Gun ban!

[Gryphon]

we received a email that if obama is reElected he plans on baning all gun and ammo.my dh and i have been in the gun and ammo sales for over 25 years.we are  small and live in a small town.but we have a sucessful business.And MR. President we did not have any goverment help.

You were grossly misinformed. Do you know how many laws Obama has passed about guns? One. It was to make it EASIER to carry in national parks! This is a matter of public record, go ahead and google "how many laws has Obama passed restricting guns" and you'll find nothing at all except crazy rumermongering like the email you received. President Bush was the one that actually passed laws restricting guns.

 

[TallChickMagnet]

we received a email that if obama is reElected he plans on baning all gun and ammo.my dh and i have been in the gun and ammo sales for over 25 years.we are small and live in a small town.but we have a sucessful business.And MR. President we did not have any goverment help.

You will get a lot of emails with lots of lies in them so that they can get you to vote for the wrong person...

 

[ivan3]

The United Nations and gun suppression? - gee, I'm 7 years old again and it's 1962 (no `issues' spamming back then, just `pirate' shortwave broadcasts from Mexico) `the Red Chinese are coming ashore in Baja! (being landed from Chicom subs, mind you) Assembling for the rape and pillage of the Greater Southwest!' (I'm not kidding, either - about the transmissions, that is). The U.N. might as well have had a black flag flying over the HQ in NYC considering the even more `unusual' claims about what perversions transpired in the General Assembly. No thought then, or now, by some, about just what a concentrated, and relatively cheap to maintain, source of intelligence/assets having the HQ in NYC represents, not to mention peddling our influence unimpeded (our closest allies at the time voted against having the UN HQ in US) Guns? Get real. Let's review: list of permanent members of the Security Council (nothing of real import occurs without their say-so): http://www.un.org/sc/members.asp Map and List of Nations that do the biggest arms deals (S&W's to SAMS): http://www.sipri.org/googlemaps/2012_of_at_top_20_exp_map.html Any permanent members not on the list?

In the final hours of negotiations, the United States, as well as Russia and China, all large weapons exporters, said more time was needed.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/28/w...ms-trade-treaty-urge-final-approval.html?_r=1 Weapons in one ship, wheat in another - bomb `em and feed `em. While our right to shoot squirrels will, until the Senate can garner 2/3 vote for and the Supreme Court overturns all precedents, flow unvexed into the distant future. The FUD mongers will, no doubt, outlive us all.

rebelcowboysnb wrote: Unless you vote third party it does not matter...

Had a penny, Heads or tails, nevermind, worth less than it costs us to create and maintain it. Melt it down and cast something with some true utility... (at least scare the living heck out of those who think they own the `mint') An interesting exercise and some might find it useful (really think. What would one do if one had to determine priorities as president?) Take the survey and then see which of the candidates you are closest to on a variety of issues: http://www.isidewith.com/ Not as easy as being spoonfed predigested positions, in thirty second spots, by cynical marketeers whose last job was probably pushing ice to eskimos... Sure it is... ..

 

[bakerjw]

Any treaty needs to be passed by the senate before it can be signed by the POTUS. They will never get 66 senators to vote for the UN treaty. It would be a death knell for their career.

Where the concern should lie is that the POTUS was caught telling a member of the Brady bunch that he was working under the radar on gun control. His words, not mine. He has used EOs to get around congress and the head of the DOJ has shown a propensity to ignore congress, in particular contempt charges, so in a second term I can see EOs or the DOJ being used to crack down on gun ownership.

Never stopped anyone else from pushing a stupid law.

Like 1 30 round clip is so much more deadly than 3 10 round clips...

I do need a silencers for my AR15. I would shoot more if I didn't have to worry about bugging the neighbors so much. We have a silencers manufacturer up here on the mountain but its out if my price range even before the tax stamp...

I have 3 25 round clips( taped together) for it by the way... I am sure people like me give the Brady bunch nightmares.

FWIW, ARs don't silence all that well unless you're running a piston system. They produce more back pressure and the direct impingement system tends to blow more gas back through the upper receiver. Silencers are becoming more affordable and maybe one day we'll see them taken off of the NFA list. Silencer talk, where I am a mod, has a lot of good information on all makes and models.

 

[chickened]

The Obama administration has thier own gun dealing issues to worry about... "fast and furious" I have a feeling after he is out this will rise to a real news story.

As for government taking away our guns it has a good of chance as a sales tax passing in Oregon. When they knock on my door I may worry then.

 

[rebelcowboysnb]

ARs don't silence all that well unless you're running a piston system.

Not a piston system. ( I dont think) but it is already a quiet gun. Its a Smith & Wesson AR15-22.

 

[sargent spurs]

Whatever they are trying to do it isn't good.

 

[TallChickMagnet]

Whatever they are trying to do it isn't good.

They're trying to scare you into making stupid choices...

 

[sargent spurs]

Ya,

 

[KristyHall]

Who's "they?"