5 Facts Proving ‘They Are Coming For Your Guns’ Is Not A Conspiracy Theory

[GURPS]

1. The mainstream media is openly calling for the repeal of the Second Amendment
It is no secret that every time there are reports of a mass shooting, there are a number of politicians who openly call for gun control, but there has recently been an increase in media outlets joining the anti-gun bandwagon. The Miami Herald published an Op-Ed titled, “Repeal The Second Amendment—It’s Not A Crazy Idea.” Rolling Stone published an explanation on “Why It’s Time To Repeal The Second Amendment.” And USA Today stated, “Repeal The Second Amendment. It’s The Only Way Towards Real Change.”

2. Students are parroting the claims and using their platforms as victims of gun violence to push for a ban on guns
Parkland Shooting survivor David Hogg has become the face of the student activist movement against guns, and the demands are troubling. The students are openly supporting a ban on guns that have been deemed “assault rifles,” a ban on high-capacity magazines, a federal background check “on every gun sale,” increasing taxes on gun sales and raising the minimum age to own a gun to 21.

3. Law Enforcement officials are also calling for a ban on guns—which means they would be the only ones with guns

4. States are chipping away at the constitutional rights granted by the Second Amendment by passing laws banning guns that have been deemed “assault rifles”

5. Congress recently passed legislation that gives federal agencies power over gun control, effectively putting every American’s Second Amendment rights at risk
When gun control legislation was introduced in Congress last year, it came in the form of the Fix NICS Act, which was later rebranded as the STOP School Violence Act and signed into law in March after it was quietly included in the 2018 Omnibus Appropriations bill. The legislation amends the agencies that have control over the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, which determines whether Americans are allowed to own guns.



5 Facts Proving ‘They Are Coming For Your Guns’ Is Not A Conspiracy Theory



Queue ....

 

[black dog]

Most likely true where you live, but not where I live..

 

[hitchicken]

Please stomp on me gently for my opinion. I'm sensitive.

I am pro-2nd amendment. I agree with background checks. That's it.

Many crimes and school shootings occur with stolen guns or guns taken or 'borrowed' from legal owner relatives.

That said, the flaw seems to be that the original gun purchaser and owner seems to be lackadaisical with regard to keeping their guns out of the other people's hands. If stolen, they just say, "Oh, well. That gun wasn't very expensive. I'll just go buy another one to replace it." They seem tone deaf about the harm that can be done with a gun that is no longer in their protected and level-headed ownership.

If the original gun owner/purchaser were made partially responsible for any crime committed with their stolen gun (and suffered some legal consequence), you can bet they would go to extreme lengths to keep their weapons are secure. Lock it up when not in use or needed. Don't loan your gun to your whacky nephew...

For those of you who like to compare car ownership with gun ownership (apples and oranges, I think), cars are generally more expensive and people go to great measures to keep them from being stolen (take keys, park in garage, alarm systems, GPS tracking, Lo-Jack, etc.) I'm not counting the whack jobs who leave their keys in the running car's ignition to pop in to a convenience store.

Maybe if all guns were as expensive as typical luxury cars, the owners might want to protect them better. Of course, then they become more valuable for a thief to want to steal them. (Sigh...)

In any case, this is my opinion and I like to hear some thoughts.

The HitChicken

 

[MiddleGround]

Maybe if all guns were as expensive as typical luxury cars, the owners might want to protect them better. Of course, then they become more valuable for a thief to want to steal them. (Sigh...)

I agree with Chris Rock. "We wouldn't have a gun problem if bullets cost $5K a piece!"

"Damn.. he musta really hated him. He pumped $50K worth of bullets into his azz!"

 

[hitchicken]

I agree with Chris Rock. "We wouldn't have a gun problem if bullets cost $5K a piece!"

"Damn.. he musta really hated him. He pumped $50K worth of bullets into his azz!"

Artificially inflated pricing. They would proliferate on the black market at cheap prices. Won't work.

 

[black dog]

Please stomp on me gently for my opinion. I'm sensitive.

I am pro-2nd amendment. I agree with background checks. That's it.

Many crimes and school shootings occur with stolen guns or guns taken or 'borrowed' from legal owner relatives.

