All-purpose gun legislation thread

While I think the Terrorist watch list (as is) is pretty brazenly unconstitutional, it is real and in use. I tend to support using it for screening gun purchases because

A. it is already in use (and being used to deprive Citizens of their Constitutional rights)
B. due to its current nature, it is almost impossible to gain standing to challenge in court

Tying weapons purchases to it will actually in my mind serve 2 purposes:

  1. Keeping weapons out of the hands of terrorist suspects (something most folks agree on)
  2. Setting up a significant constitutional challenge to the Terrorist Watch list so that it can be fixed

So while I think that the Terrorist Watch list is a very Star-Chamber/Un-american thing, I think expanding the use of it will actually force it into the light so that it can actually be addressed.

Of course, that could backfire… but if it does, then the US is so far down the police-state rabbit hole that it doesn’t really matter.

It would definitely backfire. I have zero faith in putting arbitrary laws in place to then fix bigger problems in the Supreme Court. Those clowns don’t always do the right thing.

The Bosnians got their asses beat, but even so, it’s worth noting that they actually had military hardware.

As I said, I have no knowledge of the Algerian war with the French, but I suspect that the French simply chose not to leverage their whole military capability there.

I honestly do not know what kind of point you are making, because none of the things you are saying actually support some utility of small arms for the purpose of revolution against a modern military.

This is a best case scenario. Were that to happen it would be a double win.

However it requires a high level of confidence in the outcome of the judiciary. I honestly don’t know what the outcome would be. Worst possible? Uphold the lists, but disallow banning gun sales. That would further cement the arbitrary and unjust application of the list.

The best outcome? Striking down of the list as constructed, but allowing the banning of sales on a far more stringently monitored, and challengable, set of rules. i.e. require a higher burden of evidence to be put on such a ban list, with room for speedy and equitable appeals.

The thing is that it would actually get to the courts, whereas now, it can’t even get there. Additionally, it’s not a new arbitrary law, it’s an existing one that’s out there already with no significant judicial review at all.

And if the courts are as worthless as you say (and Kelo , if not Citizen’s United are definite points towards that conclusion), well then it doesn’t matter much, does it? Legal or not, Citizens will have their rights taken away if the Courts can’t function as the Check on the Executive and Legislative branches that they need to be.

This list is the kind of thing that would have seen most our civil rights leaders stripped of their rights, restricted their movements and all without due process. It’s a secret list that they can essentially put anyone on it for any reason with no justification, no recourse and no proof. Just because some terrorists are on the list does not make it an okay tool to use.

All the THIS for this.

There is a reason the ACLU is opposed to this and it sure isn’t because they love guns.

Pretty good read from a gun-nut’s perspective on an American insurgency.

Just from the URL I know this is going to be good.

Contra Praeteritum: Why patriots today are gearing up for the last insurgency

Shit yes, let’s do this.

…treated to a particularly frustrating experience. Someone was there in Gucciflage all pretty and matchy-matchy (if George W. can invent words then so can this Texan) but failed to bring a holster for his sidearm (because who needs a holster when you look that good), so the planned iterations of transitions from long gun to handgun were interesting to say the least…

I’m sure there’s some kind of tribal signaling going on in this word salad, but hell if I can decipher it. I am, however, pretty confident that the problem is that there are a bunch of faggots and girly-men prancing around, eating veggie burgers and primping their designer Shih-Tzu/Pomeranian mixes.

I very much agree with both JC Dodge and Max Velocity on the abandonment of military uniforms, nomenclature and patches.

The better to regulate you by, but I digress.

The IRA originally built a rather impressive base of support, even spanning the Atlantic until the shifting cultural dynamic turned against them, partly because of their own actions (Omagh 1998, whether perception or reality), partly because of the absorption of Sinn Fein into the government, and partly because of how terrorism was perceived by the public in Western countries after 2001.

No shit, the IRA was eventually neutered by giving them a seat at the table and drawing away the popular support for their terrorist actions? Clearly if Thatcher had had drones to murder all the IRA leaders and their families, we could have a united Britain once again.

Oh wait.

During their heyday both the historical and modern IRA enjoyed support among the indigenous population to one extent or another. The patriot movement enjoys no such support among the population.

I wonder fucking why.

Ask local LEO how many people saw something after an incident in a primarily black community, particularly if it is in a gang’s territory.

