Guns WILL be banned, and banned soon.

[chris in va]

Guys, it's not the GUNS we really need to worry so much about, it's the AMMO they're going after. Nothing in the Bill of Rights to protect it.

Here's my prediction. Wolf will be banned, so all these 'evil' AK's running amok will not have anything to shoot after a while except American stuff...which of course BG's won't mind since they just need a couple boxes.

WWB? Limited to 20 rounds per person. $1 per round of course, and reloading will be illegal.

In the end, it's lawful gun owners that get the shaft.

 

[AStone]

Learning how to reload increasingly sounds like a good skill.

 

[wideym]

I agree that indoctrination in schools has been going since I was in school. From grade school to college teachers have always preached that guns are bad, republicans are bad, corporations are bad, and peace and love will save the world. I was poorly prepared for the real world when I graduated HS. Yes my mother was one of those people who relied on public education to raise me, she was a single mother with three kids and a job as a hairdresser, who made alot of bad decisions in her life. If it was not for the fact I joined the Army, I would probably be your average unempolyed, blame everyone, scumbag. My teachers put many high ideals in my head that looked great on paper or in disscution, but had no place in getting by in the real world.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Guns WILL be banned, and banned soon.

Ever wonder why Chicken Little thought the sky was falling when everyone else didn't?

Ever wonder why folks think bans on coming soon when more states and university are considering allowing concealed carry for school campuses than ever before?

 

[lanternlad1]

"The absolute worst case scenario is Hillary Clinton, who will with one fell swoop in aobut one years time destroy everything our country stands for, and she has a damn good chance of making it into office."

I tend to disagree there. I think if Hillary gets in, she'll be watched like a hawk since everyone already knows how she plays the game. I think Obama is the bigger problem. A former Constitutional Law professor, he knows the rules, and how to break them. Also, he's new on the scene, and no one really knows what he'll do. He'll get a lot more passes and people willing to look the other way because they like him. He's much more calm under pressure, Hillary is already starting to crack.

I think he'll take Ted Kennedy as his V.P., since Teddy has so much more experience in the political scene (and Hillary hates his guts). After all, why did Kennedy endorse him, when everyone was sure that Ted would endorse Hillary? (Even Hillary's camp was devastated by this.)

And then, he will be assassinated (by Teddy or Teddy's people), and Teddy will be president. Just like Teddy always wanted.

Then we'll have REAL problems on our hands.

...The crystal ball has gone cloudy...

 

[Marlin 45 carbine]

this is all the more reason to pay attention to Governor races as well as State Reps. in NC hunting is BIG$$$ bizz. youi may be right about 'evil assault rifles and hi-cap mag guns' but shottys and hunting rifles no way. ammo restrictions/tracking maybe. just IMO.

 

[cmidkiff]

From 1986 to now the right to carry has been steadily advancing.
1) 48 states now issue concealed weapon permits and 39 of them operate as "shall issue".
2) NO state that has gone to “Shall Issue” has reversed it’s decision.
3) 24 States permit some form of “open carry” and right now only about 13 require any sort of permit to do so.
4) Reciprocity between states has been increasing as the rules and regulations move towards a standard.
5) Several States have begun to remove restrictive legislation and some that were recently passed may fail as “unenforceable”.

Speak it, brother

You could add that an extremely well written legal opinion on the 2nd amendment being an individual right is currently before the supremes, and is likely to be upheld... and that Castle Doctrine laws are sweeping the nation... and that the AWB was allowed to sunset... and that we are likely to be able to carry in national parks soon... that there are several states considering legal CCW at colleges... that the BATFE has been chastised by congress, more than once, for their draconian methods... and that Missouri got rid of it's ancient jim-crow 'Permit to Acquire' law (very important to me, anyway)...

The fight is far from over... it may never be over... but things are getting better! KEEP FIGHTING! You don't throw in the towel and accept defeat when you have your opponent on the ropes!:banghead:

As for the school system: I have taught my 4 daughters to value and exercise their 2nd amendment rights. They have the facts behind them, and they're not shy about arguing their position on the issue. They know that I will back them up if they are ever discriminated against because of their views. Know the rules at your school and obey them, but I've not seen a school system yet that has made policies against sharing a fun experience at the range with your fellow students! I have no doubt that they are getting their share of anti-gun bigotry... and that they are objecting to it each and every time they hear it.

