National Joe Biden's first official gun control statement as president

[Yotehunt]

I know who is defending me...

 

[Member 53328]

FOLKS....consider for a moment.

Post #9
…...until I see pen hit paper and cops show at my door I am not going to allow it to "scare me."

My Post #10
Every little thing…..Is gonna be alright.
Until it's not.
Meaning: Hummm...."....until I see pen hit paper and the cops show at my door". So post #10 was my response to the (what I call a) "complacent attitude" displayed in post #9. Don't get me wrong....I'm NOT saying that anyone or everyone has to care or give a $@^*. It's a free country.

BTW.....the song is IMHO.....a great one.

My Post #11
RASTAMAN.
Meaning: Rrrrright…..it's what Bob Marley (from post #10) is known for (besides his music). So he smokes MJ (as a "religious practice") and he likes being high. Yup. And then, it's been my observation that MJ smokers don't usually seem to care much (call it complacent perhaps) about anything except maybe getting/being high. MAYBE.....not to different, from the attitude in post #9? Complacent.

The Govt is more and more allowing for the recreational use of MJ so......
Hillary: What difference does it make?
The voters win some and lose some (or just lose). Cough, cough....
Meaning: Think maybe.....that it could be all part of the Govt's plan? Getting/keeping people high and addicted? Evidence: Decriminalization and subsidizing bad behavior. Why? So that those in Power (the Govt)….can F@^*s you/us over? Cough, cough.....is that cough from smoking or to express....some disbelief?

Post #12
Once again who cares if MJ is legal. Alcohol is legal and way more deadly and addictive. I don't see your point here.

My Post #14
HA, Ha, ha......put it down.
Meaning: I assume, that some of us do indulge. Even if only once in a while. So, put down (whatever it happens to be) take a break. Clear your head.

Do it for the kids.
Meaning: Kids learn a lot from their parents behaviors/addictions. Yeah…..the Anti- crowd uses that argument/reasoning a lot. Probably too much.

PS….look over here, not over there.
Meaning: Look at what The Govt. did for you. Rrrright....The Govt is allowing more people, more paths, to get high and addicted. You don't have to care about.....your guns. Or, how or why.....those that hold The Power is about to/going to screw you or the country over. Just sit back and be a good/compliant (or complacent) subject.

Aloha, Mark

Thanks for clarifying.

 

[4Freedom]

How much you want to bet after 4 years Biden won't legalize nothing (including weed), but will make sure to ban plenty. The last thing Biden wants is to shrink a bureaucratic branch of government (DEA). Just as Biden is going to have to spend billions increasing the power and authority of the ATF with his draconian gun control measures he is planning.

But, hey, they are printing lots of money to redistribute to everyone. As long as the sheep get free cash from the Federal Reserve monopoly money printing factory, they will willingly throw away all their freedoms to the wolves.. Just like someone trapping a bunch of rodents with cheese or peanut butter, they are luring in all the mindless people with their free monopoly money and promises of miracle world of economic recovery after magical vaccines come and save us all.

Yeah, Biden, Harris, Pelosi, Schumer and Company are going to attempt to disarm 100,000,000+ Americans for one shooting that happened 3 years ago. 769 people were murdered in Chicago last year with illegally obtained guns, mostly pistols, not the "heinous" AR-15.. Yet, somehow its not really worthy of a mention, since it is mostly minorities in poor neighborhoods, involved in gang, drug and other illegal activity wrecking havoc on the innocent victims of their own community. Kind of funny how he is going to wage a Second Civil War so he can prevent a school shooting. And, believe me, if you are naive enough to think this is going to be an Assault Weapon Ban, think again. Kamala Harris, Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez are running the show and the ultra radical leftist Democrats who support them are all crying for Australian style gun buybacks and nothing else. Assault Weapon Ban was so 2008.. That is not the Democrat party of today. And, yes it is the Democrat party as a whole (and no, not every single one of them), not just the puppet Biden who is pushing for this draconian Communist/Nazi era type legislation. As well, I do think if people are willing to riot and burn down America for the George Floyd episode, they will be willing even more willing to stand up to even the Federal government (if that is how it goes down) to disarm 100,000,000 Americans.

