View Full Version : Second Amendment crumbling as gun-control victories spread. (article)
The source of it all is not what many erroneously believe:
http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=OK4n8rcM0FY&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DOK4n8rcM0FY
SURPRISE!
These states already had stupid laws on the books. They just made the shit more stupid. The U.N thing is a joke and waste of time to even discuss.
polymorpheous
04-05-13, 05:09
What about the 10 states that pushed and passed laws strengthening gun rights?
@Belloc:
Have you even read the UN ATT?
The treaty has NO bearing what so ever on the right/opportunity to own guns in your, or mine or any other country for that matter.
It strictly deals with the international arms trade; a State Party cannot sell conventional arms to another country if it is reasonable to believe that this country will use these arms to commit genocide or to unlawfully attack another country, or other war crimes or breaches of international humanitarian law. Each State Party must also maintain control of whatever arms are sold; for example, if the US sells 100,000 M4's to another country (for government use), the US must register the serial numbers of these weapons. If one of these weapons are later found in the hands of a terrorist group, for example, it is quite clear that the government that bought these weapons is in breach of the treaty and will suffer consequences.
Again, it has nothing to do with limiting 2A rights
It even specifically states the following:
Mindful of the legitimate trade and lawful ownership, and use of certain conventional arms for recreational, cultural, historical, and sporting activities, where such trade, ownership and use are permitted or protected by law
– The respect for the legitimate interests of States to acquire conventional arms to exercise their right to self-defence and for peacekeeping operations; and to produce, export, import and transfer conventional arms;
http://www.un.org/disarmament/ATT/docs/Draft_ATT_text_27_Mar_2013-E.pdf
As Failure2Stop said in another thread, it is basically an internationally ratified version of the US ITAR.
These states already had stupid laws on the books. They just made the shit more stupid. The U.N thing is a joke and waste of time to even discuss.
Really??
How many of OUR Congressmen have goals that are more or less in sync with the majority of those of the UN?
Thought so.
Ignore it at your own peril...
FromMyColdDeadHand
04-05-13, 08:23
These states already had stupid laws on the books. They just made the shit more stupid. The U.N thing is a joke and waste of time to even discuss.
Mostly agree that people are turning up the stupid, but CO has gone from no real firearms restrictions to the first step. The CO model has been widely touted as a model for the country, and Dems are going to try to 'Colorado' Texas over the next decade.
These states already had stupid laws on the books. They just made the shit more stupid.
That seems to be about right and more pro guns laws have been passed recently on the state level then anti:
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=128278
Obviously, and additional restrictions on 2A Right that only impact the law abiding is a bad thing, but the sky is not falling it appears.
VooDoo6Actual
04-05-13, 10:34
People are parviscient about this unfortunately.
Project VULCAN (project VULCAN, a study of Arms Control and a Stable Military Environment, which was made by the Special Studies Group of IDA for the Department of State under contract No. SCC 28270, dated 24 February 1961. Dr. J. I. Coffey was the Project Leader.) It is very much alive & kicking in it's current iteration. In fact Project Vulcan's name has been reused as a C02 study project.
There IS cause for concern & to stay informed.
Here's a copy by Halpern it's author:
http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/file_download/190/Halperin.pdf
The bigger problem is that most will not simply not take the time to read it & acknowledge it but rather hurl vituperative invectives & be dismissive.
@Belloc:
I am not sure how you can conclude from my post that I find the UN to be "swell".
I am not particularly fond of the UN, and I see it as a flawed and irrelevant organization based on utopian ideals. Their thoughts are "noble" I guess, but are of little relevance in the real world.
My post was only meant to bring som perspective and fact to the discussion, that the UN ATT contains no wording that threatens your 2A rights.
And just to be clear, I am on your side regarding 2A rights. We are fighting a similar battle here in Norway as a result of the 22.07.11 terror act.
That said, I feel some arguments by pro 2A people are a bit exaggerated, and that some of the threats presented seem a bit "constructed" as opposed to actual threats, in order to make the situation appear extreme.
I do not doubt for a second that there are politicians and individuals in the US who are hell-bent on taking away your 2A rights, with most of their arguments based on incorrect stereotypes regarding gun owners, faulty assumptions regarding the effectiveness of strict gun control measures and so forth. Many also display an alarming lack of knowledge on firearms in general.
The problem arises when pro 2A people use arguments that are easily countered, like the article author's use of the ATT as something that threatens the 2A rights of the American public, when it demonstrably isn't so. The ATT isn't something that was brought on recently either, it is the result of work that began many years ago. And it most certainly isn't part of some great scheme to limit the rights of the American people to keep and bear arms.
