Anti-firearms legislation

RELH · Mar 4, 2009

Just read a front page article in our local paper that was taken from one of the larger news agency.
It seems, according to one Democrat congressman, that some members of his party are not willing to stick out their necks to inact any new anti-firearms laws for fear of the political backlash they may receive.

To give credit where it is due, this is not just the result of the NRA and GOP congressmembers, but in conjuction with recently elected "MODERATE" members of congress that are in the Democrat party and oppose any laws that effect lawful ownership of firearms.

It seems some of these new members are from areas where hunting is a strong tradition, or owning firearms for defensive purposes is strongy supported by the citizens who elected the congressman.

Of course the Brady anti gunners consider this only a temporary setback and will continue to push their anti gun agenda to anyone that will listen. It was stated that the recent Washington D.C. case in the Supreme Court had also effected how far some of the liberal members of congress will go in the future on supporting these anti gun bills.

Might be the reason why Obama has also changed course recently on his anti gun stance of the past.

Just a ray of sunshine on these doom and gloom posts we normally see in this forum.

RELH

huntindude · Mar 4, 2009

This is how its supposed to work.

REDDOG · Mar 4, 2009

I guess i was wrong, maybe the Dems did learn somthing in '94. I dont expect they will have the same attitude if they maintain power in 2010. but still great news.

Naildriver · Mar 4, 2009

Are you kidding? The libs far outnumber the mod's in congress today.

Don't doubt Obamas stance on guns. The majority of dinks in congress will of course follow the Dink in Chief's stance on gun control of responsible gun owners.

Where would we be without the N.R.A.

TFinalshot · Mar 5, 2009

"stick out their necks to inact any new anti-firearms laws for fear of the political backlash they may receive. . . "

Or maybe, they are Dems from Montana like our governor and two senators who are themselves gun owners and users and who also believe in our rights to keep and bare arms. . .

I'd love for guys that like to just pop off about this issue to come to montana and have a talk with our federal leadership, Baucus, Tester, Reburg, while your here stop in and talk to our governor, Schweitzer about being a Dem and a gun owner and how politics, guns and re election work for democrats in montana. . .

I think some of you guys just like to have something to hold on to that makes you feel tough. In our state, we are equal opportunity gun owners who are not partisan about our rights to keep and bare arms. . . we all have them, we all use them.

So I'm not sure this is as much a matter of "political backlash" as it is a matter of spin, hype, paranoia, tactics, and whining.

huntindude · Mar 5, 2009

Our resident Yosemite Sam's read way to many NRA fundraiser flyers.

Anytime you judge the majority by what the minority does you're off base.

Spencer · Mar 5, 2009

> Anytime you judge the majority
>by what the minority does
>you're off base.

Maybe you can heed that advice the next time you issue a blanket blast on conservatives?

Scott
Member: RMEF, SCI, and NRA

TFinalshot · Mar 5, 2009

LAST EDITED ON Mar-05-09 AT 09:38AM (MST)[p]
I get the feeling that HD blasts ideology more than "conservatives." If you give it much thought, you really cant be in the ag business, at the local and private level, if your not a conservative - I know that from my own life of past ranching and farming. I think that often words get misused.

I think most of what I argue against is the neoconservative, i.e., anti gay, religion down your throat, no help for the poor, or to people who need some, "it's mine and your lazy so get out" attitude. If that has a name, i think it's called Neocon, that's what I dislike.

Sometimes we mix republican, and conservative in the same group and everyone in america knows they are different, just like often democrats and liberals are often mixed or confused, there are extremes in both cases, Soros is not the demoratic party, just like Pat Robertson is not the Republican party. . .

bwnco · Mar 5, 2009

You won't get a response from Huntind--k on that one, it made to much sense, and will make him look like the hypocrite he is. If it is not liberal in nature he blasts it.

REDDOG · Mar 5, 2009

Tfinal, thats great about your states dems, the D party needs more pro gun members. your blowing smoke however, the D party are the ones that are for gun control, and to say the pro gun dems swayed the majority is probly wrong, i would lean more towards backlash in the upcoming election being the culprit.

