OBAMA TO USE THE BODIES OF CHILDREN (dead and living) TO GRAB GUN RIGHTS !!!!!!

I love little theories like this!


Who in the hell needs an assault rifle? It just takes one bullet to put a person down. Maybe some people like their enemy to look like swiss cheese? I don't know!

One of the additional steps needs to be a THOROUGH mental health exam.
Originally Posted by brownsugarbaby

Who in the hell needs to jump out of a perfectly good airplane
It’s all about personal liberty, the pursuit of happiness. Obama is famous for saying when referring to the evil rich people and their money “How much is enough?” A lot of Obama’s policies lean towards socialism – Take only what you need and the government will decide what you need and how much is enough.

I agree with most of what’s been said in this thread that are against Emperor Obamas decrees about gun control but there is another issue – personal liberty.

Guns don't kill people. Criminals with guns kill people!

Brownsugarbaby; FYI, I DO NOT think the government "planned" the Newtown killings as a way to justify taking away our 2nd Amendment; but it is clear that Obama is using the tragedy to do just that !

And the 2nd Amendment doesn't exist to protect deer hunters rights; it exists to protect (empower) individuals against tyranny in our government. It is intended to be a constitutional check on the powers of a central government.

It is no surprise that Obama would want to diminish individual liberties intended to resist tyranny.

I love little theories like this! So, you are suggesting that the government planned a massacre of 20 innocent children as a way to Justify taking away our Second amendment?

Assault Rifles were made for war. Unless you are a solider fighting for your life and country, then why in the hell would you be carrying around such a deadly weapon?

You must have a pretty bad aim if you can not defend your life, home, and country with a shotgun or pistol. Who in the hell needs an assault rifle? It just takes one bullet to put a person down. Maybe some people like their enemy to look like swiss cheese? I don't know!

Now I can understand having an assault weapon if you are a GUN COLLECTOR and you keep your guns well-kept in a very secure safe! That's reasonable.

But even still, I don't think Assault rifles need to be banned. Criminals will always have access to them on the streets. But I do think there needs to be an extra step to obtain one. Maybe even lessons, training, and additional licences to legally obtain an assault rifle.

One of the additional steps needs to be a THOROUGH mental health exam.

Remember,...our forefathers protected America with these....LOL

Originally Posted by brownsugarbaby

BTW BronwSugarBaby,you are very sexy and I love your Showcase......please keep posting in the Sandbox, your comments/views are always welcomed here.

http://www.eccie.net/providers.php?do=view&id=118353 ...(...applause... )

its nauseatingly digusting the lie of obama

he is not man enough to state he hates elements of the constitution.

stand up you obfuscating sidewinder

Speak English, douchebag.

.
A point of order: It has NEVER been legal to own an assault rifle in the United States without a Class III Federal Firearms license, that has been the case since the assault rifle was invented in 1944. Originally Posted by Iaintliein

If you are talking about fully automatic weapons you are correct. However, control advocates are after anything that happens to look like an "assault rifle". It is pure political bullshit.

If you are talking about fully automatic weapons you are correct. However, control advocates are after anything that happens to look like an "assault rifle". It is pure political bullshit. Originally Posted by Budman

so put a 7 round clip in your Bushmaster, as long as it hasnt been converted to full auto its legal. Carry more clips, and practice dump and pump ... end of problem


watch this guy sling some non auto lead and at the end load a shotgun by hand .. the shotgun is a Winchester model 97, I own one that my dad bought brand new in 1951 ..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1BwUJ4--Qw

Bulshit. I want my 25 or 30 round magazine. Making large capacity magazines illegal is stupid and will not stop a crazy cocksucker from killing people. I could do just as much damage to unarmed people with my 8 round 45 as the lunatic did in Newtown. Blaming the weapon is fucking stupid.

nothing will stop it ... a magazine being taken off the table is pretty fucking light reform considering what could have been ..

Im assuming you have all the 30 round magazines you need .. if you dont thats your fault

nothing will stop it ... a magazine being taken off the table is pretty fucking light reform considering what could have been ..

Im assuming you have all the 30 round magazines you need .. if you dont thats your fault Originally Posted by CJ7

Same argument here, the magazine capacity make very little difference. Legislating that is just more "feel-good, hey we're doing something" illusionary tactics.

Go ahead and give the next logical argument on magazine capacity....that ones in the bag too.

Go ahead and give the next logical argument on magazine capacity....that ones in the bag too. Originally Posted by Chica Chaser

My concern would be that legislation would "out law" possession, ..

.....not just purchase. The Feds work like that ... they don't have to prove that you "purchased" it before the act was passed, if you possessed it after the act was passed. Additionally they can insert a "defense" of prior purchase with the possessor having the burden of proof on the defense. So load up ... and save your receipts!!!! But be expected to give them up in due time.

Surely someone posting on here is familiar with ....

.... the Federal sentencing guidelines!

It would seem to me a better "plan" would be to acquire "acceptable" magazines and acquire appropriate training for handling magazines, strong and weak hand, including recharging existing, expended magazines, in a tactical environment.

Obama's plan PROPOSES reinstating the ban on assault weapons, running background checks on all weapon sales and limiting mag sizes to 10 rounds. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

He'll need the budget, the hiring, and the data base availability for seller access.

So, I want to sell one of my pistols to Joe Smuck. I have to do a background check.

This smells like California setting a patient-nurse ratio maximum, then ....

.. figuring out there weren't enough nurses to meet the quota-ratio. Just as much sense.

I know, I know. If the U.S. Post Office can keep track of your mail ....

The strategy session for protecting our "babies":

So, I want to sell one of my pistols to Joe Smuck. I have to do a background check. Originally Posted by LexusLover

I'll have to go find a link, but the Govt is already working on this so that you have to go back to them for their "approval of the buyer" via BG check to sell that gun. For a small fee, of course.

According to the "Federal and State officials", no AR-15 was used to kill the school children. It was all done with 4 handguns.

http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/tod...08495#50208495

Listen to the apologists. "Complex"? I'm surprised they didn't blame in on a Youtube video. There's no "National Secret" about what was or wasn't found there. Why wasn't this release before Biden's "Gun Summit?"

More disinformation from the complicit media of the most corrupt administration in this nation's history.

When it comes to their agenda; the left will lie, cheat, steal, and beat you up if you get in their way.