That said, the flaw seems to be that the original gun purchaser and owner seems to be lackadaisical with regard to keeping their guns out of the other people's hands. If stolen, they just say, "Oh, well. That gun wasn't very expensive. I'll just go buy another one to replace it." They seem tone deaf about the harm that can be done with a gun that is no longer in their protected and level-headed ownership.

If the original gun owner/purchaser were made partially responsible for any crime committed with their stolen gun (and suffered some legal consequence), you can bet they would go to extreme lengths to keep their weapons are secure. Lock it up when not in use or needed. Don't loan your gun to your whacky nephew...

For those of you who like to compare car ownership with gun ownership (apples and oranges, I think), cars are generally more expensive and people go to great measures to keep them from being stolen (take keys, park in garage, alarm systems, GPS tracking, Lo-Jack, etc.) I'm not counting the whack jobs who leave their keys in the running car's ignition to pop in to a convenience store.

Maybe if all guns were as expensive as typical luxury cars, the owners might want to protect them better. Of course, then they become more valuable for a thief to want to steal them. (Sigh...)

In any case, this is my opinion and I like to hear some thoughts.

The HitChicken

Do you believe that you should do a background check when you give or sell a firearm to a family member or friend?

 

[LightRoasted]

If I may ...

December 15, 1791. The ratification of the Bill of Rights. England. A country without a Constitution nor a Bill of Rights. England. With the most draconian firearm and weapons laws. A free people they do not have. England, now being hailed as "Wild West Britain". Oh yeah. Those laws sure do work. Maybe if nations, states, such as ours, instead focused on the individuals using inanimate objects to wound and kill? Maybe?

 

[black dog]

Artificially inflated pricing. They would proliferate on the black market at cheap prices. Won't work.

I have enough primers / smokeless for my family's next two generations to shoot a few hundred rds a week until they are dead if not longer.

 

[hitchicken]

Do you believe that you should do a background check when you give or sell a firearm to a family member or friend?

No, not you specifically. You or I would not know how. But having a government agency do a background check (same one as gun dealers do perhaps) seems reasonable before completing the transfer (again, just like the dealer would).

 

[black dog]

No, not you specifically. You or I would not know how. But having a government agency do a background check (same one as gun dealers do perhaps) seems reasonable before completing the transfer (again, just like the dealer would).

. You would be,,,,,, you have to do transfer at a State Police Barracks or pay a FFL to do transfer.
Just like you already have to do in MD.
Same question ,,, should a background check be done when you give or sell a firearm to a family member or a know friend?
Should it just be done with a handgun?
Should it be done with a long gun?

 

[hitchicken]

If I may ...

December 15, 1791. The ratification of the Bill of Rights. England. A country without a Constitution nor a Bill of Rights. England. With the most draconian firearm and weapons laws. A free people they do not have. England, now being hailed as "Wild West Britain". Oh yeah. Those laws sure do work. Maybe if nations, states, such as ours, instead focused on the individuals using inanimate objects to wound and kill? Maybe?

So you're saying giving those 'individuals' easy access to your 'inanimate objects' get to slide?... Totally? Sure. focus on the individual a lot, but don't give a totally blind eye to the original owner/purchaser who makes no attempt to secure their gun in a reasonable fashion.

 

[MiddleGround]

Artificially inflated pricing. They would proliferate on the black market at cheap prices. Won't work.

What if gun powder were that much? Would that mean that people would be making their own powder too?

 

[black dog]

So you're saying giving those 'individuals' easy access to your 'inanimate objects' get to slide?... Totally? Sure. focus on the individual a lot, but don't give a totally blind eye to the original owner/purchaser who makes no attempt to secure their gun in a reasonable fashion.

What's easy access?
What's a secure reasonable fashion please?

 

[hitchicken]

Simple answer. "Yes."

I'm not going nitty-gritty to start picking and choosing gun types, but I say all gun types that are sold by dealers that require a background check should require private sale background checks as well and in the same way.

 

[hitchicken]

What's easy access?
What's a secure reasonable fashion please?

You're asking me to complete a detailed, flawless, include all possible specifics plan. I can't do that nor would I. Please don't try destroy the idea with a 'flood' of excessive detail requires. I am suggesting an idea, not a exhaustive plan ready for the governor's desk.

 

[hitchicken]

What if gun powder were that much? Would that mean that people would be making their own powder too?

Gunpowder can easily be made by other foreign countries. Completed cheap bullets can be smuggled into the USA. You don't have to make gunpowder, bullets or guns for the black market. Foreign entities will do that for you. Everything on the black market is not homemade, you know.

