doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Moved topic

You may win that bet! All it means is that he's well educated. Although I cannot quote Kenyatta, if I try hard enough I can dredge up some Koranic quotes from some 30 years ago when I read it.

Given the times we live in I would hope that my President is familiar with both.

I want to and will respect the wishes of both Dave, because he has created this forum for us all, as well as all the members. I am posting in this thread because I believe the Canadian experience, like the British and Australian, should be a cautionary tale for Americans. I strongly believe that we got to where we got to in Canada because too many of us put our heads in the sand, myself included, until it was too late.

I'm a bird hunter, what do the hand gun regulations have to do with me? I like old shotguns, what do black guns have to do with me?

It took a lot to wake us all up. And it has taken a lot more to start to roll back some of the most obvious foolishness. What I see often posted is the idea that "It can't happen here" or "It's not my kind of guns that are the problem." That there are checks and balances that protect you and your interests. I think, in different ways, Lonesome Road's and Gnomon's recent posts exemplify that approach.

I speak from personal experience, so I admit to having skin in this game. Briefly, I have spent the last two years under a court order to have all my guns removed from my home. It has been lifted effective April 15, 2012. Why you might ask? Very simple. I caught my wife of 17 years in an affair with a close friend of mine. We separated. To gain advantage in court room/back room negotiations, her lawyer described me as a potential threat. No evidence, no discussion, no hearing, just accusation and action by the courts. It has been lifted because we came to a separation agreement, not because there is any evidence I now longer pose a potential threat, but because it no longer has use as a tactic by my ex wife and her lawyer. There is not one single shred of evidence that could portray me as unreliable, unstable or untruthful. I have been a gun owner for almost 40 years without any incident of any type. I have been employed by the same firm, mine, for the last 35 years. The worst offense I am guilty of in my life is speeding. But in Canada, the gun owner is a bad man, a crime, a shooting spree waiting to happen.

The main internet gun forum in Canada is called gunnutz and because it includes members from all disciplines and covers all possible subjects relating to firearms, it has brought gun owners together POLITICALLY in a way no other organization has. Gunnutz is unfunded, except as required to keep it up on the internet. It is not a lobby group per se. We have nothing like the NRA in terms of a strongly financed, powerful lobby group.

The kind of action I have described against gun owners, and far worse, happens multiple times daily in Canada. It is not reported in the MSM. Without Gunnutz, even those of us in the community would have no sense of just how widespread the abuse is, no idea how skewed the behavior of our police, crown attorneys and judges are towards gun owners. We would only have the vague notion that the MSM is against us.

Gunnutz was also a clearing house for information during our last federal election about what we could do as individuals, as it was happening, to help defeat the most vocal anti gun Members of Parliament. Mobilizing and organizing volunteers during the actual election campaign, aligned not specifically to a party, but to the outcome we all aim for. And it worked!

The first section of Gunnutz is titled FIREARMS POLITICS and the first forum in that is FIREARMS POLITICS NEWS ARTICLES. The positioning means it is the first thing you see when you log in and , because of it's positioning, has become almost required reading for all members. Yes, we can scroll down to the real area of firearms or hunting interest we logged on for, but human nature is what it is.

My recommendation to Dave would be that a new, separate "firearms political news" forum be created, as he has in the past when there has been enough interest in a particular subject, and that it be the first on the list. Not have the subject buried in misfires at the bottom of the page.

My main point in my posts on this subject would be that without a clearing house of information, you may be surprised at the actual state of affairs. Accurate knowledge is never a bad thing.

You have the benefit of the second amendment. However I think that also creates a false sense of security. Rest assured, they are coming for your guns, by whatever tactics they can muster. I think that is what so many miss. The antis are not giving up. Their reasoning is emotional, not grounded in fact, and so can never be swayed. They are true believers in the righteousness of their efforts. And like so many true believers, utterly wrong.

Good luck!

Also, I sort of apologize for being long and wordy. I just happen to like writing! Here is where I would insert a smilie face if I knew how.

Keith, I think you misjudge "many" members of this board. I also think members shouldn't have to parade their credentials as gun rights supporters to avoid being labelled ignorant and oblivious for expressing a different perspective.

As for over and over, when repeated posts say essentially the same thing, I'd like to see fewer words in successive posts. Eventually we're down to "I disagree", and then maybe the thread ends.

Jay

My point was that Obama's father was close with Kenyatta and that Kenyatta and the entire Mau Mau movement was "helped" by the Marxists.I have my doubts about Mr. Obama's intellect when he did not even know what a "corpsman" was.

I don't think folks get worked up about preaching to the choir. Seems to me, that there are gun owning liberals whose only contribution to the issue is, 'I'm not worried, they'll never do it here, things are better than ever, they'll leave my double alone, etc.'. Easy to get stirred up when that mentality reaches across the isle and says we have common ground, let's stand as one. Sorry for revisiting the misfire in some one else' house.

Canvasback:
Your post is one of the most Telling I've ever read to support the position that potential firearms legislation is and has to be a mainstream topic and not something relegated to the back page.
I think we're constitionally protected againt the type of seizure you've been under but, with the abuses to our Constitution, I'm seeing by the current administration I'm not so sure.
With your permission, I'd like to repost this in other forums.
Jim

Jim, thanks for the comments and the request. I would like to consider your request.

