Obama to announce gun control Pkg tomorrow

[Metalflames 0]

You guys aren't concerned about the ACA/Gun connection?

 

The two should have ZERO to do with each other.

I remember reading years ago the way they would go about getting rid of guns was through heathcare and ammo taxes. This is only the beginning. It's on like donkey kong.

[EchoMirage 137]

Wasn't there a provision buried in the middle of the ACA banning the sharing of gun information?

 

there was, and his new EO just fixed that. check the main thread on the speech for more info

[WVisHome 0]

there was, and his new EO just fixed that. check the main thread on the speech for more info

 

Yea, that's what I meant. This new EO eliminated the separation clause in the ACA.

[JacksonLee 4]

Wasn't there a provision buried in the middle of the ACA banning the sharing of gun information?

 

Well there WAS.

 

Executive order number 16 changes that....

 

Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients

about guns in their homes.

[DngrZne 0]

Ah, wasn't aware that law could be changed through an EO

[BlueLineFish 615]

I would love to see my doctors face when I tell him how many I have.

[H.M. Murdock 0]

There is a very pro-2A Doctor at my outdoor range but I think he specializes in backiotomies

[smashclash 0]

According to Wiipedia, 25,000 Taliban vs. nearly 500,000 men (Americans, Europeans, Afghan Security Forces).

 

Over 2,000 Americans dead on our side, many thousand wonded.

 

What about Iraq? Over 4,000 Americans dead and 32,000 wounded???

 

I'm sorry, but our jetfighters and tanks haven't magically destroyed the Taliban. It's been a SLOW and PAINFUL process.

I don't understand your arguement. Where are the numbers that show how many people have died on their side? I'd like to see how many of the bad guys have died so I can see the ratio of how bad we are getting our ass kicked. And it's WAR, not monopoly, people will always be dying unfortunately.

 

 

 

I'll also bite,,,

 

How about this first, it's not a privilege like your drivers license, it's a RIGHT.

 

Second, without the 2A and the RIGHTS that they afford us, and if that's change, well you posting up your question and the use of free speech may not be there for long, among every other thing the amendments afford us. It could all be lost and past history around the world only proves that.

Nobody is taking all of your guns away. They are just making it more difficult to get into "bad" guys hands. Sure there will always be ways around whatever provisious they put in place, but you have to start some where. I think you're jumping the gun [pun intended] with connecting a stricter gun policy manifesting itself into speech censorship. There are some things Americans would never stand for and that's one of them. 70% of Americans back more gun control. That's a pretty high percentage you can't refute. http://www.langerres...1GunControl.pdf

 

And if AW are ok, why only stop there? Why not allow automatic weapons? If you can afford it, why not be able to have your own nuclear weapon? Where do you draw the line in what's ok and what isn't?

[JonF 79]

there was, and his new EO just fixed that. check the main thread on the speech for more info

That was put there to appease Harry Reid and the NRA. The house is gonna be pissed!

[this_is_nascar 162]

I was not home to watch this live, nor have I watched the video as of yet, but here it is.

 

[cigarsnscotch 0]

Why in the world are these trolls just swarming out of the woodwork? (Yeah you smash clash). Do you honestly not have something better to do? Do you work? Are you retired.? Are you mental? Ah never mind I could really care less.

[JacksonLee 4]

Why in the world are these trolls just swarming out of the woodwork? (Yeah you smash clash). Do you honestly not have something better to do? Do you work? Are you retired.? Are you mental? Ah never mind I could really care less.

 

That's all he is, a troll. Engaging them in a reasonable or sensible discussion is simply not possible. The best thing to do is just not feed them.

 

The reason that semi-automatic weapons must be allowed is because "Shall Not Be Infringed" is not very hard to understand.

[Farsanarian 0]

Let me make a commitment to my brothers! In celebration AFTER we prevail here in NJ, I will take my entire collection of impeccably built variant rifles to Ft. Dix and anyone who wants to shoot them can. I'll even bring 2 spam cans even though the countries supply of 7.62x39 is on E big time! I have some real beauties, all built by the best builders in the country. I even have an East German built by Mario at A Piece Of History. Not many of those floating around Jersey I'll tell you that! In addition... a gorgeous Bulgarian Suchka, a TIGR and many more! Anyone care to join me????

 

Sorry to go off topic.... Take that troll!

 

Also... I expect you guys to hold me to that!

 

[NJBeretta 42]

[NicePants 58]

I don't understand your arguement. Where are the numbers that show how many people have died on their side? I'd like to see how many of the bad guys have died so I can see the ratio of how bad we are getting our ass kicked. And it's WAR, not monopoly, people will always be dying unfortunately.

 

 

 

 

Nobody is taking all of your guns away. They are just making it more difficult to get into "bad" guys hands. Sure there will always be ways around whatever provisious they put in place, but you have to start some where. I think you're jumping the gun [pun intended] with connecting a stricter gun policy manifesting itself into speech censorship. There are some things Americans would never stand for and that's one of them. 70% of Americans back more gun control. That's a pretty high percentage you can't refute. http://www.langerres...1GunControl.pdf

 

And if AW are ok, why only stop there? Why not allow automatic weapons? If you can afford it, why not be able to have your own nuclear weapon? Where do you draw the line in what's ok and what isn't?