As for the ATT, it is nothing more than a "noble" idea, that will probably have little effect on what it set out to stop.
@Voodoo6Actual:
It is much appreciated if you could use words I don't have to google. I am but a simple knuckle-dragger to whom English is a second language. So if you were trying to insult me, not saying you were, it would be more effective to use more common adjectives.
-------------------------
And just to be clear. I live in Norway, a monarchy governed by a cabinet of ministers, and a parliament. Currently our coalition goverment is socialist. I am talking political parties that were serious about armed revolution in true communist style, back in the 70's. I live in a society like the one you are afraid America is becoming. I am by no means ignorant of what a socialist government means or is capable of. I would argue that I know it better than many of you.
I bet if I outlined some of the practices we have here, they would completely and utterly blow your mind. If you think our gun control system is retarded, you should hear about our tax system and price level. Did I mention that I pay almost 40% of all my income in taxes? Oh yeah, that's right. On top of that we have food tax, commodity tax, car tax, road tax, fuel tax (70% of our fuel price are fees to the state), savings tax and so forth. A can of coke is 3.60$. One litre of gasoline is 2.6$. All to fuel the "welfare society" that is so easy to abuse by people who don't want to work. We even have muslim extremists, actively fighting in Syria and Afghanistan, who receive welfare money. Paid for by my tax money.
So, bottom line, I am no liberal socialist by any stretch of the imagination, and I would appreciate if people would ask questions regarding my stance or view on different issues, rather than assume things about my beliefs or character from reading a pretty non-revealing post.
You will soon be termed a "terrorist" for not complying and "Voila!" Your changed status makes you a third party to said "treaty".
I have no idea how people can keep their eyes closed nowadays. Granted, more are coming around but they need to be quick(ER) about it.
VooDoo6Actual
04-05-13, 14:37
@Voodoo6Actual:
It is much appreciated if you could use words I don't have to google. I am but a simple knuckle-dragger to whom English is a second language. So if you were trying to insult me, not saying you were, it would be more effective to use adjectives.
Sorry, I was not speaking to you.
Stop being pedantic.
Source UN office of drugs & crime.
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e225/teehee321/1365190170_zps92945572.jpg
Sorry, I was not speaking to you.
Stop being pedantic.
Source UN office of drugs & crime.
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e225/teehee321/1365190170_zps92945572.jpg
Allright, cool. No offense meant.
And I am not disagreeing with what is depicted in that picture. I agree.
Swell as in, 'nothing to see here, have no fear of this new international arms treaty from the UN, as always they hold your freedoms and liberties in the highest regard'.
Not the intention of my post, nor my belief, as I pointed out in my previous post.
Tell that to over 1 million butchered Rwandans.
Uhm, sort of my point.
And I am not nearly as sure of that as you seem to be. Not even in the same ballpark as sure.
Well, how do you believe it will negatively affect your 2A rights?
As you admit, you are not from here (in the U.S.). Perhaps you are right and we are seeing threats where none exists. On the other hand 1. it is better than not seeing them when they do. And 2. perhaps you should also acknowledge that you not being from these parts might actually mean we see and understand things you miss.
Never claimed otherwise.
Again, I simply do not agree. And as we see in the my second link, and comments on this thread, I am not the only one. Considering the present climate, I can see no downside with calling attention to this.
Sure, but I miss some factual arguments or points to be concerned about.
That remains to be seen.
I'm sorry, but you cannot comment on what I said when you take it out of context. I said it will have little effect on what it set out to stop, ie illegal trafficking of conventional arms. I don't think this treaty will have much of an effect on that. Bad guys will always find a way to get guns.
Norway has a homogeneous population of only about 5 million people (heck we have just about that many Norwegians in the US), simply enormous oil and gas wealth, a 3.0% (or there abouts) unemployment rate, what Forbes magazine called "a stunning per capita GDP of $57,000 a year", an enviable impressively low crime rate, a net national debt of $0.00, the largest budget surpluses in all of the developed world, and you are trying to compare our respective problems?
Well, respectfully, I never once compared your problems to our problems. And despite that those numbers paint a pretty picture, the grass is not that green. Although that is a topic for another thread. I was adressing the fact that one concern that has been voiced on this board, and in relation to anti-2A supporters, is the political leanings of the politicians in charge, and individuals supporting those views. Ie liberals, socialists. I know a thing or two about that mindset, that was the point that I was trying to make.
