Uncle Bernie doesnt like guns that can be used to kill people but hunting guns are ok.

Originally Posted By: Stu Farishno, obviously I'm just a [beeep] who doesn't have any idea what action I took in my life.



Funny guy. So you actually remember doing something that doesn't reflect the actual course the law enaction took. Or you sent of a letter that had nothing to do with the law that was being debated. I'm certain you took action, but I'm not sure what it was after. Sounds like you mixed a few years, and a few different laws up. It was almost 30 years ago, so it's understandable.

Talk about rewriting history.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Mr. PoppadopalisOriginally Posted By: Stu Farishno, obviously I'm just a [beeep] who doesn't have any idea what action I took in my life.


Stu = Big Dummy (According to Eugenecanterumremember)


Mr. Poppadopolis, who are you saying can't remember? Reread the thread sir, it will help you, instead of running off at the mouth sir. And please sir, don't ever put words in my mouth like that. I never implied, or stated that. It seems you think that, and tried to be funny by vicariously speaking through me. I don't appreciate that type of behavior sir.
 
Last edited:
I don't get my panties in a bunch over the mulford act of 1967 anymore than i get upset over the gun laws of Illinios or AZ. Each state as part of the Constitution (states rights in the 10th Ammendment) has the right to change the individual laws (as outlined in precident in supreame court decisions) I understand that during the late 60s they were worried about Black panters running around in California threatening violence.
I wouldn't object or think anything about Ferguson, Baltimore, New York, or Detroit doing the same thing today..
So hows that for critical thinking..

Do you seriously have an objections to having to complete a background check with the simple form we fill out today? How is that limiting you rights? How exactly is that taking away 2A rights. (as it is today) If enforced right and followed it should be checking to make sure those the Supreame court has said shouldn't have 2A rights don't buy guns over the counter. If Facebook can tell me the names of all those i went to Highschool with, and find people i know, but am not friends with. Then the Federal Government should be able to fix the background check system to make sure it is operating as it is supposed too.

I am also not going to shed any tears or get worked up because someone can't walk into a store and buy a fully auto assult weapon. If the need for a fully auto weapon comes up, I can tell you that you don't want it.. For one is the challege of just keeping ammo to use in it. They malfunction significantly more than AR-15s, Also if i have that many people to shoot, I should be leaving that area and taking care of my family. If that need does arise, as someone that has been in a few shootouts that lasted more than the typical american 1 minute or less shootouts. I can tell you that there will be no shortage of weapons on the ground. (old joke with troops, lightly used, only dropped once)

Of all of the Presidents since 1930 Reagan was and is the biggest 2A supporter. The other thing is that in his own book, it was talked about how he regrets making a deal with the dems for the amnesty. But, if you look at that deal, they were supposed to impliment and enforce the laws created. That hasn't happened, and not only that, but since that deal each President, including Bush hasn't followed or slow walked imigration law enforcement, just not nearly so blatently as Obama.

Anything else?
 
Rand and Ron Paul are nothing more than seagulls.

They fly in when there is something to feed on, squak and make a ruckas, crap all over, and then fly off without doing any work or when they feel there is nothing left there for them to use. Then it's off to the next thing.

You know.. like Al Sharpton.
 
Wow tbone I thought more of you. I guess as long as your guns haven't been banned you are ok with it. That's fine, we all are individuals. But most gun owners are law abiding. And yes I do have a problem with the background checks. Because it only affects legal buyers. Full auto to me is a choice. That's all its about. Next is 30 round mags because you can reload your 10 round mags while target shooting. And Reagan being the most gun friendly is a sad state of affairs for the republicans. They really are just as bad. See the 60's black panthers carrying guns is like the tea party guys now. What's the difference really? Oh and they were black. And by you saying you wouldn't object to the government banning guns in those cities you mentioned is just plain absurd. You are actually worse than Hillary Clinton on this. I can't even believe you admitted that in public. What other parts of the constitution are you ok with tearing up? Most likely the whole thing. I still can't believe what you wrote
 
Eugene,

Relax and take a deep breath!

