Bloomberg's gun control group spends $15M on campaigns in eight swing states

Status
Not open for further replies.
AlexanderA said:
Exactly. Biden is a cipher. He was selected to be the Dem nominee because he does them the least harm. People are not voting for Biden; they're voting against Trump. As for gun control, I don't see that happening despite what outliers like Beto O'Rourke say. (Remember that he lost after his "Hail Mary pass" regarding gun confiscation.) If the Democrats take control of the Senate (and that's the only way they could possibly enact gun control), they would do so by winning in a bunch of gun-friendly states, such as Montana, the Carolinas, Georgia, and Kansas. These newly-elected senators would never support draconian gun control. Even Mark Kelly, husband of Gabby Giffords and currently leading in the Arizona senate race, has backed away from confiscation of "assault weapons." He would bring them under the National Firearms Act, a position that reflects that of Biden himself. If we're talking about NFA amendments, there's a lot of scope for changes that would be beneficial for gun owners. (If we played our cards right.)
Click to expand...
I dont see that as benefical in the least. Registering all semi autos?

Are you nuts? History shows..registration leads to confiscation.

No thank you.
 
AlexanderA said:
The 2020 election is not a referendum on guns. It's a referendum on Trump. And Trump has shown he's not the savior of guns.
Click to expand...
Wrong, yes they hate him, but is also about taking your guns they made that plain enough, they just won't harp on it a lot while trying to get elected.

No Trump isn't our savior of any kind, but he won't lead the charge to take your guns like Biden and his ilk will.
 
I am in agreement with those who do not see the sky falling when it comes to gun rights after the election even if Biden wins. It takes a majority of the House and 60 votes in the Senate to pass a bill. Just getting a majority in the Senate is not enough to pass legislation. While that Senate rule could be changed, and threats to change it have been made by both parties it has survived for many years because it reinforces the need to negotiate legislation to pass it. I think the last few months have to have made legislators know that American are buying guns and want to continue to do so. But I do think that universal background checks will pass not matter who gets elected. The only reason it has not passed recently is because of the election. With most voters in favor of it the pols will pass it once the election scrutiny ends.
 
1942bull said:
I am in agreement with those who do not see the sky falling when it comes to gun rights after the election even if Biden wins. It takes a majority of the House and 60 votes in the Senate to pass a bill. Just getting a majority in the Senate is not enough to pass legislation. While that Senate rule could be changed, and threats to change it have been made by both parties it has survived for many years because it reinforces the need to negotiate legislation to pass it. I think the last few months have to have made legislators know that American are buying guns and want to continue to do so. But I do think that universal background checks will pass not matter who gets elected. The only reason it has not passed recently is because of the election. With most voters in favor of it the pols will pass it once the election scrutiny ends.
Click to expand...
Who says most voters are in favor of it?

The polls?
Same polls that says 80% of NRA members are in favor too?

You believe that? If you do...I got this nice bridge to sell you...

I call BS. With respect, I'm just not buying it.
 
Here is my issue, and I'm sure many others as well, with universal back ground checks.

It sounds like a great idea. Lots of stuff does on paper and turns into a nightmare when reality sets in.

First, it's impossible to enforce. It would take decades till every firearm had a 4473 attached to it somewhere. Many many guns out there that were sold before the GCA passed.

Second..you need to ask WHY. WHY they want UBGs so bad. Is it because police cant trace crime guns? No, because that isn't much of a problem. Everytime so.e nutjob shoots up a school, CNN is spouting the complete history of that gun before your dinner is even cold. The police have no problem tracing guns with the present system. So, ask Why!

Meantime...I'll tell you WHY. Because...UBCs wont do a single damn thing to impact guns used in crime. Not one little bit. So, they will then say it's because we dont know who owns what, so now we need to get everyones guns registered, so they dont end up in the wrong hands...

Will this solve the problem? NOPE! it wont do a dang thing either...but now they know who owns what and how many...etc...which leads to the next step, which is really what they want the whole time...

Confiscation. Game over.

So...no, not giving them UBCs. Not on my watch.
 