You are incredible. Even when I am clearly showing support for your cause, you still cherry-pick stuff from my posts to be contentious about. Why this incessant need to belittle people when you enter a discussion?
Then you use your words as poorly as anyone I have seen.
My reply in my first post was purely a factual observation that the ATT will not infringe on your 2A rights, based on how I read it. Never once did I even allude to being a fan of the UN, or the treaty for that matter. Show me where, if you think I did.
Did you even bother to read the link in my response post?
Yes. I was asking you to articulate your thoughts on the matter.
If you're bemoaning the expanding your use of the term "effect" to mean other possible effects instead of just a specific one, as taking what you posted 'out of all context', then you are not seriously interested in engaging in debate as an adult.
Jeez. You are creating a classic straw man argument doing what you did in your previous post. I did not mean anything other than what I wrote, that the treaty would likely have little effect on what it intends to do, namely reduce or stop illegal trafficking of conventional arms. By replying "that remains to be seen" to an out of context quote, it indicates that you construe my argument to mean something completely different.
And that explains your rather deliberately querulous, even snide, assertion?
Easily offended? Your attempt at outlining what I said in this way clearly shows that you read my post with the worst intent in mind:
I would argue that I [as a Norwegian] know it better than many of you [as Americans].
Not my intent at all. It was a general comment aimed at posts claiming that many are clueless and ignorant regarding how leftists/liberals et al work. Nothing more.
If you are going to go off on this tangent again, discussing all sorts of stuff not even related to the topic at hand, and throwing insults at me regarding my use of words or how I am not interested in having an adult conversaton, and that I am somehow claiming superiority over Americans on an issue...well, knock yourself out.
There is no need to attack me in this thread at all.
sinlessorrow
04-05-13, 16:49
Damn i don't think there is enough tin foil in the world to cover this thread.
Damn i don't think there is enough tin foil in the world to cover this thread.
One would think the sanguinoid would have awakened by now. Just 10 years ago did you HONESTLY think we'd be here defending the Second Amendment this way? Five years ago? Two years ago?
I sense that you would have been spouting "TIN FOIL!" not too long ago...
What about the 10 states that pushed and passed laws strengthening gun rights?
There are some states headed (albeit slowly for my own) in the right direction:
Received this email from the NRA-ILA today:
Mississippi: *NRA Members Score Major Victories During 2013 Legislative Session
The Mississippi Legislature adjourned sine die on Thursday, April 4, ending its 2013 legislative session.* Yet again, gun owners and sportsmen made significant gains thanks to the strong support of House Speaker Philip Gunn (R), Lieutenant Governor Tate Reeves (R), key committee chairmen and pro-Second Amendment lawmakers in both state legislative chambers.*
Governor Phil Bryant (R) has already signed several NRA-backed pro-gun measures into law:
*House Bill 2,*by House Judiciary B Committee Chairman Representative Andy Gipson (R-Braxton) and State Senator Giles Ward (R-Louisville), makes critical clarifications to Mississippi’s gun carry laws.* A 2012 state Attorney General’s opinion determined that it was unlawful under existing statutes for anyone to carry holstered, partially-visible pistols on their person.* Additionally, any concealed carry permit holder who temporarily or accidentally displayed their firearm when removing or adjusting a suit or sport jacket would be violating the law.* HB 2 revised the definition of concealed as it applies to the carrying of firearms by permit holders and non-permittees alike.* Rep. Gipson distributed the following memo explaining the intent and effects of this legislation as passed and enacted, which you can access*here. *This new law takes effect on July 1, 2013.
*House Bill 485,*by House Judiciary A Committee Chairman and state Representative Mark Baker (R-Brandon), ensures that personal information regarding carry permit holders and applicants remains confidential and exempt from the Mississippi Public Records.* This information is only to be released upon order of a court having proper jurisdiction over a petition for release of the record or records.**Mississippi is among the 38 states that now provide such privacy protection for law-abiding gun owners.
The state Legislature also passed key mental health and school security measures while taking those important steps to protect your rights:
*Senate Bill 2647,*by state Senator Briggs Hopson (R-Vicksburg), requires the state to report mental health adjudications, court-ordered commitments and other records to the federal NICS system that would disqualify someone from purchasing or possessing a firearm.* This measure brings Mississippi into compliance with the NICS Improvement Amendments Act, makes the state eligible for federal grant money to improve recordkeeping and reporting, and recognizes that the existing system’s effectiveness is tied to the quality of the data contained in it.