Look, I’m not racist, but…

They are not ideologically motivated and the portion that are call themselves Black Lives Matter, Bernie supporters and social justice warriors. Motivated populations also provide a pool of potential recruits, as we have found out the last several years in the Middle East.

Nerpa dinka derpa doo. What?

We are Americans and we do it better, so let’s get to it…and for goodness’ sake get a pair of khaki or olive pants and quit being a gear queer!

Haha, faggots are gay, amirite?

In the event of another civil war the US military would splinter. So it would not just be armed civilians vs the US military in its entirety. It would be armed civilians and some part of the US military vs some other part of the US military. It would likely break down by state, just like our first civil war.

True enough. I think the Court got it wrong.

And yeah the no-fly list/terrorist watch list is pretty shitty. Its one of those things that sounds good at first but when you dig into it…its not really good. How do you get on it? How do you get off it? Who knows?

Can I play too? In the event of another US civil war, I am guessing right beyond civilians and a splintered US military will be all the other groups and countries and corporations any other assholes that can’t wait to profit and get in on the action. It would be crazy to the think rest of the world would just take a hands off approach as we tore each other apart. This would not happen in a US vacuum.

It’s amazing, listening to the people around there. They heard about Orlando and literally the first thing they think about is, and i’m not making this up, “Holy shit, Obama is coming for out guns! Look at this random list of guns i found on my Facebook feed that Obama is going to confiscate, we’re totally seceding, fuck this shit”. I mean, not one word of sympathy, concern, or frankly, even awareness, of what just happened. It’s clear people like this live very regionally; they only see their immediate community, and really, only ‘their’ people within that community. You might live in a town of 2000, but half of those 2000 live across the tracks, and so they’re really on the wrong side of the world, you know? It’s so depressing seeing the world’s outpouring support and these fellow graze along cow like back to the well worn tracks and pastures, unable and unwilling to change even for a moment. I mean, it’s clear that on some level, these “unquiet” spirits aren’t going to be changed rationally by debate. They’re the kind you have to beat about the head until they fall to the ground and admit you kicked their ass, then scrape themselves up and slink back to the feedlots and grain silos from which they came, proudly indifferent and incapable of empathy.

Sadly too long for a bumper sticker but damn, ain’t that the truth.

So you read it, but your extreme bias blinded you from comprehending it. And you wonder why any talk of gun control goes nowhere. Good job in keeping with the status quo.

Seriously? Dude is dragging out all of his four-bit words to meander on about why weirdo militias and fringe secessionist movements don’t have more power in the modern US.

You got me though, I do have an extreme bias against weirdo militias and fringe secessionist movements.

President Obama, who said during a townhall meeting earlier this month that “the notion that I, or Hillary, or Democrats, or whoever you want to choose, are hell-bent on taking away folks’ guns is just not true, and I don’t care how many times the NRA says it. I’m about to leave office. There have been more guns sold since I’ve been president than just about any time in U.S. history. There are enough guns for every man, woman, and child in this country and at no point have I ever proposed confiscating guns from responsible gun owners.”

54321

But he wants to ban assault rifles, and ban is a word that go either direction (future sales or existing guns).

I did want to update the collective here. A few pages back, I was lamenting how my approaches were not working with my more righteous gun-toting friends. The other night I put a chink in the armor. My argument is thus:

Over 200 children die each year because of negligence due to people who are not handling / storing guns safely. We need an education program to ensure that people are trained in how to handle / store guns safely.

We then all reminisced how we all shot 22’s in grade school, and how it would be so much better if we could re-institute a similar program because the education brings respect of the firearm. However, I cringe to think about how the liberal left would respond to something like that. So what do you say libs ;-)

I’d support it. I’m pretty liberal, but I also remember learning gun safety as a child in school. We had a riflery team and a shooting range.

The bigger problem would be paying for it. None of that stuff is free.

http://www.openthebooks.com/openthebooks_oversight_report_-_the_militarization_of_america/

"We quantified $1.4 billion in non-military federal agencies purchase of guns, ammunition and military-style equipment during the last nine years.

We estimate that federal non-military agencies now employ more officers with arrest and firearm authorization than there are U.S. Marines. There are 182,000 U.S. Marines and over 200,000 plus officers employed within the rank-and-file federal agencies."

That’s why the 2nd amendment is important.