Buying Ammo will put you on a list???

[Doc]

When the Nazis came for the communists,

I remained silent;

I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,

I remained silent;

I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,

I did not speak out;

I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,

I remained silent;

I wasn't a Jew.

When they came for me,

there was no one left to speak out.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No, it may not be directly related as a historical quote, but it does convey the idea of those who base their life decisions only on what effects them directly. I suppose that is enough said about that.

[ants]

Correct, I dont care if people know what gun(s) I own. Part of me thinks a background check on ammo/guns could be a good thing. What's stopping criminals from walking into walmart and buying guns/ammo?

Yes, my name & address was listed on the Journal News list and I don't care.

Got it.....It would other me, but thats me

By the way, not to start a p--ing match, but I guarentee you that most criminals don't buy their guns and ammo legally. If they did , the repeat offender, career criminals would never have guns because they would be caught in the background checks that are already in place. They use other means.

[BizCT]

I'm honestly not familiar with the background check process when it comes to long guns. Do stores do a background check when you purchase a shotgun or rifle? All the guns I have (except for my pistol) are guns that have been in the family since the 60's. When we sold a gun recently to a guy in texas, we went through a FFL or FLL whatever its called, but I don't know about any background checks on the seller?

[Doc]

Thats where im at. Most anyone i know has no use for the stuff that they are after. I would still fight the fight but not for saving what they are now outlawing... Just how they are doing it!

Biz is right in his way of thinking also. You will never see all guns outlawed just because of hunting. Many have a bow, rifle, muzzle and shotgun and thats it. Hunting weapons!!

I get a little nervous whenever people think they should decide for me what I need. I really don't understand what this tunnel vision is on hunting as being the only measure of what a law abiding person should be allowed to own. The 2nd Amendment never mentioned hunting as a criteria, so what is with all these people that want to use hunting as a yardstick of what firearms should be allowed. Believe it or not, there really are other reasons to own a firearm.

Those that are somehow soothed because a firearm has been banned based on its "looks" had better give their head a shake if they can't seem to see the bigger picture.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

It is not about hunting. In a system of checks and balances in the founders wisdom it was the final check and balance. It is what allows all men (women) to really be equal.

[joe12]

Agreed Doc. The arguement based on what is "needed" is very scary. I find that a lot of anti-gun folks don't own guns or have a need for guns themselves, so they think then that no one needs guns. This is such a narrow sighted way of looking at the world it is incredible. I always come back with the arguement that there have been a number of people killed recently by the subway in NYC. I hate public transportation and I drive my car everywhere so I personally have no "need" for the subway. That being said, I do not extend my situation to everyone else and claim that nobody has a "legitimite need" for a subway given how dangerous they are.

[Doc]

Yeah, I always figure that need is based on a situation you may not yet have encountered. Possibly the lady with her kids crouched behind her in the dark may have a different view on what is needed when she is looking across the room at an approaching pair of armed intruders. But there are people intent on depriving her of the means to stay alive and keep her kids alive by determining that she will legally be kept under gunned and inadequately protected. All well intentioned people, but obsessed by the idea that they know better what is good for the law abiding citizens and what it is that they need.

[ants]

Thats the angle the antis are using. King Cuomo said it himself in the state of the state speech. " No one needs ten bullets to kill a deer" they are drilling hunting and what type of gun they think you need for hunting, into peoples head. All they have been talking about is hunting and what role AR style rifles play in hunting. Keep singing the same song long enough and sooner or later enough people will start to sing along.

[sits in trees]

i mean really, who is anyone to tell someone what they can defend themselves with in their own freakin home. it just so happens that the weapon most suited for women in a home defense situation is a cut off shotgun without a stock and only a pistol grip and short barrel. something a small framed female of 115 lbs can aim and hold on target without the usual sag they display when aiming a full lenght long gun for more than a couple seconds. and these idiots are telling us we cant arm our women with the most effective weapon possible, screw them and their schizkauph laws!

[Four Season Whitetail's]

I get a little nervous whenever people think they should decide for me what I need. I really don't understand what this tunnel vision is on hunting as being the only measure of what a law abiding person should be allowed to own. The 2nd Amendment never mentioned hunting as a criteria, so what is with all these people that want to use hunting as a yardstick of what firearms should be allowed. Believe it or not, there really are other reasons to own a firearm.

Those that are somehow soothed because a firearm has been banned based on its "looks" had better give their head a shake if they can't seem to see the bigger picture.

Thats just the way it is i guess. Alot of guys do not have any or see any use for a 30 shot clip. They are hunters and just use old time rifles and shotguns. Does not give anyone the right to tell someone what they can have but if you poll the general public..30 Shot clips and such would get knocked out!

