Biden announces proposed gun control measures

[Hoodie]

Here's the Politifact check on the Feinstein comment.

Hoodie before you dabble in another states rep values know what you are talking about.
Feinstein and Boxer are anti gun been antigun and spouted more anti gun BS over the years than anyone could care to hear.
I am a born Californian, lived here all my life, so please if you are going to attempt to defend a BS antigun Political hack as pro gun make it your Oregon hacks.

Thank you very much

I didn´t say Feinstein was pro-gun. She isn´t. For what it´s worth I also think she should be prosecuted for insider trading. But I think that about Kelly Loeffler too.

I said that quote was taken out of context. And it was. Full stop.

The only reason to take the quote out of context is to make the position seem more extreme to make it easier to argue against. This is called a straw man logical fallacy.

It should be easy enough to argue against that position without misrepresenting it, right? BjornF16 has been doing it throughout this thread.

Framing quotes in the correct context is important. Iḿ not tolerant of doing otherwise regardless of who´s doing it. If someone posted a Reagan quote that was clearly taken out of context, I would fact check it just the same.

Like I said before, I don´t go along with bullshit just because I like where it leads. That tends to make me as unpopular with my liberal friends as it does with my conservative friends. Oh well.

 

[Billinsd]

How do you measure "too much" though.

By decades. Decades of overreaching regulations, spanning at least a century.

 

[Newtosavage]

By decades. Decades of overreaching regulations, spanning at least a century.

"overreaching..." Still a subjective measure.

How do we measure "too much?" IMO it's when we are no longer able to behave in a way the framers intended, for the intended purpose.

 

[BjornF16]

Probably because I was originally trained on and issued a Mini, and only after 15 years with that rifle was I told I had to transition to an AR. To me, the Mini was a lot simpler weapon to learn on, and to operate under stress. But that's probably just because that's what I learned on. When I go after pigs these days, I have a mini-30 with me. It stops pigs faster than the mini-14 and I don't have to waste rounds on pigs I've already shot because they are still running.

I'm sorry...I should've been clearer.

You seem to be ok with owning a Mini-14 (and -30). (Unless I'm missing something...quite possible ;-)

Explain to me how a Mini-14 meets your definition of allowable (I'm stepping out on a limb here with an assumption) under the 2A (or rather, ok in your mind) but an AR-15 isn't.

Aren't they identical in terms of "firepower", kinetic energy, availability of high capacity magazines?

(I ask this in a very respectful manner...I'm truly curious how you rationalize this).

 

[Opah]

God how could there be so many here that believe it is a good thing to have our rights diminished and whittled down in the name of good for the country?\
Our fore fathers ran for this type of government, forged a new and gave us rights to prevent this from happening ever again.
Here we are again making the same mistakes

"Nikita Khrushchev sent chills down my spine
I was nine years old in 1956 when I read that Russia’s Communist leader Nikita Khrushchev said, “We will take America without firing a shot. We do not have to invade the U.S. We will destroy you from within....” I distinctly remember thinking at my tender age, “That will never happen.” And now I am horrified to see Khrushchev’s words coming true."
Barbara Fowler

China, Russia, Bidden, Harris, it doesn't matter, communist are communist

 

[BjornF16]

Writing to Madison from Paris, Thomas Jefferson offered “a word on the declaration of rights you have been so good as to send me. I like it as far as it goes; but I should have been for going further.” He suggested a stronger version of “the right to speak to write or otherwise to publish any thing but false facts,” and made recommendations concerning the rights of the accused and against standing armies.41 Yet neither here nor in any other writing did Jefferson express any dissatisfaction with the language of what became the Second Amendment. Given his 1776 proposal for Virginia that “no freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms”42 and his lifelong enthusiasm for firearm ownership, Jefferson must have perceived that these values were expressed in the guarantee that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

41. Hobson et al. eds., The Papers of James Madison, vol. 12, at 363-64.

42. Thomas Jefferson, The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, Julian P. Boyd etal. eds. (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1951), vol. 1, at 344-45.

Halbrook, Stephen P.. The Founders' Second Amendment: Origins of the Right to Bear Arms (Independent Studies in Political Economy) . National Book Network - A. Kindle Edition.

