Gun Control Proposals as Found by Gharkal

Actually that's the only "discussion" ...

... there are laws "restricting access to some guns for some people" already on "the books" .... and since the anti-gun crowd have realized that laws don't help .... they are "toying" with the notion of banning ALL GUNS from citizens based upon some flawed idea that a gun ban would end "gun violence," while ignoring the realities of those countries who have strict gun controls but rampant violence.

The "discussion" totally ignores the "pesky" 2nd amendment.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/103/hjres81/text Originally Posted by LexusLover

And I'll ask my question again. Exactly which politicians have proposed banning ALL guns?

We've had discussions on the 2nd Amendment time after time on this forum. Ask 10 different people what it guarantees to the people of this country and you will probably get 10 different answers.

Let me ask a question , Do you trust Trump
To answer your question yes then have indirectly , Cuomo, Feinstein, Clinton, its a very long list however. They wish to ban AR 15 .223 rifles ,IF that happens what's next .22 s ( same Cal ) then all auto loaders ?
In this legal system we have LEGAL PRECEDENT ( look it up) which opens the door for all weapons.
The real Holy Grail is the constitution aloud to change 2 ad all Bill of Rights open to change , something the Progressive socialists are after. That pesky legal precedent again opens the door.
I guess you like writing on political forums (1 ad) and being safe in your home for gov search (4ad) and gov using your house(3 ad) and if you get arrest fair trail (4,5,6 ad) and so on.
Throughout history people have Trusted leaders ( like Hitler ) to pave the way , people trusted the Head Shed and Hillary well we know how that worked out
So do you trust the leaders to be Honest ( yeah okay) for your kids my kids and the next several hundred years which is what the constitution has enabled ( as is ) .
So do you!

Let me ask a question , Do you trust Trump
To answer your question yes then have indirectly , Cuomo, Feinstein, Clinton, its a very long list however. They wish to ban AR 15 .223 rifles ,IF that happens what's next .22 s ( same Cal ) then all auto loaders ?
In this legal system we have LEGAL PRECEDENT ( look it up) which opens the door for all weapons.
The real Holy Grail is the constitution aloud to change 2 ad all Bill of Rights open to change , something the Progressive socialists are after. That pesky legal precedent again opens the door.
I guess you like writing on political forums (1 ad) and being safe in your home for gov search (4ad) and gov using your house(3 ad) and if you get arrest fair trail (4,5,6 ad) and so on.
Throughout history people have Trusted leaders ( like Hitler ) to pave the way , people trusted the Head Shed and Hillary well we know how that worked out
So do you trust the leaders to be Honest ( yeah okay) for your kids my kids and the next several hundred years which is what the constitution has enabled ( as is ) .
So do you! Originally Posted by rexdutchman

It's not a question of trusting Trump to do what he has said he would do. It's a question of disagreeing with what Trump does.

Cuomo, Feinstein and Clinton have at no time in their lives proposed that ALL guns be banned. Might they want to ban a specific gun such as the AR-15? Possibly. It is a very long jump to go from that position to wanting to ban all guns.

www.foxnews.com%2Fopinion%2F20 16%2F06%2F06%2Ffour-ways-president-hillary-clinton-will-work-to-end-gun-ownership.html
& from Feinstein
Dianne Feinstein Says Her Goal is to Disarm All ... - YouTubeYour browser indicates if you've visited this link

Senator Dianne Feinstein's ultimate plan has always been to have Mr. and Mrs. America turn in their guns to the government, period. Feinstein has admitted that the bill is about gun confiscation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mj4AcjyuV38

That was about 12 minutes of search I have to go to work now , I don't have time to dance.

It is a very long jump to go from that position to wanting to ban all guns. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

No it's not. Example: Joe Citizen must obtain authorization from the Federal Government to buy ammunition for Joe's firearm(s).

No it's not. Example: Joe Citizen must obtain authorization from the Federal Government to buy ammunition for Joe's firearm(s). Originally Posted by LexusLover

Since I don't own any firearms I really do not keep up on what is and is not needed to purchase ammunition. Or firearms.

But Joe Citizen still has his firearm(s). And isn't the Federal Government Republican dominated at this point in time?

www.foxnews.com%2Fopinion%2F20 16%2F06%2F06%2Ffour-ways-president-hillary-clinton-will-work-to-end-gun-ownership.html
& from Feinstein
Dianne Feinstein Says Her Goal is to Disarm All ... - YouTubeYour browser indicates if you've visited this link

Senator Dianne Feinstein's ultimate plan has always been to have Mr. and Mrs. America turn in their guns to the government, period. Feinstein has admitted that the bill is about gun confiscation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mj4AcjyuV38

That was about 12 minutes of search I have to go to work now , I don't have time to dance. Originally Posted by rexdutchman

I could not get your first link to work.

In your 2nd link, Feinstein makes if VERY clear that she is talking about ASSAULT guns only. Not ALL guns.

