How close are we?

As we saw demonstrations in 49 state capitols, do you think that the politicians took note?

Do you think that they will just dig deeper into their party lines and not get any where?

Perhaps they will pass some pusstastic legislation that will not make anyone happy…

 

This brings us to a discussion that we have had before. How close are we to seeing assassination attempts? At what point will we start to took more for revolution? (if anyone has the balls left for THAT kind of action)

65 thoughts on “How close are we?”

    1. That video is very scary. I don't care if it had blanks in it, that too can kill you because of the percussion of the shell. At close range the "air" that projects forward can crush a skull. He needs to go to jail.

      I remember an actor was playing around with a 38 special that contained blanks. In front of all the other actors on the set he pointed it at his own head and pulled the trigger. Dead at the scene has new meaning.

        1. Yes, that is correct, Brandon did do that. But this also happened before.

          During a break between scenes on the Cover Up set on October 12, 1984, Jon-Erik Hexum jokingly placed a blank-loaded .44 Magnum prop gun to his temple and pulled the trigger. The shot sent the wadding from the blank cartridge into Hexum's skull, driving a bone fragment the size of a quarter into his brain and causing massive hemorrhaging. Hexum was rushed to the hospital, where he eventually was declared brain dead.

          1. Wiki is showing “a blank cartridge was fired from a gun barrel in which a bullet of a real cartridge was lodged” I just remembered that it was a freak accident. I loved the film… it is the theme for my MySpace page.

  1. NO attempts will be made. All of the Washington elite are surrounded by armed guards, which they should be. But, it highlights the hypocritical nature of their message. They are above all of us, we are the ones who don't need to be protected, we are to be included in Obamacare, they are NOT, and so on.

    We are the peons, they are the rulers. Until this attitude from Washington stops and they are all tossed out, both sides Rs & Ds, then nothing will change,

    1. Attempts?? I couldn't say. But I do agree on the rest entirely.

      Again I propose:

      Amendment 28: Congress shall pass no law that doesn't apply to every member of the United States Government, without exception. Congress shall pass no healthcare, retirement, or social welfare program or reform unless all members of government are subject to those acts. No government official or member of their staff shall have, through employment benefits, any healthcare insurance, retirement plan, or other benefit that is not available to the general public through social services at a sliding scale according to income. All government officials must hold elected office with the federal government for a minimum of 20 years in order to receive lifetime benefits and/or retirement through the federal system.

      We really need to find a way to but this so in the face of the American public that the representatives can't ignore it completely. At least they should have to go on record as to their thoughts on such an amendment. Then people could have no doubt that they are out for themselves and not "representing" anyone.

  2. An Old Dog starts chasing rabbits and before long, discovers that he's lost. Wandering about, he notices a panther heading rapidly in his direction with the intention of having lunch.

    The old Doberman thinks, "Oh, oh! I'm in deep doo-doo now!"
    Noticing some bones on the ground close by, he immediately settles down to chew on the bones with his back to the approaching cat. Just as the panther is about to leap, the old Doberman exclaims loudly,

    "Boy, that was one delicious panther! I wonder, if there are any more around here?"

    Hearing this, the young panther halts his attack in mid-strike, a look of terror comes over him and he slinks away into the trees.

    "Whew!," says the panther, "That was close! That old Doberman nearly had me!"

    Meanwhile, a squirrel who had been watching the whole scene from a nearby tree, figures he can put this knowledge to good use and trade it for protection from the panther. So, off he goes.

    The squirrel soon catches up with the panther, spills the beans and strikes a deal for himself with the panther.

    The young panther is furious at being made a fool of and says, "Here, squirrel, hop on my back and see what's going to happen to that conniving canine!"

    Now, the old Doberman sees the panther coming with the squirrel on his back and thinks, "What am I going to do now?," but instead of running, the dog sits down with his back to his attackers, pretending he hasn't seen them yet, and just when they get close enough to hear, the old Doberman says ……

    "Where's that squirrel? I sent him off an hour ago to bring me another panther!"

    Moral of this story…

    Don't mess with the old dogs… Age and skill will always overcome youth and treachery!
    BS and brilliance only come with age and experience.

  3. Personally, I think we are at a point, that if we do not stop this out of control government, we will not be able to stop them.

    Our household has made it's decision. If the time comes, we will stand (and perhaps fall) but we will not just roll over.

    1. Welcome back FS.I was wondering if the topic would flush you out.Thank you for weighing in, I understand your position. I think all of my weapons were stolen years ago, or maybe fell overboard while fishing for halibut. 🙂

      1. Well you know where we are. I can tell you, that even though ours too were lost in a horrible boating accident, there is safety in numbers. You and yours will be welcomed in. Bring booze, if we're going down, we're going happy!
        I just completed my class for CFP in Utah, Oregon and Arizona yesterday.

        1. Congratulations, Ms. Shock.

          Funny story for you. When my wife and I were taking our shooting proficiency test, require for a Texas licence, my instructor looked over my target. His words, "Wow, you would have a perfect score if it were not for this one stray shot."

          "What stray? Where?"

          "This one." Down in the middle of the crouch area there was one bullet hole.

          "Sir, Does that really look like a 9 mil bullet hole?"

          "Why, no, it doesn't now that you mention it."

          Then we both looked over at my wife who was turning away from us trying to hiding to muffled delight at what she had just done. Which was, keep me from displaying my target and keeping me humble.