..."shall not be infringed".

infringe - 1. To break, as contracts; to violate, either positively by contravention, or negatively by non-fulfillment or neglect of performance. A prince or a private person infringes an agreement or covenant by neglecting to perform its conditions, as well as by doing what is stipulated not to be done. 2. To break; to violate; to transgress; to neglect to fulfill or obey; as, to infringe a law. (1824 Noah Webster Dictionary)

 

[Rob5589]

God how could there be so many here that believe it is a good thing to have our rights diminished and whittled down in the name of good for the country?\
Our fore fathers ran for this type of government, forged a new and gave us rights to prevent this from happening ever again.
Here we are again making the same mistakes

"Nikita Khrushchev sent chills down my spine
I was nine years old in 1956 when I read that Russia’s Communist leader Nikita Khrushchev said, “We will take America without firing a shot. We do not have to invade the U.S. We will destroy you from within....” I distinctly remember thinking at my tender age, “That will never happen.” And now I am horrified to see Khrushchev’s words coming true."
Barbara Fowler

China, Russia, Bidden, Harris, it doesn't matter, communist are communist

It is sad how so many are willing to give up Constitutionally guaranteed rights, yet fight tooth and nail against wearing a mask, because it violates their rights.

Not to diminish or disrespect anyone's opinions but, until you live in a state as restrictive as California, you really cannot fathom the depth and tenacity at which the gov't will attack the 2A. You want none of what we deal with here. Trust me.

 

[Newtosavage]

I'm sorry...I should've been clearer.

You seem to be ok with owning a Mini-14 (and -30). (Unless I'm missing something...quite possible ;-)

Explain to me how a Mini-14 meets your definition of allowable (I'm stepping out on a limb here with an assumption) under the 2A (or rather, ok in your mind) but an AR-15 isn't.

Aren't they identical in terms of "firepower", kinetic energy, availability of high capacity magazines?

(I ask this in a very respectful manner...I'm truly curious how you rationalize this).

They are. I think you're correct. And I wonder about that question myself.

This is an area where my opinions are still evolving. I don't consider myself a 2A scholar at all, and I'm learning as I go.

If someone has a problem with civilians owning AR's then there is no logical reason they shouldn't have a problem with civilians owning a Mini. None at all. I would be illogical to say so.

I use mini's for a very specific purpose - feral pig control. If I didn't have that tool, I'd use what I used to use - my 30-30 Winchester, and if I didn't have that tool, I'd use a bolt action rifle and in the absence of that I'd use a single shot or even my bow.

This stuff doesn't keep me up at night. I'll use what I have at hand and I'm happy with that.

Keep in mind, I'm talking about hunting. Somewhat of an "elective" activity. It's not the end of the world if I shoot 6 pigs in a night, or 1. Not at all.

Getting back to the 2A, I think it's important for Americans to be able to defend themselves and their loved ones and in some instances, their property. And realistically, a firearm is a good tool for that, if not only just as a deterrent. But my choices for self defense and home defense (meaning my loved ones inside) is not an AR and I've really never even considered using an AR for that purpose. I feel I have other better options. It has nothing to do with not owning "scary looking" guns, although I think that's exactly what draws some people to own AR's. They like the idea that they can own a gun that other people find "scary" because - let's be honest - it's important to them that they annoy a certain group of people, for whatever reason.

At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter what I think because I don't get to choose aside from my one vote. And even then, I didn't vote for the SC justices, so it's really out of my hands. I'll abide by whatever they decide, consider my options and make my choices.

Now, I just shared a lot of my own personal views and if there's one thing I've learned, that means I've exposed myself to criticism by people I'll never meet. People who will feel "attacked" because maybe my views don't align with theirs, or people who are just mean-spirited enough to go after someone they've never met because they simply disagree with them. Let me say right now that I won't lose a minutes sleep over that.

I hope I answered your question Bjorn. If not, I'm sorry.

 

[Newtosavage]

God how could there be so many here that believe it is a good thing to have our rights diminished and whittled down in the name of good for the country?\
Our fore fathers ran for this type of government, forged a new and gave us rights to prevent this from happening ever again.
Here we are again making the same mistakes

"Nikita Khrushchev sent chills down my spine
I was nine years old in 1956 when I read that Russia’s Communist leader Nikita Khrushchev said, “We will take America without firing a shot. We do not have to invade the U.S. We will destroy you from within....” I distinctly remember thinking at my tender age, “That will never happen.” And now I am horrified to see Khrushchev’s words coming true."
Barbara Fowler

China, Russia, Bidden, Harris, it doesn't matter, communist are communist

Maybe because this is a hunting site and not a dedicated firearms site? And not even every hunter here uses firearms. There are places you can go where your company might be more suitable if you need to.