Okay, with that said here is my immigration reform policy -
1. Illegal - GTFO!!
2. Criminal Illegal - Federal Prison for a mandatory 5 years
3. Working here and Illegal -GTFO!
4. Any USA Company with Illegals working for them - GTFO!
5. E-Verify must be in place, enforced and all the illegals will self deport unless of course the current administration wants to let them to continue sucking the Government Teat!
6. Illegal - Exit the country on their own dime, come back in the gate legally, get a SSN, finger printed, DNA sample & etc.......
7. Pay into the system for 5 years before you are eligible for any Tax Payer funded entitlements
8. You may not possess a firearm at ANYTIME until you have been here for a minimum of 10 years


Hillary for Prison 2016
 
Sounds like someone got their wheaties pissed in today. IMO Reagan was the best President of the 20th century. Was he perfect, nope. Is anyone on this forum perfect? nope. I happen to agree with you tbone, the background check is a piece of cake. Actually, being a ccw carrier simplifies it even more.
There are people who should not be allowed to have guns of any kind. Can they still buy one illegally, yep, but for heaven sake, let's at least make it more difficult.
 
Originally Posted By: Mr. PoppadopalisEugene,

Relax and take a deep breath!

Okay, with that said here is my immigration reform policy -
1. Illegal - GTFO!!
2. Criminal Illegal - Federal Prison for a mandatory 5 years
3. Working here and Illegal -GTFO!
4. Any USA Company with Illegals working for them - GTFO!
5. E-Verify must be in place, enforced and all the illegals will self deport unless of course the current administration wants to let them to continue sucking the Government Teat!
6. Illegal - Exit the country on their own dime, come back in the gate legally, get a SSN, finger printed, DNA sample & etc.......
7. Pay into the system for 5 years before you are eligible for any Tax Payer funded entitlements
8. You may not possess a firearm at ANYTIME until you have been here for a minimum of 10 years


Hillary for Prison 2016


Here ya go, Popp. Be my guest.
grin.gif


zzzzhill_zpsbqj0kobf.jpg


Regards,
hm
 
I would think by now you guys would realize these keep us safe schemes don't ever work. They inconvienence law abiding folks. If they only stopped criminals then fine. But they don't. And they never follow the intent of the law. They stretch it and end up abusing it. I'm glad you guys trust the politicians, and want to ban guns from only city dwelling people. Can you imagine if Obama came out and said that? And here we have tbone and another guy agreeing with him to ban guns simply by where you live. I would never believe it if I didn't see it. To keep us safe from terrorists they spy on us and limit our rights. To keep us safe from criminals they ban guns from law abiding people. Tbone I didn't realize how much a socialist you were on this issue.
 
Originally Posted By: hm1996Originally Posted By: Mr. PoppadopalisEugene,

Relax and take a deep breath!

Okay, with that said here is my immigration reform policy -
1. Illegal - GTFO!!
2. Criminal Illegal - Federal Prison for a mandatory 5 years
3. Working here and Illegal -GTFO!
4. Any USA Company with Illegals working for them - GTFO!
5. E-Verify must be in place, enforced and all the illegals will self deport unless of course the current administration wants to let them to continue sucking the Government Teat!
6. Illegal - Exit the country on their own dime, come back in the gate legally, get a SSN, finger printed, DNA sample & etc.......
7. Pay into the system for 5 years before you are eligible for any Tax Payer funded entitlements
8. You may not possess a firearm at ANYTIME until you have been here for a minimum of 10 years


Hillary for Prison 2016


Here ya go, Popp. Be my guest.
grin.gif


zzzzhill_zpsbqj0kobf.jpg


Regards,
hm

Thanks HM!

I will have to take a picture of my two bumper stickers...........

They look very similar, 2016 - Hillary for Prison!
 
Tbone I didn't realize how much a socialist you were on this issue.

Love,

Eugene


TBone = Socialist Hahahahahahahahahahahahaaaaa - now that's a good one!



Outlaw guns, and, only Outlaws have guns!

That is why in my 8 or 9 point plan I put in that a minimum 10 years in this country legally & paying into the system along with being Criminal/Felon free before you can POSSESS a firearm........
Key word is POSSESS~~~

Mr P. for President!!!!

