Protect our Gun Rights, Vote this November !
- Thread starter lowlight
- Start date
I just want Nov 3 to hurry and get here and be done with it.
Just remeber the guns are for taking away the oligarchs' money not for voting for them because they "promise not to take them away"
I won't disagree, but the sad fact is internet privacy laws, or lack thereof, make all that paper stuff obsolete:/
My entire redneck family already thinks the guns they’ve bought from a dealer in the last 20 years are registered.
How many people on this site own at least one can or sbr?
Over the last couple years, how many thousand form 4s have been processed?
If I’m the gov, it sure looks like folks don’t mind having their shit on a list.
Thanks to the Sniper's Hide forum for posting this thread. Time to wake up people. I also went to the Biden website and read about their stance on firearms and our freedoms therein. Maybe in the past politics had a bit of fear-mongering involved to sway votes, but this time its straight from the horse's mouth!
Wake up America.
Wake up America.
That's exactly what I was thinking too! Whoever wrote that bullshit should be kicked in the balls/snatch.
In addition to bans on high-cap magazines, I read this on his site last night guys, get your rears out and vote!
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/#
Quoting from the page above:
"End the online sale of firearms and ammunitions. Biden will enact legislation to prohibit all online sales of firearms, ammunition, kits, and gun parts. "
I don't know how this would stand up in court, but since they have inferred they may pack the supreme court, its not out of the realm of impossible. This is ballgame over for me. I don't care what you think of the other guy, but at least our freedom and the 2nd isn't going to be trampled on. You are gauranteed it will with Biden!
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/#
Quoting from the page above:
"End the online sale of firearms and ammunitions. Biden will enact legislation to prohibit all online sales of firearms, ammunition, kits, and gun parts. "
I don't know how this would stand up in court, but since they have inferred they may pack the supreme court, its not out of the realm of impossible. This is ballgame over for me. I don't care what you think of the other guy, but at least our freedom and the 2nd isn't going to be trampled on. You are gauranteed it will with Biden!
So if the internet is considered a basic human necessity now, and owning firearms is constitutionally covered could he actually attempt this and have it passed?
While it might seem a stretch the answer is YES - if they pack the Supreme Court, control the House, Senate, and White House at the same time. Such complete power would let them do just about whatever they please. Don't forget the 1994 Assualt weapons ban which was the law of the land for 10 years, and which they want to return to and implement on steroids.
Judicial activism seems to now allow judges to interpret and bend our Constitution as they see fit, if it happens at the Supreme Court there's not much to challenge that.
For more hard facts on the Biden plans, check out Mr. GnG's latest video. I had to pick my jaw up at the definitions of assualt weapons and the desire to tax any "high-capacity" magazine subject under the NFA. IMagine having to register, engrave, and pay a $200 tax on every 10+ round magazine you have!
Link:
WOW -- YouTube removed the video! I watched the whole thing, no idea why it was removed. Talk about censorship.
Judicial activism seems to now allow judges to interpret and bend our Constitution as they see fit, if it happens at the Supreme Court there's not much to challenge that.
For more hard facts on the Biden plans, check out Mr. GnG's latest video. I had to pick my jaw up at the definitions of assualt weapons and the desire to tax any "high-capacity" magazine subject under the NFA. IMagine having to register, engrave, and pay a $200 tax on every 10+ round magazine you have!
Link:
WOW -- YouTube removed the video! I watched the whole thing, no idea why it was removed. Talk about censorship.
Last edited:
+1. had to wait in line a whopping ONE minute to vote!!!
let's hope the trump train ekes this one out!
Eeking ain't gonna do it this time. We need a crushing landslide to rid our country of the threat of communist take over. Their fake polls and cockiness despite of negative number turnout for the Grumpy & Frumpy Show campaign events signals a huge Democrat voter fraud effort. Unfortunately the wife of our local Republican representative, a friend of the family has just informed me that as of now the turned in Republican ballots in Colorado, are trailing the turned in Demo-Commie ballots by a count of 134,000 sounds fishy and reeks of "undocumented" Juan Valdez and his posse voting by the droves in sanctuary city Denver no questions asked.