 

[LawBot5000]

I think Hillary is generally careful about spending her political capital and isn't going to back gun owners into a corner, especially if she is already meeting strong resistance over her other plans. She is already disliked by many people, so I don't think she would receive much slack. She might actually do a decent job if she gets hounded enough due to caring about her legacy. I fully expect sleazy tactics from her against gun owners, but I don't think she will do anything particularly bold- she will spent the interest, not the capital.

Part of me wonders about Obama. I personally suspect he will push very hard from day one, riding his charisma as far as it will take him. And I fully expect the media to play along and eat out of his hand like they do now. I would be surprised, but I think it is plausible that Obama could push hard enough that we start having violent backlashes or armed resistance against enforcement actions. It really depends upon what he succeeds in doing to us.

Of course, his charisma might fizzle or he might drastically overshoot in the first year of his presidency. That could have an effect that ranges anywhere from a lame duck presidency or a 94 style catastrophe in Congress. If Obama pushes too hard and creates a lot of outrage (over any number of issues), you could see a besieged Obama surrounded by a hostile republican congress in 2010.

 

[jimbob86]

this is all the more reason to pay attention to Governor races as well as State Reps. in NC hunting is BIG$$$ bizz. youi may be right about 'evil assault rifles and hi-cap mag guns' but shottys and hunting rifles no way. ammo restrictions/tracking maybe. just IMO.

Need I remind everyone that is precisely how it played out in England (and everywhere else!): Divide and Conquer. "We only want to ban thase military style semi-auto rifles. Your hunting rifles are OK." Then when that ban is a done deal, they ban something else, while reassuring all the other gun owners that they are only after these few types of gun. And an inch at a time, the gun owning community is worn down to the point where it is not politically strong enough to defend itself. At that point, the debate has moved past guns. In today's England, only criminals carry guns (and use them!) and the debate is about the registration of kitchen of KITCHEN KNIVES!

 

[Caimlas]

Everyone here who's saying "it couldn't happen, isn't going to happen" are thinking short term. Very short term.

Who is in power right now? That is, which generation of people is it that has elected the politicians into power, and of which generation are those politicians? As near as I can tell, it is primarily the 30-50 age bracket, because prior to this election, the number of young people who vote have been minimal.

That's changing, though, and has been changing for the last 2 years, as near as I can tell (starting with the 2006 election). A lot of previously politically inactive 20-somethings, as well as a number of people who became eligible for the vote in the last 3-4 years actually are voting, and apparently, something like 80% of them vote Democrat.

Chalk that up to simply their age if you want, but I find it hard to believe that, over the course of the next (say) 10-15 years that 30% o fthe populace will drastically change their world outlook. No, once people pass their formative years, their world outlook is mostly the same throughout their life, with minimal modification. Yes, changes can be made - and will be made - due to things like military service (for the few who go that route) and parenthood (which will likely come in about 10 years, if at all). But those changes will be minimal: first beliefs, as formed during their infancy in public schools, will remain the metric of assessment for their decisions.

It won't just boil down to who's in charge of the Presidency. It'll be: who's on the city council; who's running state government; who's running federal agencies? The people who make up the largest component of the so-called Republican party today are older. They're in their 40s, 50s, 60s, or older and, unfortunately, do not appear to have passed on their values to the Gen-Xers and younger. After the cultural divide of the 1980s, it seems as if the Conservative elements of our society decided to stop institutionalized generational indoctrination, or at least handed over the reigns of the culture to the hippy/socialist element. As a result, each subsequent year that goes by results in fewer and fewer children who adhere to traditional values, because parents aren't raising their children anymore - the state is, in public schools.

 

[armed85]

Most of the young people I meet in the 20-something age bracket play video games which feature a lot of guns. A lot of these video games are pretty realistic and have actual rifles and handguns with correct markings, names, etc.

The United States Army even tried to capitalize on the video game market with their own recruiting video game.

Unfortunately what triggers new gun control is most often a "shooting" of somesort. A mass murder of people at a bank, public school, university, etc. You can even see it in the media, people are growing tired of the same old solutions to these shootings.