*Senate Bill 2659,*by state Senator Gray Tollison (R-Lafayette) on behalf of Lt. Governor Reeves, establishes “MCOPS” which is a grant program that will be administered by the Mississippi Department of Education to assist law enforcement agencies in providing additional School Resource Officers (SROs) to engage in community policing around primary and secondary schools.
-------
-Jax
VooDoo6Actual
04-05-13, 18:48
One would think the sanguinoid would have awakened by now. Just 10 years ago did you HONESTLY think we'd be here defending the Second Amendment this way? Five years ago? Two years ago?
I sense that you would have been spouting "TIN FOIL!" not too long ago...
Holy Tinfoil Hat Batman !
I haven't heard the word "sanguinoid" used for a while. IIRC, Chris Sullivan of NZ penned that one.
He wrote this one below as well. The last is my fav penned by him.
When the government says that the Spanish have blown up the Maine, wager that they're lying.
When the government says that withholding tax is a temporary wartime measure, wager that they're lying.
When the government says that U.S. ships have been attacked in the Gulf of Tonkin, wager that they're lying.
When the government says that the Swine Flu vaccine is safe, wager that they're lying.
When the government says that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, wager that they're lying.
When the government wants to control the internet for "national security" reasons, wager that they're lying.
Politicians are largely people without honor or courage, always bet that they're lying.
Whatever dude. Your need to twist what everyone else says, whilst still managing somehow to not reply to a single point with your own observations or thoughts is impressive, to say the least.
And your three visits to Norway has clearly made you an expert. You seriously did not understand the point I was trying to make, although I strongly believe you make an effort at that particular feat.
Have a good day.
VooDoo6Actual
04-06-13, 12:14
Another factual based OP Ed
This Cat is switched on & gets it. Keep in mind Obama sits at head of UN Security Council (which really has not been covered by the media) ...
Que / Cui Bono ?
http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2013/04/state-control-what-un-firearms-treaty.html
MountainRaven
04-06-13, 16:16
I would argue that neither side is really winning, outside of Colorado (a pretty major loss for the Good Guys).
I would instead argue that what we're seeing is each side consolidating their holds over what they already have.
jonconsiglio
04-06-13, 19:55
My understanding is that this needs a 2/3rd vote by congress to pass, correct?
Littlelebowski
04-06-13, 22:16
I have no doubt that anyone who says "whatever dude" and also begs another member here not to post comments containing 'big words' as they confound him, is rather easily impressed.
Cheers.
I'll bet real money on Arctic out shooting you on video and out debating you in his language. So how about you doing more for this community than being an ass in GD? Or name 2 carbine drills, he'll name two, and you both ante up like men. I know he does more than talk, how about you?
I'll bet real money on Arctic out shooting you on video and out debating you in his language. So how about you doing more for this community than being an ass in GD? Or name 2 carbine drills, he'll name two, and you both ante up like men. I know he does more than talk, how about you?
It's a shootoff!
/billy zane
Littlelebowski
04-06-13, 22:40
Imagine a forum where people spent more time shooting than running their sucks in GD.......
Imagine a forum where people spent more time shooting than running their sucks in GD.......
I shot today, ringing 1/4 man size steel with a 14.5" CL barrel and TA33 at 500 yds. Good times.
Damn i don't think there is enough tin foil in the world to cover this thread.
There will be if they melt down all of our receivers for the aluminum!!!!!!
Mauser KAR98K
04-06-13, 23:19
Imagine a forum where people spent more time shooting than running their sucks in GD.......
We can't. Ammo is in short supply.
We can't. Ammo is in short supply.
If you're motivated enough, you can get ammo.
Also, I am sad no one got my Zoolander reference. Is there no culture on this board?!
Littlelebowski
04-07-13, 05:56
You really thought that adding a little Massengill freshness to the thread was going to somehow improve things?
I had hoped it would keep you from taking the low road of being a strident ass sneering at someone on this forum to whom English is a second language but since you did take it, I suggested a shooter's friendly method of both making you like slightly more gentlemanly and shutting up. You're not a fan of shooting other than shooting off condescending remarks, I take it.
I would have put $100 cash on Arctic. Still will. Not that you're going to do more than talk shit from behind a computer screen. It's so much harder not to be an anonymous ass, isn't it?
Littlelebowski
04-07-13, 07:12
Hey Belloc, plenty of folks on here have shot with me and know me. Matter of fact, I'll be shooting with some forum members here next Saturday. Sort of negates your silly claim of me being anonymous.....
