Many people may believe that I am being a little paranoid by saying the registration of firearms will eventually lead to complete confiscation… well then, let me clear things up a little. I am not implying that the confiscation will be the next step after registration; what I mean to say is that registration will make confiscation literally effortless. Read the rest of this entry »
Waiting periods are just another attempt of the liberal socialists to “desensitize” American’s regarding their rights to own firearms. The fact is that waiting periods do literally nothing than waste time, and on occasion, a new defenseless victim is the result of not receiving a weapon then and there. Read the rest of this entry »
What!!! I am so close to saying some inappropriate things that I need to take a quick walk to calm down. I do not care what the media says or what the government says, criminals do not prefer to use assault weapons to commit crime… anyone with common sense can see that. I am sorry if I offend some people, but many of us in this country need to stop taking the government’s word as pure truth… it is not. Read the rest of this entry »
In case you are not familiar with the process of microstamping, let me explain it briefly to you. Microstamping is the process where a gun imprints a unique serial number on any rounds fired from the gun. The general idea is that a gun and an empty shell can be used by police to link a firearm to a crime scene. Wow, the liberal’s are really reaching out aren’t they? Read the rest of this entry »
May 20
Lookout Boo Boo!
Something they were unable to do with a republican president. But it looks like president Obama will sign the bill into law later this week.
Here’s a clip from the article at the NYT
The White House is lukewarm at best on the gun provision, which was added to a popular measure imposing new rules on credit card companies. But the Democrats who now control both Congress and the White House appear ready to allow it to survive rather than derail a consumer-friendly credit card measure that Mr. Obama is eager to sign as Congress heads off for a Memorial Day recess.
“Timing is everything in politics,†said Senator Tom Coburn, Republican of Oklahoma and the champion of the gun proposal.
A majority of Democrats in the House and Senate still typically come down on the side of gun control. But the fact that they have been outmaneuvered by Republicans on gun issues is rooted in the fact that recently swollen Democratic ranks include senators and House members who represent Western states and more rural areas where gun ownership is popular and deemed sacrosanct.
Looks like the NRA is going to get a few in the win column for a while. It’s about time!
A very good video going over the new gun laws in Montana. I don’t ordinarily like much from Fox news, but Glenn Beck brought on the writers of the new gun law in Montana to explain their position.
Here’s part of the transcript:
BECK: OK. What would you say if I said to you, “I think a background check is not necessarily a bad idea”? You don’t want some guy and going — I was in a gun store in Pennsylvania. I’m not kidding you. Two people walked in, some, you know, 20-year-old dope and his girlfriend, and he is like, “Well, what do you want?” And she said, “I don’t know. That one’s kind of cute, the pink one. I like that one.”
I just looked at the guy behind the counter and I said, “Don’t sell them a firearm.” He did. I mean, I think we should have some standards. What do you say about standards - having some kind of standard?
MARBUT: We don’t have those kinds of people in Montana. Or at least —
(LAUGHTER AND APPLAUSE)
BECK: You don’t like (UNINTELLIGIBLE) Montana. You’re right. You’re right.
MARBUT: At least we have fewer of them than you do. We want to set our own standards and we should be allowed to have guns and we don’t want the federal standards. We’re not the same as New Jersey or California or somewhere else.
And if we want to put restrictions on who can possess firearms, they should be our restrictions and should fit our culture and our people.
BECK: But people will say — Kevin and judge, people will say, “We’re all part of a union. We all have to work together.” Kevin, you’re smiling like this and it doesn’t have a shot in hell of working.
KEVIN GUTZMAN, AUTHOR, “POLITICALLY INCORRECT GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION”: Well, there are two levels to approach this question. One is on the theoretical level. On the theoretical level, the gentlemen are exactly right. The federal government is grabbing power to regulate these things and anything else that comes to mind that it’s not supposed to have. And so I applaud them.
And trying to figure out a way to confront the federal government and get it to rein itself in is a good idea. On the other hand, practically, the first time this matter comes into a federal court, it’s tossed.
BECK: Judge?
JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO, FOX NEWS SENIOR JUDICIAL ANALYST: Well, I think the more states that do it, the more pressure there will be on the Congress to realize that the states are serious about preventing the Congress from taking power away from it.
For example, if this were extended another step further, like the state of Montana forbids all police, local, regional and state, from enforcing federal laws in Montana. The federal government simply lacks the resources and the money to enforce all of its laws without the states helping them. So the more piling on there is, the more judges will realize, hey, something is going on here.
BECK: Leo, let me go to you, because you are a representative in the state of Texas. With Texas — you guys get it. And no offense, Montana, but Texans are going to come up and kick your butts. You guys are also — are you going to be taking Gary’s amendment? Is that what you are trying to do? What are you doing in Texas?
REP. LEO BERMAN, TEXAS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES: We’ve already filed his bill in Texas. But he’ll have the court case in Montana. But Glenn, I’m a 9/12er. I served 22 years in the military because I love this country, just like you do. And we say that we fought against fascism, communism.