Oh yes, this is nothing about saving children... They will have to kill lots of once law-abiding people to actually enforce these laws.. Unless the laws are passed but are not enforced like we are seeing with our marijuana laws. It will be 1000s, if not 10000s of Parklands ..But, if you are against Big Joe and Kamala, you being killed is just a necessary action and you don't count as a real victim. The Nazis never considered all the Jewish children they gunned down and eventually sent to gas chambers as victims of mass murder. They were merely terrorists and threats to the rules and sovereignty of the bureaucracy who had to be "dealt with".

Of course, we can pray for the Supreme Court to help us, but then their next step will be to pack the courts and believe me they will try to do it. ANd, it will lead to a much worse fiasco.

The Libertarianish Republican in me is quite nauseated.

 

[ma96782]

Biden calls on Congress to ban assault weapons

Sunday marked the third anniversary of the Parkland school shooting.

www.yahoo.com

Time to impeach him for.....

Violation of his Oath of Office.

See how that works? Yeah....they used that one with TRUMP too.

Aloha, Mark

 

[NW Backpacker]

Would you be so kind as to point me in a direction so I'm more informed? PM it if that will be more comfortable for you...
I'd not be happy were I to find we couldn't have civil discourse on a given subject here. We each have opinions & views and that's the exact rationale as to why we should be able to discuss it. We may not agree with each other but to say we can't discuss an issue, as long as it's civil, is absolutely wrong!

Dan

I think this is the increased moderation he is referring to:

Announcement - The Future of Northwest Firearms

This message was sent to our members on August 31st, 2020. It is posted here for reference. If you have any questions, please contact @Joe Link. ============ For better or worse, Northwest Firearms has been my life's work. Watching this grow from a spur of the moment idea to a thriving...

www.northwestfirearms.com

It would be entertaining to read the complaints that resulted in the increased moderation.

 

[The Heretic]

Biden pledges action on guns amid resistance

White House officials met last week with several gun violence prevention groups as they weigh how to move forward on an issue that has stymied Democrats for years.The White House says Presiden…

thehill.com

 

[Mikej]

Biden pledges action on guns amid resistance

White House officials met last week with several gun violence prevention groups as they weigh how to move forward on an issue that has stymied Democrats for years.The White House says Presiden…

thehill.com

This stuff ^^ drives me crazy. It's the same thing over and over. Stricter gun laws, banning features and certain types of guns. There's no point in reading past the first paragraph and a half. If that much even.

Here's a message to any member of these "Gun Safety" groups that may peruse our websites...... Push for laws that give life without parole sentences to people who use guns illegally! It's that damned simple. YOU, "Law Makers".... you can work out the fine points of exactly what degree of gun crime will get life in prison. Certainly robbing a mini-market with a gun and shooting the clerk in the process will net you life in prison. No parole if you see fit. Where, on a lesser gun crime where no one was injured, but a less serious gun law was broken, life in prison may not be appropriate. And YOU, "Common Sense" gun law pushers, you want "Equity"? Everybody in the democrat party wants "Equity"! Equity would be the justice system being blind to skin color/sex. Under the new laws everybody that commits violent gun crime goes to jail the same.

We, the legal firearms owners of America, are tired of being ignored! Passing laws that punish the law abiding Americans and let repeat criminals walk the streets are the epitome of stupidity!

 

[The Heretic]

Push for laws that give life without parole sentences to people who use guns illegally! It's that damned simple.

Yes and no. Devil in the details.

The problem with such laws is how it is applied and what is currently an "illegal gun usage" - that can include simply carrying one concealed without a permit - something (constitutional carry) that should be legal, but often is not. That is not to mention what they would tack onto such laws.

So I would support adding to the sentence of someone who actually uses a gun in a violent crime (including robbery, burglary) and so on, but not simply for having a gun in ones possession when doing something non-violent (e.g., drug possession).

Thing is, we already have laws like that.

II would also support usage of a gun in a crime resulting in prohibiting all gun possession in the future - but that doesn't really help with felons as typically they already are a prohibited person in most cases.

