun free school zone d) much less commit murder with it. As well again, making it illegal to be in possession thereof. (possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony) These facts had absolutely no effect on stopping the heinous crime. The shooting in Columbine happened during the '94 AWB, this also did nothing prevent it. Are you aware that Dillon and Klebold booby trapped the school with propane cylinders? Not covered by the '94 AWB Also not covered under the current "plan." A "full capacity" magazine ban is futile at best; there are literally millions of them floating around and, it is just as easy to do what the VT shooter did, walk in carrying a back pack full if limited capacity magazines. It takes less than one second to swap one 10 round magazine for another, not to mention carrying multiple handguns, even 6 shot revolvers defeats this. Which can also be reloaded in about 1 second. Search Jerry Miculek. While a record holder, this demonstrates the capability of the determined individual. Also, common sense and rational thought would tell you that; with a 20 minute lead time (the time from the first 911 call to when the police arrived on scene at Sandy Hook) even an individual armed with a single shot or double barrel shotgun will still have plenty of time for their (Illegal) killing spree. Laws are for the law abiding, and those who are determined to cause mayhem and murder are not and never will be affected by them. And those determined to commit suicide after the carnage will never he held accountable. How about we stop giving the mass murderers their televised glory. How about we make murder, whether it be by firearm or drunk driver so untenable that it is completely out of the question to do so. Some questions for you. Why are there more DUI related deaths than from firearms, but you are not pounding the table to prevent them? The Billboard down the street from me advertises over 4000 DUI's last year. With a yearly average of 45 deaths per year since 1995, in Delaware alone, why are you not more concerned in correcting this deadly problem? Most folks with DUI's still continue to drive, even with revoked licenses, often right up until they cause a deadly crash. While less sensational to the media, this is a far greater problem, yet receives almost no attention. Why do the states with the strictest gun control laws, including AWB's also have the highest rate of gun crime? Chicago, Wasington D. C. for example. As well as why all of the shootings recently have happened in GUN FREE ZONES. And as I read the statistics, nearly 40% of federal gun crimes go UN-prosecuted. Proving that the laws do not work when someone intends to flout them and the current laws are not enforced. Adam Lanza was turned away from buying his weapons legally. He murdered his own mother to acquire them. This happens routinely (being turned down for purchase) where is there no follow up by law enforcement? THIS might have prevented the tragedy. I would invite you to read this exhaustive article. Here By the way, "Military Assault Weapons" are already highly controlled nationwide and banned in Delaware. It is illegal to own or be in possession of class 3 weapons or suppressors. Thank you again for your reply. I welcome the opportunity to discuss this with you further. Sincerely, Mr. Delmarksman

[C210N]

All conservatives who stayed home and didn't vote against this communist monster...

It occurred to me the enormity of a double-whammy here.

For each and every stay-at-home-conservative AND for each and every low-information "voter", to make headway, the remaining conservative voters had to/have to rally another individual besides themselves to make up the lost ground.

It's much easier for a low-information voter to rally another low-information couch-potato to vote.