American Gun Owners to be Fingerprinted and Registered: Feinstein Announces Nightmare

[bigscoop]

It can be prevented and addressed. The proposed new regulations are an attack on the 2nd Amendment, it is like saying well they have repealed free speech in the 1st amendment guess we can't do anything now.....

There were less than 9,000 deaths in 2011 by guns, why are they addressing that and not the 500,000 deaths related to tobacco? There were over 3 times as many people killed in car accidents than by guns but they are not addressing that issue, there were over 10 times as many alcohol related deaths but they are not adressing thoses issues, only trying to take our rights away guaranteed in the Bill of Rights..........

As citizens we have the right, the duty and the obligation to resist attacks on our Bill of Rights, good men and women laid their lives down on the battlefields to give us those rights, are we suppose to just sit by and say "oh well nothing we can do".....

There are several possibilities facing this country in the coming years including god forbid, armed conflict to address it, before something that drastic happens we have another strong option, the option of "petition for redress" as written in the 1st admendment in the Bill of Rights......

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."


The best way to do a petition for redress is to withhold taxes...... Imagine what would happen if the 80+ million gun owners in this country just failed to file taxes this next year as a protest........

I have already written both of my Senators and Congressional rep on the new "proposed" gun laws and made it very clear that it is a direct attack on our rights in the Bill of Rights and they had better understand there are millions of us that feel this way........

If we allow them to gut the 2ND amendment, which amendment is next, which freedom are you willing to give up next time? Remember it is always easier and more tempting to do something a 2nd time if you have already gotten away with it once.... Next time is it our freedom of speech, religion, the right to a trail, quartering troops in our homes that your willing to surrender.... I know what my choice is... NONE!

I said, "I think, "they think"....in my reply I mentioned absolutely nothing in regards to taking away any rights, only that "they" possibly "think" it may present a better means of keeping track of that right and making that right a more harshly enforced responsibility. I also said I didn't believe these type of actions can be stopped now. Not sure, exactly, what fueled the direction of your reply?

And if I'm not mistaken, over the years, many new laws have been created to further protect the public from the effects of smoking and alcohol use. So those probably aren't very good points of argument.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[packerbacker]

Oh, I totally agree scoop; gun owners need to keep their weapons locked up. I mean in gun safes, not closets. If you can't afford a gun safe or you don't have enough guns to warrant purchase of a safe, find another way to lock them up. Don't give access to your mental-case offspring. Don't give access to your friends. Make it very difficult for thieves. A little common sense goes a long way. I would venture to guess that most drive-by shootings are not committed by a registered gun owner and his gun, it's a thief and a stolen gun. I also have to state that I believe there are a lot of shootings by gun owners that shouldn't have taken place. These are crimes against spouses for various reasons or other family members having arguments that are usually escalated by drugs and/or alcohol. Thing is, additional laws won't help in most cases. I know a guy that went to jail for felony spousal abuse. He isn't supposed to have guns in his household at all, and yet, he has guns everywhere. More than once I've seen him open his pickup door and ammo roll out onto the ground. He has beer for breakfast and smokes dope on a daily basis. He's also involved in the "legal" growing of dope to help the unfortunate with their severe health problems. Almost anytime he gets behind the wheel, he's drunk. Something bad will eventually happen someday and there isn't anything you can do. If he were to get busted for something now, he would continue doing it as soon as he got out. No "new" law will change that. Maybe enforcing the ones we already have would help. They say, if you are raising a child and you are punishing him/her to teach them right from wrong, you have to carry out the entire punishment for them to learn. You can't ground a kid for a week and then let them go out the next evening. Now you got me ranting.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

It was your "I don't think it can be prevented now." comment that I replied to scoop....I was not attacking or insinuating you were, only replying to that line of thought in general....

Sorry if it came off as post was directed to you specifically, it wasn't, only to the "don't think it can't be prevented" thought........

 

[bigscoop]

My point was simply that lawmakers know they can't take away the right to own arms, however, they are also very aware that there is nothing to prevent them from building a very high and thick legal wall around that right. This is the sense of things as I am following it. And due to recent events and the enormous amount of pressure that is being applied to them, I don't think the progressive building of this wall can be prevented now.

One thing i have also been curious about in regards to all this talk of new laws and requirements is the quit interest that may also stand to profit handsomely from it. i.e., once it is known that you possess those arms, will the insurance companies try to take advantage of it? You can bet that big money interest are looking into these things and they will be involved in all of this somewhere down the road. So I don't think it's just the obvious pressures that are going to come into play. "Liability" coverage comes to mind right away.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Insurance company alreadys about my guns, they are insured.

 

[dieselram94]

The only thing (as has been already stated) more legislation will do is chip away at the second amendment. We have plenty of laws now. This is a VERY SLIPPERY SLOPE we are going down, more laws must be stopped. They don't even address the real issue of policies of the last 30 years or so that has done nothing but create nut jobs that do these kinds of things. I simply don't understand Americans willingly giving up and/or letting any of our rights get compromised.......many soldiers died to ensure we have these rights and pass them on to future generations. Giving them up is a completely dishonorable thing to do. I am sure most of them would roll over in their graves if we let our guns or any other rights go. Maybe so many Americans support these actions because they feel the need to be controlled by a nanny state......foolish! I can speak for myself, I am very confident in my ability to think, protect, decide what to eat, and even OWN a gun. If some one else has doubts on their own ability to own a gun they can choose not to. Fine by me, just don't expect me or many millions of others to go along with loosing our rights......that leads me to another problem this country has. This problem is the one of the busy bodies, you all know the ones I am talking about. The people that drive around looking to report anybody for anything, they get a thrill up their leg at just the thought of dictating what someone else can do. Most of these people support more rules, giving their support to new restrictive laws makes them feel important.