You have to admit they did themselves no favors by making a regular yote or chuck rifle look like something out of war times. In many eyes. I dont own any or know of any but have heard talk of the look of some such new guns!

[josephmrtn]

Biz did you ever hear the term [give em an inch and they will take a yard] ? Well thats what the gun stance is all about and it's been proven time and again ! Do some research and read what the head of I.C.E said about the endgame plan for gun ownership in the U.S of A It just might change your mind or at least broaden your thinking on this matter !

P.S. We need all the help we can get !!

aint it "give an inch and they take a mile"?

Many might not agree with me but those that sit idly by and allow rights to be infringed on because "they don't affect me" are the problem or at least equal to those actively taking the right away. In my mind they may even be worse because they are owners of firearms and won’t take a stand.

Can we at least agree that this Safe act will do nothing to reduce violent gun crime? That is one of their stated goals. When that does not work, and it won’t, what then? Do you honestly believe they will throw in the towel and say “Oh well we tried”. If, as only a hunter, you want to see how this could impact you, just do a little research on what has happened in Australia. That did take place in a “life time”. Less than one as a matter of fact. Try to hunt with a semi auto shotgun down there to say nothing of a semi auto rifle. Check out the hoops you have to go through to hunt with a bolt action. It can happen in a life time and if the fence sitters in our ranks don’t choose a side, it will.

This safe act is stupid and i am 100% sure that it is just the tip of the iceberg more is coming in the near future...

Got it.....It would other me, but thats me

By the way, not to start a p--ing match, but I guarentee you that most criminals don't buy their guns and ammo legally. If they did , the repeat offender, career criminals would never have guns because they would be caught in the background checks that are already in place. They use other means.

+1

i mean really, who is anyone to tell someone what they can defend themselves with in their own freakin home. it just so happens that the weapon most suited for women in a home defense situation is a cut off shotgun without a stock and only a pistol grip and short barrel. something a small framed female of 115 lbs can aim and hold on target without the usual sag they display when aiming a full lenght long gun for more than a couple seconds. and these idiots are telling us we cant arm our women with the most effective weapon possible, screw them and their schizkauph laws!

EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Doc]

Thats just the way it is i guess. Alot of guys do not have any or see any use for a 30 shot clip. They are hunters and just use old time rifles and shotguns. Does not give anyone the right to tell someone what they can have but if you poll the general public..30 Shot clips and such would get knocked out!

You have to admit they did themselves no favors by making a regular yote or chuck rifle look like something out of war times. In many eyes. I dont own any or know of any but have heard talk of the look of some such new guns!

Well, I don't own any of the modern sporting arms and definitely am not much of an authority on them, but I believe that the designs popped out into the civilian world because of modularity and the ability to customize and service them applies to hunting needs.

And by the way, there are many guns that had their origins and/or their features coming from the military. I don't see any reason to argue against a firearm based on the features that have their basis in military design. That would include just about any firearm.

Perhaps that is the next criterion that the anti-gunners will use ..... any gun that has any feature that was ever found in a military weapon. That ought to just about cover the rest of them .... eh?

[Four Season Whitetail's]

Well, I don't own any of the modern sporting arms and definitely am not much of an authority on them, but I believe that the designs popped out into the civilian world because of modularity and the ability to customize and service them applies to hunting needs.

And by the way, there are many guns that had their origins and/or their features coming from the military. I don't see any reason to argue against a firearm based on the features that have their basis in military design. That would include just about any firearm.

Perhaps that is the next criterion that the anti-gunners will use ..... any gun that has any feature that was ever found in a military weapon. That ought to just about cover the rest of them .... eh?

Could be i guess but the way things are working out the looks of some of them does not help.

All eyes do not see the same thing, Even if they are the same!

[13BVET]

I don't even own any so-called assault weapons, but history has shown that the Supreme Court is more apt to protect gun rights under the militia clause in the Constitution, than anything else. I don't think there were many decisions protecting gun ownership for the purpose of hunting (at least I can't find any). These are cases that clearly state that "military style" weapons are clearly protected.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Miller

[Doc]

Could be i guess but the way things are working out the looks of some of them does not help.

All eyes do not see the same thing, Even if they are the same!

Well, let's face it. When laws are determined on the appearance of the products, then something has really gone screwy in this country. Obviously there is no point trying to find a firearm that will win a political popularity contest. When they are all done with the spooky-looking guns, they'll be coming after the rest ..... one at a time. And there will be plenty of people that just sit back and shrug their shoulders and say ..... "oh well", just like they do with the banning of modern sporting rifles. Human nature never does seem to improve.