Remove non-violent drug possession offenders from incarceration to make room for replacing them with violent offenders.

Then send out warrant service squads to round up violent offenders with warrants against them. Currently most PDs do not do this even though they have a pretty good idea of where these criminals can be found. It has been shown that 80% of the crime is committed by 20% of the criminals, typically repeat offenders. Taking these criminals out of circulation would go far to reduce crime, especially violent crime.

 

[Mikej]

Yes and no. Devil in the details.

The problem with such laws is how it is applied and what is currently an "illegal gun usage" - that can include simply carrying one concealed without a permit - something (constitutional carry) that should be legal, but often is not. That is not to mention what they would tack onto such laws.

So I would support adding to the sentence of someone who actually uses a gun in a violent crime (including robbery, burglary) and so on, but not simply for having a gun in ones possession when doing something non-violent (e.g., drug possession).

Thing is, we already have laws like that.

II would also support usage of a gun in a crime resulting in prohibiting all gun possession in the future - but that doesn't really help with felons as typically they already are a prohibited person in most cases.

Remove non-violent drug possession offenders from incarceration to make room for replacing them with violent offenders.

Then send out warrant service squads to round up violent offenders with warrants against them. Currently most PDs do not do this even though they have a pretty good idea of where these criminals can be found. It has been shown that 80% of the crime is committed by 20% of the criminals, typically repeat offenders. Taking these criminals out of circulation would go far to reduce crime, especially violent crime.

Let the politicians work out the details. Jail people that need jailing. The point is, leave the law abiding gun owners the hell alone!

 

[The Heretic]

Let the politicians work out the details. Jail people that need jailing. The point is, leave the law abiding gun owners the hell alone!

Letting politicians work out the details is a major part of the problem.

 

[E4mafia]

Question,

To those here on this site who voted Biden knowing full well his intentions with the 2A and now this, are you planning on fighting against this in any capacity?

I get this is only in the introduction phase right now but this is also the same guy who made the crime bill which later had feinstein roll the AWB into it and then Clinton signed it.

Will we see some unison to stop this or? Let's keep it single issue exclusive to why we are here, the 2A we supposedly all love and don't want to lose regardless of political affiliation.

Quick refresher: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban
Feinstein is still active btw as are most the other grabber pals who've been in for quite awhile along with the newer faces. They also control all 3 branches currently too.

View attachment 826982

Curious to hear from any new gun owners who recently joined after 2020 to the tune of 7 million that has been reported. If you are new and reading this what is your input after reading pic related above and living thru the 2020 events that made you purchase a gun/guns to begin with.

Bumpingy question again as none have responded and also adding this in now.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1361791155583729664

For those who don't want to visit twitter:
NEW: At a press conference today, Press Sec. Jen Psaki said that Pres. Biden is "not afraid of standing up to the NRA" and won't rule out using executive orders to enforce stricter gun control measures


Hoping you can give us all an answer sooner rather than later to my question above and not duck it. That question again: for those that voted for Biden knowing full well his intentions with the 2A will you join in unison to fight against his/co from taking our rights either via EO/congress actions - will you try to stop it?

 

[wired]

Bumpingy question again as none have responded and also adding this in now.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1361791155583729664

For those who don't want to visit twitter:
NEW: At a press conference today, Press Sec. Jen Psaki said that Pres. Biden is "not afraid of standing up to the NRA" and won't rule out using executive orders to enforce stricter gun control measures


Hoping you can give us all an answer sooner rather than later to my question above and not duck it. That question again: for those that voted for Biden knowing full well his intentions with the 2A will you join in unison to fight against his/co from taking our rights either via EO/congress actions - will you try to stop it?

Nothing he can do without Congress. EO's are clarifications of existing laws. If it isnt there it isnt there. He can ban imports of some guns and gun parts like Bush , Clinton , Bush and Obama did for violation of existing laws. Thats legal like it or not. New legislation by EO ...not legal. He's got two years to pass a few feeble spending bills, some pro labor stuff, usual Democrat stuff . A 50/50 Senate isnt going to go along with sweeping gun reform. They want to get more seats not lose them. They want to keep their jobs. Remember that the next time you advocate for Congressional term limits.

