Biden Calls on Congress to Strengthen Gun Ownership Rules

None of any of this matters anyway. If the Democrats do not get rid of the filibuster AND expand the Supreme Court, then any discussion on what gun control is coming and how people may or may not respond to it, is moot.

A gun ban and/or registration will not pass or would get an injunction put on it immediately by a conservative judge in the same way liberal judges constantly stick their nose in on Trump’s decisions.

The same will happen for a National red flag law, because they are based on hearsay. A person can literally get you disarmed by saying “this person doesn’t seem quite right” and the cops will disarm you; and you have to spend money in court to prove the hearsay was BS. That won’t pass this Supreme Court.

I feel sorry for gun owners in states like California. Piss off the wrong liberal over there, and they can just call the cops, make up a reason they are scared of you, and boom your house is raided. The investigations come after the fact.

 

My guess is because the feds do not recognize restoration of gun rights for felons but states do. It is one of the hitches in the giddyup of people wanting their gun rights restored--just because the local judge signs an order doesn't mean your arse should ever be caught on federal land with a gun if you enjoy your freedom.

 

If a series of laws are abided by those who abide by laws, but not by those who do not abide by laws, what makes anyone think that a new set of laws will be abided by by those who don't abide by the first set of laws?

'Weapons of war'? Really?

 

Have a friend just purchased a rifle for the 1st time. He can't get ammo for it. I have all I need.

 

The “weapons of war” saying angers me and it angers me even more because they know they don’t mean what that phrase implies it means.

If they really truly felt these are “weapons of war”, they would not allow the cops to have them either; since the cops are not at war with the rest of the public. The fact that they always exclude the police from these bans tells me:

A - They either are lying about these weapons being only for war..

..and/or..

B - They are just using scary phrases to get us in a situation where only the state has all the guns that are useful.

I suppose there is also a C:

Someone who doesn’t see a disconnect between protesting police brutality, while voting for legislation that ensures those same cops are the only ones among the population armed with “weapons of war”.

 

Little steps. I can't count how many times the phrase 'it's common sense to do X', when it isn't common sense, but it's the third or fourth 'common sense' reduction in a Right edging towards nullifying it.

Just because we don't object about a firearm not being carried one place or another, it doesn't mean we agree to it at all times, in all places.

 

They are trying. That in itself in a big deal.

 

But I thought you lost that gun when you went fishing last year....

 

This is an expensive time for anyone that has not already stockpiled ammo and would like some. I don’t see it letting up for this administration; which means this will last years.

 

My wife and son both worked several years in a local ammo plant. You'd think we'd have connections. There are none!

 

Funny picture. At least they know to keep their finger off the trigger. They can use a little training on keeping them pointed in a safe direction so they don't shoot themselves in the foot.

On topic, CA already has most of this in place. Anyone care to discuss results?

 

You are acting as if there aren't already federal background checks when buying. Good guys being restricted is an issue, Bad guys RARELY go buy guns at the freaking gun store because they can't buy one with a felony, they buy on the black market mainly from Mexico.

 

No, I'm saying this is window dressing that affects only a small number of gun owners. Remember the aw ban in the 90s? Same thing.

 

Ok let's play this out, what good does an AR ban do? Did the last one result in any reductions? What's the purpose of the ban other than a stepping stone?

 

Why should you restrict a RIGHT to even a small number of legal firearm owners?

 

Window dressing. I've already explained this. It calms those who have lost loved ones to gun violence, especially victims of mass shootings.

Gun regulations aren't new. They go way back. Centuries back. The slippery slope argument doesn't cut it.

 

Is that all Biden wants? We already have these.

 

Yep.
So what?

 

The laws Biden seeks will have no affect assault rifles in any way.

To calm irrational fears of the tiny minority, I should allow my rights to be further limited?

 

When they ban "assault" weapons, which one of these firearms (Just an example of a few) do you thinkbelieve should be included on the ban list?

THIS one?...

...or THIS one?...

 

You are right, but isn't this the way of the left? Just add more redundant laws! Until the DNC base becomes familiar with laws already on the books they will continually be fooled my their reps..

 

Don't forget the "Gun Show Loophole" that those idiots never shut up about.

 

Ah yes - just another example of how the (D)ishonest prey upon the emotions of the ignorant.

 

LOL!!! Sure you do.

Okay, give me McConnell's phone number.