Thank you!!

 
I loath the background checks. I see them as a waste of time, money & LEO resources that could be used to combat actual crime.

We don't prosecute prohibited people for attempting to buy guns. It demonstrably does not stop felons & others who shouldn't have guns from getting them. It sometimes does prevent people who are not and should not be prohibited from having guns from buying one, denying them their rights.

No, I don't have anything to hide & I've been through many BG checks. I can still hate the [beeep] things.
 
Originally Posted By: canislatrans54Originally Posted By: azmastablastaSounds like someone got their wheaties pissed in today. IMO Reagan was the best President of the 20th century. Was he perfect, nope. Is anyone on this forum perfect? nope. I happen to agree with you tbone, the background check is a piece of cake. Actually, being a ccw carrier simplifies it even more.
There are people who should not be allowed to have guns of any kind. Can they still buy one illegally, yep, but for heaven sake, let's at least make it more difficult.


Amen!!
cool.gif


IMHO, if anyone has issues with having a background check done on them...then they must have something to hide.
I love the fact that my state of Kansas has at least a semblance of a background check.
smile.gif

'Course, that may be because I have nothing to hide...and 99% of the time that a check has been run on my firearms purchases, the longest I have had to wait for verification, was about 15 minutes.
cool.gif

Only twice have I had to come back the next day or two. and those times were due to some sort of problem @ the government with their computers being crashed.


Nothing to hide huh? Then send me all your passwords to your email addresses. Or why bother with a search warrant. I'm certain a nice guy like you had nothing to hide. If you want to have your background searched that's fine, but don't force everyone else to. And this doesn't do anything to stop crime. I can't believe how everyone is tripping over themselves to agree to more government intrusion. I do suddenly realize why you guys will blindly vote for whoever they throw in front of you though. Some of you guys are ready to go farther than the democrats. Vote for Hillary, she only wants background checks on every gun purchase. Anyone who uses the reason they have nothing to hide is naive to the point of ignorant.
 
Originally Posted By: Mr. PoppadopalisTbone I didn't realize how much a socialist you were on this issue.

Love,

Eugene


TBone = Socialist Hahahahahahahahahahahahaaaaa - now that's a good one!



Outlaw guns, and, only Outlaws have guns!

That is why in my 8 or 9 point plan I put in that a minimum 10 years in this country legally & paying into the system along with being Criminal/Felon free before you can POSSESS a firearm........
Key word is POSSESS~~~

Mr P. for President!!!!

Thank you!!



Can you explain the difference between the avowed socialist Bernie banning handguns, and Tbone banning all guns in the city? Please do explain this to me, I'm stupid and don't see a difference.
 
haha, I can't be goated that easily.
I do support gun rights, states rights, and the strict adhearance to the Constitution, but with that also includes the acknoldegement that each state (and in this case Reagan as Governor) signed laws to deal with the issues of the time. I have no dog in the fight with the laws of other states.. If you don't like the laws of your state, that is the best thing, since it's a smaller group and you can get into meet with them or use the petition process to make changes. Please don't get Constitutional rights for the country and the states rights. This is a lost battle on that issue of the Constitution reigns supreame on 2A.

Originally Posted By: Eugene CanterburyI would think by now you guys would realize these keep us safe schemes don't ever work. They inconvienence law abiding folks. I don't think filling out a form that I affirm that i meet the requirements to buy a gun as a burden. It takes minutes and I am walking out the door as soon as the cash is counted. The forms are not kept with the serial numbers and there is no national database (i bet there is now, but not supposed to be)

If they only stopped criminals then fine. But they don't. And they never follow the intent of the law. (so your not against the form just the way they impliment the form and follow-up on those that are trying and shouldn't own a gun) They stretch it and end up abusing it. I'm glad you guys trust the politicians, and want to ban guns from only city dwelling people. Can you imagine if Obama came out and said that? And here we have tbone and another guy agreeing with him to ban guns simply by where you live(I didn't support banning guns, i do understand cities and states having laws that limit open carry. Ferguson is a good example of why, if i have to explain it, i would be wasting my time) I would never believe it if I didn't see it. To keep us safe from terrorists they spy on us and limit our rights.(getting way off track) To keep us safe from criminals they ban guns from law abiding people. Tbone I didn't realize how much a socialist you were on this issue. I am not sure that it's socialist to support cities and states being able to make their own laws for thier own citizens. States should be allowed as part of the Federalist papers to be able to be small experiments. Supporting the overall dictates of the federal Government is socialism.