3blade · Mar 5, 2009

I heard the Blair Holt Firearms Bill was put in the first stimulus bill and is now the law. Takes effect in 1 yr from the date Hussein signed it. Any one else hear anything about that?

kilowatt · Mar 5, 2009

http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/blairholt.asp

REDDOG · Mar 5, 2009

thats nice, wonder if a CCW permit will cover it?

hossblur · Mar 6, 2009

Guess I am missing the lack of gun control laws. Check your proclamations in utah, arizona and cali, notice how lead is now illegal? Guess I was on crack when ag holder is working with the mexi's on their claim that their drug war is fought with guns from us. Wonder how long till the assault rifle ban comes back from this bs. The UN wants to stop ALL small arms exporting and importing(see ban all guns) and last I checked Hillary was secretary of state. Tried buying a hi cap mag lately? REMEMBER, Obamas statments have an expiration date. Heard today that to buy a gun in DC you have to find a dealer, whom cannot operate in a storefront, have guns on hand, etc. You must then apply for a permit. Upon receiving a permit(easier to get an MD license) you can then go to the dealer and order your gun. You must then take said gun the the cops for ballistics testing. Sounds like freedom to me!!

REDDOG · Mar 6, 2009

what? random ##### we all know.

RELH · Mar 7, 2009

I must admit, old Tfinal does not miss a lick when it comes to putting a "Halo" on his democrat party. According to him they never do anything wrong.
We see about that in the next couple of years if they still have that halo or wearing horns.

RELH

TFinalshot · Mar 7, 2009

LAST EDITED ON Mar-07-09 AT 10:34AM (MST)[p]Lets see RELH, as I recall, and according to most of america, if i know where you live I'd say you live in the most limp-wristed, pot smoking, broke, leftist state in the union, right - this is what shawn hanity and glen beck tell us all the time on their shows and they always are right . . . .

If youve been half alive or read anything i've posted in the last 4 months you'd know that I was telling you and the rest of the readers of this board that the stimulus (starting with Bush when it was called a bail out, and more recently before and after Obama signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act,) is just "more of the same but with more zeros."

I've also been very critical of his selections for his cabinet as well as outspoken on his "have it both" ways when it comes to lobbyists. . . It may seem to you that I'm a democratic supporter, I'm might be but i'm supporting common sense on this and you my friend need a dose of reality. Bush bombed big, no question about it, and Obama's plan sucks just as bad. . .

Anyhow, the sooner you can come to grips with the truth the sooner you'll be able to face the reality that youre either part of the mess or youre helping America to fix it. . . You seem to be one of the evil doers who's mission it is to take the country down with your rhetoric. . . God bless you my fried, but be careful, this is one nation under God, and your included in that!

BTW, hows your health care? As I recall, youre getting to the age where it's really going to matter soon. . . I'm not picking on you, i'm interested in your perspectives on health care since, if im not mistaken yours is almost completely subsidized by the tax payers. . . . as is at least part of your retirement. I'm not saying youre on welfare but you are subsidized. . .

grizzly · Mar 7, 2009

HR 45 was referred to committee on Feb. 9, 2009. It has not been voted on by anybody yet.

Grizzly

RELH · Mar 7, 2009

Tfinal, you know what they say about people who "assume" things. They turn into a complete Arse as you have done with your assumptions.
My health care is just fine for me and the wife. I just happen to pay out of pocket to the tune of $827.00 per month for it. Sorry, but the tax payers do not supply my heath care.

As for the liberal state I live in, that is true if you only look at the counties that border the coastal areas from San Francisco to L.A. The county I live and the counties that border it is not liberal and voted GOP majority. You will find this to be true with most of the interior counties located in CA.

We did not drink the democrat Kool Aide as you did. Sorry to hear that your hero is not living up to your expectations so soon after taking office and he is sitting a record on not delivering as he promised. GEE!! do you think now he flat out B.S. you to vote for him.

Maybe you need to go back to that Wash. D.C. lunchroom and sit back in the chair that J.F.K sit in and do some more thinking about what you asked for and got.

You asked for him and his fellow liberals and you got him, I did not ask or support him because his track record was way too left wing for me and I have a big distrust of believing anyone who has the title "attorney" attached to their name. Seen to many shysters in my day.

RELH

REDDOG · Mar 7, 2009

hey thanks Tfinal, i was getting worried no one would mention Bush in this post.