 

[Newtosavage]

Writing to Madison from Paris, Thomas Jefferson offered “a word on the declaration of rights you have been so good as to send me. I like it as far as it goes; but I should have been for going further.” He suggested a stronger version of “the right to speak to write or otherwise to publish any thing but false facts,” and made recommendations concerning the rights of the accused and against standing armies.41 Yet neither here nor in any other writing did Jefferson express any dissatisfaction with the language of what became the Second Amendment. Given his 1776 proposal for Virginia that “no freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms”42 and his lifelong enthusiasm for firearm ownership, Jefferson must have perceived that these values were expressed in the guarantee that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

41. Hobson et al. eds., The Papers of James Madison, vol. 12, at 363-64.

42. Thomas Jefferson, The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, Julian P. Boyd etal. eds. (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1951), vol. 1, at 344-45.

Halbrook, Stephen P.. The Founders' Second Amendment: Origins of the Right to Bear Arms (Independent Studies in Political Economy) . National Book Network - A. Kindle Edition.

..."shall not be infringed".

infringe - 1. To break, as contracts; to violate, either positively by contravention, or negatively by non-fulfillment or neglect of performance. A prince or a private person infringes an agreement or covenant by neglecting to perform its conditions, as well as by doing what is stipulated not to be done. 2. To break; to violate; to transgress; to neglect to fulfill or obey; as, to infringe a law. (1824 Noah Webster Dictionary)

Again, the question IMO really comes down to what constitutes "arms" today.

 

[BjornF16]

Again, the question IMO really comes down to what constitutes "arms" today.

Well, I've answered that, and the 1939 SCOTUS answered that in US v Miller.

Military arms = civilian arms

arms - 1. Weapons of offense, or armor for defense and protection of the body. 2. In law, arms are any thing which a man takes in his hand in anger, to strike or assault another. A stand of arms consists of a musket, bayonet, cartridge-box and belt, with a sword. But for common soldiers a sword is not necessary. (1824 Noah Webster Dictionary)

United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939)

United States v. Miller: Only weapons that have a reasonable relationship to the effectiveness of a well-regulated militia under the Second Amendment are free from government regulation.

supreme.justia.com

Primary Holding
Only weapons that have a reasonable relationship to the effectiveness of a well-regulated militia under the Second Amendment are free from government regulation.

 

[BjornF16]

Well, the Dems are not only talking about stacking the Supreme Court, but now it looks like they want to stack the Senate!

D.C. Mayor Bowser: Dem-Led House, Senate Will Pass D.C. Statehood, Bring It to Biden's Desk

Washington D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser told "Just the News" on Friday that the Democratic-led Senate and House will vote in favor of statehood for the District of Columbia and send the bill to President Joe Biden's desk, who has expressed support for D.C. statehood in the past. | Clips

www.breitbart.com

 

[AK_Skeeter]

What, you too?

Sigh.....

H.R. 5717 was introduced this time last year. Still stuck in Committee. Kinda like H.R. 5103, which was introduced in 2018, went no where. Varying levels of state tax increases also went no where (Connecticut HR 5700, Illinois HB 1586, etc.)

Worry monger much?

Perhaps.
Obama had the House, Senate, and Supreme Court majority his first 2 years in office.
Yet no anti-gun legislation was passed.
Obama did sign the bill allowing firearms in National Parks in 2009.

More likely is the erosion of gun-rights at the state level.
For example, look at what happened in Washington state last November.

 

[Stewy]

It’s all a bunch of craziness. I can’t believe that we let these people into these positions. I think that our colleges have totally sculpted these newer voters and it’s really starting to show. I guess we’re in it for the long haul, better hold on to your hats

 

[Rob5589]

Again, the question IMO really comes down to what constitutes "arms" today.

From Heller v. DC;

To the question “what is protected under the Second Amendment?”, Heller answers: those firearms in “common use for lawful purposes like self-defense.”

