Article: Gun Control Doesn't Survive Christmas

[Queen_of_Thunder]

It's no longer gun control but public safety and a way to protect traditional hunting and sporting rifles. They want to save these traditional hunting implements from disappearance. Not sure why they need protection but you can count on them going after FTF sales, online purchases of ammo or guns, limits on amounts you can have, magazines and one medical doctor wants the police to be able to have you committed based on your what you think versus what actions you take.

 

[NWCP]

Wait until Feinstein opens her yap in the new Congressional session before you get your hopes up. Both she and Obama are going to stir the pos using the murders at the elementary school to tug at the heart strings of the public. The worst is yet to come.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

Some of us have voted with our wallets and pocketbooks

NICS Background Checks
required for Form 4473 gun
transactions since Nov 1998
YEAR 2011
NOV 1,534,414
DEC 1,862,327
2012
JAN 1,377,301
FEB 1,749,903
MAR 1,727,881
APR 1,427,343
MAY 1,316,226
JUN 1,302,660
JUL 1,300,704
AUG 1,526,206
SEP 1,459,363
OCT 1,614,032
NOV 2,006,919
DEC 2,783,765

2012 TOTAL 14,801,619
Grand Total since Nov 1998: 160,474,702 NICS checks as of 31 Dec 2012.
The DOJ NIJ NSPOF gun survey published in 1997 estimated 200 million guns in private ownership.
Recent estimates are 350 million private guns after a decade of media-political drumbeat of gun control guncontrol needaban needaban.
And of course gun control advocates claim the number of gun owners is declining.

AHEM. The Form 4473 has five blank lines for make, model, serial number, type and caliber. The NICS asks name of person and most restricted type of firearm being purchased (long guns have an 18 year age limit, handguns and "other" (PGO shotgun, AR bare receiver, etc.) have a 21 year age limit.) An NICS check on a person may represent more than one gun purchased. When I bought my wife a revolver and a shotgun as gifts, that was one NICS check. When my son bought a Yugo M70AB2 for himself, he bought a matching gun for me for my birthday, again two guns, one NICS check.

 

[hso]

The article is based on a false premise that the public can't be stirred again by the press, Senator Feinstein and her allies, or the report from the presidential commission headed by VP Biden that was tasked with rushing to their conclusion by sometime this month. Then there's the fact that public apathy isn't the same as opposition. Remember that we're dealing with political deal making and former defenders of the 2A and our rights have called for gun control. What do we think politicians will do in the face of the majority of people not caring if semis in military style are defined as a category 2 firearm under an amended NFA (after all you can still own them), new magazine capacity is limited to 10+ rounds (after all you can still have magazine fed firearms), the Tiahrt Amendments are amended, and a new commission to study the other (real) causes of mass murder to offer solutions that won't be funded. No one looses any guns (except our children), no one looses any magazines (except as they wear out), no one looses any privacy (unless you own a firearm), and nothing really is accomplished.

 

[Queen_of_Thunder]

And your prediction is? Do they get it or don't? All your scenarios,Queen?

All I can say for sure is I don't have enough money to prepare. I think Republicans in the House will cave, I think the Senate will change the filibuster rule, FTF sales will no longer be legal, a magazine capacity limit will be imposed, importation rules will change and who knows what else. Oh let's not forget the coming 2014 elections and the propensity for those in our sport to just talk and not become involved in the political process.

If the mayor of your city belongs to Bloomers group then form an local political group/association and get them to leave.

Get your local police chief on your side.

If I told you that you had 2-3 months to prepare for a full force attack on your 2nd Amendment Rights would you just sit there or would you prepare to defend your Rights? Consider yourself warned. As sure as the sun rises in the East they are coming nd it won't be under the banner of Gun Control but under a less provocative banner like public safety, public health, firearm preservation or some other non threating banner.

 

[mgmorden]

Probably a good sign, but remember: neither the media nor the Twitter/the populace pass new laws. Politicians do. Unless their focus has waned, then we have no reason to celebrate just yet.

 

[RX-178]

hso is right, this can be stirred up again if we slack off, and allow them to.

We have the advantage now in that they missed their window, it'll be harder for them to open it again, but they can still pull it off.

But we do have the capability to stop them.

 

[hso]

They haven't missed their window. The new Congress is just warming their seats and the Presidential Commission is pledged to a "solution" before the end of January.

We have two choices, fall asleep on watch and wake to find our side destroyed or to continuously put pressure on all our elected officials (local, state and Congress) to make no changes to existing firearms laws and policy.

This is what I used the letter writing engine at Congress.org to send to all my elected officials and that I'll send to my Governor (who already has come out against any change) and state reps.

I pledge to donate time and money to keep you in office if you vote NO to any changes to current federal law or policy with respect to firearms.

I pledge to donate at least as much time and money supporting your opponent to see you are unseated in the next primary or general election for any support of changes to current federal law or policy with respect to firearms.