Libertarians are interesting but clearly have never had to stop and actually impliment a society. It doesn't work becuase in the let everyone do what they want at any moment isn't a rule of law situation that is repeatable and sustainable. the Very idea that anyone would think that no laws and no restictions is a recipie for disaster. They have that.. most people would call that kind of thing Samolia or Sudan. look how that works out. Yes, having the fewest laws neccessary to prevent anarchy is or should be the goal, but filling out a form that says that i am not bat turd crazy, or a convicted Fellon isn't overly burdonsom, and reasonable in the interest of the saftey of my local community. There is a good reason for it and Reagon never even claimed he was mistake free. At least he admitted mistakes vs. the hypocrit Ron and Rand. Ron was bad about railing about handouts and pork, yet took them in large numbers. His hypocrisy drips like the clap.
Final note.. It's patently obsurd to compare the Tea Party of the past 6 years, which is full of Senior citizens by demographic, with the 60's black panthers which were nutiriosly violent. I would buy this comparision if you could find one case of tea party people committing police station bombings and any other violent crimes that were attributed to the Black Panters. To which they were so bad, and militant, that they had to rebrand it after cleaning house to the "New black panthers"

Look, i get that you sling mud to provoke thought and questions the status quo, but don't get irratic because someone points out the idiocy of libertarianism.
 
Originally Posted By: azmastablastaIMO Reagan was the best President of the 20th century. Was he perfect, nope. Is anyone on this forum perfect? nope. I happen to agree with you tbone, the background check is a piece of cake. Actually, being a ccw carrier simplifies it even more.
There are people who should not be allowed to have guns of any kind. Can they still buy one illegally, yep, but for heaven sake, let's at least make it more difficult.

+1 I can't remember his exact words, and cannot locate an exact quote, but from memory, RR, while still confined to hospital after the attempt on his life, was asked by a reporter if he felt the need for more gun control and his reply was essentially, "No". Not what the reporter had hoped for.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/16/erich-pratt-gun-owners-of-america_n_2488903.html



Quote:
Gun Rights Under President Ronald Reagan

A Pro-Second Amendment President Who Supported Gun Control Measures

President Ronald Reagan will forever be remembered fondly by Second Amendment supporters, many of who are among the American conservatives who consider Reagan a poster child of modern conservatism. But words and actions of Reagan, the 40th President of the United States, left behind a mixed record on gun rights.

His presidential administration did not bring about any new gun control laws of significance.

However, in his post-presidency, Reagan cast his support to a pair of critical gun control measures in the 1990s: 1993’s Brady Bill and 1994’s Assault Weapons Ban.

Reagan: The Pro Gun Candidate

Ronald Reagan entered the 1980 presidential campaign as a known supporter of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. While gun rights wouldn’t be a primary issue in presidential politics for another decade, the issue was being pushed to the forefront of the American political scene by those, as Reagan wrote in a 1975 issue of Guns & Ammo magazine, “who say that gun control is an idea whose time has come.” The Gun Control Act of 1968 was still a relatively fresh issue, and U.S. Attorney General Edward H. Levi had proposed outlawing guns in areas with high crime rates.

In his Guns & Ammo column, Reagan left little doubt about his stance on the Second Amendment, writing: “In my opinion, proposals to outlaw or confiscate guns are simply unrealistic panacea.”

Reagan’s stance was that violent crime would never be eliminated, with or without gun control.

Instead, he said, efforts to curb crime should target those who misuse guns, similarly to the way laws target those who use an automobile feloniously or recklessly. Saying the Second Amendment “leaves little, if any, leeway for the gun control advocate,” he added that “the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms must not be infringed if liberty in America is to survive.”

