Write the New Federal Firearm Law - Page 6
Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 51 to 55 of 55

Thread: Write the New Federal Firearm Law

  1. #51
    Bikenut Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Kramer1113 View Post
    Point Of Thread:

    The Feds are re-writing the Federal Gun Law.

    IF you were able to write the Federal Law, What would it look like?

    Again, The Thread was born because as we go through our day some weasel in the Federal Government is re-writing the law.

    What Would Your Law Look Like?
    What would my law look like? It would look exactly like this... the supreme law of the land:

    Amendment II. A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

    Now... if I really and honestly wanted to address the problem of gun violence I would focus my attention on the word "violence" instead of the word "gun" and I would write laws that would involve penalties like....

    Capitol punishment for the most violent of the violent...

    Life imprisonment for anyone convicted of a violent crime...

    Hospitalization in a secure facility for as long as is necessary for anyone who is violently mentally ill...

    And I would write laws that focused on controlling the violent people themselves instead of trying to control the things they use.

    But then.... that isn't what you want to hear is it Mr. Kramer? What you are fishing for is some kind of hint as to what gun owners are willing to put up with as far as yet another gun control law that only controls the law abiding who aren't violent felons or nuts.

    Gun control laws we got... but those laws have proven themselves to be useless simply because they do not address the real problem.

    The problem isn't gun violence... the real problem is violent people.

  3. #52
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    The Great State of Texas "Remember the Alamo"


    Liberalism (LibTardism) would be deemed as a 'mental illness'.
    No firearms for 'the mentally ill'.
    Fascist's are Magicians...They can make our Property, our Freedom's & even our Children 'Disappear'.

  4. #53
    I call "Bull Ship High In Transit" on your mindless ideas, Kramer. What is it about the 2d Amendment that you don't understand?
    Any Law that regulates firearms -- Federal, State, County, City, Township or whatever -- is an infringement on my inalienable right to keep and bear. I repeat: Any law.
    The 2d Amendment is a written guarantee of that inalienable right. Every law that infringes on my inalienable right is not a legal law at all. Read the Constitution!
    If everybody had their inalienable right restored, there would be less killing.
    You're coming pretty close to being as liberal as Oboyimanutjob and his minions, in my opinion.
    Stop, Drop, and Roll won't work in Hell.
    The truth about the former Republic of the United States of America:

  5. #54
    Bikenut Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Kramer1113 View Post
    OK, One More Time and I'll Type Really Slow for you.

    Thank you for resorting to the leftist tactic of ridicule.

    The Federal Government at this very moment is trying to write a "New... Federal... Gun... Law". I had hoped for some reasonable thoughts here.

    There have been many reasonable thoughts expressed. Although it is apparent you are ignoring anything that doesn't fit into what you are considering as "reasonable thoughts".

    If you read my posts (IF) you will see I am suggesting nothing new to what we have right now, today, at this moment, as a Federal Gun Law.

    May I direct you to the title of this thread? The title of the thread YOU started?

    "Write the New Federal Firearm Law"

    And your continued posts asking folks how they would write such a new law? Your own posts say you want a new law and... you are asking folks how to write that new law... and...

    are ignoring anything that is contrary to what you are fishing for.

    I do not believe we need or want State Gun Laws at all. Are you getting this?

    Do you know the difference between State and Federal Law?

    I will give you an example to help you see through your blur of anger.

    Colorado passed the Magazine restriction Law (For one). They said no more than 15 rounds in a Mag.

    Federal law has No Such Restriction... See, Less Restrictive Law. Are you getting it now?

    Are you aware that the States have the power to enact their own laws that are more restrictive than Federal law? And that in many areas Federal law does NOT supercede State law? So the Feds can have a law that says 100 round mags are legal and a State can say only 10 round mags are legal. If you reside and/or visit that State the State law supercedes the Fed. law.

    So your hope that a Federal law less restrictive than a State law would require the State to abide by the Federal law is not based in how things work.

    The ONLY area that I suggested in My New Federal Gun Law that gets tougher for a guy like you is some how improving the Mental Health section of the law.

    Cheap shot... and an indication that you are again resorting to ridicule and implied insult. You do realize that doing such actually says more about you than it does me?