Look at NYC rifle registration.
The registration fee was promised to never be raised, and lawful guns would not be confiscated, ignore the doom sayers of the NRA, blah, blah, blah,
The registration fee for rifles has been replaced with $140 rifle permit and $96 background check, $236 in fees to buy a rifle.
When New York banned military style rifles ("assault weapon") owners were given options:
_ transfer the gun to a licensed gun dealer to be sold outside NYC
_ move it to a residence outside NYC
_ take it to a gunsmit hand have it permanentlt DEWATted
_ surrender it to the NYPD
Yeah sure no door to door confiscation.

New York politicians have been trying to impose the Tammany Hally Sullivan Act nationwide since 1924.

And putting existing semiauto rifles on the NFA like machineguns???? Democrats Froze the NFA, remember? No new registrations after May 1986. They dont intend to reopen the registry, They intend to keep it closed.
 
Megawatt maker said:
I dont see that as benefical in the least. Registering all semi autos?

Are you nuts? History shows..registration leads to confiscation.
Click to expand...
History shows that neither the original NFA registration of 1934, nor the amnesty registration of 1968, led to confiscation. On the contrary, the owners that did register saw their ownership cemented, and eventually their values skyrocketed.

Opening up the NFA to wholesale amendments (as this plan would do) would mean that the Hughes Amendment could be repealed. Hell, in this scenario owners of semis could register them as machine guns, and convert them later.

After the expiration of the previous AWB in 2204, the market for semis exploded. There are now plenty that are owned, so that a moratorium on future production would have little impact.
 
You have been trying to tell us the antis aren't going to take our guns for a long time. Well, they don't care what you say here, they will vote for anti gun bills and as soon as they have enough votes, bingo. Keep voting for anti gun politicians if you want, and don't come crying to me when it happens.
 
AlexanderA said:
History shows that neither the original NFA registration of 1934, nor the amnesty registration of 1968, led to confiscation. On the contrary, the owners that did register saw their ownership cemented, and eventually their values skyrocketed.

Opening up the NFA to wholesale amendments (as this plan would do) would mean that the Hughes Amendment could be repealed. Hell, in this scenario owners of semis could register them as machine guns, and convert them later.

After the expiration of the previous AWB in 2204, the market for semis exploded. There are now plenty that are owned, so that a moratorium on future production would have little impact.
Click to expand...
Wrong. Just plain...WRONG.

1934 was different times. 1968 was different times. Both pre Nixon, both in times when government could still be trusted.

Not any more...not ever again.
Because those registered due to the NFA have not been confiscated means nothing. Many reasons why that hasnt happened. But the reason why, today, now, it hasnt happened is because it would show their hand. I can see the arguements...you dont need class 3 firearms...its only a few compared to what's out there...we wont be going after anymore...etc.

Basically, if they did try to confiscate NFAs, they would be showing their plans. They want the whole pie, not NFA crumbs.

They will NEVER EVER REPEAL the Huges Amendment. You are suffering from wishful thinking. Neither party will ever do it.

They could solve the problem this way...like that did back when they made pot illegal. They really wanted to stop hemp production, so Dupont could sell nylon easier, so pot became the excuse. You need a license to grow hemp...ok..fine.

They never printed any...so nobody could get a license to grow hemp...so the hemp Industry died I the USA.

They would do the same here. No tax stamps would ever be printed. On the books, you could register...and you must do it by a certain date.

Opps..that date has passed...sorry we didnt print the Tax Stamp...too late now...turn them in.

OR, they could solve it any number of other dishonest ways...but rest assured, it would be dishonest.

Nope. Stick that whole idea in your pipe and smoke it.

Not on my watch!
 
Carl N. Brown said:
And putting existing semiauto rifles on the NFA like machineguns???? Democrats Froze the NFA, remember? No new registrations after May 1986. They dont intend to reopen the registry, They intend to keep it closed.
Click to expand...
They'll have to reopen the registry, in one form or another, if they intend to add millions and millions of new guns (semiautos). They could do it, for example, by redefining machine guns as shooting more than one shot without manual reloading (deleting "automatically" and "by a single function of the trigger"). But then there would have to be a wide-open amnesty. A prospective Hughes Amendment would be meaningless if millions upon millions of new machine guns would be registered all at once. Plus, the ATF just doesn't have the resources to handle all of this. From the point of view of the antigunners, this NFA proposal is a non-starter, as Sen. Feinstein found out when she tried to do it previously. But the pro-gun side could run with this and really put the antigunners in a tough spot if they propose it. Use your imagination!
 
Walkalong said:
Wrong, yes they hate him, but is also about taking your guns they made that plain enough, they just won't harp on it a lot while trying to get elected.

No Trump isn't our savior of any kind, but he won't lead the charge to take your guns like Biden and his ilk will.
Click to expand...

Yep some of the Biden posters crying about Trump, will fall down like snowflakes once Biden takes away their firearms. Must be some kind of brain damage from watching CNN. The Liberals have given us fair warning that they are going after the 2nd amendment among other things. Look at NY City. What a mess. Do you really believe Deblasio did not know what was going to happen when he de funded the Police? Of course he did. A vacuum of crime rushed in. Just like the Plan. And of course all of these are in a cabal. Take away guns, Defund the Police. Do some research on his Background. He learned quite a bit for the Sandinista's.
The Liberal gun rights owners make all kinds of excuses why they will not vote for Trump or 2A right leaders.Lol. Some of this forum, do not like Trump and many love the guy. For one thing Liberals do not like Strong leaders and that is a fact. Trump hurts their feeling. If you do not vote for a Gun Rights Advocate then please spare us the snowflake tears. Either you are going to FIGHT for the 2A rights or you are going to vote against them. No CNN talk please.
 
Megawatt maker said:
1934 was different times. 1968 was different times. Both pre Nixon, both in times when government could still be trusted.
Click to expand...
Hardly. I was a 23-year-old law student in 1968, and I knew people that didn't register their MGs during the amnesty precisely because they didn't trust the government. Boy, did they turn out to be the big losers!

The fact is, federal gun registration in this country has never led to confiscation. Draw your own conclusions.
 
AlexanderA said:
Hardly. I was a 23-year-old law student in 1968, and I knew people that didn't register their MGs during the amnesty precisely because they didn't trust the government. Boy, did they turn out to be the big losers!

The fact is, federal gun registration in this country has never led to confiscation. Draw your own conclusions.
Click to expand...
I have. Because it hasnt happened here YET, doesnt mean it cant happen. It has in many other places.

Not on my watch.
 
AlexanderA said:
Hardly. I was a 23-year-old law student in 1968, and I knew people that didn't register their MGs during the amnesty precisely because they didn't trust the government. Boy, did they turn out to be the big losers!

The fact is, federal gun registration in this country has never led to confiscation. Draw your own conclusions.
Click to expand...
What are you hoping to gain? You think your AR will suddenly skyrocket in value?
What kind of reason is that....pure greed.

I'm not selling my rights. I make money the old fashioned way...I earn it!
 
Megawatt maker said:
Who says most voters are in favor of it?
The polls?
Same polls that says 80% of NRA members are in favor too?
You believe that? If you do...I got this nice bridge to sell you...
I call BS. With respect, I'm just not buying it.
Click to expand...

Yes, the polls in public opinion (not political opinion) are generally correct when most of those polls report the same basic findings. As for polls on candidate choices I would never trust them. Political opinion is a fluid mix that changes as the ingredients change. Most Americans support 2A but believe that the best way to stop the wrong people from getting guns is to 1) enforce existing laws, and 2) exercise due diligence in the transfer process. Makes sense to me.

To clarify my faiths in polls I did say non-political polls, and I should have added non media polls. I would never trust a CNN, WAPO, NYT, Fox, ONA polls so I do not even look at them. But the Marist, Quinippiac, Harris, Pew, and the like polls are different in my mind.
 
