2  0

2  0

15  6

We are talking large capacity magazines and weapons of mass destruction not your hunting guns. I like the analogy of an atomic bomb one of the posters mentioned below. Hey, why not gun nuts? Why limit ANY weapon you might want to “protect” yourselves from the government?

4  1

We ARE going to have new “Gun Control” laws!

It will start with Registration.

Once they have THAT “list” they can begin the squeeze.

They will come at us from all fronts.

The EPA will regulate bullets since they’re made with the “Toxin” lead.

There will be “adjustments” to the regulations.

New “fees” for people on “The List”.

You name & address published in the local paper.

Eventually the only people who will be able to purchase and own guns will be “The Rich”.

And after a couple generations people will become accustom to the Government controlling and diluting your “right” to bear arms. Accustom to only a small handful of manufacturers surviving the new regulations and restrictions.

Then the outright BANS and confiscation’s can commence.

That’ll be right about the same time that most Health Insurance companies have folded under THEIR new regulations and we will all (except “The Rich”) be left with NO CHOICE but to hop on the Government Health plan or risk one of the 17,000 new IRS agents knocking at your door!

This will be the NEW America!
Obama’s America.

Where we all stand together on our knees waiting for the Government to mend our illnesses, feed, cloth & house us and defend us against well armed criminals with little regard for the laws we are about to pass.

UTOPIA!

22  7

12  6

After all the same crazies that kill people with guns , vote and elect people who kill people with guns, don’t they?

I feel that if you are registered to vote, you should also received a concealed weapons permit with your registration so that you can defend yourself when needed,

If you allow nuts to vote, you should allow the same nuts to carry concealed weapons!

16  5

32  7

LOL

Not A Chance your vague threats scare me over a controlled internet forum! Not A Chance at all, even.

But, seriously, I gotta go, my gold currency needs burying in the back yard.

5  24

The semi-automatic AR-15, not the fully automatic M-16 which is already heavily regulated and not legal at all in California, is by way of it’s sales over the past few decades pretty much the most commonly owned / used arm in private hands. While the Supreme Court, correctly, held that some regulation was possible and indeed prudent (i.e. felons in possession, forbidding firearms from those adjudged by a court to be mentally deficient, etc.) the court held that additional regulation would have to pass, at minimum, the common use test.

Courts across the country are still deciding just what the standards of scrutiny will be for Second Amendment cases post McDonald.

16  7

6  18

It states, “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.”

The Supreme Ct has ruled that this, the infringement clause, applies to the Federal government and that the states have the right to regulate militias. They have ruled that the first clause (the militia clause) trumps the second clause (bear arms clause). In other words, the amendment confers to the states the right to form militias which bear arms. It does not guarantee that each individual can purchase any weapon they chose whether it be a nuclear bomb, or an assault rifle. It allows the states to “regulate(d)” militias and thereby weapons (guns).

However, in 2008 the Supreme Court also ruled that the amendment does protect an individual’s right to certain weapons in an effort to protect themselves. They held that handguns cannot be banned.

In this ruling Justice Scalia stated that the amendment covers only arms that “have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia.” Scalia acknowledged that the Second Amendment only protects arms that would be used in a militia. He makes clear that “M-16 rifles and the like, have no Second Amendment protection and may be banned.” Justice Scalia, by the way, is pro-gun advocate and a very conservative interpreter of the Constitution and yet even he had to admit that the government can regulate guns and yes even ban them in certain instances.

You may not like the history, or even how the founders worded the amendment, but those are the facts folks…like it or not.

No one is talking about banning guns people. Thompson, the president and most rational humans are talking about REGULATING them. This is within the power of the state to do being granted by the US Constitution. The question becomes to what extent and by whom, the federal government, or state governments.

Unfortunately many in the hearing room the other night neither understand our constitution nor want to even hear what it has to say in this regard. Like most things, we want to dogmatically hold to our preconceived notions and ignore history and the facts. We live in a culture of anger and fear, and I’m afraid that this is what sits at the center of these mass shootings…our desperate cultural need to see others who disagree with us as evil or out to take something away from us.
Think about it.

15  37

No chance at all.

27  8

9  23

10  29

51  14

37  13

38  16

Wait, gotta go, theres a black helicopter over my house and my tinfoil hat is tingling.

RON PAUL 1912!!!!

18  35

This is a UN directive, along with plans to control the internet, commerce, water, energy, land and everything else.

This isn’t unchartered groud.

We have the benefit of irrefutable statistics, current and past history to tell us what happens when a society is disarmed. The statistics are NEVER favorable for the populace, to say the least.

Between this and a possible audit of the FED. Maybe people will wake up, connect some dots.

Word has it our dictator in the White House has an “Executive Order” forthcoming regarding a breach of our second amendment rights.

Fasten your holster…er, seat belt.

Don’t care much for guns, care a lot about the protection of our freedoms.

46  17