It ain't over until it's over! Enough evidence of downright fraud and "irregularities" to nix the whole show without congressional "decision" by Nancy's clown circus.
This may be the most disgraceful day and week in American history.
Sounds like they will take the Senate ,if that happens 2A is out the door with the progressive agenda. Beto and much of the dems want to take away all AR's and AK's . Since they are not in "Common Use" ( less than 3% of total civilian arsenal ) they aren't protected by the second amendment.
The Senate is still up for grabs. It will not be decided until Jan 5th at this point due to runoffs. There are two seats for GA and we only need one to maintain the majority. But, if we lose both, Harris (if confirmed) will push through anything the house carves up.
I suspect they will be in "common use" when they try to take them. Very hard to believe they're under 3%???
If everyone would purchase M72 LAW then it would be common and therefore protected under 2A
Assuming the AK and NC races go for the Republicans, we need to win 1 out 2 in Georgia when those run offs occur. If NC breaks bad, we gotta sweep in the GA run offs. I dont see the AK race going south but could be wrong.
Either way, it’s going to be a nerve wracking holiday season...
I am not a lawyer or even well versed on the subject, but I call bullshit that AR’s and AK’s (semi auto rifles) account for less than 3% of gun ownership. Every time I go to the range almost every individual pulls out a semi auto rifle and pops of a few. Are M1A’s or Garands also “assault weapons?” I can make an assault weapon out of a pencil, or a ball bat, broken beer bottle, whatever. This is commie bullshit!!!!!!
Point is that if someone wants to kill people they will find a way. Look at New Zealand now, the only folks that have guns are criminals with access to the black market and the government. What are they to do if they get a radical government in place like the one we are preparing to face or the criminals want what they got? Then the media says gun crimes are down since the guns were confiscated. Sure they were, but did overall crime levels go down? I bet not.
Not sure what you mean to imply by that??? It would be NFA item to start with. You can buy explosive M203 rounds with a $200 tax stamp ea.
Everyone has been purchasing the hell out of AR/AK variants. I literally don't know anyone that owns more then 1 or 2 guns that doesn't own at least 1 AR. No one I shoot with doesn't own one. The public range I shoot at has been 3 or 4 to 1 AR vs anything else the past 2 years.
If I had to guess, that number represents those that own an NFA select fire weapon, not a semi automatic AR/AK, etc. the number of semi auto rifles in civilian possession is prob at least 30%, probably much more.
Perdue only needed a smidge over .2% of the vote to clinch his Senate seat. Ossoff would've needed over 2% to win. Warnock only got around 30%; Loeffler and Collins combined had nearly 50% of it and that's not counting the assorted nothing-candidates who further broke up the vote.
If enough of the Republican/Conservative base in GA rally behind a candidate in the special election and just .3% of votes shift from Hazell to Perdue, then both seats are ours.
They will go hard after 80% anything and probably succeed on that front. They are patient & relentless. The incremental infringement will march on.
We voted, they stole it. Now lets hope we keep the senate & they show their ass enough to energize enough lazy fuds into voting in 2022 to retake the house.
Thank God we got ACB prior to this shitstorm.
We voted, they stole it. Now lets hope we keep the senate & they show their ass enough to energize enough lazy fuds into voting in 2022 to retake the house.
Thank God we got ACB prior to this shitstorm.
I’m with you... but we know the Dem’s will flood GA with millions of dollars of campaign funds. As soon as I see donations to be made up for this runoff(s), I’m donating. I encourage any and everyone who care about maintaining senate majority for the GOP to do the same.
That was from their last ruling about "Common" what is common the amount that civilians own or does common mean number of units produced to date of a rifle ? Or does common mean what ever rifle is available to be used by a person ? Common should mean in reference to 2A a weapon that fires a projectile down an cylindrical barrel which the Forefathers called "Arms"
Join Team Perdue - Donate NOW!