Your 3rd link was rather long and it was about various subjects. I tried to fast-forward through it and find the point at which anything relating to Feinstein was mentioned and I failed to do so.

It is a very long jump to go from that position to wanting to ban all guns. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Are you not watching the videos some have linked, or read the articles??



We are showing that yes, they DO wanna ban all guns, eventually. SO letting them ban some, IS starting down that dark path.

Since I don't own any firearms I really do not keep up on what is and is not needed to purchase ammunition. Or firearms.

But Joe Citizen still has his firearm(s). And isn't the Federal Government Republican dominated at this point in time? Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

What's the point in owning a firearm, if you have NO AMMO TO FIRE FROM IT? Just like what's the point in owning a car, if you can't ever drive it.

I could not get your first link to work.

In your 2nd link, Feinstein makes if VERY clear that she is talking about ASSAULT guns only. Not ALL guns.

Your 3rd link was rather long and it was about various subjects. I tried to fast-forward through it and find the point at which anything relating to Feinstein was mentioned and I failed to do so. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Feinstein has never been able to definitively explain what her definition of "assault gun" means; hence, the eye of the needle one can drive a camel through. And then there's Feinstein's full-throated support for Odumbo's "Operation Choke Point" which was aimed at shutting down any and all manufacturers, dealers and suppliers of weapons and ammunition. Gun owners who do not have access to ammunition are effectively disarmed. As they say, actions speak louder than words, and Feinstein, Schumer and Odumbo's actions are on the record for disarming American citizens by subterfuge.

Are you not watching the videos some have linked, or read the articles??

As I said, I could not open the first link. In the 2nd link, it is very clear Feinstein is talking about banning certain assault weapons and in no way is talking about banning all handguns. In the 3rd link I fast-forwarded through it looking for a person commenting who was relevant to the discussion. Did not see one. But I will try to go back and sit through the 3rd link to see if there is anything relevant in it.


We are showing that yes, they DO wanna ban all guns, eventually. SO letting them ban some, IS starting down that dark path.

So no, I have not seen anything yet that states that a national-level politician, or even a state-level politician, has come out and said he/she wants to ban ALL guns. I try to limit the search since I'm sure you will find some irrelevant person out there who wants to ban all handguns.



What's the point in owning a firearm, if you have NO AMMO TO FIRE FROM IT? Just like what's the point in owning a car, if you can't ever drive it. Originally Posted by garhkal

As I said, I do not know how easy or difficult it is to purchase ammunition for one's guns. There are federal restrictions. There are state restrictions. Has anyone on this forum been unable to purchase ammunition? I've been on this forum for maybe 2 years and 2nd Amendment rights have been discussed several times. At no time do I remember anyone complaining about not being able to purchase ammunition for their guns. And as I said, this thread was started in order to discuss gun control and who wanted to ban ALL guns, not on the various restrictions that exist regarding guns and ammunition.

More fear tactics from the NRA.

These politicians have not proposed a total ban on firearms. They do not propose the repeal of the Second amendment.

The fear that anybody is coming for your guns is exactly what the NRA wants to stoke. And they’ve been so successful at it that nobody ever questions whether or not it’s the truth.

Since I don't own any firearms I really do not keep up on what is and is not needed to purchase ammunition. Or firearms.

But Joe Citizen still has his firearm(s). And isn't the Federal Government Republican dominated at this point in time? Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Unwittingly, I believe you just confirmed my point of concern.

Most often than not the "reason(s)" why folks are in one mess or another today is because they didn't focus on all the "what ifs" that could arise "back then" when the decision was made to head down this or that direction. The same goes with our government.

Here's a hotly debated concept ....

.. placing a penalty on the public to compel them to do something that will cost more than the penalty if they do that which the government is trying to force them to do ...

.. as in purchase health insurance.

Or may be this will help ... make the fine for stealing a $1.00 candy bar 50 cents ... or more closely akin to the Obaminable Care .... 30 cents.

"Operation Choke Point" was Odumbo's surreptitious attempt to ban guns. Feinstein and Schumer supported it. "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet" and a "gun ban by any other name -- Operation Choke Point -- would smell as bad."

"Operation Choke Point" was Odumbo's surreptitious attempt to ban guns. "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet" and a "gun ban -- Operation Choke Point -- by any other name would smell as bad." Originally Posted by I B Hankering

The Anti-Firearm Groupies are suffering from the same affliction that plagues all Liberal Groups, which is they actually believe they are smarter than the Firearm Groupies (and Conservative Groups) so they can use "words" to trick the Firearm Groupies, et al, into believing their bullshit.

They try to do the same with "illegal aliens" and abortions ... the list is almost endless. It's not the slight of hand, but the verbal "pea and shell" game.

"Operation Choke Point" was Odumbo's surreptitious attempt to ban guns. Feinstein and Schumer supported it. "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet" and a "gun ban by any other name -- Operation Choke Point -- would smell as bad." Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Do you know of anyone who was unable to purchase a gun while Operation Check Point was in affect and the reason was Operation Check Point? Simple yes or no answer.