It'll never happen here...

[Watchman]

For those that are convinced that it can never happen here, a couple of links that deal with confinscation of firearms here in the good ole USA.

If this dosent convince you that its possible,well then... no need to worry, whether these bills pass or not, its just a matter of time.

In North Carolina:
Confiscation Bill (http://www.thearmedcitizen.net/forums/showthread.php?threadid=3849)

In Pennslyvania:
Another Bill (http://www.acslpa.org/alerts/HB1791.htm)

[Hightower]

That is actually really scary!!! If there are enough liberals in those states, the bills will pass with flying colors :mad:

Hightower

[dannybarnes]

This is why everybody needs to understand that the 2nd amnd. isn't about hunting, sports shooting, or anything like that... it's about preserving our liberties and freedoms. No country, no government, no constitution is safe from a tyrany. The only things that can save a society from a government-gone-bad is a well-armed, freedom-loving populice.

But the argument can't be reduced to classifying conservative or liberal, just like so many other arguments cannot be simplified to such terms. I consider myself liberal, but I'm stuanchly anti-gun-control, anti-abortion, anti-"hate-crimes" ligislation, etceteras.

And don't think that conservatism and patriorism (Awww the red white and blue, AMURICAH, etceteras) will protect your freedom. Compare Bush's policy of late, the DoJs policies of late, and the nationalistic attitude that's flourishing across the nation to the policies and attitudes of Nazi Germany... For everybody who keeps touting the completely valid argument that if "it happened to them, it can happen to us," remember that if it happens, it's truly more likely to happen under a conservative-republican banner of patriotism, national homeland security, and similar attitudes than it is under freedom-loving administration that places more focus on individual rights than on national security. This nation was founded to protect the rights of its citizens.


Cheers.

[auntysuz63]

even if this bill passes in these states, they will eventually be struck down as unconstuitional by the u.s. supreme court just like the texas anti sodomy law and the california law that allowed state prosecutors to retroactively prosecute child molesters.all it takes iis a group to challenge it remember the part of the 2nd amendment that says the rights of the people the keep and bear arms SHALL NOT be infringed

*This was posted by my hubby, drew9582. Gotta remind him to check the login before he posts!:D

[retdetsgt]

Oregon's had that domestic violence law for several years and it's passed all the tests so far. It's caused havoc for some police officers because all it takes is the issuance of a restraining order for the guns to be confiscated. And a restraining order is as easy to get as a fishing license in this state.

I believe that you can do things to forfeit your right to own a gun, but the word of a mad spouse shouldn't be one of them.

Jim

[drew9582]

sorry aunty by the time i realized it, it was already too late:) :D :eek:

[DaveInTx]

Originally posted by retdetsgt
Oregon's had that domestic violence law for several years and it's passed all the tests so far. It's caused havoc for some police officers because all it takes is the issuance of a restraining order for the guns to be confiscated. And a restraining order is as easy to get as a fishing license in this state.

I believe that you can do things to forfeit your right to own a gun, but the word of a mad spouse shouldn't be one of them.

Jim
It is not universally realized that the 5th Circuit Court's Emerson decision upholding Texas's law restricting the possession of firearms by the recipient of a restraining order included in its discussion the fact that issuance of a restraining order in Texas follows a very well-defined process with opportunities for the proposed recipient to respond, call witnesses, etc. and thus had not been denied "due process"--under those circumstances, the court agreed that a person covered by a restraining order had not been denied his basic rights without carefully-considered due process. The court further opined that similar laws in other states without such a well-defined process might not pass muster. If Oregon's laws do not offer proper channels for the supposed offender to respond and provide a defense before the order is issued, then it's laws could be struck down.

DaveInTx

[Underdog]

I find it somewhat distressing that the Republicans and Democrats abruptly switch positions regarding civil rights when the issue of firearms is raised. For this issue, the Democrats suddenly decide that civil rights are not so important while the Republicans are now civil rights champions. This is one of the reasons that I switched to the Libertarian Party.