I figure this topic could keep us busy for awhile. Would like to hear serious opinions w/ some pros & cons... Here we go!!

Some of the main legislative proposals backed by Obama and Vice President Joe Biden are:
1•requiring criminal background checks on all gun sales, including private sales
2•banning "military-style" assault weapons
3•limiting ammunition magazines to 10 rounds
4•strengthening penalties for gun trafficking

So, who gets in trouble for "Fast and Furious?"

My thoughts are IMPEACH.

#1 Is pretty much unenforceable
#2 I can see happening
#3 Makes no sense at all
#4 I'm all for it

#1 Unenforcebale
#2 NOT gonna happen
#3 Maybe
#4 Shoulda been done on the Mexican border during Fast and Furious

Fact is, I am still trying to figure out how anyone (B.O.) could possibly get 100% of the vote in those pennsylvania precints unless it was rigged, with not 1 vote going to Romney. 19000 to 0 votes, with not one even accidental vote to R?????

Wasn't just Pennsylvania that happened. Ohio had quite a few that way also.



1, Can see them enacting that
2, Take an act of Conress
3. Stupid
4. All for it, beginning with Fast and Furious please

How ironic that our nation's first African-American president will go down in history as the one who became the greatest threat to citizen's rights.

It doesn't really matter what they pass, what they say is right or wrong, or what they say is detrimental to our safety. Most legislation they will bring up and/or pass will make ordinary folks like the majority on THF into criminals. Examples from the OP...
1) Background: Are you going to pass up buying a gun because the seller doesn't want to mess with checking your background or are you not going to run a background check on your best friend which makes your sale illegal. Criminal.

2) "Assault Weapons": Are you going to register the SKS or AR you bought paper free? They may grandfather you in, but make you register your weapon. I would be willing to bet no. Criminal.

3) Magazines: Like New York you can grandfather the 10 or 15 rd magazines but only put seven live rounds in the mag (that is if you register it). Limit my wife to seven rounds when I can put 15 in my mag and take a chance of seven not getting the point across in a break-in. I don't think so. Criminal. (Heck, they passed that one so fast they didn't even realize they might have made it illegal for police to carry more than seven rounds in a mag. Genius)

4) Strengthening Penalties: I am all for it. Just a crying shame that everyone that pulls these idiotic crimes just so happens to be mentally incompetent and unable to pass a sanity test. Wouldn't that be the case of any person that pulled this BS? They should be tried and prosecuted to the fullest extent no matter their mental state or lack there of.

And then during the press conference where they partially discussed the proposals, calling said proposals common sense like those of us against it had none. They have a lot of nerve and it saddens me the ignorance of the country and our political leaders.

What is sad is that the people who "allegedly" voted for nobama the first time fell for his BS and voted for him again. Thats a sign of insanity, doing the same thing twice and expecting a different result.

The laws they are trying to pass are all based on emotion, not facts. Look at chicago, strict firearms laws and notorious crime problems. This is all BS that I hope blows over soon.

What is sad is that the people who "allegedly" voted for nobama the first time fell for his BS and voted for him again. Thats a sign of insanity, doing the same thing twice and expecting a different result.

The laws they are trying to pass are all based on emotion, not facts. Look at chicago, strict firearms laws and notorious crime problems. This is all BS that I hope blows over soon.

Man, this post should take off like a wildfire......my
Although, they sound good to some anti-gun people and to some effect, gun owners...I don't think this Executive Decree by the King will work. The only effect of these decrees will be penalizing the law-abiding gun owner. Why does our government need lists of law abiding people all the time?
1) Will Johnny Crackhead go through a criminal background checks when he sells or buys a gun? NO. Selling any handguns without proper paperwork will hit the law abiding citizen only.
2) What exactly defines a "military style assault weapon?" You can buy some hunting rifles with detached magazines and semi-auto function. Last time this was enacted, gun manufacturers just changed the way the weapon looked to not appear so "military style" and sold reduced capacity magazines. Plus, 10 round clips can be taped together to allow quick changes.
3) Read number 2 again. If someone broke into my house...I'd feel more comfortable with my 13 plus 1 rounds in my Sig to meet and greet them. Is my Sig now illegal too?
4) Yeah right, then how come no one involved in Fast & Furious is doing time?
I want to see the Obama try Executive Orders on any other amendments and see how that goes. Your Constitution was written for the sole purposes of limiting our government from tyrannical rule. The words of our Founding Father's have meaning. Don't bend to the current leader who feels the US Constitution is impediment to his dictatorship.

President Obama did not pass a law, he passed a Presidential Order. He did it to show his stance. It was a political move and is not the same as a law.

I doubt all of those will pass.

Personally, I thought we all had to do background checks already.. heh.

I do not care, they won't ever take my hunting guns and they can talk about banning semi-auto hunting guns all day, but they can only talk.

Just keep writing your congressmen so they know we are all listening, but relax...it is not going to be as bad as it seems and it will be what it will be no matter that. Congress will exact it's flesh from someone or something, we just get it back when we vote.

R

Not going to happen, too many dem senate seats coming up at midterm and it will never get past the house.

Yup.

I just heard Megyn Kelly on Fox News state that Harry Reid has been cited saying that he doesn't feel he has the votes in order to pass something like this. The dems would have to pass it in the Senate first in order for Obama to go back to his strategy of, "Look at these damn Republicans. They don't love children. They're the ones who want your children to die. Not us, it's them."

1. Not sure how I feel about this. I would have to see what gets defined as "gun sales." Philosophically, I'm for it. HOWEVER, on a practical sense I'm opposed to it. To me, this would give too much of a gray area for LE and DAs to screw you on some technicality.
2. NO! This standing alone as a bill would die for sure.
3. See answer to #2.
4. A HUGE, emphatic YES! And how about we start with that criminal Eric Holder.

i think one of the issues moving forward is how many of these measures are wrapped together. We'll see. i hope this sort of kills the craze.

Even Harry Reid will vote against Obummer's proposals, or he'll lose his job.....and he knows it. That's why he backpedalled faster than Michael Jackson when asked in an interview the other day, Nevada is a gun state!

Dead in the water!

.

.

Folded like a cheap suitcase. Thank you cheap suitcases.