I'm counting on your help to continue delivering results and shaking up Washington. Join our outsider movement today.
secure.winred.com
Found this one, just wanted to see more “officially” about the runoff before sending $$
Perhaps we should consider sending financial support as allowed under law to the republican's senate candidates in GA.
Scalia used the term “M16” when describing military/assault weapons. If he meant that terminology to apply to AR15s and the like, he would have used those terms. And yes, the Framers used “Arms” to mean any common use arms that may be prevalent and in possession of civilians (ie the people) at any given time.
My take on it...
But as Biden said in his NY Times Op-Ed...
We have a huge problem with cars. Red cars — racing inspired cars designed to drive rapidly — are a threat to our national security, and we should treat them as such. Anyone who pretends there’s nothing we can do is lying — and holding that view should be disqualifying for anyone seeking to lead our country.
I know, because with Senator Dianne Feinstein I led the effort to enact the 1994 law that banned red cars and high-capacity gas tanks for 10 years. Those automotive safety reforms made our nation demonstrably more secure.
They were also, sadly, the last meaningful automotive legislation we were able get signed into law before the Cars & Coffee crowd and the car manufacturers put the Republican Party in a headlock.
I fought hard to extend the red cars ban and the large capacity gas tanks bans in 2004. The Republicans who allowed these laws to expire asserted that they were ineffective. But, almost 15 years after the bans expired, with the unfortunate benefit of hindsight, we now know that they did make a difference.
Many police departments have reported an increase in criminals using red cars since 2004. And multiple analyses of the data around highway pile-ups provide evidence that, from 1994 to 2004, the years when red cars and large gas tanks were banned, there were fewer road deaths — fewer deaths, fewer families needlessly destroyed.
There’s overwhelming data that traffic violations committed with red cars kill more people than violations with other colors of cars. And that’s the point.
Drivers looking to inflict mass carnage choose red cars with high-capacity gas tanks capable of holding more than 10 gallons. They choose them because they want to speed through as many people as possible without having to stop and fill up.
In Dayton, where the police responded immediately and neutralized the driver within about 30 seconds, he was still able to massacre nine people and injure more than two dozen others because he drove a red car with a gas tank capable of holding 100 gallons.
We have to get these red race cars off our streets.
Nearly 70 percent of the American public support a ban on red cars — including 54 percent of Republicans.
When you have that kind of broad public support for legislation that will make everyone safer, and it still can’t get through the Senate — the problem is with weak-willed leaders who care more about their campaign coffers than children in coffins.
The 1994 red cars ban and high-capacity gas tanks bans worked.
And if I am elected president, we’re going to pass them again — and this time, we’ll make them even stronger. We’re going to stop car manufacturers from circumventing the law by making minor deviations of red to their products — modifications that leave them just as deadly. And this time, we’re going to pair it with a buyback program to get as many red cars off our streets as possible as quickly as possible.
I won’t stop there. I’ll get universal background checks passed, building on the Brady Bill, which establishing the background check system and which I helped push through Congress in 1993. I’ll accelerate the development and deployment of smart-car technology — something car manufacturers have opposed — so that cars are keyed to the individual biometrics of authorized owners.
There is so much we can do — practical, sensible steps that draw broad support among the American people. But we will see only more and deadlier crashes if we continue to dodge the core issue of unregulated red cars and high-capacity gas tanks in our communities.