1942bull said:
Yes, the polls in public opinion (not political opinion) are generally correct when most of those polls report the same basic findings. As for polls on candidate choices I would never trust them. Political opinion is a fluid mix that changes as the ingredients change. Most Americans support 2A but believe that the best way to stop the wrong people from getting guns is to 1) enforce existing laws, and 2) exercise due diligence in the transfer process. Makes sense to me.

To clarify my faiths in polls I did say non-political polls, and I should have added non media polls. I would never trust a CNN, WAPO, NYT, Fox, ONA polls so I do not even look at them. But the Marist, Quinippiac, Harris, Pew, and the like polls are different in my mind.
Click to expand...
The vast vast majority of gun lovers due indeed exercise the utmost responsibility when it comes to selling their guns.

Myself, I have sold some, in times when I really needed the cash, or to a friend I knew and trusted who REALLY wanted a particular gun I had.

Those I have sold, went on a place like gunbroker, and where sent to an FFL to keep everything legal and on the up and up, and also, to be sure, the person buying wasnt a low life pos.

I'm sure all of you do the same things. Always have too I'll bet...and what's more, always will.

That's why no law will ever make things perfect. There will always be that tiny slice of the population that doesnt care to be responsible, they are either rebels, or are looking for a quick buck.

No law, if any kind, or BGC, or gun registration...or any other BS gun control scam, will ever stop a person like that.

Now for polls...I dont trust any of them. NONE. Those same polls you mention...PEW being one of them, Had Hildabeast beating Trump by 12% on election day in Pennsylvania.

Lol...wrong. happened a lot if other places too.

That's your wake up call when it comes to polls....any poll. ALL have a political bias...ALL.
 
During the last election Trump vs Hillary, I was into online betting. You would work it very much like the stock market. You could buy sell shares daily. And of course when it comes to cash, you put your bias and feeling aside. The thing was, the Polls were killing Trump. Stock shares were tumbling. Not only the Presidential betting, but each state and electoral votes. At the end, I had called every state except two. While the betting sounds easy, it took a lot of devotion into playing. You can to keep up with all the public opinions, read crap you do not want to read and worst of all watch CNN. I never forget the day before the Presidential election and I saw this a CNN poll that had Hillary winning by 300 electoral votes. One of their typical mouth pieces spouting off the same crap.
Man, I never forget that day. I laughed so hard I almost fell over. Went and just sunk in every nickel I could come up with.

Thanks CNN. I love man.

aMxwWuz.jpg
 
Ernie Bass said:
During the last election Trump vs Hillary, I was into online betting. You would work it very much like the stock market. You could buy sell shares daily. And of course when it comes to cash, you put your bias and feeling aside. The thing was, the Polls were killing Trump. Stock shares were tumbling. Not only the Presidential betting, but each state and electoral votes. At the end, I had called every state except two. While the betting sounds easy, it took a lot of devotion into playing. You can to keep up with all the public opinions, read crap you do not want to read and worst of all watch CNN. I never forget the day before the Presidential election and I saw this CNN poll.
Man, I never forget that day. I laughed so hard I almost fell over. Went and just sunk in every nickel I could come up with.

Thanks CNN. I love man.

View attachment 931599
Click to expand...
Lol...that's great! Wish I would have done that. I knew, Trump was winning PA. Will again too, you can just feel it in the air, just like in 2016.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

U
  • Locked
Bloomberg is going to be a huge threat when he's done being mayor of NY
2 3 4
Replies
76
Views
4K
GambJoe
G
U
  • Locked
Why isn't there a Pro-2nd Amendment equivalent to Bloomberg?
Replies
8
Views
663
ugaarguy
ugaarguy
A
  • Locked
Anti-gun groups disarray is 2nd Amendment's gain
Replies
10
Views
941
hdwhit
H
O
  • Locked
Levi Strauss getting in bed with Bloomberg
2 3
Replies
58
Views
3K
Larry Ashcraft
Larry Ashcraft
hps1
  • Locked
Levi Strauss Sticking with Gun Control Push Whether Customers Agree or Not
2
Replies
29
Views
1K
Robert
Robert
Back
Top