A lot of states are considering allowing CCW in schools now that people's attitudes have changed post Virginia Tech.

 

[ZeSpectre]

A lot of states are considering allowing CCW in schools now that people's attitudes have changed post Virginia Tech.

Speaking for just one local area, it has amazed me how many years of anti-gun social programming I've seen undone in the brief time since Va Tech. Of course a lot of that programming depended on folks believing the nanny state's "You don't need that, we'll keep you safe" line.

A "million mom marcher" was talking to a young lady (say about 21ish) at the recent "lobby day" in Richmond (the young lady was just a bystander and not part of any group as far as I could tell) and the MMMer was pontificating to the young lady about the horror of that day and how guns must be banned because only the police had the right to protect us and this young lady looked at the MMMer like she was insane and said something to the effect of "Lady I was THERE! We waited and hid and I didn't see a cop ANYWHERE! If anything like that happens again I'M GOING TO TAKE CARE OF MYSELF!"

 

[IllHunter]

I can't let it go...

Act like an idiotic gun-grabber. Fit in. Conform.

Suonds like retreat to me

 

[Wineoceros]

Guys, it's not the GUNS we really need to worry so much about, it's the AMMO they're going after. Nothing in the Bill of Rights to protect it.

Of course there is. Banning ammunition for the arms we have a right to keep and bear is a de facto infringement of that right...unless you think the courts are pedantic (or stupid) enough to conclude the 2A only guarantees the right to keep and bear useless hardware.

 

[ctdonath]

My niece won't even say "gun" because someone (she won't say who) taught her it's a "bad word".

 

[sherman123]

everything green?

if by "liking anything green" that has anything to do with protecting the environment i dont see what that has to do with wanting to ban all guns. same goes with hating wal mart and liking pot. theres no clear cut description on can give of an overly liberal gun ahting hippie because its near impossible to meet someone who exaclty matches that descprioton view4 view. that would just be stereotyping. although i as of alotta ppl here prolly choose to stay away from it, i guarantee you theres obviously plenty of responsible and safe gun owners out there who smoke pot, hate wal mart and have a problem with destroying the environment we have to live in. (there are a few billion ppl in the world after all)-the point is that we cant label these people because we really dont know who is or who sint a radical gun ahting hippie we just have to make it known we wont tolerate teachers pumping this bull into impressionable young minds before they get old enough to make the educated decision that guns are not in fact evil like theyve been lied to about.

 

[Patrick_Henry]

I believe my generation is being misinterpreted as brainwashed and liberal. Yes, in schools and other areas the liberals are cramming their ideas down our throats just as fast as they can, but they have over looked something. We are a generation that grew up in political turmoils and school shootings. We've seen the government and others fail to take care of us in every way they possibly could. Many of us may be more socialist than others, but we know one thing. We have to take care of ourselves, cause no one else ever has, and because of that we know we have to protect ourselves, which is why I have very liberal friends who will never let the 2 A die. What we may see instead is the Democratic party forced to give up it's anti gun stance to reach it's other ends if it wants to survive at the hands of its newest supporters.

For the record though, I myself am a conservative.

 

[Patrick_Henry]

And if it encourages you, Concealed Carry Campus's Facebook group has more than 18,000 members. While those may not all be college students. Consider that it means that we are not all anti-gun in face we are fighting for our rights to. And it shows in the recent wave of legislative move to allow CCW on campuses.

 

[goon]

It may be a regional thing.
I've had some classes with some pretty liberal professors, some of them being education classes back when I was dumb enough to think I could be a teacher.
We got on to a lot of discussions about various political, cultural, and social issues.
Guns never came up as a problem other than when the threat of a kid bringing a gun to school was brought up.
Even then, in a class with a pretty liberal professor, she still didn't blame the gun.

Some may disagree, but in my opinion being on the "left" doesn't necessarily make you bad, wrong, stupid, or anti-gun.
I actually think that in some cases they are "better" than the right and I'd probably be a Democrat if it weren't for guns and abortion.

The problem with youth isn't guns or "education" as much as it's youth.
Point blank, my generation is soft. Most of us have never had something to harden us up and the current crop of college kids I see are probably worse than "we" were.
And I'm only 10 years older than most of them.
That's the problem and it won't get fixed until something goes drastically wrong. Then they'll have to turn around and pay attention if they want to live.