 

[bigscoop]

Insurance company alreadys about my guns, they are insured.

True, and today it's common, no big deal. But "I" don't think it will remain that way. I'm guessing big money bean counters are already looking at all the possibilities and they're busy trying to figure out how to capitalize on the situation. There are billions of dollars to be made from gun owners, billions more to be created for city, state, and federal coffers. Once these two forces start meeting in those back rooms "I" believe we'll start seeing that strategic wall being built. In other words, sure, we can own your firearms, but we will be required to meet "newly designed" standards and we will also pay for the privilege of ownership, and, we are going to start being held more accountable for the "secondary effects" of that privilege. Sound familiar? It should. But I'm just guessing where it's all eventually heading. My feeling is; Huge issues like this are not going to be ignored by big money, influential opportunist.

 

[bigscoop]

TH...was a safe a requirement before they would insure your guns? Did the safe effect the premium at all?

 

[Sackett]

Again is cocaine illegal? How many lawabidding people possess cocaine? How long does it take a criminal to get cocaine? as a retired police officer it don't take long!!!!All that these nuts want is to TAKE GUNS AWAY FROM THE CITIZENS of the USA!! Now we have to ask why? Simple so they can control us....Yes I will be either dead or a criminal before they get my guns, but still an Honorable American as viewed by my Forefathers who founded this Country!!!! Haharr!!!!!

 

[swiftfan]

Unfortunately for us the fourth amendment is also on the chopping block... The senate voted today to extend for five years the right for the government to monitor our communications without a warrant. This also shows who voted for it, and against it. Remember them in the next election...

H.R. 5949: FISA Amendments Act Reauthorization Act of 2012 (On Passage of the Bill) -- GovTrack.us

 

[Rebel - KGC]

My point was simply that lawmakers know they can't take away the right to own arms, however, they are also very aware that there is nothing to prevent them from building a very high and thick legal wall around that right. This is the sense of things as I am following it. And due to recent events and the enormous amount of pressure that is being applied to them, I don't think the progressive building of this wall can be prevented now.

One thing i have also been curious about in regards to all this talk of new laws and requirements is the quit interest that may also stand to profit handsomely from it. i.e., once it is known that you possess those arms, will the insurance companies try to take advantage of it? You can bet that big money interest are looking into these things and they will be involved in all of this somewhere down the road. So I don't think it's just the obvious pressures that are going to come into play. "Liability" coverage comes to mind right away.

Have to agree with "Scoop"... townhouse communities we have lived in, already have by-laws against guns; SOMEONE will benefit ($$$$$$$$$) from the "liabilities" of gun-ownership...

 

[Dano Sverige]

I don't call it "gung-ho from my dead fingers BS" it is a way of LIFE!!! it is why we fought the British not once, but twice for these "ways of life"

Hmm well, the 2nd time was definately fought for the American "way of life" concerning attacking and (trying to) occupy a country that never did you any harm, and the right to slaughter your native indians for your "expansionism"....I can't argue with that one!

 

[releventchair]

Yep ,made possible by guns ,preserved by guns. If you don,t like it just do what your told. others are very willing to tell you how to live. for there own good. Go ahead and accept the blame for others actions. utopia and Valhalla await.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

Dano you must have poor schools there, you left off the part about England kidnapping American citizens on the high seas.

If you want to talk about slaughter let's talk about your viking raids on innocent villages, the rape and murder of innocent people...

 

[civil_war22]

Treasure hunter you sure are right

 

[releventchair]

Or more recently when the price of butter sky rocketed and the lower caste had to (gasp) eat margarine secure in their knowledge their leaders would not have to stoop so low. may have missed it but did not hear any tales of sharing.

 

[Red James Cash]

Just about every school doesnt tell the truth about the war of 1812.The primary reason was land.The British wanted a Native American buffer zone between Canada and the U.S.The U.S. wanted to push the Native Americans from that buffer zone.The U.S. fought 5 of the 7 major land battles of the war of 1812 primarily against Native Americans.Madison used Britians refusal to respect american ships and seamen as a pretext.In return for the U.S. leaving canada alone Great Britan gave up its Native American alliances in the U.S.

 

[Dano Sverige]

Not poor schools TH, just a lack of inclination to educate someone who can get full details very easily.
Being an Englishman i'd have been on the raped and murdered side of those fights. I don't have any vikings mate!
Besides,most invading armies are guilty of rape and murder of innocents. It's apparently "just part of war". Your very own My Lai massacre being one (well documentized and published) example.

 

[Gunny71]

Please pardon my ignorance on this subject, but I don't see what the big deal is with thumb hole stocks. I have used several of these since I was 13, and they were all over priced small bore single shot target rifles. Also, I have no idea what a bullet button is. Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance,
Bill

Lots of so called "evil" guns, guns that would normally not meet the requirements of the last weapons ban were imported with a thumb hole stock attached. AKM,Fal and other rifles that were normally included in the ban could be legally imported and sold with a thumb hole stock attached. Closing a loophole in the last ban.

I won't stand for it, time for Texas to leave this liberal diseased union and strike out on their own.
Or time for me to leave.

 

[Gunny71]

Requiring all firearms to be "locked up" defeats the purpose of some firearms. I have no children at home anymore and keep my house locked. There is a pistol in the top drawer of the night stand by my bed. Its reason for being there should be self explanatory. If someone breaks in in the middle of the night, what am I supposed to do? Being readily able to defend myself is a right.
Locking my gun up, or taking it away and forcing me to depend on the police is a violation of my right to protect myself and my family. Police are always on the scene After the crime has been committed.
Taking away my right to defend my life and property makes me something I refuse to be....A VICTIM.