TexasCHLforum.com

I found this article on MYFoxAustin and thought I would share. My apologies if this is a repost.

http://www.myfoxaustin.com/dpps/news/ob ... z1NmwopjtN" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


How is banning imported shotgun and reducing magazine capacity going to reduce gun crime. You would still be able to buy basically the same shotgun after the ban the only difference it it would have to say "Made in America" as it is only a ban on IMPORTED shotguns. Also, how is a high capacity magazine ban going to do anything, bullets are deadly no matter how many are carried, the shooter in Tucson was stopped because people were able to gain control of his weapon because of the extra length of Hi-Cap mags.. What need to be done is keeping gun out of the hands of people who should not have them in the first place and having a zero tolerance policy on violent crimes to keep these people off the streets in the first place.

Let the "Itold you so's" begin

They're looking at this because the ATF could regulate the importation without Congress getting involved. Thus, that Union guy with the buzzcut who said he was voting for Obama to protect his "job and his gun" could keep saying that Obama hasn't done anything about gun control.

As to the rest of it, well just remember that gun control is less about the guns and more about the control.

loadedliberal wrote:How is banning imported shotgun and reducing magazine capacity going to reduce gun crime. You would still be able to buy basically the same shotgun after the ban the only difference it it would have to say "Made in America" as it is only a ban on IMPORTED shotguns.

It sounds a lot like Bush's "assault weapon" import ban that's still in effect.

Ameer wrote:

loadedliberal wrote:How is banning imported shotgun and reducing magazine capacity going to reduce gun crime. You would still be able to buy basically the same shotgun after the ban the only difference it it would have to say "Made in America" as it is only a ban on IMPORTED shotguns.

It sounds a lot like Bush's "assault weapon" import ban that's still in effect.

I HATE the term "assault weaapon" By thier defination (the anti's, Brady Bunch etc.) ''assult weapons'' are anything that looks even the least bit scary, god forbid you paint it black even pink . I would not be surprised if you laid a couple black air-soft guns and paintball guns on a table they would call 'em "Assault weapons" too. To me the only time a gun looks scary is if I'm looking down the wrong end. The only guns I would refer to as assault would be select fire or full auto pistols or rifles.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle ... print.html

On March 30, the 30th anniversary of the assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan, Jim Brady, who sustained a debilitating head wound in the attack, and his wife, Sarah, came to Capitol Hill to push for a ban on the controversial “large magazines.” Brady, for whom the law requiring background checks on handgun purchasers is named, then met with White House press secretary Jay Carney. During the meeting, President Obama dropped in and, according to Sarah Brady, brought up the issue of gun control, “to fill us in that it was very much on his agenda,” she said.

“I just want you to know that we are working on it,” Brady recalled the president telling them. “We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar.”

I've had several democrat members of this board express to me that this administration isn't pursuing gun control because they know it's the third rail of politics. But when you've got the president himself telling the namesake of the Brady Foundation that they ARE working on gun control, just under the radar, I have to believe that A) they are; and B) if so, why are our democrat friends continuing to support this president?

I tend to agree with several of the talking heads that I've heard over the last several months: Obama will likely limit what he does between now and the election. He may do one of two "small" measures that the majority of Americans will not notice, not understand, etc. so that he can claim a victory for his base. Maybe a magazine ban, maybe something else.

If he gets reelected, I think all bets are off. He'll push for anything he can possibly get passed and anything he can't get passed he'll try to get done by executive order, his control of the BATFE, FBI, ICE, etc.

punkndisorderly wrote:I tend to agree with several of the talking heads that I've heard over the last several months: Obama will likely limit what he does between now and the election. He may do one of two "small" measures that the majority of Americans will not notice, not understand, etc. so that he can claim a victory for his base. Maybe a magazine ban, maybe something else.

If he gets reelected, I think all bets are off. He'll push for anything he can possibly get passed and anything he can't get passed he'll try to get done by executive order, his control of the BATFE, FBI, ICE, etc.

A magazine ban is not such a small thing. Any such ban would automatically render illegal ALL of my M1A magazines, ALL BUT 2 of of my AR 15 magazines, and ALL of my wife's Glock 19 magazines. That's several hundred dollars worth of magazines, suddenly illegal. Not such a small thing at all—not to mention that it will have NO effect on crime. I don't think he'll be able to get too much done by executive fiat. He may try, but he would fail and it will be the death knell for the democrat party—plus there are a number of democrat congressmen who would defy him and urge him not to do it.

I don't even see a way they could do a magazine ban without going through Congress.

Import bans--yeah, they have some room to work because of the sporting purpose restrictions in the Gun Control Act. Could probably make some trouble with ammo importation as well.

Something big like a magazine capacity restriction, though, would require an act of Congress (like it did the first time) and there's no way that gets through.

AndyC wrote:Wouldn't put it past him to issue an Executive Order on his way out.

The good thing about that is it would be easy to undo.

AndyC wrote:Wouldn't put it past him to issue an Executive Order on his way out.

An executive order to do what? It's the job of Congress to pass laws, and there's no enabling legislation from Congress to allow him to order a magazine ban. There's no way the President can, on his own, outlaw the manufacture and sale of certain gun or magazines.

Executive orders aren't a way for the President to enact laws without going through the legislative process. In general they can only dictate what executive agencies do--eg the import bans are possible because the Gun Control Act allows the State Department to decide what gets imported, and the President can tell the State Department what to allow.

Methinks Obama was humoring the anti's telling him that he was going to do something "under the radar".

Obama may currently be looking like he'll get a 2nd term due to no front-running Rep for the Rep nomination,
but if Obama makes any kind of overt gun control act, the 2A friends will sink him fast.

The Dems know that Clinton's stupid Assault Weapons Ban was one of the nails in Al Gore's coffin at election time.

Those who don't study history are bound to repeat its mistakes. So it's still possible for the Dems to shoot themselves
in the foot (just before they make that gun illegal!!).

SIA

surprise_i'm_armed wrote:Methinks Obama was humoring the anti's telling him that he was going to do something "under the radar".

I'm thinking this is the most likely explanation. It's not like Obama is at all opposed to lying to people to get votes--just look at his record for keeping promises from his campaign.