I feel somewhat among friends here and shared personal details. I would like to consider how much farther those details may be spread and whether I am okay with that, fully realizing it is on the net and it's possible to copy without doing me the kindness of requesting my permission, as you have.

There's not a soul here who's for gun control or who doesn't recognize the need of vigilance to protect our interests. Inviolable or unalienable constitutional rights on paper bear no resemblance to practice here or there. Jim recognizes it above as we all do. Whatever Dave does with this dissolving phantasmagoria, my hope is that there's a cleanup of all the political partisanship and slogans, jingoism, imputing of motives and citizenship, and it's packed it off to another place on the board. I'm here to learn about doubles. I don't give a tinker's dam about someone's father or politician unless it relates to gun provenance or some activity in the shooting sports.

Had to look that one up King!
Jim

Phantasmagoria ( American pronunciation (help�info), also fantasmagorie, fantasmagoria) was a form of theatre which used a modified magic lantern to project frightening images such as skeletons, demons, and ghosts onto walls, smoke, or semi-transparent screens, frequently using rear projection. The projector was mobile, allowing the projected image to move and change size on the screen, and multiple projecting devices allowed for quick switching of different images. Invented in France in the late 18th century, it gained popularity through most of Europe (especially England) throughout the 19th century.

Gnomon, I used your own thoughts and words to draw my conclusions about you. It was you and only you who alluded to the belief that our pro-second amendment stance would only help felons to acquire guns. The resurgance of gun rights during the current administration has nothing to do with support from Obama, Pelosi, Schumer, George Soros, et al. That regaining of lost ground has come from folks who put boots on the ground and fought for it and funded the fight. You and your kind are not among those. And The only credit you can give your 100% anti-gun President is being smart enough to hold back until he is a lame duck with no fears of losing re-election. He has laid the groundwork for attacks on gunowners in the future with his judicial appointments. No need to rehash that. You see no faults and no problems because so far, you have not been affected.

The exact same personal situation that Canvasback related to us about losing all of his guns due to a divorce situation happened to my sister-in-laws' ex-husband. She had a PFA taken out on him after she made a false claim of domestic violence. The county sherriff also came and gave him 10 minutes to gather some belongings and vacate the house they shared which had been in his family for over 150 years. I learned years later that the claim was false because she herself told me. Just a simple thing like your wife making a false claim tomorrow could change your whole situation in the blink of an eye. He lost his guns, including several doubles, and the right to shoot and hunt. If he had been a bowler or a golfer, he would not have lost the right to pursue his hobbies. You seem... no, you are oblivious to these attacks on gunowners. After all, it hasn't happened to you and your mostly liberal hunting buddies. Even after reading and hearing of these abuses, you will still dig your heels in and support candidates who make them happen. You won't change until it happens to you. Then it will be too late.

You say you worry about a crisis where the presidency might be bought and paid for by 3 or 4 people, some with loyalties to other sovereign nations. Talk about wild conspiracy theories. Please tell us who these evil Publicans are. I'll bet Bush and Cheney are right there in the thick of it. What we do know is that this will be the first election where one candidate will likely exceed spending over a billion dollars on an election. That candidate will be the Democrat Barack Obama, who incidentally got more Wall Street and big business backing than anyone else in 2008. That wouldn't explain the bulk of TARP money going to big banks, insurance and car companies, and green energy campaign contributors, would it?

Jay, I respectfully disagree with your thought that I misjudge that many members of this board, and many gun owners in general, are uninformed about threats to gun rights and disengaged when it comes to fighting to thwart those threats. I come to those conclusions from their own words and deeds. It was not you who said you are a strong supporter of gun rights for 7 decades, yet don't even know who George Soros is. So I wasn't speaking of you in particular. Do I need to go back through this thread and many old threads to quote similar evidence to support my position? You've read them. Why would you deny they happen? I can repeat them if you'd like, but you want brevity and you want this thread to end.

In truth, I don't wish to place myself on any pedestals here. Yesterday, I filled out my ballot for NRA Board of Directors elections. As I read the bios and resumes of the candidates, frankly, I felt a little embarassed that I haven't accomplished near as much for gun rights as the least of the candidates. My intent is to motivate rather than alienate, and when I say we collectively need to do more, that includes me. Some will grumble that I pushed them away rather than encouraged them. I will still maintain that 99.9% of those guys never were involved in the fight and never will be. Their actions speak volumes.

Canvasback, thanks again for taking the time to try to educate your gun owning brothers in the U.S. about what can and does happen. It took some guts to relate your own tragic situation. Please don't be discouraged that it will fall upon some deaf ears. There is nothing we can do but fight harder to compensate for those who refuse to see the battle. Your words are powerful and thought provoking.

As to whether we vote on where to put these types of threads, I will only say that the final results would only reflect the current beliefs of the voters. It wouldn't necessarily be what was best for gun owners or this BBS. And it's funny that some who want this section to be pure double guns have posted or participated in threads entirely unrelated to the subject many times. Do I need to give names and dates? I can do that. That evidence alone could go on for dozens of pages. More "do as I say, not as I do" behavior. Obama won the last election by a healthy margin and we have to live with that fact. But how many here would admit publicly that that voting result was good for us or the nation?