Firearm Owners Protection Act

The lone piece of significant legislation related to gun rights during the Reagan administration was the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986. Signed into law by Reagan on May 19, 1986, the legislation amended the Gun Control Act of 1968 by repealing parts of the original act that were deemed by studies to be unconstitutional.

The National Rifle Association and other pro gun groups lobbied for passage of the legislation, and it was generally considered favorable for gun owners. Among other things, the act made it easier to transport long rifles across the United States, ended federal records-keeping on ammunition sales and prohibited the prosecution of someone passing through areas with strict gun control with firearms in their vehicle, so long as the gun were properly stored.

However, the act also contained a provision banning the ownership of any fully automatic firearms not registered by May 19, 1986. That provision was slipped into the legislation as an 11th hour amendment by Rep. William J. Hughes, a New Jersey Democrat. Reagan has been criticized by some gun owners for signing legislation containing the Hughes amendment.

Post-Presidency Gun Views

Before Reagan left office in January 1989, efforts were afoot in Congress to pass legislation creating a national background check and mandatory waiting period for handgun purchases. The Brady Bill, as the legislation was named, had the backing of Sarah Brady, the wife of former Reagan press secretary Jim Brady, who was wounded in a 1981 assassination attempt on the president.

The Brady Bill initially struggled for support in Congress, but was gaining ground by the latter days of Reagan’s predecessor, President George H.W. Bush. In a 1991 op-ed for the New York Times, Reagan voiced his support for the Brady Bill, saying the 1981 assassination attempt might have never happened if the Brady Bill had been law.

Citing statistics suggesting 9,200 murders are committed each year in the United States using handguns, Reagan said, “This level of violence must be stopped. Sarah and Jim Brady are working hard to do that, and I say more power to them.” It was a 180 degree turn from Reagan’s 1975 piece in Guns & Ammo magazine, when he said that gun control is pointless because murder cannot be prevented.

Three years later, Congress had passed the Brady Bill and was working on another piece of gun control legislation, a ban on assault weapons. Reagan joined former Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter in a letter published in the Boston Globe that called on Congress to pass a ban on assault weapons. Later, in a letter to Rep. Scott Klug, a Wisconsin Republican, Reagan said the limitations proposed by the Assault Weapon Ban “are absolutely necessary” and that it “must be passed.” Klug voted in favor of the ban.

End Result of Reagan Presidency on Gun Rights

The Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986 will be remembered as an important piece of legislation for gun rights. However, Reagan also cast his support behind the two most controversial pieces of gun control legislation of the past 30 years. His support of the Assault Weapons Ban in 1994 may have directly led to the ban winning the approval of Congress. Congress passed the ban by a vote of 216-214. In addition to Klug voting for the ban after Reagan’s last minute plea, Rep. Dick Swett, D-N.H., also credited Reagan’s support of the bill for helping him decide to cast a favorable vote.

A more lasting impact of Reagan’s policy on guns was the nomination of several Supreme Court justices. Of the four justices nominated by Reagan — Sandra Day O’Connor, William Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia and Anthony Kennedy — the latter two were still on the bench for a pair of important Supreme Court rulings on gun rights in the 2000s: District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008 and McDonald v. Chicago in 2010. Both sided with a narrow, 4-3 majority in striking down gun bans in Washington D.C. and Chicago while ruling that the Second Amendment applies to individuals and the states.

http://civilliberty.about.com/od/guncontrol/a/Gun-Rights-Ronald-Reagan.htm

Regards,
hm

 
Eugene,
I think most members here are all for some form of Gun background check, not an anal cavity search and a first born! We want less Government intrusion. Not $10.00 per background check! That's why we pay taxes, every time a politician comes out with a new law they assign a fee! We pay fees all day everyday! Our hard earned tax dollars are now paying for 20+ million illegals.

I was born here, have a valid DL, a CCW, a Passport, a job, a residence etc........I don't want to be treated like a criminal during a background check. Mohammed should!

I guess it is like the Airport TSA - An 80 year old white haired woman on Oxygen, a walker and or walking cane gets treated just like Mr. Abdullah Mohammed Raghead Bomber


As Donald Trump has said - THE PC bull Crap needs to end, not everybody finishes first and gets a Blue Ribbon!
 
Back
Top