    This does not come in the form of screening. This more than likely would fall to the parent or legal guardian of the mentally ill individual. They would have requirements and punishments to fit the condition.

    An example may be that the parent shall not allow or permit access to a firearm. This may require them to keep their guns constantly under lock and key.

    Biometric safes are quick access if we are worried about time constraints in the face of danger for the parent or guardian.

    Again you are requiring those who have done nothing wrong to suffer new restrictions upon their right to keep and bear arms while ignoring that it isn't access to the gun that is the problem... the problem is that a violently mentally ill person is not locked up.

    Having a statistic on our side is not a "Feel Good" measure. At a time like New town its the only thing we have in OUR defense. Why would you ever want that tool to be gone?

    Yes that statistic is a "feel good" measure simply because it does absolutely nothing to ADDRESS THE ISSUE! I'm not interested in sucking up to the anti gunners with statistics that show law abiding folks don't break the law! I want solutions, real world solutions that actually work to solve the problem of violent people instead of suck up "feel good" crap!

    Everyone knows criminals will get guns and bombs and what ever else they desire. I would take a guess that most people that we would consider the "Criminal Element" don't even know the Federal or State Gun Laws and they sure as heck aren't going to follow them if they do. DUH.

    There has to be a stopping point. Fast & Furious is an example of what happens when the flow of guns goes unchecked.

    As Stated. I want Less Laws, Not More. Learn Your Federal Laws, Dump your State Laws and you'll get to the Core of what I am talking about here.

    The core of what you are talking about is giving the Federal government complete and total control over the individual State's power to make their own laws.

    And I find it interesting that you want the Feds to be in charge of gun laws when you said yourself:

    Quote Originally Posted by Kramer1113 View Post
    Fast & Furious is an example of what happens when the flow of guns goes unchecked.

    And we all know the Feds were running Fast & Furious... correct?

    What I am talking about is change the focus from gun control laws (Federal and State) that don't work to laws that control violent people... because the problem isn't guns.. the problem is violent people.

    The Feds are re-writing their laws and are soon going to try to pass them... again. We never want to see that. If the Federal laws tighten then some states will pile on and restrict us even more.
    Got It Now?
    And if anyone wants less laws trying to get the Feds to make new laws in the hope that the Feds can force the States to not make even more strict laws is not the way to go.... because...

    It doesn't matter what laws the Feds make... the States still have the power to make even stricter laws than what the Fed law happens to be. And the States can do it anyway no matter what laws the Feds come up with. So thinking that easy Federal laws will stop the States from making strict laws is... not realistic.

    And.... even you admit that gun control laws don't stop felons or nuts from getting guns... so exactly how would a new Federal gun control law help? Especially since, as I said before, the individual States have the power to enact laws even more strict than whatever Federal law is made.

    If a person is honestly interested in addressing the problem of gun violence then they would be honest about the real problem being violence and not guns... and would work with their State and Federal Representatives/Senators in hopes of changing the focus from gun control to controlling violent felons and nuts....

    instead of trying to suck up and help the politicians write a new restrictive gun control law.

    Got it now?

  6. #55
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    The Lowcountry of South Carolina
    Quote Originally Posted by Kramer1113 View Post
    The 2nd amendment is a Right.
    "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security."

    The rights are not given by the Constitution. The rights are ours. The Constitution is a legal and binding document limiting the power of the Federal Government. Why don't you take a gander at the 9th and 10th. One says "hey future idiots, just because we didn't list it here doesn't mean it's not a right, but the ones we chose to define are the really important ones that the feds can't mess with". The other says that the if the feds can't touch it, then the states damn well can't. But the states can make laws regarding the other stuff not prohibited to them. Guns and free speech are among the things neither the feds nor the states are supposed to mess with. ALL federal and state gun laws are unconstitutional, PERIOD.

    IMHO, What we need to do is have the loss of constitutional rights listed as a punishment for certain crimes. Basically you go to the pokey, then when you get out you don't have free speech, guns, etc. AND you are ineligible for government handouts. You are basically forfeiting your rights for committing murder, violent crimes, predatory crimes, crimes against children, rape etc. It might seem harsh, but once they see we're serious it would reduce those crimes.

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts