r u ready to give them up..

nightwatchman

New member
well basically every gun i own will be illegal if this ban goes in again.. this is part of the ban that was with the clinton ban incase you guys were wondering what all it had in it .. this was part of the proposals... and obama wants to make it more extreme than this..


this was just the 5year plan..


THE FIVE YEAR PLAN:

1. National Licensing of all handgun purchases.

2. Licenses for Rifle and Shotgun owners.

3. State Licenses for ownership of firearms.

4. Arsenal Licenses (5 guns and 250 rounds of ammunition).

5. Arsenal License Fees (at least $300.00, with a cap of $1,000.00).

6. Limits on Arsenal Licensing (None in counties with populations of more than 200,000).

7. Requirement of Federally Approved Storage Safes for all guns.

8. Inspection License. (Gun safe licenses, yearly fee for spot inspections).

9. Ban on Manufacturing in counties with a population of more than 200,000.

10. Banning all military style firearms.

11. Banning Machine Gun Parts or parts which can be used in a Machine gun.

12. Banning the carrying a firearm anywhere but home or target range or in transit from one to the other.

13. Banning replacement parts (manufacturing, sale, possession, transfer, installation) except barrel, trigger group.

14. Elimination of the Curio Relic list.

15. Control of Ammunition belonging to Certain Surplus Firearms. (7.62×54R and .303).

16. Eventual Ban of Handgun Possession.

17. Banning of Any ammo that fits military guns (post 1945).

18. Banning of any quantity of smokeless powder or black powder which would constitute more than the equivalent of 100 rounds of ammunition.

19. Ban the possession of explosive powders of more than 1 kg. at any one time.

20. Banning of High Powered Ammo or Wounding ammo.

21. A National License for Ammunition.

22. Banning or strict licensing of all re-loading components.

23. National Registration of ammunition or ammo buyers.

24. Requirements of special storage safe for ammunition and licensing.

25. Restricting Gun Ranges to counties with populations less than 200,000.

26. Special Licensing of ranges.

27. Special Range Tax to visitors. ($85.00 per visit per person).

28. Waiting period for rentals on pistol ranges.

29. Banning Gun Shows.

30. Banning of military reenactments.

PLUS:

Ban of all clips holding over 6 bullets.

Elimination of the Dept. of Civilian Marksmanship.

Ban on all realistic replica and toy guns (including “air soft” and paintball).

The right of gun-violence victims to sue, with financial assistance from government programs, the gun manufacturers.

Taxes on ammo, dealers, guns, licenses to offset medical costs to society.

The eventual ban on all semi-automatics regardless of when made or caliber.
 
Last edited:
WHAT!!?? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/angry-smiley-055.gif

Has Obama actually, officially signed on to this stuff??!!

If he has then do you have a link you could post so I can check it out?

If he is now openly advocating this laundry list then that is huge news, given his previous denials.

I knew it would just be a matter of time, but i didn't figure on it happpening this quick, yikes!
 
OK, yeah, this IS bad news for us...I'm glad you saw this article, helpful post NW...

Alan Korwin

Gun Law Update: Brady Backs Barack
2008-10-16 at 8:54 am · Filed under 2008, Analysis, Conservatism, Current Events, Law, Politics, Second Amendment, Vox Populi

Will Anti-Gun Group’s Endorsement Help Or Hurt?

Anti-Gun-Rights Candidate Could Gut “Heller” Decision

Now that Barack Obama has received the endorsement of the Brady Campaign gun-control group, will the Supreme Court’s findings in the D.C. gun-ban “Heller” case matter?

That’s the question experts are asking in the wake of Obama’s 11th-hour support from America’s leading gun-ban advocates. The late-date endorsement was conspicuously absent from most large news outlets. Those groups have repeatedly claimed that anti-gun-rights agendas were a key issue in the Democrat election defeats of 2000 and 2004.

“Obama publicly supported Washington D.C.’s total gun ban until the Supreme Court’s ‘Heller’ case voided it,” says Alan Korwin, co-author of “The Heller Case: Gun Rights Affirmed,” which was just released (see below for news-media review copies). “His opposition to gun rights is well known and carefully documented in the new book,” he said. Obama swiftly reversed his position after the High Court found that gun rights belong to individuals, a point also documented in the new book.