Okay, okay, I obviously took some liberties in this parody excerpt of Joe Biden railing on "assault weapons" and "high-capacity magazines," but it makes EXACTLY the same amount of sense that Joe Biden makes in this disturbingly ignorant, uneducated, and warped view of firearms for which he is demonstrating he knows next to nothing about (owning a shotgun hardly qualifies as expertise). He must not be looking at the same raw data that the FBI produces in order to reach these conclusions and convince anyone who wouldn't know any better. But this is the guy and the party that has no qualms picking their narrative before they have evidence to support it -- forcing whatever evidence they think they have to conform to their hypothesis. Gut feeling first, evidence second. It's human nature, but humorous being "the party of science" applying purely inverse science to its agenda. Is this humor too dark or disrespectful of those who have perished in mass shootings? Possibly, but before you freak out, ask any combat veteran how useful dark humor can be to survive, create a useful perspective, rise from the ashes, or get back on the horse. With guns in this country, we have a substantial segment of the population that knows nothing about them, have never had any experience with them, or understands their utility. This is akin to a mass of people who have never driven a car, rarely see cars, have no desire to have anything to do with cars, but sees them caricatured in movies every day. This group, with this depth of knowledge about cars, wants to make decisions for all the licensed drivers out there as to how to handle their cars.
Before I could ever drive or work on a car, I wouldn't have even fathomed being so bold as to tell all the adults that they're doing it wrong. That would have been pretty presumptuous, naïve, and hopelessly immature, if not ballsy. I would have risked their respect for me too. I wish that Democrats could see that we all have children who we would die for to keep safe. To claim otherwise, as Joe does, is absurd and not human. Many Republicans in this country would die to protect other people's kids too. Flippant jabs to discredit his detractors rather than address their arguments is intellectually stunted. I wish the Democrats could only see, behind all the frustration and anger, how we are pleading with them to understand that people far wiser than all of us wrote and amended the Constitution as it is for good reasons. Blindly following them was not their intent either and to question them is still necessary. We all need progress, but you better have your shit together better than any human being who has ever lived in the last 244 years and that's a pretty tall order. The odds are staggeringly against you. Anything short of that level of wisdom would be presumptuous, naïve, and hopelessly immature. Joe doesn't even come close, but he's obviously pretty proud of himself. It pains me to see such a young soul flail like this without even trying to assemble an ounce of the wisdom and reason necessary for progress on such a serious concern.
We have a huge problem with cars. Red cars — racing inspired cars designed to drive rapidly — are a threat to our national security, and we should treat them as such. Anyone who pretends there’s nothing we can do is lying — and holding that view should be disqualifying for anyone seeking to lead our country.
I know, because with Senator Dianne Feinstein I led the effort to enact the 1994 law that banned red cars and high-capacity gas tanks for 10 years. Those automotive safety reforms made our nation demonstrably more secure.
They were also, sadly, the last meaningful automotive legislation we were able get signed into law before the Cars & Coffee crowd and the car manufacturers put the Republican Party in a headlock.
I fought hard to extend the red cars ban and the large capacity gas tanks bans in 2004. The Republicans who allowed these laws to expire asserted that they were ineffective. But, almost 15 years after the bans expired, with the unfortunate benefit of hindsight, we now know that they did make a difference.
Many police departments have reported an increase in criminals using red cars since 2004. And multiple analyses of the data around highway pile-ups provide evidence that, from 1994 to 2004, the years when red cars and large gas tanks were banned, there were fewer road deaths — fewer deaths, fewer families needlessly destroyed.
There’s overwhelming data that traffic violations committed with red cars kill more people than violations with other colors of cars. And that’s the point.
Drivers looking to inflict mass carnage choose red cars with high-capacity gas tanks capable of holding more than 10 gallons. They choose them because they want to speed through as many people as possible without having to stop and fill up.
In Dayton, where the police responded immediately and neutralized the driver within about 30 seconds, he was still able to massacre nine people and injure more than two dozen others because he drove a red car with a gas tank capable of holding 100 gallons.
We have to get these red race cars off our streets.
Nearly 70 percent of the American public support a ban on red cars — including 54 percent of Republicans.
When you have that kind of broad public support for legislation that will make everyone safer, and it still can’t get through the Senate — the problem is with weak-willed leaders who care more about their campaign coffers than children in coffins.
The 1994 red cars ban and high-capacity gas tanks bans worked.
And if I am elected president, we’re going to pass them again — and this time, we’ll make them even stronger. We’re going to stop car manufacturers from circumventing the law by making minor deviations of red to their products — modifications that leave them just as deadly. And this time, we’re going to pair it with a buyback program to get as many red cars off our streets as possible as quickly as possible.