 

[E4mafia]

Nothing he can do without Congress. EO's are clarifications of existing laws. If it isnt there it isnt there. He can ban imports of some guns and gun parts like Bush , Clinton , Bush and Obama did for violation of existing laws. Thats legal like it or not. New legislation by EO ...not legal. He's got two years to pass a few feeble spending bills, some pro labor stuff, usual Democrat stuff . A 50/50 Senate isnt going to go along with sweeping gun reform. They want to get more seats not lose them. They want to keep their jobs. Remember that the next time you advocate for Congressional term limits.

Ok then why did people pitch a fit over trumps EO on bumpstocks?

It also deflects from the original question as well about if anyone who voted Biden plans on standing against and fighting any attempts. So far I hear 0 uproar from that front. This whole site was up in arms when trump's EO for bumpstocks was going on tho. Brought up in fact in another thread just the other day matter of fact.

Also hoping you mention this to Psaki and current standing administration too. I also don't get the last comment about term limits but I've seen you post that at least a few times now in other threads

 

[wired]

Ok then why did people pitch a fit over trumps EO on bumpstocks?

It also deflects from the original question as well about if anyone who voted Biden plans on standing against and fighting any attempts. So far I hear 0 uproar from that front. This whole site was up in arms when trump's EO for bumpstocks was going on tho. Brought up in fact in another thread just the other day matter of fact.

Also hoping you mention this to Psaki and current standing administration too. I also don't get the last comment about term limits but I've seen you post that at least a few times now in other threads

Trump did not issue an EO over bumpstocks.

He directed the acting head of the ATF to ban bumpstocks . It was an executive action. Almost everything the Executive does casually is an Executive Action. It had no force of law.

 

[E4mafia]

Trump did not issue an EO over bumpstocks.

Trump takes executive action to ban bump stocks that increase weapons' firepower

President Trump signed an order to regulate the use of bump stocks, effectively banning the devices that allow rifles to mimic automatic weapons.

www.usatoday.com

Memo to sessions to take action and all necessary steps. Came from trump. I sure as hell wasn't happy about this. I also recall the thread having many pages deep debates over it. All sides participated.

Now it's awful quiet from one side when asked a simple question.

 

[wired]

Trump takes executive action to ban bump stocks that increase weapons' firepower

President Trump signed an order to regulate the use of bump stocks, effectively banning the devices that allow rifles to mimic automatic weapons.

www.usatoday.com

Memo to sessions to take action and all necessary steps. Came from trump. I sure as hell wasn't happy about this. I also recall the thread having many pages deep debates over it. All sides participated.

Now it's awful quiet from one side when asked a simple question.

Do you know what an Executive Order is?

 

[E4mafia]

Do you know what an Executive Order is?

Do you know how to do anything other than deflect?

 

[wired]

Do you know how to do anything other than deflect?

You stated that Trump issued an executive order to ban bumpstocks. He did not. My question is whether you understand what an executive order is since you do not seem to .

 

[E4mafia]

Yeah an EO overrides the need for congress to take actions.

Which psakis tweet highly implied. So now that I've played your game you gonna play mine and read that article?

My original question still stands, will any who enabled Biden and his cadre help oppose any grabbing laws? Simple yes or no answer it doesn't have to be dragged thru a political debate or deflection. Ezpz

 

[wired]

Yeah an EO overrides the need for congress to take actions.

Which psakis tweet highly implied

Trump did not issue an official executive order to ban bumpstocks. If he had the legal authority to do so he may have. Thats generally how EO's work . The President legal counsel drafts up an executive order that is within the bounds of existing law. and the President signs it. It goes into the Federal Registry as an official position that the justice dept among others have to follow in accordance with existing law. We dont know if Trump looked into doing that and his legal counsel shot it down or not because he did not do that. Probably because they told him it wasnt legal. He just called the acting ATF head and told him to ban bumpstocks. Neither one had the authority to ban bumpstocks in a accordance with existing law. They just did it. That of course means as soon as it gets to court it will get ripped up.