 

[hitchicken]

What's easy access?
What's a secure reasonable fashion please?

Let the geniuses and investigative committees in government figure that out as well as the penalties for each case. We each have are own ideas, I sure.

 

[LightRoasted]

If I my ...

So you're saying giving those 'individuals' easy access to your 'inanimate objects' get to slide?... Totally? Sure. focus on the individual a lot, but don't give a totally blind eye to the original owner/purchaser who makes no attempt to secure their gun in a reasonable fashion.

If society were to prosecute and not put up with people using firearms in the commission of a crime or to kill or maim someone in the first place, then we would not be having this kind of problem. But there is no consistency in the application and enforcement of current law. But low and behold, we have a complicit media that will bleed the airwaves dry with the constant pounding of the latest use, while never mentioning the inherently already illegal usage of the firearm, that firearms are bad and need to be banned. And here you are, thinking and spewing the same BS propaganda as thoughtful and reasoned questions. Are you so insecure with yourself, so fearful of others, lack any ability to fend for yourself, that you feel the need to take away from others their ability? Others that have no problem defending themselves or others in any manner they choose, as well as their defense with any class of firearm?

 

[hitchicken]

If I my ...



If society were to prosecute and not put up with people using firearms in the commission of a crime or to kill or maim someone in the first place, then we would not be having this kind of problem. But there is no consistency in the application and enforcement of current law. But low and behold, we have a complicit media that will bleed the airwaves dry with the constant pounding of the latest use, while never mentioning the inherently already illegal usage of the firearm, that firearms are bad and need to be banned. And here you are, thinking and spewing the same BS propaganda as thoughtful and reasoned questions. Are you so insecure with yourself, so fearful of others, lack any ability to fend for yourself, that you feel the need to take away from others their ability? Others that have no problem defending themselves or others in any manner they choose, as well as their defense with any class of firearm?

Now, you are being less than truthful. "And here you are, thinking and spewing the same BS propaganda as thoughtful and reasoned questions." I have never suggested, in any way shape or form, that "firearms are bad and need to be banned" in my posts and threads. You made that up. You know what that makes you, right?

"Are you so insecure with yourself, so fearful of others, lack any ability to fend for yourself, that you feel the need to take away from others their ability?" Where, in any of my threads and posts did I say take away anything from anybody. As a matter of fact, I'd like to see fewer restrictions on guns (short of gnd to air heat seeking missiles.).

Show me and others where I did any of your accusations. You can't because you are not being honest.

 

[Ken King]

Please stomp on me gently for my opinion. I'm sensitive.

I am pro-2nd amendment. I agree with background checks. That's it.

Many crimes and school shootings occur with stolen guns or guns taken or 'borrowed' from legal owner relatives.

That said, the flaw seems to be that the original gun purchaser and owner seems to be lackadaisical with regard to keeping their guns out of the other people's hands. If stolen, they just say, "Oh, well. That gun wasn't very expensive. I'll just go buy another one to replace it." They seem tone deaf about the harm that can be done with a gun that is no longer in their protected and level-headed ownership.

If the original gun owner/purchaser were made partially responsible for any crime committed with their stolen gun (and suffered some legal consequence), you can bet they would go to extreme lengths to keep their weapons are secure. Lock it up when not in use or needed. Don't loan your gun to your whacky nephew...

For those of you who like to compare car ownership with gun ownership (apples and oranges, I think), cars are generally more expensive and people go to great measures to keep them from being stolen (take keys, park in garage, alarm systems, GPS tracking, Lo-Jack, etc.) I'm not counting the whack jobs who leave their keys in the running car's ignition to pop in to a convenience store.

Maybe if all guns were as expensive as typical luxury cars, the owners might want to protect them better. Of course, then they become more valuable for a thief to want to steal them. (Sigh...)

In any case, this is my opinion and I like to hear some thoughts.

The HitChicken

Gently? Okay.

Easy and quick, if you are "pro-2nd amendment", how can you be okay with any manner of infringement on the citizen's right to keep and bear arms? Each and every one of us has the innate right to protect ourselves, our families, our property, and others from devious intent (by individuals, groups, or governments) and any interference from the government, as to the type of arm, how to store an arm, or how to acquire an arm, is anti-2nd amendment.