 

[Colt]

I do not know about you, but no child of mine will ever set foot inside a school, nor attend college, nor will they be raised by a TV.

If you want to know who dropped the ball, if any of us wants to know who dropped the ball, look in the mirror...

If you want to know who is going to have to pick up the ball, again, look in the mirror...

So how does running away from the education system constitute "picking up the ball again?"

The only parents I loathe more than those who complain that the schools are raising their children are those who surrender their tax dollars to the schools and run away scared.

"Picking up the ball" means fighting to change the system. You do it one teacher, one board member, and one state congressman at a time.

 

[MakAttak]

So how does running away from the education system constitute "picking up the ball again?"

The only parents I loathe more than those who complain that the schools are raising their children are those who surrender their tax dollars to the schools and run away scared.

"Picking up the ball" means fighting to change the system. You do it one teacher, one board member, and one state congressman at a time.

I will fight the public school system.

I will work to abolish the horrible situation that allows teachers to indoctrinate as they feel and sucks money from those who are not being served.

However, when I have children THEY WILL NEVER SET FOOT IN A PUBLIC SCHOOL (i mean to be shouting).

I love my country, and I will give my own life for it. I WILL NOT SACRIFICE MY CHILDREN AT THE ALTAR OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS. I say that again, I will not sacrifice my children in order to bring about some MINOR change to the school system.

If you think it's worth subjecting your children to a substandard, hostile environment, that's fine.

I'd prefer to make sure my children are raised properly so that they may continue the fight, rather than subject them to a hostile environment before their minds are fully formed and capable of defending themselves.

But, they are your children to sacrifice.

 

[Wineoceros]

When you give them your kids to brainwash (send them to school, expose them to their lies via TV, etc) do not complain when you wind up with brainwashed kids...

I do not know about you, but no child of mine will ever set foot inside a school, nor attend college, nor will they be raised by a TV.

You're right. The best way to prepare your kids to deal with the world at large is to hide it from them as much as possible. The last thing you want is for them to be contaminated by exposure to ways of thinking that are not yours, as well as information that you are not spoon-feeding them yourself. That sort of thing can only lead to open-mindedness and...*gasp*...intellectual curiosity. Not in YOUR house, by God.

We failed...

What you mean "we", white man?

...and it is on us to set things right again... Either we can groan, moan, and complain about how miserable things are, or we can do something meaningful to try to change it, or prepare for the time when we can change it.

And how exactly is refusing to allow your kids to go to school a means to change anything?

My kids have attended public schools from K-12 (well, my son is in 10th grade, but will be going the full distance at the same high school), and my daughter is now attending a local college on a full 4-year scholorship. And you know what? Neither of them has been "brainwashed" by their teachers (even though they've had some real loonies) nor anyone else in the process. How can that be? Probably because we didn't send them to school and then simply abdicate all parental responsibility for their education and other mental development. We still provide them with their primary instruction on values (morality, et al) and give them heavy guidance in the areas of reasoning, evaluating what's being taught to them by others, etc. In this way the've been able to profit from the experience and knowledge of serious teachers who have expertise that we lack, as well as exposure to differing points of view, while not being susceptible to "brainwashing" by those who are less prone to teach, and more towards indoctrination into whatever their pet nonsense is.

Your kids have to deal with the outside world eventually. What do you think shielding them from it in the interim is doing for (or rather, to) them? Good luck to them when it comes time for them to get a job and they find themselves competing with formally educated kids from Europe, India, China...

 

[MakAttak]

Your kids have to deal with the outside world eventually. What do you think shielding them from it in the interim is doing for (or rather, to) them? Good luck to them when it comes time for them to get a job and they find themselves competing with formally educated kids from Europe, India, China...

You're right, sheilding people from reality in order to train them to prepare them for it is foolish.

This is why we take people out of the army recruiting office and send them straight to IRAQ, right?

 

[Wineoceros]

You're right, sheilding people from reality in order to train them to prepare them for it is foolish.

This is why we take people out of the army recruiting office and send them straight to IRAQ, right?

That analogy is asinine on so many levels one scarcely knows where to begin.

 

[Justin]

I see it's time for the weekly "Woe is me! They wants ma guns!" thread.