TexasCHLforum.com

RPB wrote:http://offgridsurvival.com/obama-feinstein-gunban/

Jay Carney told reporters the president will be actively supporting Senator Dianne Feinstein’s gun control legislation. The legislation is expected to go after all semi-automatic weapons and firearms that can hold over ten rounds of ammunition.

said this bill will not only ban the sale and transfer of a huge number of firearms, but it will also make possessing them illegal.

[youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=BUPa5UW0oBM[/youtube]

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) says she will introduce a gun-control bill on the first day of the next Congress: "It will ban the sale, the transfer, the importation and the possession -- not retroactively, but prospectively --" of "assault weapons" as well as high-capacity magazines.

I just want to be sure I am understanding this... She just said that existing sporting rifles, AKA Assault Weapons, will be grandfathered... is that what I am hearing? You know how politicians lie.. I mean, misspeak.

We need to write our congressmen and senators and be as vocal as you can to NOT suppurt this!

She means

Grandfathered to a point
you can own what you got, they won't knock on your door to get yours now
but when you die, the government owns it, not whoever you'd leave it to
you own it, you can't gift, transfer, donate or sell to anyone
you can't buy more

((((Lots of trusts/corporations or other legal entities will soon own guns that people used to own..., they don't die, trustees/corporate officers etc just change... I'd think, just guessing, a face to face sale of personal property to a corporation/trust might not require FFL record like face to face person to person of a dishwasher))

I sold it to some company ... I forget the name, I met the Company Rep behind Jack in the Box before dinner one night in September, I remember it hadn't snowed yet that year and there was a dog ... I think the dog ate the receipt or my homework or something

Just in, Biden will head up a gun policy committee.

RSJ wrote:Just in, Biden will head up a gun policy committee.

His consultants weighed in already

Communist People’s Republic of China, killed 40-70 million unarmed people demands the US citizens be disarmed .... what a surprise

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012 ... e-Disarmed" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

My question is, where is our line in the sand? Will our response be to post nasty things on internet message boards and Facebook? They are shaking in their boots at that prospect. [/sarcasm]

I believe that this legislation has a chance at passing, what then? What is likely to happen is.....nothing. This will ultimately be a repeat of the Clinton gun ban, we will whine and moan, and comply. This one, however, goes much further by making POSSESSION of these weapons illegal. Mark my words, your weapons won't be grandfathered, the fact that you possessed them prior to the law's enactment will be grandfathered. Possession after passage will be an illegal act, regardless of when you purchased the weapon.

We, as a society have lost the nerve to stand up to our government and say NO, WE WILL NOT ALLOW THIS! The left is smart enough to not ban all firearms in one sweeping peice of legislation, they choose to be more "progressive". This will prevent them from having a massive pushback from we the people. We, collectively, will succomb to the total destruction of the second amendment with only a few people, who will be labled as crazy extremists, actually taking a stand for their rights. In the end, each country gets the government that they deserve, welome to Amerika.

15 Yr-Old Uses AR-15 Home Defense Shot Home Invader http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBe48u6ERiI" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; … @SenFeinstein wants disarmed child killed instead? #ItsForTheKids

[youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=UBe48u6ERiI[/youtube]

Jumping Frog wrote:

Beiruty wrote:I will spring for discounted and special offer NRA life member. Numbers do matter.

If you are serious, send me a PM with your telephone # and I'll conference call the NRA with you to sponsor your Life membership.

How much is it right now?

canvasbck wrote:My question is, where is our line in the sand? Will our response be to post nasty things on internet message boards and Facebook? They are shaking in their boots at that prospect. [/sarcasm]

I believe that this legislation has a chance at passing, what then? What is likely to happen is.....nothing. This will ultimately be a repeat of the Clinton gun ban, we will whine and moan, and comply. This one, however, goes much further by making POSSESSION of these weapons illegal. Mark my words, your weapons won't be grandfathered, the fact that you possessed them prior to the law's enactment will be grandfathered. Possession after passage will be an illegal act, regardless of when you purchased the weapon.