Deadred7o7 · Mar 7, 2009

LAST EDITED ON Mar-08-09 AT 02:35AM (MST)[p]

Deadred7o7 · Mar 7, 2009

>Tfinal, thats great about your states
>dems, the D party needs
>more pro gun members. your
>blowing smoke however, the D
>party are the ones that
>are for gun control, and
>to say the pro gun
>dems swayed the majority is
>probly wrong, i would lean
>more towards backlash in the
>upcoming election being the culprit.
>

There ARE indeed people in this country unfit to keep and bear arms..120 million of them.
Those are the people that lined up to vote obamacain. A single vote for EITHER of those candidates is enough to cause a REAL American to vomit.

There is ignorance;

Then there is stupidity.
Stupidity is claiming that somehow mccain is better then the other guy. A gun controller is a gun controller ..I recognize no ?degrees? of ?good? versus ?bad? when it comes to that subject.
Either you are an American ..OR YOU ARE NOT !!!

Americans do NOT vote for gun control...and mccain is a gun controller.

Kyle
"If it moves shoot it again"

REDDOG · Mar 8, 2009

you put my post in quote, then go off on a rant that has nothing to do with it? why?

huntindude · Mar 8, 2009

LAST EDITED ON Mar-08-09 AT 02:45PM (MST)[p]Until you guys get past the notion the anti gun politians are some entity not in touch with reality you're going to lose this battle. the anti gun liberals were elected by the people, they get re releted if they do as the people wish, and that tide is pushing us twards more gun restrictions not due to " evil dems " but because the majority is getting what they want.

Do we agree politians are elected by getting the most votes or not? then what does it take to get the voters to support what we're trying to tell them? this is how you win, the politians will follow the votes not the other way around. this battle is made even tougher when it seems we can't go a week without a gun crime in the spotlight. today some freak goes into church in IL and pulls a 45, after 4 shots he smokes the preacher right in front of the crowd. we all know this cull wasn't your average gun owner but how is this going to play with the general public? how many people in that town and watching the news in NYC and every other population center are going to say we have too many gun laws? we're in trouble and it's going to be the votes of the people that put the hurt on us not any politian. trying to single out elected officials who we can target as the problem is childish.

Deadred7o7 · Mar 8, 2009

>you put my post in quote,
>then go off on a
>rant that has nothing to
>do with it? why?

Neither party in this country gives two craps for the average working person. If you think otherwise you are sadly misinformed.

Form another post I read tells it like this:
The Republicans had their chance with the contract and they blew it. Why did they blow it? They decided they liked their jos and sold their "values for job security. It caught them, they went to change washington and allowed themselves to be changed.

Term limits, and the election of ordinary people, eliminating career politicians is the answer, neither party wants that.

Get rid of all the cookie cutter socialists that hide behind different labels.

Kyle
"If it moves shoot it again"

huntindude · Mar 9, 2009

By " get rid " do you mean vote them out or take them out?

If you don't like either party, and I can agree with you a little on that then support and promote a 3rd party and upset their apple cart. the greatest president of all time tried it with the Bull Moose party, unfortunetly it flopped just as all alternatives seem to do but it was a great idea.

TFinalshot · Mar 11, 2009

Here, how timely, Tester and Baucus on guns -

WASHINGTON - Democratic Sens. Max Baucus and Jon Tester have a message for the Obama administration: They will oppose any gun restrictions the new administration may be considering.

In a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder, the two Montana senators said the Justice Department should enforce existing laws rather than propose additional laws they said could infringe on Second Amendment rights.

“We oppose reinstating the ban on the sale of assault weapons, and we call on the Department of Justice to enforce existing laws before it considers imposing any new restrictions on gun ownership,” Baucus and Tester wrote.

The senators said their letter was prompted by Holder's recent comment that reinstating a ban on the sale of assault weapons could help reduce bloodshed in Mexico, where 6,000 people were killed last year in drug-related violence.

http://www.missoulian.com/articles/2009/03/05/news/mtregional/news15.txt

RELH · Mar 11, 2009

Good for them, but they are a small minorty in the ranks of the Democrat party.

I would not be surprised if they are considered rotten apples in the barrel by the Democrat leadership that is so anti-gun beyond any reason.

I just wish there was a lot more like them among their peers in the party.

RELH