“Before the ban was overturned, Mr. Obama supported the position of the Court’s dissenters — that gun bans are fine and the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights does not protect people, it protects ‘collective rights’ of states,” Korwin notes. That position had little to support it in the historical record, but was favored by people seeking to ban firearms from public hands. The “collective rights” theory, a recent creation, was dismissed with ridicule by the Court (equating it to Alice in Wonderland). The Amendment itself speaks of “the security of a free state,” and “the right of the people.”

As the first book released about the landmark gun-rights decision, “The Heller Case: Gun Rights Affirmed” describes the events leading up to the case, and precisely what the Court said, word-for-word and in plain English. If Obama follows the Court’s decree, the civil rights of the general public should be fairly well safeguarded with respect to owning and using firearms.

If he instead follows the lead of his endorsers in the Brady Campaign, gun rights as America has known them for more than two centuries could easily end. His campaign positions so far suggest the latter, if he is elected. His widely available voting record is 100% consistent — voting for every restriction on law-abiding gun use, and against every proposed protection for innocent individuals.

Virtually all recent gun-law proposals fall into those two categories — bans on honest ownership and rights, or support for honest ownership and rights. New laws targeting criminals are rare, since every imaginable criminal activity with guns is already against the law and carries severe penalties.

The only thing left, according to leading experts, is to ban guns for non-criminals, a policy choice adopted in some circles. Gun bans on criminals have had embarrassingly little effect on street gangs, the drug war and career criminals in general. Facing abject failure of crime-related social policies, and unable to disarm criminals, many politicians are turning instead to civil-disarmament schemes. Working against this trend, “Disarm Criminals First” says one campaign slogan in the Marksmanship Movement.

The three publicly announced elements of the Brady-Obama anti-gun positions include 1- Ban the freedom to sell firearms from one innocent person to another, euphemistically called the “gun-show loophole”; 2- Allow all law enforcement officers to fish through gun-dealer records looking for paperwork or other violations, and compile data as they see fit, euphemistically known as “repealing the Tiahart Amendment” (which prevents them from doing so currently); and 3- permanently ban an enormous list of perfectly legal firearms and accessories based on looks, names and operating characteristics, euphemistically called an “assault-weapons ban.”

First, knowledgeable observers know assault is a type of behavior, not a type of hardware, plus the ban seeks to outlaw all semiautomatic firearms. Second, it’s already completely illegal for criminals to buy firearms under any circumstances, so the proposed private-sale ban would only affect innocent citizens. And third, the Tiahart Amendment protects the innocent from government registries and abuse, so all three proposals, as noted above, have virtually no effect on stopping crime, but do crush freedoms Americans currently enjoy.

A long wish list of other gun-freedom repeals have been previously announced by Brady, Obama and their supporters, but have not shown up in the candidate’s platform yet. See some of them here:

http://www.gunlaws.com/PageNineIndex.htm

and many more here:

http://www.gunlaws.com/Left-wing%20Gun%20Plan.htm
 
looks like their old game plan that they hope to make progress on once obama is in office, rather than anything new.
 
i was stirred up hotter then a hornet this morning at work and starting digging on the internet for stuff.. i wasnt sure if i was reading old news or information that was going to hit us eventually...

thanks for clearing up my post guys.. i thought i was misinforming people for a second.. woooo... that would of been bad..
 
Quote:
looks like their old game plan that they hope to make progress on once obama is in office, rather than anything new.



I'm talking about him crawling publicly into bed with the Brady bunch. That occured less than a month ago. It should have been a bigger campaign issue and the MSM should have questioned him about it.

How any gun owner could have voted for this guy is beyond me.

News Release
Jim And Sarah Brady, Brady Campaign
Endorse Barack Obama And Joe Biden

For Immediate Release:
10-13-2008

Contact Communications:
(202) 898-0792


Washington, D.C. - Sarah and Jim Brady and the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence with its network of Million Mom March Chapters endorsed Senator Barack Obama for President and Senator Joseph Biden for Vice President today, and urged Americans to vote for them.

Paul Helmke, President of the Brady Campaign, issued the following statement on behalf of the organization and the Bradys:

"Senators Barack Obama and Joseph Biden know that we make it too easy for dangerous people to get dangerous weapons in this country. They know that our weak gun laws have too many loopholes, which lead to over 30,000 deaths and 70,000 injuries from guns every year.

"Senators Obama and Biden know that we can reduce those deaths and injuries from guns by strengthening our Brady background check system, getting military-style assault weapons off our streets, and giving law enforcement more tools to stop the trafficking of illegal guns.