I won’t stop there. I’ll get universal background checks passed, building on the Brady Bill, which establishing the background check system and which I helped push through Congress in 1993. I’ll accelerate the development and deployment of smart-car technology — something car manufacturers have opposed — so that cars are keyed to the individual biometrics of authorized owners.
There is so much we can do — practical, sensible steps that draw broad support among the American people. But we will see only more and deadlier crashes if we continue to dodge the core issue of unregulated red cars and high-capacity gas tanks in our communities.
Okay, okay, I obviously took some liberties in this parody excerpt of Joe Biden railing on "assault weapons" and "high-capacity magazines," but it makes EXACTLY the same amount of sense that Joe Biden makes in this disturbingly ignorant, uneducated, and warped view of firearms for which he is demonstrating he knows next to nothing about (owning a shotgun hardly qualifies as expertise). He must not be looking at the same raw data that the FBI produces in order to reach these conclusions and convince anyone who wouldn't know any better. But this is the guy and the party that has no qualms picking their narrative before they have evidence to support it -- forcing whatever evidence they think they have to conform to their hypothesis. Gut feeling first, evidence second. It's human nature, but humorous being "the party of science" applying purely inverse science to its agenda. Is this humor too dark or disrespectful of those who have perished in mass shootings? Possibly, but before you freak out, ask any combat veteran how useful dark humor can be to survive, create a useful perspective, rise from the ashes, or get back on the horse. With guns in this country, we have a substantial segment of the population that knows nothing about them, have never had any experience with them, or understands their utility. This is akin to a mass of people who have never driven a car, rarely see cars, have no desire to have anything to do with cars, but sees them caricatured in movies every day. This group, with this depth of knowledge about cars, wants to make decisions for all the licensed drivers out there as to how to handle their cars.
Before I could ever drive or work on a car, I wouldn't have even fathomed being so bold as to tell all the adults that they're doing it wrong. That would have been pretty presumptuous, naïve, and hopelessly immature, if not ballsy. I would have risked their respect for me too. I wish that Democrats could see that we all have children who we would die for to keep safe. To claim otherwise, as Joe does, is absurd and not human. Many Republicans in this country would die to protect other people's kids too. Flippant jabs to discredit his detractors rather than address their arguments is intellectually stunted. I wish the Democrats could only see, behind all the frustration and anger, how we are pleading with them to understand that people far wiser than all of us wrote and amended the Constitution as it is for good reasons. Blindly following them was not their intent either and to question them is still necessary. We all need progress, but you better have your shit together better than any human being who has ever lived in the last 244 years and that's a pretty tall order. The odds are staggeringly against you. Anything short of that level of wisdom would be presumptuous, naïve, and hopelessly immature. Joe doesn't even come close, but he's obviously pretty proud of himself. It pains me to see such a young soul flail like this without even trying to assemble an ounce of the wisdom and reason necessary for progress on such a serious concern.
Last edited:
Stacy Abrams, Georgia Democrat indicated they have already started the marshalling of $$$$$$$$$ to ensure both seats go Democratic, resulting in a 50/50 split.
Expect Bloomberg and Tom Styer to find a way to channel a billion each in to Georgia
If you live in Georgia, be prepared for nothing but vitriolic political adds for 2 months...
Expect this to be politics at its nastiest.
Assuming they don't just use easier cheating methods, I wonder how much of that money will be funneled into "dumping ground" apartments that they can house 10 homeless people or otherwise worthless individuals (Portland rioters), and register them to vote before the runoff? I'm guessing it's not outside the realm of possibility to do this (ostensibly "legal") for at least 10-20K people, 100% of which would be instructed to vote Dem.
How many of you real men had the little lady cancel your vote? I finished my ballot and the little lady said, “would you fill mine in honey”. Think about it!!
Dthomas3523
Hall Monitor
Staff member
Moderator
Hessian
Commercial Supporter
PX Member
Minuteman
Online Training Access
