JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Messages
784
Reactions
1,409
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/...un-violence-reform-report-20160217-story.html
I get the whole slippery slope and that these laws are pretty much already available to law enforcement but my reason for posting this is if they want a direct attack on domestic violence with firearms as they seem so concerned about in this article then as law abiding firearms owners, "What guarantees do we get" "I want some guarantees spelled out" of course I know there won't be any, but, just getting it out there.
 
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/...un-violence-reform-report-20160217-story.html
I get the whole slippery slope and that these laws are pretty much already available to law enforcement but my reason for posting this is if they want a direct attack on domestic violence with firearms as they seem so concerned about in this article then as law abiding firearms owners, "What guarantees do we get" "I want some guarantees spelled out" of course I know there won't be any, but, just getting it out there.
You'll never get it.
The best you can hope for is a sunset clause based on available data. When the sunset clause hit on the AWB, they looked it up and realized it wasn't worth it.

And I doubt they'll give you that because they know this is pure smokescreen. Once they take those rights they'll never give them back.
 
You'll never get it.
The best you can hope for is a sunset clause based on available data. When the sunset clause hit on the AWB, they looked it up and realized it wasn't worth it.

And I doubt they'll give you that because they know this is pure smokescreen. Once they take those rights they'll never give them back.

That would be like the airlines NOT charging baggage fees now that they are back in the black. They will never not charge a baggage fee regardless of the profit margin.
 
Idiots, do all 37 of them agree on this?

Do any of the millions of us believe that a "guarantee" from the lib elite would be worth the tird it was written on?
 
if your asking for guarantees, what your really saying is your willing to compromise. Every time you compromise you lose something.

The article addresses ways to take away guns from domestic abusers by proposing two things (paraphrased) 1) change Federal law to prohibit people with restraining orders from guns... 2) take away guns from individuals identified as domestic abusers by having been issued a restraining order.

That debate is nothing new. To summarize, the compromise here is the removal of due process, a restraining order is not a conviction. I don't see at all what the gun rights guarantee would be?

Instead of compromising our rights to lying nefarious "significant others" who just want to create you hardship with no ramifications, we should be demanding due process. What if a restraining order demanded a conviction of menacing and harrassment and assault?
 

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top