doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Obama Pushing For Massive Gun Control

[quote=King Brown]
"Canadians are still agitating for improvements."
Yes, and actively, by with-holding money, among other things.

"Your messages appear as from one who hasn't been involved directly in action of what it takes to beat back grabbers other than a NRA membership. (And that antagonizing NRA comment while the nation mourning was no service to our cause, as I said here at the time. Better that the NRA would consider what Obama proposing and it would respond in good time in the country's best interests etc.) Unwarranted inflaming of public opinion is a mistake, and in confrontations of this kind, it's the faux pas that can kill you. Some November dandies come to mind."

Ooh, So,,,so,,,,logical! -Talk nice and the politicians will listen.... B.S.!!!
The NFA tried that in Canada -"Lets wait and see what the Government proposes, then comment on it"
We got what the Government proposed! No changes.

One look at the gun violence committee shows the real intent is to exploit the tragedy in Newtown to further a gun ban agenda that has been in the works ( or "under the radar") for years.
The NRA has done the only thing it could and did show the PROVEN cause of these shootings,Gun Free Zones and no protection-that the elite/complicit media and politicians have for their children.We don't need or want any help from guys like King who will give in to some bans/laws and attack our largest ally with clout.Give it up King we are not buying what your are selling.

Looks at this member of Bidens task force and you can get an idea of their real intent that has nothing to do with protecting children

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlic...ssacre-n1483006

President of the National Assocation of Police Officers and Boston Police Officer Thomas Nee is a member of Vice President Joe Biden's gun control task force, which was created by President Obama in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. Nee's son, Joseph Nee, was convicted in 2008 for planning to commit mass murder of students and teachers at Marshfield High School in Massachusetts, similar to that of Columbine in 1999. After spending nine months in prison, Nee's conviction was upheld by the Supreme Judicial Court

If one tenth of the bilge that has appeared on this thread was directed to Congress, we might have a chance in this fight...

Sadly, people don't like to talk about religion or politics, until their church is on fire or their laws have changed................if they don't write and call their politicians in Washington as requested on the "Simple Request" thread, then we will all lose...........

OK, let's examine what you said. Without directly stating that we should give up semi-autos and "clips", you said, that you don't buy into the "slippery slope" argument re "assault rifles" (which are not really assault rifles as Jim has shown with his pictures worth a thousand words example), and you personally "don't favour them." Then we are given your more winnable choice in the coming battle, "Registration" which "should be easier to defeat." Then we are advised to "Choose your battles."

Now, if those statements are telling us to cling tightly to all of our current rights and to give up nothing, then I and several others here do indeed have a reading comprehension problem. I don't see it that way. If that's what you were saying, you really need to phrase things differently to communicate your real point.

I, and several others, read what you cryptically said, and connected the dots, and came to the same conclusion: We should choose battles we can win, and since the battle to keep assault rifle look-alikes and "clips" is "a harder fight", we should not "dissipate energy" and create ill will given the current state of an "antagonized" "nation in mourning" lest we make the mistake of "unwarranted flaming of public opinion" as the NRA did (in your opinion). All of these words in quotes are yours, some from other posts.

That being said, we should ignore what may be unwinnable and concentrate our energies on what may be winnable... stopping, at least for the time being, any registration schemes. The result would be the "balancing" you spoke of previously, and would satisfy Washington and mitigate their scorched earth "get 'em this time program." The resulting loss of "assault rifles" and "clips" which you personally don't "favour" would not lead to the "slippery slope" scenario where the grabbers would smell blood in the water and come back for more. And more. And more.

We, most of us anyway, don't see it that way. You say you "support the 2nd". So does Obama. So does Biden. We hear those words all the time from those who are all about getting our guns while ignoring the root causes of gun violence. It appears there are vastly different interpretations of those words as well... reading comprehension problems in the opinion of some. To me, to the NRA, to most who frequent this board, supporting the 2nd means leaving it untouched and unblemished by feel good measures that the framers specifically warned against. They foresaw the threats we face today because they remembered the past. They didn't just say it, they expounded upon it and their reasoning is just as valid today as it was over 200 years ago. The tendancies for both good and the evil in the hearts of men are the same now as then. Thirst for power and ambition and greed and corruption by Governments have not been erased by a mere 200 years of man's evolution.

So King, when we connect the dots, and analyze your words, we come to the nearly unanimous conclusion that you would have us give up those things which you personally don't "favour" and fall prey to the kind of incrementalism that has methodically stripped gun owners of their rights in your own country and around the world. When we add certain circumstantial evidence to the case, such as your frequent condescending attitude ("Your message appears as from one who hasn't been involved directly in action of what it takes to beat back grabbers other than an NRA membership.") toward pro-gun rights guys and your willingness to give a pass to the grabbers here, is it any wonder so many of us are questioning your advice, if not your motives? Or do we all have reading comprehension problems? A professional wordsmith ought to have the ability to make it clear and concise.

Obama like most liberals are hypocrits....they argue its unsafe for schools to have armed guards while they send their own kids to private schools with armed guards.

THey argue citizens should not be allowed to have handguns or what they incorrectly call "Asssult weapons"..while they themselves have conciel carry permits and personal bodyguards with their own guns.

They argue how the evil corporate types aren't paying their fair share while giving Hollywood and other lefties special tax breaks.

The same brain damaged morons call an AR-15 a high powered weapon when the 5.56mm round known also known as the .223 what most are chambered for.

THe .223 round is illegal to use for Deer hunting in most states because it lacks sufficient stopping power to drop a deer cleanly. THe Military is moving away from it for the very same reason, its not an effective round to stop enemy soldiers.

The Special forces Sniper rifle is (from my understanding) Based on the Remington 700. Which is a simple nice but unimpressive looking Hunting rifle that is far more effective than an AR-15 if you want to kill something. Its got the stopping power..the quality to reach out and hit the target you want to hit...and it uses rounds that have better ballistics and stopping power.

It just doesn't have the Oooooo Ahhhhh factor of fancy looking black stuff that solely makes the gun look tough or impressive to the unknowing..and the unexperienced person who likes to flap their gums rather than engage their brain. But looks do not equal function...or Quality.


I think we should take all of these morons that think the AR-15 and the Bushmaster and the other replicas have such awesum firepower....out to the Alaskan wilderness and challeng them to take down a Grizley bear each.

I doubt most of them would survive the attempt.

THink about it..the same party of numbnuts that was not long ago GIVING thousands of guns to the Mexican drug cartels (and for all we know they are STILL doing) is now preaching to disarm the Law Abiding citizens of our own country.

You're getting close, keith. First, let's clear up who the "we" are who have connected the dots and the "we" of the "nearly unanimous decision" that I want Americans to give up guns in the looming battle. No names. Are you speaking for those of God-like ability to categorize members as good and evil for their political inclinations, as you do here. Or, as spokesman for those "nearly unanimous," you're perhaps representing a divided group. Since there's no such thing as unanimity in anything, I think the latter. But which is it?

There's nothing condescending in asking of your experience in fighting gun control. Your reluctance to answer and errant understanding and misinterpretation of what I've said has made me wonder if you've had any experience in the trenches other than NRA membership and preaching to the converted. Have you got out of the house, picketed, marched around legislatures, represented gun owner interests with decision-makers, as I have? Your messages speak of inexperience. Which is it?

Now, let's be clear on what I said, not what the "we" said I said. Whenever I ask you to provide evidence of what you said I said, you provide more misinterpretation as you have again in your last message: "you would have us give up those things which you personally don't favour." Again, where's the evidence? US is far down in educational achievement in national comparisons but that's no excuse for blithely putting words in my mouth which were not said. That's arrogance. Inexcusable.

In my last message, I promised that I would reply to your messages if you read them carefully. You are not giving me that consideration. I haven't the energy to keep asking for redress of misreading or misinterpretation on your part. I do not see anything ulterior in what you write other than imputing motives, always iffy, ever unwise. At no time did I say Americans should give up their guns. To paraphrase what I did say about the looming battle, I said choose your battles, consider what the emperor can do at a stroke of his pen, as he did with Obamacare, fight the good battle on all fronts but make the best use of resources where you can win, don't dissipate energy and goodwill fighting the end of a pen.

For all the breast-beating here, for all the good intentions, from my experience in the trenches, any member who can't read with comprehension, or contrives meaning where it is not intended, would be left out of battle. It's tough enough as it is. The US Marine Corps wouldn't permit it nor would I. Those who think differently may do what they will, and will. I've seen my duty by describing how we went about it in Canada, an entirely different country with different people. Do what you will. I've seen my duty and done it.

Kind regards, King

King:
As far as I'm concerned it's time to end the semantics and endless chatter here and get to work.
I made a couple of proactive recommendation's as to what YOU could do with our NRA, as a volunteer advisor, and within Canada to get some real teeth into you own Constitution and this sofar has met with silence.
Here's an opportunity to become part of the solution. The balls in your court.
Jim

King, I believe the frustration comes from your condescension. You've achieved an important Canadian victory, but you're comfortable living under quite a bit more gun control than some of the folks around here would prefer. Your reasoning of bipartisan cost effectiveness, intentionally conceals the controlling party's platform and its constituents.

My read on your victory. Someone else had the idea and the will to see it through, and you were a paid consultant to advise. That's ok, and I may be wrong. I don't believe the Marines would willfully ignore an enemy, unless someones ideology steered the mission.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
BENJAMIN FRANKLIN