If you don't like me calling you for sneering at Arctic's English, don't be an ass. You could try to do more that bitch and whine in GD; you know, maybe talk about guns on a gun forum but simply not stooping to the level you did earlier would be fine. No one's asking that much of you.
Again, I note that shooting is not your forte?
I agree Arctic needs no help from me but when I see a GD troll such as yourself literally making fun of his language skills, I'm offended especially since he adds to this site with his knowledge on.....shooting guns. You add nothing. You're just another non shooting GD troll.
Littlelebowski
04-07-13, 07:47
Not going shooting today, Belloc? Busy expounding upon gentlemanly behavior? Maybe some important matters in GD to take care of?
Like I said, you're not much of a shooter. Definitely not much of a man to stoop to the juvenile level you are at and so often. But hey, you're really adding to this training and shooting oriented forum! When was the last time you say.....tested your own skills on a timer or insulted another man to his face?
polymorpheous
04-07-13, 08:20
Guys, what exactly is this bringing to the conversation?
jonconsiglio
04-07-13, 09:55
I think your attack on Artic1 is what got some people upset. He's a solid dude. I talked to him last night and he's not saying anything that you're claiming he is.
He agrees. It's easy to read into posts when there's no tone to pick up on.
My view on it... I just don't know enough about it to say. What I can say is that regardless of the outcome, I'd rather see us not sign it. I think we need to steer clear of UN treaties.
But again, doesn't this need a 2/3 senate vote?
I think your attack on Artic1 is what got some people upset. He's a solid dude. I talked to him last night and he's not saying anything that you're claiming he is.
He agrees. It's easy to read into posts when there's no tone to pick up on.
It is entirely possible that you are spot-on and I misread, or read too much into, his posts. However since I still believe they would use the Clean Water Act to ban guns if they could, and considering the appraisals of what in fact may be one of the true intentions of this treaty as explained in the links posted, his what seems to me to be almost brazenly cavalier dismissal of having any concerns about it whatsoever, I find wholly unsupportable.
jonconsiglio
04-07-13, 10:46
It is entirely possible that you are spot-on and I misread, or read too much into, his posts. However since I still believe they would use the Clean Water Act to ban guns if they could, and considering the appraisals of what in fact may be one of the true intentions of this treaty as explained in the links posted, his what seems to me to be almost brazenly cavalier dismissal of having any concerns about it whatsoever, I find wholly unsupportable.
I get what you're saying and I don't disagree about what they'd do if they could. But just take a breath for a second and look at it this way....
You are emotionally invested in this right now, and that's a good thing. Arctic comes along with English being his second language and points out that worrying too much about it might be a waste of time, but also fully supports your posts.
Those two things together were just a bad mix bro. You're heated about this topic (again, rightfully so) and his words may have been taken out of context. I talked to him last night and I'm certain his intentions were good.
I've read many posts from Arctic1 here and on Lightfighter, and I assure you he is a stand up guy, even though he may not be a US citizen (I'll fault his parents, not him for that!).
Believe me, a lot of us our angry about the way things are going. Let's just try not to take it out on each other.
Jon
Moose-Knuckle
04-08-13, 03:48
Guys, what exactly is this bringing to the conversation?
Absolutely nothing, that’s the point.
The idea is if a particular topic and or poster does not coincide with your own personal views on lighting rod topics like oh I don’t know say homosexuality for example then you simply troll said poster so as to get the thread locked and or get the other member banned. There’s at least three threads with this shit going on in them currently here in GD.
It’s no different than small children throwing their toys at one another except the small children have an excuse.
polymorpheous
04-08-13, 05:08
Absolutely nothing, that’s the point.
The idea is if a particular topic and or poster does not coincide with your own personal views on lighting rod topics like oh I don’t know say homosexuality for example then you simply troll said poster so as to get the thread locked and or get the other member banned. There’s at least three threads with this shit going on in them currently here in GD.
It’s no different than small children throwing their toys at one another except the small children have an excuse.
I'm gonna troll you for your lack of commas in your response.
:jester:
VooDoo6Actual
04-08-13, 09:31
Absolutely nothing, that’s the point.
The idea is if a particular topic and or poster does not coincide with your own personal views on lighting rod topics like oh I don’t know say homosexuality for example then you simply troll said poster so as to get the thread locked and or get the other member banned. There’s at least three threads with this shit going on in them currently here in GD.
It’s no different than small children throwing their toys at one another except the small children have an excuse.
100% spot on.
The Kabuki theatre seems fairly obvious.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.