Making legislation in a panic that treats 200 million voters across the nation as if we were criminally insane due to the heinous act of a single criminally insane young man that slaughtered little children is insulting and irrational. Further, it is uncalled for when the 2011 FBI Uniform Crime Report shows violent crime has been trending downward over the past 5 years and that rifles of all types were used in only 2.5% of murders in 2011. Such changes would be a burden on the federal budget, increase the bureaucracy needed to implement the new regulations, impose unreasonable burden on the public.

All this for the misguided and misdirected desire to implement the 20 year plans of some lawmakers that are using the bodies of the children of Sandy Hook elementary as a platform to advance themselves.

I expect you to oppose any further restrictions on firearms and firearms owners.

 

[Beach Nut]

I think the anti gun hardliners will get most of what they ask for shot down in
the House of Representatives. I do think chances of some sort of compromise
on this issue have a good chance of passing, for example, a bill that closes the
so called gunshow loophole, tighter restrictions on face to face sales, longer
and more detailed background checks and perhaps a waiting period for purchases.
This issue is not set in stone either way by a long shot and everyone needs to
keep up the pressure on their elected representatives.

 

[Skribs]

HSO, I'd gladly support a politician who makes changes to firearms laws. As long as its in the right direction

 

[skwab]

I definitely disagree with the article. Obama now has nothing to lose. He's won a second term and is essentially done running elections, he "won" the fiscal cliff debate with the raising of taxes and virtually no dent in spending - he's going to take his clout for a ride and see who else besides Boehner he can push around. Plus the Republicans are licking their wounds from Novemeber and wondering how they have to posture themselves to be more electable for the next presidential election - this is not a great recipe for gun owners.

I think new legislation will be introduced - I don't think Feinstein's bill will be signed as is, but usually her gun control bills get buried in committee - that won't be the case this time around. I think it'll get altered but will get a vote, and there's a good chance of it passing this time. Obama's first four were about securing his next four, now it's about his legacy - scary times ahead I'm afraid.

 

[LSMS]

I think the anti gun hardliners will get most of what they ask for shot down in
the House of Representatives. I do think chances of some sort of compromise
on this issue have a good chance of passing, for example, a bill that closes the
so called gunshow loophole, tighter restrictions on face to face sales, longer
and more detailed background checks and perhaps a waiting period for purchases.
This issue is not set in stone either way by a long shot and everyone needs to
keep up the pressure on their elected representatives.

And how would those things be a compromise?

 

[Beach Nut]

Compared to what Feinstein and others have proposed, tighter sales restrictions,
more through background checks and closing any so called loopholes in current
firearm regulations would be a much lighter load to bear.

 

[Cosmoline]

There are enormous systemic obstacles against any new gun control coming out of the feds this year. The most they might get are some NICS tweaks to get better records of those adjudicated nutty. Or maybe a TAX on some guns.

Remember this is the same government that can BARELY FUNCTION at the moment. Things that used to be a given like budgets and disaster aid are sputtering out like fume from a dying engine. I would actually be much more worried about gun control if Romney were in there now and was tempted to use it as a bargaining chip in the Senate. As it is, the House will block any major gun control.

When it comes right down to it, the other side doesn't have a realistic plan. They've been spouting off about everything from a renewed AWB to an Australian confiscation. Unlike us they have no organized grass roots. It's all astroturf.

There's also the dirty little secret that PASSED gun control stands to HURT the dems and risk the Obama coalition that brought him key swing states. Politically, it is far better for O to push a bill that will fail, and then enable his peeps to run against the NRA candidates in the mid-terms and beyond. If a bill passes then the momentum swings back the other direction as turncoat blue dogs are ousted.

there's a good chance of it passing this time.

Where's that math coming from? You're saying a majority in the House will support an enhanced AWB? Or any AWB at all?

Of course that doesn't mean we should let down our guard for a second. If we can knock down their efforts this time, it will dishearten them further. Remember a great deal of the fluff about the "great change" after these shootings is generated exclusively from editorial offices in the MSM. It's not real. If we show the reps that by continuing letter writing and hitting polls, then this will sputter out at least at the federal level.

I do agree that there is a very serious danger in some of the anti states, where the usual mobsters are likely to be able to start imposing some of their dream laws. It's bound to get worse if you're not in a free state.

 

[Skribs]

Cosmoline, they can barely function, but some things do get passed that nobody thought there would be a snowball's chance on Venus of passing.

 

[Claude Clay]

this time it is not going away.

be in it for the long fight...especially the late night votes when a "rat" gets added to a bill which is known that it will pass. many who vote will not even know the addition was made when they cast their "carefully thought out" vote.

thats how they will get us
or a Zero decree from out of left field...its his MO

 

[LSMS]

Compared to what Feinstein and others have proposed, tighter sales restrictions,
more through background checks and closing any so called loopholes in current
firearm regulations would be a much lighter load to bear.

Yet we are still the ones to bear the load. I don't consider any of those things reasonable, common sense or anything else they want to call it. Most definitely not a compromise.

I bet not one criminal will say to themselves. "I better not commit that crime (be it armed burglary, or drive by, or rape, or murder) because they're really cracking down on background checks and private sales." I would wager they're not going to care wether they're tool for the job is illegal in the first place, or worry they'll get caught with a non-compliant magazine.

