We’ve had years where handgun bans or machine gun bans were “the thing.” Ending free-market mail-order purchases had its day in the sun. Then came bans on ugly guns. And along with them, waiting periods. And background checks. And ammo bans. And background checks for ammo. Every time we turn around, victim disarmament has taken some new form. Some of these pushes against guns have become law; others not. But it’s funny how, decade after decade, there’s always some new way to “solve the problem” presented by guns and gun owners. (We are beginning to wonder when they’ll light on the “Final Solution.”)
The latest push — backed by both lefties and squishy or elitist righties alike — is to ban anyone who appears on certain secret watch lists from purchasing firearms.
We’d like to know your thoughts on that …
I can only imagine that the other votes were some version of hell no.
Knowing this group, I’m surprised (and disappointed) ANYONE voted against outrageous/ineffective. Who voted for “acceptable”? No one I know, surely.
And I certainly hope Pigpen is right about the other two, maybe with some emphatic particles inserted between “Hell” and “No.”
I despair about the current and ongoing slide into the never-never land of expediency. Neither the D’s or the R’s give a damn about out rights, they only care about the maintenance of power. Here are two examples.
A Court of Appeals Judge (Richard Posner who is an ardent advocate for judicial rule by fiat), has announced that it was now a waste of time to worry about the Constitution.
“I see absolutely no value to a judge of spending decades, years, months, weeks, day, hours, minutes, or seconds studying the Constitution, the history of its enactment, its amendments, and its implementation (across the centuries—well, just a little more than two centuries, and of course less for many of the amendments). Eighteenth-century guys, however smart, could not foresee the culture, technology, etc., of the 21stcentury. Which means that the original Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the post–Civil War amendments (including the 14th), do not speak to today. David Strauss is right: The Supreme Court treats the Constitution like it is authorizing the court to create a common law of constitutional law, based on current concerns, not what those 18th-century guys were worrying about. In short, let’s not let the dead bury the living.”
Also:
West VA Senator Joe Manchin, 6/16/16, on “Morning Joe”.
“The problem that we have, and really the firewall that we have right now, is due process. It’s all due process. So we can all say we want the same thing, but how do we get there? … The shooter in Orlando was brought in twice by the FBI. They did everything they could … but there was no way for them to keep him on the NICS list or keep him off the gun buy list. So can’t we say if a person’s under suspicion there should be a five-year period that we have to see good behavior [before they can buy a gun]? Maybe we can come to that kind of agreement. But due process is what’s killing us right now.”
And yet these two still retain their positions.
Appalling. Just appalling. A judge who is no longer willing to pretend to respect the constitution (at least, this is honesty) and a Senator who kvetches about it interfering with his job. (Er. No. Following the constitution IS your job, schmendrick.)
” Then came bans on ugly guns.”
Ugly?
History may not repeat itself, but it does rhyme.
2496 years ago, a Persian King, with honeyed words, promised peace and wealth to those who opposed him if they would surrender their arms, and submit to Persian tyranny. Outnumbered over a hundred to one, the Greek rebels, led by Leonidas, one of the Kings of Sparta, refused. “Molon Labe!” (Come and take them!)
Xerxes crushed Leonidas and the 300, killing them all together with several thousand other Greeks who fought beside him, but it was a very costly victory.
So will it be if this supposed bit of tyranny masquerading as ‘legislation’ passes, for that will be the final proof that the Federal government of these presently united States is utterly illegitimate. TPTB ought to weigh that very very carefully, for loss of legitimacy in the people’s eyes guarantees the loss of authority and eventually the loss of power.
Unfortunately, this will be the “final proof” for only a small number of people. There have been other final proofs for other people in the past, most who haven’t already decided they’ve lost legitimacy still wont, just because of this.
Not enough will notice this and be sufficiently outraged, to have any effect whatsoever on TPTB.
The frog is being boiled, slowly.
I wonder if whoever voted for the appeal process actually checked the proposed law to see what the proposed “appeal process” consists of. I imagine it will work just fine for people like the presidential candidate who just got Gregoryed by the FBI.
Regular people? Notsomuch.
Regardless, all you really need to know about the subject is “secret government list.”