"Fortunately, the candidates most favored by the gun lobby were rejected by the voters during the primaries. The gun lobby has lambasted Senator John McCain for being a leader on gun violence prevention issues in the past. In 2000 and 2001, he introduced legislation, gave floor speeches, and appeared in television ads to close the gun show loophole. In 2004, he gave floor speeches supporting access to crime gun trace data, requiring gun dealer inventories, and retaining background check records. Back then, Senator McCain was a "maverick", willing to take on the gun lobby.

"But now, Senator McCain has stopped talking about these issues and, instead, has pandered to the gun lobby whose opinions he once disdained. His erratic approach to gun violence prevention leads to our concern about whether a President McCain would remember and follow the leadership shown by Senator McCain in 2000 and 2004 and take steps to help reduce gun violence.

"The difference between the two tickets is clearest with regard to assault weapons. Senator Obama made his position clear in his acceptance speech in Denver when he said "the reality of gun ownership may be different for hunters in rural Ohio than they are for those plagued by gang violence in Cleveland, but don't tell me we can't uphold the Second Amendment while keeping AK-47s out of the hands of criminals." And Senator Biden helped get a ban on assault weapons passed in 1994 and fought for its renewal in 2004.

"Senator McCain, however, opposed the assault weapon ban in 1994 and voted against its renewal in 2004. McCain's running mate, Governor Sarah Palin, told ABC's Charles Gibson that she also opposed a ban on assault weapons, saying that they were part of her "culture". (That's my girl!!! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-003.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-003.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-003.gif)


"The Obama-Biden ticket understands that the rights of law-abiding gun owners can co-exist with the reasonable restrictions which the U.S. Supreme Court recognized as "presumptively lawful" in its recent Second Amendment decision finding a general gun ban unconstitutional. As Justice Scalia stated, there is "not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever for whatever purposes." Senator McCain once understood this concept but that "straight talk" is now silent.

"The Obama-Biden ticket will work with law enforcement, gun violence victims, and ordinary citizens who want to do more to protect themselves, their families, and their communities by making it harder for dangerous people to get dangerous weapons.

"Along with Sarah and Jim, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and its dedicated network of Million Mom March Chapters strongly endorses the Obama-Biden ticket and encourages our supporters to vote for them on November 4, 2008."
 
Last edited:
Quote:
just keep in mind that McCain was the other choice.
http://www.gunowners.org/mccaintb.htm
As far as the Brady’s endorsement it shows the power of single-issue politics, remember that they were strong GOP supporters before the assassination attempt.
here's somemore on McCain
http://www.goapvf.org/mccain.htm
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/49274_helen05.shtml
http://www.libraryindex.com/pages/197/There-Should-Be-Stricter-Gun-Control-Laws.html



And he still has a higher NRA rating Than Obama, His selection for appointments to SCOTUS would have been preferred over your guy, thanks a lot. But go ahead and justify it anyway you feel like, it's a free country at least for the next couple of months. And as far as a single issue, do you mean a Marxist leaning leader, abortion, higher taxes, more restrictions on business, stricter controls on investments and more social programs paid for by the working Joe the plumbers of this country, the very real possibility of amnesty for as many as 30,000,000 illegal aliens, some who will start drawing on social programs as soon as the ink has dried on their new drivers licenses, higher gas prices as the cost of the new taxes are passed on to the consumer, Health care taken over by the government, like they haven't screwed up every program they have gotten their hands on, not to mention that every left wing group will come to feel entitled to push their agendas on the rest of us, "forcefully" I might add, and it's already happening, and has found a leader that will be paying more than lip service to their wants' , voting present will not get him far in his new job and when he folds to the Reeds and Pelosi's, not to mention the RHINOS that currently take up spots in both the House and Senate it will be up to the working class to pick up the tab. And I don't care as much for what he says as what he's done, and he has a history as being no friend to gun owners and sportsmen, the man can't even catch a fish, let alone clean and cook it, and some hunters think he knows where we are coming from, please!!!

Less than two hundred days on the job and now the leader of the largest free nation in the world, and I thought Jim Jones was dead.
 
I believe rimmy is trying to overtake daddyrabbit vs W. Wake up rimmy, McCain lost,is going back to the nursing home with his tail between his legs.All those Obama talking points you've saved about how bad McCain is are now a moot point.
 
Back
Top