The only people new legislation will hinder are law abiding citizens who are doing/did nothing wrong in the first place.

 

[GEM]

While I'm betting against a new draconian AWB, I think I'll be wrong if previously progun folks are stampeded.

All ready supposed progun Democrats have been (they make back off a bit) but if pressures they will fold.

So what about the so-called progun 'conservative folks' from the GOP?

Watch if they start talking about hunting - they will fold.

Look at Joe Scarborough - a loud mouth, egotist who proclaims his conservatism. On the fiscal cliff he would blah, blah - tough guy.

However, he says: Why is the GOP cowed by an extremist like Wayne LaP. If I take my six year old hunting I don't need a 30 round clip full of cop killer bullets.

If that mindless panic mode or pandering takes over - that's it and we will see some kind of strict bans.

I still wouldn't bet on it but that prediction is worth what you paid for it.

 

[Derek Zeanah]

Where's that math coming from? You're saying a majority in the House will support an enhanced AWB? Or any AWB at all?

My worry is that we'll get an enhanced AWB prepped, with backers informed on it, and it'll sit on the sideline until the next mass shooting. Then it'll run a serious risk of passage if the administration and the media can whip up enough fervor in the 24-48 hours following the shooting.

Look at the patriot act and how easily it passed, even though there was only one copy of the bill and nobody knew what was in it.

It can happen. And it can happen quickly. Our opponents are getting their ducks in a row for the next push.

We need to decide now how we'll respond, have a plan in place, and be ready to execute on an hour's notice. Who do we call? What's our message? Who speaks for us?

These are questions the banners (if they're smart) are answering right now.

 

[Killian]

Article from Business Insider. Where the lobbyists who give huge amounts of money to our Congressmen's campaigns read their news.

http://www.businessinsider.com/gun-control-could-be-good-for-the-gop-2012-12

I am very concerned that Republican Representatives from certain parts of the country might vote for a ban of some type. Either as a backlash against perceived slights they see coming from within the party toward their area of the country (I'm looking at YOU Northeast Republicans) or as part of deal making they do now with some Democrats in order to get some other legislation passed in the future. The rest of us in other states might not like it, but if Northern conservative voters are more concerned about taxes and not so much about gun rights, then it might not be too terribly costly for a NE Rep to jump the party line. Advantageous for them in fact.

 

[Killian]

That newspaper article I just posted suggests it would be good for the Republican Party to go with a ban. When I started thinking about it, I realized how someone who was a political strategist might think so. Think about it...1994 to 2004, AW ban in place, Republicans are winning either in stellar fashion or holding their own. 2004 comes and by the next election in 2006 they are being voted out. Sounds like this newspaper is making the argument that we gun owners would "whip up" our support if we had something to be mad about..such as another AW ban. We'd be 300% more involved and dedicated Republican voters. Scary thought. Or please correct me if I missed the tone of the article..I'd enjoy being wrong in this case.

 

[Jeff White]

I just left the author a comment promising to throw republicans who vote for gun control out with the Democrats and reminding him that to most of us the Bill of Rights wasn't a set of chips to be spent to accomplish political goals.

I suggest bury him in comments.

 

[cfullgraf]

Where's that math coming from? You're saying a majority in the House will support an enhanced AWB? Or any AWB at all?

In my opinion, the government will remain dysfunctional until the 2014 elections. The people will be tired of the Republicans being royal stick in the muds and vote them out of office. Then the anti-gunners will pounce and enact about anything they want.

It will have nothing to do with whether anyone votes for or against gun control before the elections in 2014. There are too many factions within the Republicans and a number of them are sore losers that their ideals are not front and center. The Republicans as a whole are not looking at the big picture.

Of course, the Republican National Committee could wise up and get the Republicans to make constructive adjustments to various proposed legislation to make the Democrats look like the heavies.

Maybe the threat of Boehner losing his Speaker's position will be a wake up call.

Sorry for the rant, but the picture is bigger than gun control if we wish to prevent gun control.

 

[Cosmoline]

This little tidbit was disturbing:

Possible strategies include asking for support from Wal-Mart and other major gun retailers (who might get a sales boost from the closing of a loophole that allows people to purchase weapons from private sellers without background checks) and introducing measures that do not require congressional approval, such as changes to federal mental health programs and updates to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives' gun-tracking system.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/01/early-look-joe-bidens-gun-control-task-force.html

I've never been a fan of Wally World and don't buy from them for precisely this reason. One or two execs change their mind about guns due to pressure from the Pres, and the whole company does a 180. Too many eggs in that one basket. FAR too many.

 

[Cosmoline]

It can happen. And it can happen quickly. Our opponents are getting their ducks in a row for the next push.

That's a good point. Biden's plan is going to be ready to roll the next time this happens, and its' likely failure in the 2013 session is going to be a talking point for them in 2014 and 2016. This is a long game for them, and they have a lot of ground to recapture before they can make new headway. Eventually they hope to have a majority in all three that can withstand attack from gun owners.