• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Wisconsin Republicans do the right thing

R

RightIsWrong

Diamond Member
Let me preface this by saying that I am a supporter of gun laws that are sensible. Registration, required training and waiting periods are ok in my book.

But this story points to a law that needed to be addressed sooner rather than later.

The state Senate has passed a bill that would prohibit the government from seizing citizens' guns in an crisis.

State law grants the governor, the Wisconsin National Guard's commander and local officials broad emergency powers during an enemy attack or disaster.

The Republican-authored bill says they can't use those powers to restrict the possession, transfer, transport, storage or use of guns and ammunition.

The measure has already passed the state Assembly and now goes to Gov. Jim Doyle.
Click to expand...

No government, state or local, should have the right to seize guns from the citizens of the state/country based on what they deem an emergency. Ever!
 
Why should you even have to register your guns. If the government doesn't know who has them they can't round them up.
 
Is today opposite day? I'm having a tough time reconciling the above two posts with the poster's previous postings..
 
Originally posted by: hellokeith
Is today opposite day? I'm having a tough time reconciling the above two posts with the poster's previous postings..
Click to expand...

Maybe it's just RightISWrong day.

But if you could show me where I'm inconsistent on this matter I'll re-examine my position.

Edit: I guess I do have ambivalent views here. How the subject looks depends on whether you are being shot at by loons or protecting yourself from them.
 
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Why should you even have to register your guns. If the government doesn't know who has them they can't round them up.
Click to expand...

I agree, registration is only used to confiscate.

 
Originally posted by: SoundTheSurrender
Well if Obama and Hillary get into office, you can say bye bye to your guns.
Click to expand...

Time to bring out the boogyman that is brought up every election cycle :roll:
 
Originally posted by: SoundTheSurrender
Well if Obama and Hillary get into office, you can say bye bye to your guns.
Click to expand...

:roll:

Do you have any idea how impossible that would be?

 
Originally posted by: SoundTheSurrender
Well if Obama and Hillary get into office, you can say bye bye to your guns.
Click to expand...

I can't stand either one of them. I would not vote for either one.

But this is just ridiculous.

Oh, yeah. Obama AND Hillary?
 
Originally posted by: TallPilot
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Why should you even have to register your guns. If the government doesn't know who has them they can't round them up.
Click to expand...

I agree, registration is only used to confiscate.
Click to expand...

They get your car yet? :disgust:

 
Originally posted by: Perknose
Originally posted by: TallPilot
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Why should you even have to register your guns. If the government doesn't know who has them they can't round them up.
Click to expand...

I agree, registration is only used to confiscate.
Click to expand...

They get your car yet? :disgust:
Click to expand...

it is not always the case, but atleast for guns, "registration" is often eventually denied, thus creating a defacto ban.

I believe that has already happened in chicago and DC.
 
Originally posted by: hellokeith
Is today opposite day? I'm having a tough time reconciling the above two posts with the poster's previous postings..
Click to expand...

If you actually go through the previous threads on the topic, you will see that I am being consistent in my view. I have always argued for what I believe are common sense laws regarding firearms. Where you might be getting mixed signals is that I have argued many times on how effective CC laws would be in deterring mass shootings or crime in general.
 
*ding-dong*

"Hello, we're here to confiscate your weapon."

"Ok, hang on, let me go load it."

🙂



"The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it." - Thomas Jefferson
 
Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
Let me preface this by saying that I am a supporter of gun laws that are sensible. Registration, required training and waiting periods are ok in my book.

But this story points to a law that needed to be addressed sooner rather than later.

The state Senate has passed a bill that would prohibit the government from seizing citizens' guns in an crisis.

State law grants the governor, the Wisconsin National Guard's commander and local officials broad emergency powers during an enemy attack or disaster.

The Republican-authored bill says they can't use those powers to restrict the possession, transfer, transport, storage or use of guns and ammunition.

The measure has already passed the state Assembly and now goes to Gov. Jim Doyle.
Click to expand...

No government, state or local, should have the right to seize guns from the citizens of the state/country based on what they deem an emergency. Ever!
Click to expand...

And Repubs just blowing smoke again? Would a state law affect Federal confiscation of firearms?
 
Originally posted by: SoundTheSurrender
Well if Obama and Hillary get into office, you can say bye bye to your guns.
Click to expand...

Did Rush tell you that?

Neither has been campaigning heavily on the matter...

Also if I remember correctly for the last... oh I don't know 20 years politicians have been breaking promises left and right... even if they say they would like to... no democratic politician will ever be able to get rid of the second amendment...

Repubs would stop that from even getting out of committee...

The only way we would lose it is if another authoritarian wanna be comes storming in and this time is Pres, not V.P. with a Pres pet...

That is when we will say bye bye to guns... amongst the hundreds of other liberties we would give up in the name of "safety"
 
Originally posted by: Perknose
Originally posted by: TallPilot
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Why should you even have to register your guns. If the government doesn't know who has them they can't round them up.
Click to expand...

I agree, registration is only used to confiscate.
Click to expand...

They get your car yet? :disgust:
Click to expand...

The Wales case is a pretty good argument.

Guy was shot and killed by a .380. Of course he was a federal prosecutor so he gets special attention. The FBI went to the largest distributor of Makarov replacement barrels (why they decided it was a Makarov with a conversion barrel is unknown), FAC, and got a subpoena for all their files.

The FBI then went down the list of every customer that bought the barrels and took them for "testing" to see if they were the murder weapon. One by one.
 
Originally posted by: jman19
Originally posted by: SoundTheSurrender
Well if Obama and Hillary get into office, you can say bye bye to your guns.
Click to expand...

Time to bring out the boogyman that is brought up every election cycle :roll:
Click to expand...

it holds more water than "Vote or Die!" did, thats for sure.


 
Registration for guns does not work because, they are different than cars. Guns can be bought and sold without a license or insurance or registration between two citizens with little or no accountability. In fact the criminals use this to their advantage. Criminal elements often have someone else purchase the guns legally and then the criminals buy them from the legal owner. In most cases there is no system in place to track what is going on. So if you had registration required, someone would have to have a way to track secondary sales.

With an automobile you have to have a license plate on it to drive it, but you dont take guns out to drive them around. So there is no incentive to maintain a valid registration. The only way to check up on guns would be to send the police to someone's house and demand to see the guns. I dont think people are going to like that happening.

Now if people had to pay a yearly license fee or something like that to keep the gun, maybe that might make people not so interested in owning a lot of guns. As it stands I can purchase say 10 firearms of all different types and no one really knows what I have. If I wanted to be sneaky, I could buy them all second hand at gun shows or buy just the parts and assemble them myself. There are some people that make their own barrells and what not. In fact some indians have started making guns and hand carving the stocks to pretty them up and make them more desirable.

I dont think people will pay a license fee or a free to license a gun when they already have a right under the constitution to own it. This just does not make sense and it is not very practicle. As it stands, we probably need to start enforcing the laws we have on the books. Every time a gun crime is committed, if the person did not have the gun legally, then the person illegally in possession of the gun needs to have to do twice the penalty, along with paying a big fine for having the gun illegally. Then the police need to go after whoever purchased the gun if that can be figured out. More aggressive enforcement of gun possession and theft of guns needs to be enforced. Not only do we need to convict people for murder but they should also be convicted of the illegal use or possession or transmission of fire arms to commit illegal acts.

I think we focus too much on the crime of murder and not enough on the actual gun crimes. Using a gun is just one way to commit murder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top