| News & Current Events The forum to discuss things that are happening in the world today. |
 | | 
2nd October 2003, 03:28 AM
|  | Amos 9:6 | Psalm 103
   
| | Join Date: 21st September 2003 Location: South Central AK
Posts: 822
Blessings: 91,871
Reps: 23 (power: 0) | | | McCarthy & Schumer Duping Pro-gunners Into Supporting Gun Control
(Tuesday, September 30, 2003)
Remember the so-called "Our Lady of Peace Act" from last year? Well, Our Lady is back, but under a new name.
Two notoriously anti-gun legislators have teamed up again to deny millions of additional Americans their right to keep and bear arms. They are Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY).
What makes this bill so dangerous is the fact that many Congressmen who are perceived to be "pro-gun" are supporting the bill as well.
According to CNS News, a current NRA Board member, together with a former board member, appeared at a press conference last week to support the Schumer-McCarthy legislation. Specifically, Senator Larry Craig (R-ID) and Rep. John Dingell (D-MI) lent their visible support on Thursday in favor of the "NICS Improvement Act."
NICS, of course, refers to the National Instant Check System -- a key component of the Brady Act which forces honest citizens to prove their innocence to the FBI before they can purchase firearms from gun dealers. The Brady Act, named after anti-gun lobbyists Jim and Sarah Brady, requires gun purchasers' names to be given to the FBI, thus creating the potential that the feds could keep an illegal registry of firearms owners.
read more here http://www.gunowners.org/a093003.htm  
__________________ - Note to self: Think before you post. -
"Lord Maitreya is the anti-christ and will take rule in about 10 years."
Father Andrew Wingate
Last edited by TruthTraveler; 2nd October 2003 at 03:30 AM.
|
2nd October 2003, 04:51 AM
|  | You are my itchy sweater.
7   
 | | Join Date: 24th June 2003 Location: Sudzo's Purple Palace of Snuggles
Posts: 22,639
Blessings: 438,824
Reps: 143,964 (power: 174) | | | Um, just because someone is "pro-guns" doesn't mean they are anti gun control. Um, how do you know that dude buying a gun from you at the gun trade show is an innocent person and didn't just get out of jail for stealing a 12 guage and shooting his wife? The point is, gun control doesn't mean you still don't have your right to bear arms. I applied, went through a safety course and all that stuff to get my conceal weapons licence. Would you rather I just bought the handgun and kept it on me and that was ok?
__________________ I don't just want your flu, I want your cough too
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
2nd October 2003, 11:20 PM
|  | Orthogonal, Tangential, Tenuously Related
38 
| | Join Date: 26th December 2002 Location: Southeast of Disorder
Posts: 5,840
Blessings: 85,195
Reps: 2,470 (power: 17) | | | Is it really a bad thing that we want to try to keep guns out of the hands of criminals? This isn't the court system - people aren't innocent until proven guilty when buying guns. Also, please refrain from using the 'slippery slope fallacy' in your answers. |
2nd October 2003, 11:45 PM
|  | Constitution Party->11.04
41 
| | Join Date: 26th June 2003 Location: TX, USA
Posts: 743
Blessings: 92,314
Reps: 16 (power: 0) | | Thanks for the heads-up, Truth.  Originally Posted by Philosoft Also, please refrain from using the 'slippery slope fallacy' in your answers.
It's funny how every non-socialism-slanted post inevitably draws a "slippery slope" accusation, isn't it? 
May God bless America and the Constitution - the second amendment, included.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Where’re you goin’?
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
2nd October 2003, 11:49 PM
| | You are my itchy sweater.
7
| | Join Date: 24th June 2003 Location: Sudzo's Purple Palace of Snuggles
Posts: 22,639
Blessings: 438,824
Reps: 143,964 (power: 174) | | | Brother Christian- I am all for us owning guns, but I think the idea of some sort of gun control is a smart idea don't you? Some people aren't mature enough to handle the responsibility that goes with owning a gun.
__________________ I don't just want your flu, I want your cough too
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
3rd October 2003, 12:34 AM
| | Orthogonal, Tangential, Tenuously Related
38
| | Join Date: 26th December 2002 Location: Southeast of Disorder
Posts: 5,840
Blessings: 85,195
Reps: 2,470 (power: 17) | | Originally Posted by Brother Christman It's funny how every non-socialism-slanted post inevitably draws a "slippery slope" accusation, isn't it?
No, what's "funny" is the irritatingly fallacious habit of gun-rights advocates to trot out the references to Nazi Germany every time a "gun law" is discussed. May God bless America and the Constitution - the second amendment, included.
Oh, right. I'm sure God's really concerned about our guns. :rolleyes: |
3rd October 2003, 12:41 AM
| | Constitution Party->11.04
41
| | Join Date: 26th June 2003 Location: TX, USA
Posts: 743
Blessings: 92,314
Reps: 16 (power: 0) | | Originally Posted by Philosoft No, what's "funny" is the irritatingly fallacious habit of gun-rights advocates to trot out the references to Nazi Germany every time a "gun law" is discussed.
It's fallacious how, exactly? The abolition of churches/religion and confiscation of weaponry have been the first steps toward tyranny throughout history. It happened under Hitler and Stalin, but it was far from new.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Where’re you goin’?
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
3rd October 2003, 01:26 AM
| | Orthogonal, Tangential, Tenuously Related
38
| | Join Date: 26th December 2002 Location: Southeast of Disorder
Posts: 5,840
Blessings: 85,195
Reps: 2,470 (power: 17) | | Originally Posted by Brother Christman It's fallacious how, exactly?
Because it's a logical fallacy. The abolition of churches/religion and confiscation of weaponry have been the first steps toward tyranny throughout history. It happened under Hitler and Stalin, but it was far from new.
This is hindsight bias. You can look at the history of Nazi Germany and point to gun confiscation as an early precursor to a tyrannic state. But that's all you can do, because other states in history have had gun control laws, yet have not developed into tyrannical states.
To sum up:
1) Nazi Germany was a tyrannical state.
2) Nazi Germany banned private gun ownership early on.
3) Therefore, outlawing guns was a precursor to Nazi Germany's reign of tyranny.
is probably defensible, whereas:
1) Nazi Germany banned private ownership of guns and they were a tyrannical state.
2) The US has background checks.
3) Therefore, the US will become like Nazi Germany.
is not. |
3rd October 2003, 01:53 AM
|  | Veteran
33
| | Join Date: 14th August 2003
Posts: 1,325
Blessings: 90,659
Reps: 66 (power: 0) | | | Since one cannot predict future behavior hindsight is always 20/20.
Last edited by water_ripple; 3rd October 2003 at 02:02 AM.
|
3rd October 2003, 02:00 AM
| | Veteran
33
| | Join Date: 14th August 2003
Posts: 1,325
Blessings: 90,659
Reps: 66 (power: 0) | | Originally Posted by Philosoft Is it really a bad thing that we want to try to keep guns out of the hands of criminals? This isn't the court system - people aren't innocent until proven guilty when buying guns. Also, please refrain from using the 'slippery slope fallacy' in your answers.
No matter what the attempts the blackmarket will always exist. Making it more difficult for people who do not use guns to kill or threaten other people is punishing those who use guns responsibly. | | |
| Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes |  Linear Mode |
| | |