We watched socialist countries throughout the world just languish while we prospered based on free enterprise and individual freedoms. We see this president and this administration taking us not to the far-left, but beyond that to socialism. We don’t want to go there.
So Rep. Brandon Creighton and I filed two bills in Texas. The bills don’t really need to pass because 30 other states did essentially the same thing. But what these bills do is reassert our sovereignty under the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.
And we tell the federal government that if they mandate anything on us which is not fully authorized by the U.S. Constitution, we’re going to challenge it and not do it. That’s the only thing we can possibly do right now.
We don’t want to become a socialist state. We want to challenge the federal government and I think we can do it. If we get all the state governors together to pull their resources, and anytime the federal government comes out with a mandate that’s not authorized by the Constitution, we take it right into federal court, all of us at the same time.
Amen and Amen. It’s not about being right or wrong, it’s about state control vs. government rule. States rights people!
May 15
Sales are Heavy
What they failed to mention are the real reasons why. At least the real reasons I think why.
It’s not that people were running out to pick up a Ruger for mother’s day, and it’s not that people are trying to load dad down with buckshot before his day in June either. Nope, it’s an out and out fear of more gun control if you ask me. People see that gun control laws coming their way and are stocking up on arms and ammunition like nobody’s business.
Because they don’t want to lose their right to have them.
It’s not a coincidence boys and girls. People are more scared of government than ever before, and these record gun sales prove it. At least it proves it to me.
Discuss.
Hand Guns in a Dallas Gun Store
Here’s the out take:
Montana has passed a law allowing local gun manufacturers to sidestep federal regulations as long as the weapons they make are sold within the territory of the state. “It’s a gun bill, but it’s another way of demonstrating the sovereignty of the state of Montana,” Democratic Governor Brian Schweitzer said, according to the AP, as he signed the bill into law in mid-April. “I like big guns, I like little guns, I like pistols, I like rifles, and I would like to buy a gun that’s made in Montana.”
In a nutshell, the 10th amendment is what Mr. Schweitzer and Montana lawmakers are leaning on. Which is sure to launch a battle like we’ve never seen before. It’s not about the right to bear arms, it’s about state rights and how far they really go.
What are your thoughts?
Lady liberty wins again this week when the U.S. court of appeals in San Francisco sent the victims of a 1999 gun crime packing (no pun intended) when they tried to sue the actual manufacturer.
Amen and Amen! It’s like fat people suing McDonalds or smokers suing Phillip Morris. It’s become the ‘in’ thing to sue everyone and everything you can. Not important if the company was acting legally and only made the weapon. They wanted them to be held accountable. For something they didn’t do.
Here’s some more from the article:
The case stemmed from a rampage in which white supremacist Buford Furrow wounded five people, including three children, at a Jewish Community Center in Granada Hills and then killed a Filipino-American postal worker, Joseph Ileto, in Chatsworth on Aug. 10, 1999.
Furrow later pleaded guilty to 16 federal charges including committing a hate crime and was sentenced to life in prison without parole.
Meanwhile, the surviving victims and Ileto’s mother sought to sue Georgia-based Glock Inc., RSR Wholesale Guns Seattle Inc. and Norinco for allegedly marketing the guns in a way that encouraged illegal purchasers to buy them.
In an earlier ruling in 2003, the appeals court said the plaintiffs could sue the companies on the common-law claims of creation of a public nuisance and marketing negligence.
I’m sorry boys and girls, and you can correct me if I’m wrong here, but this smells an awful lot like “victims” looking for deep pockets rather than out and out justice. It looks an awful lot like some people want to to turn a tragedy into a payday.
Sorry if that ticks you off, I just call em’ like I see em’.
Discuss.
May 8
I have to tell you, I’m still reeling pissed from yesterday. I spent some time doing some research after I made yesterday’s post, only to find out that there are MANY states that want to turn law abiding citizens into criminals.
Just for being gun owners.
Understand, it’s not legal gun owners causing gang violence in L.A. nor is it registered gun owners in most of the gun related crime in America.
Nope, it’s people that have obtained them ILLEGALLY. So what’s the best approach? I don’t know, but it sure as hell isn’t a good approach to make owning a gun wrong. It sure isn’t a good approach to punish someone that buys more than one weapon a month. Can somebody explain that logic to me?
Give me a break please.
The real deal is going to have to center on responsible gun ownership. Not limiting the amount of guns, but securing whatever guns you might own. It’s why we do what we do here at firearmsfax.com , we offer a safe deposit box that allows you to store all of your weapons serial numbers in a safe place, should they ever be stolen. (sounds like responsible ownership to me….)
Anyway, back to the topic. What do you think boys and girls? Should a person go to prison because they LEGALLY purchased a couple of handguns in the same month?
‘Splain it to me Lucy…. Put your comments in the box below!