 

Wtf? You serious bro? You come on here, refer to assault weapons, argue for them to be banned, and then say most people support a ban using biased polls? Where do you think you are? ...Why am I even responding?

 

[GlassFanta 0]

I would love to see my doctors face when I tell him how many I have.

 

He probably won't care, because you are a cop. Aside from the most pacifistic of all new-age homeopathic zen buddhists, no one bats an eye when cops own guns.

[NicePants 58]

He probably won't care, because you are a cop. Aside from the most pacifistic of all new-age homeopathic zen buddhists, no one bats an eye when cops own guns.

Yeah, this. But tell him that you own that amount if you are a citizen with no intention of becoming a LEO or military, and suddenly you are a domestic terrorist in the making or a baby-killing, right wing extremist.

[ruger9 0]

Am I missing something? Most of those executive orders are toothless, feel-good BS. I mean, sure- if you've ever taken an anti-depressant you might have a problem, but... no bans on anything? No increased restrictions? I'm very suspicious.

[iRescue 0]

I don't understand your arguement. Where are the numbers that show how many people have died on their side? I'd like to see how many of the bad guys have died so I can see the ratio of how bad we are getting our ass kicked. And it's WAR, not monopoly, people will always be dying unfortunately.

 

 

 

 

Nobody is taking all of your guns away. They are just making it more difficult to get into "bad" guys hands. Sure there will always be ways around whatever provisious they put in place, but you have to start some where. I think you're jumping the gun [pun intended] with connecting a stricter gun policy manifesting itself into speech censorship. There are some things Americans would never stand for and that's one of them. 70% of Americans back more gun control. That's a pretty high percentage you can't refute. http://www.langerres...1GunControl.pdf

 

And if AW are ok, why only stop there? Why not allow automatic weapons? If you can afford it, why not be able to have your own nuclear weapon? Where do you draw the line in what's ok and what isn't?

 

An AWB and magazine limits will do NOTHING, to save lives. If someone has set in their mind to carry out an act of unspeakable evil, a few less rounds in the mag won't stop them. That's IF they even acknowledge the law in the first place. Where there's a will there's a way.

 

You and the rest of those preaching and praising gun control are missing the boat....

 

There are sick, sick people out there. Mentally ill people who display signs of violence and aggression because they are sick. And we as a nation, treat them like a number and bounce them around. They are a ticking time bomb.

 

You want to save lives?? Stop the violence?? Legislate some real changes to our mental health system. Find a way to identify who they are and get these people committed or into programs where they will pose no threat to the public. Also keep criminals in jail. Don't maintain a catch and release program like most states do.

 

Making me and the rest of my law-abiding friends on this forum into criminals for having a pistol grip on my target rifle is not the way to stop this.

 

The line is drawn here. We will not give in. This is our right as Americans. I am not a criminal and I will not be treated as such because politicians can't get their act together.

 

 

 

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[jamesbod 0]

Ever notice liberals always use "the people" to refer to themselves?

It makes it sound like liberals represent the majority of Americans.

the people want this

the people want that

the people want pizza

blah blah blah....

[jamesbod 0]

Hey, those little kids look familiar....

Are those the same little pawns liberals used for the ObamaCare photo signing opt a few years ago?

[GlassFanta 0]

the people want pizza

 

Now ain't that the F****' truth.

 

Time to make a phone call!

[18Steel 11]

I was not home to watch this live, nor have I watched the video as of yet, but here it is.

 

 

Watched it today and I think Reid will get an Oscar for his performance. I love the talk about voilence in video games by the president but, NO mention of Hollywoods possible role of violence in society or the possible effect of our greatest musical talents in the rap/hip hop industry have. Then again why would a celebrity like our president bite the hand that feeds him all those contributions. Signs a bill for 500 million to do the research. Simply amazing.

[Bob2222 317]

Am I missing something? Most of those executive orders are toothless, feel-good BS. I mean, sure- if you've ever taken an anti-depressant you might have a problem, but... no bans on anything? No increased restrictions? I'm very suspicious.

 

At the least it does give him the opportunity to pummel the "do nothing" Congress for the next two years. If the Democrats win the House, keep Senate and have a White House with a lame-duck President, it's anyone's guess what might happen.

[rlsbee 1]

Do LEOs (non-Federal) even swear an oath to the US Constitution? Or to the state constitution?

[mx597turbo 0]

 

I wish more LEO's in NJ were like this. They need to stand up for the citizens.

[GlassFanta 0]

Cops in NJ stand up for only two things - their highest in the nation salary, and the juicy pension that comes with it

[BlueLineFish 615]

Cops in NJ stand up for only two things - their highest in the nation salary, and the juicy pension that comes with it

 

More mindless anti LEO opinions

[GlassFanta 0]

Neither mindless nor an opinion. I haven't seen any chief or sheriff in NJ say anything like the sherriffs across the country are. even the firearm enthusiast cops on here aren't saying anything like that.

 

I'm not anti-LEO, I'm pro-facts

 

[GlassFanta 0]

By the way, blue line fish, what is your opinion on the matter? Would you arrest someone for violation of a new federal assault weapons ban if one passed? Keep in the mind the theoretical weapon is NJ compliant but newly banned in our hypothetical situation.