By that definition, 15+ million AR15's would definitely demonstrate common use.

 

[Shraggs]

There is a very small minority of people in this country who feel this way. So unless you plan on installing something other than a democracy, I don't think you'll get much support for your idea. Probably about as much support as those idiots who stormed the capitol on the 6th are getting right now.

Newt, not ganging with this. Engaging.

what if, what if we had a group of elected officials many felt and campaigned on an alternative form of government than we have, some flavor heavy handed government. And many or even most don’t want that. Maybe they exert control using medical emergencies, choose who’s immune to control, threatening reprogrammed children and loss of job if you fail to see it there way, maybe have troops interview about their alliance to new commander because of how they voted (interesting that is known to someone other than self), what About outlawing body armor for citizens who live in south Chicago for example, how about these elected officials who on tv encouraged violence repeatedly in the name of racism while many of the innocent they hurt were in fact ethnic, but held cops responsible for arresting them and they were returned to the streets yet to face prosecution... bla bla. Interesting world right now.

My personal opinion, we have had a cancer from within for nearly 40 years, who’ve had issues with our political structures including the notions of free, private property and In alienable rights. I just can’t believe how upside down some things are. The bias and inconsistency is overwhelming, to me..

we have warts as a nation, I’d like to fix them, but I’m not comfortable anything resembling fascism even a light version of it.

and if they should disagree with my resistance and others like me what is to stop them. As long as the second amendment stands as written and intended I have a choice. You can make good arguments but I draw the line if it whittles the intent to protect even from ejected people who who don’t like free and love control.

9mm 7-9 layers of drywall.
buck shot 4-5
AR 1-2
Birdshot 1

I choose all the above, I won’t be limited

 

[Newtosavage]

Newt, not ganging with this. Engaging.

what if, what if we had a group of elected officials many felt and campaigned on an alternative form of government than we have, some flavor heavy handed government. And many or even most don’t want that. Maybe they exert control using medical emergencies, choose who’s immune to control, threatening reprogrammed children and loss of job if you fail to see it there way, maybe have troops interview about their alliance to new commander because of how they voted (interesting that is known to someone other than self), what About outlawing body armor for citizens who live in south Chicago for example, how about these elected officials who on tv encouraged violence repeatedly in the name of racism while many of the innocent they hurt were in fact ethnic, but held cops responsible for arresting them and they were returned to the streets yet to face prosecution... bla bla. Interesting world right now.

My personal opinion, we have had a cancer from within for nearly 40 years, who’ve had issues with our political structures including the notions of free, private property and In alienable rights. I just can’t believe how upside down some things are. The bias and inconsistency is overwhelming, to me..

we have warts as a nation, I’d like to fix them, but I’m not comfortable anything resembling fascism even a light version of it.

and if they should disagree with my resistance and others like me what is to stop them. As long as the second amendment stands as written and intended I have a choice. You can make good arguments but I draw the line if it whittles the intent to protect even from ejected people who who don’t like free and love control.

9mm 7-9 layers of drywall.
buck shot 4-5
AR 1-2
Birdshot 1

I choose all the above, I won’t be limited

Where are you getting your data on an AR only penetrating 1-2 layers of drywall?

 

[Newtosavage]

From Heller v. DC;

To the question “what is protected under the Second Amendment?”, Heller answers: those firearms in “common use for lawful purposes like self-defense.”

By that definition, 15+ million AR15's would definitely demonstrate common use.

They are in "common use" for reasons other than self defense, but that's the argument their owners will make if it's convenient.

 

[Rob5589]

They are in "common use" for reasons other than self defense, but that's the argument their owners will make if it's convenient.

Common/lawful use "like self defense." Which would imply there are other uses as well; eg, hunting and target shooting. There are plenty of people that have an AR for self defense.

 

[Newtosavage]

Common/lawful use "like self defense." Which would imply there are other uses as well; eg, hunting and target shooting. There are plenty of people that have an AR for self defense.

At least, that's what they will claim. However, I suspect a run through the data would show that AR's are rather low on the list of weapons actually used in self defense, far outnumbered by handguns and other weapons.

Can you use one for self defense? Sure you can. I can also use a baseball bat. But are they used? I'd be surprised if the instance of AR's actually used for self defense is more than 10% of all cases.