We, as a society have lost the nerve to stand up to our government and say NO, WE WILL NOT ALLOW THIS! The left is smart enough to not ban all firearms in one sweeping peice of legislation, they choose to be more "progressive". This will prevent them from having a massive pushback from we the people. We, collectively, will succomb to the total destruction of the second amendment with only a few people, who will be labled as crazy extremists, actually taking a stand for their rights. In the end, each country gets the government that they deserve, welome to Amerika.

the social equivalent of the boston tea party eill be when the government forces everyone only to use verizon as a data provider or declares everyone must only use myspace as a social networking site

RPB wrote:She means

Grandfathered to a point
you can own what you got, they won't knock on your door to get yours now
but when you die, the government owns it, not whoever you'd leave it to
you own it, you can't gift, transfer, donate or sell to anyone
you can't buy more

((((Lots of trusts/corporations or other legal entities will soon own guns that people used to own..., they don't die, trustees/corporate officers etc just change... I'd think, just guessing, a face to face sale of personal property to a corporation/trust might not require FFL record like face to face person to person of a dishwasher))

I sold it to some company ... I forget the name, I met the Company Rep behind Jack in the Box before dinner one night in September, I remember it hadn't snowed yet that year and there was a dog ... I think the dog ate the receipt or my homework or something

To a trust is how a gun store in Wharton sells suppressors and it sounds like a pretty good idea.

canvasbck wrote:My question is, where is our line in the sand? Will our response be to post nasty things on internet message boards and Facebook? They are shaking in their boots at that prospect. [/sarcasm]

I believe that this legislation has a chance at passing, what then? What is likely to happen is.....nothing. This will ultimately be a repeat of the Clinton gun ban, we will whine and moan, and comply. This one, however, goes much further by making POSSESSION of these weapons illegal. Mark my words, your weapons won't be grandfathered, the fact that you possessed them prior to the law's enactment will be grandfathered. Possession after passage will be an illegal act, regardless of when you purchased the weapon.

We, as a society have lost the nerve to stand up to our government and say NO, WE WILL NOT ALLOW THIS! The left is smart enough to not ban all firearms in one sweeping peice of legislation, they choose to be more "progressive". This will prevent them from having a massive pushback from we the people. We, collectively, will succomb to the total destruction of the second amendment with only a few people, who will be labled as crazy extremists, actually taking a stand for their rights. In the end, each country gets the government that they deserve, welome to Amerika.

It's incrementalism but the conditions are different here than in the UK, so they may discovered it won't work quite so easily. For instance, by the time there was a handgun ban in the UK there were only 35,000 people who legally owned handguns. Millions of people own handguns in the US. Millions own "assault" rifles. And BTW, a ban on transfer is effectively confiscation since it removes a right of ownership and reduces the value of the object. This will be litigated in court and may or may not stand. Twenty-years ago I'd have said not, since it is clearly a taking of property without compensation, but these days, who knows?

That is all I can say about that. It makes me so so angry that our president is perfectly willing to throw the constitution in the toilet whenever it pleases him.

mamabearCali wrote: That is all I can say about that. It makes me so so angry that our president is perfectly willing to throw the constitution in the toilet whenever it pleases him.

You make it sound like there are times when the Constitution is relevant to Glorious Leader: I submit there are not. Collectivists view every aspect of a free Republic as a tool to exploit in its destruction. Today's typical liberal, versus the liberals of my youth, are almost all collectivists. The old liberals actually believed in Constitutional Supremacy...I'm not talking about the "new deal" types here, but the classical liberals back in the time when liberalism meant something entirely different than it does today. To these modern collectivist liberals the Constitution is a tool for dismantling the Republic. As an example, the idea is to take something like the 1st Amendment and exploit it to gain power, and as power is gradually accumulated, dispense with parts of it that consolidate their gains.....political correctness is a prime example of this....we simply are no longer allowed to have a public discourse on certain subjects, no matter how relevant they are to the governance of the country and health of the Republic. Urban crime and illegal immigration are two almost entirely forbidden topics of discussion in public forums.

You can join the NRA for $10.00 a year - A fact that is not as well known as should be.

The $35.00 join fee is that high because you're not just joining the NRA, you're paying an additional $25.00 for a magazine subscription.

I have enough to read...so I'm one of the $10.00 members.

If ever you've held back joining the NRA because you don't care to spend $35.00, you don't have to.

$10.00 will do the job.

So, what are you waiting for?

Oldgringo wrote:Did we expect any less? Now is the time for our Senators and Representatives to gird their loins for battle. Have you written,or otherwise, contacted your Senators and Representatives yet? The NRA is gonna' need all the help it can muster if we are to weather this mighty storm with minimal losses.

Done and Done! I kept my request simple: please work to defeat any legislation that would put further restrictions on firearm purchase or use. I also include that I think the gun-grabbers are a despicable lot for using the bodies of dead school children as a platform for their agenda.

Is that possible to do online?

I only see these options:

1 Year Membership - $35.00
2 Year Membership - $60.00
3 Year Membership - $85.00
5 Year Membership - $125.00

When I select no magazine, it does not update the price or anything.