        2. So it is just the two permits, one for Washington, then the Utah permit to cover the other multitude of states? It sure would be nice if it were a federal permit to go with a federal right… but that may overstep the federal authority and infringe on the states' rights.gratz by the way.

          1. Well I have had WA for a while. Oregon requirements are stricter, so you need to take the class, send in a certificate, references and your letter of need, wait for them to do your background check then they email you to set up an appointment. Then it's fingerprints and payment and picture. Utah has the highest standard for issuance, which includes a moral turpitude testing. That is why so many other state reciprocate and recognize theirs. They also have a 4 hour class instruction requirement. Then Arizona, which does not require a permit to carry but you can opt to apply for one. It tells all LEO that you are not a bad guy with a gun, since you pass the background check there too. I got Arizona, because at the end of the year, Nevada began reciprocating to them. So WA, OR, UT and AZ gives me all states west of the Mississippi except IL, CA, CO and HI as well as a lot east of the Mississippi too.
            So it is 4 different permits that I will have as soon as they get the paperwork done on their end.

            1. moral turpitude testing, really?Why should my lewdness preclude me form being able to conceal a weapon… I do hope that they are only looking at behaviors that will relate to firearms…If I buy a stolen DVD player (misdemeanor with today's prices) I should still be able to carry.Tax evasion? If they can steal my money, I should be able to play the game and hide some…How would

  4. Here's something, the people who would fight back should the government decide to actually try and enforce their anti gun mandate/agenda are very likely the same ones working hard, paying taxes and supporting the fat-cat government hog-pin. What are they going to do when the money they need to collect from these people runs dry?

    I guess they can just print all they need. But that only works for a while.

  5. Here's an idea: Before we hasten another civil war, why not give our system a chance?

    Some proposed changes to how guns are purchased are VERY POPULAR. Provided that "infringement issues" are aired, reviewed and addressed, let's see that the democratic principle that popular improvements may be applied.

    Now, in contrast, the NRA also remains very popular. There's so much good chance that nothing will go anywhere. Why the hell get your panties in a bunch, gun people?

    p.s. this whole issue and debate is driving gun sales THROUGH THE ROOF! Be happy about that!

    1. I guess it's a question of trying to enforce the EOs. Down here these will not be enforced. Civil War? Don't think it's come to that yet. Right now it's just bravado and talk.

      The first time a federal agent tries to enforce these in Texas there will be a huge legal tangle. No one around here is stopping buying and selling the ARs or the "capacity magazines" and I don't see this really becoming a real problem since they are all sold out already.

          1. RM-
            Here are the 23 Executive Orders that Obama signed. You should notice that nothing here affects either high capacity magazines or assault weapons.

            1. "Issue a presidential memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system."

            2. "Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system."

            3. "Improve incentives for states to share information with the background check system."

            4. "Direct the attorney general to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks."

            5. "Propose rulemaking to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun."

            6. "Publish a letter from ATF to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers."

            7. "Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign."

            8. "Review safety standards for gun locks and gun safes (Consumer Product Safety Commission)."

            9. "Issue a presidential Memorandum to require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations."

            10. "Release a DOJ report analyzing information on lost and stolen guns and make it widely available to law enforcement."

            11. "Nominate an ATF director."

            12. "Provide law enforcement, first responders, and school officials with proper training for active shooter situations."

            13. "Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime."

            14. "Issue a presidential memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence."

            15. "Direct the attorney general to issue a report on the availability and most effective use of new gun safety technologies and challenge the private sector to develop innovative technologies."

            16. "Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes."

            17. "Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities."

            18. "Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers."

            19. "Develop model emergency response plans for schools, houses of worship and institutions of higher education."

            20. "Release a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover."

            21. "Finalize regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within ACA exchanges."

            22. "Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations."

            23. "Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health."

            1. This is not the same list that was originally issued. They changed it. The original list included those two items and was the reason everyone got upset. The only item now I have somewhat of a problem with is the way they worded this.”Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.” I understand the purpose for it, but this backhanded way of stating this opens everyone up to questions concerning their privacy and not only for the mentally ill.

                1. Yes, and it is not the same list as before. Eyes makes some great points too about these.First doctor that asks me anything will be told none of your business and I will leave. The implications are that your answer will be entered on an electronic “medical” data base. Very convenient way to keep track of the bad guns are for future actions, isn’t it?

            2. Thank you for providing the list, I have been searching for a list of the EOs but for some reason my searches keep coming up with stuff that is several years old.

              Can you provide a direct link to where you found the list please?

            3. I do have as problem with several of the EOs, but they do seem to be cut down from the original ones that the liberal parties were publicizing.

              2) Removing legal barriers to background checks, with regards to peoples healthcare records is the same as saying that patient/doctor confidentiality no longer exist. This is a big problem! If a person has mental health issues that should preclude them from buying a firearm, they are already red flagged in the system, why does the government need to know more than that?

              3) "improve incentives" really? Shouldn't the states want this? Why do they need incentives?

              4) Oh, now this is a joke, considering the AG should be on that list. And with the racist remarks and actions he has shown in the past, he will probably start with "Oh, they're white, that's a dangerous group so they can't have guns" Nope, not with this AG!

              5) I'm good with this, as long as there is a very short time limit put into place for the return or confiscation, ie. the police can't drag their feet on doing the background check. I've had tool confiscated while they did a check to see if I was among a group of local thieves, it took me a year to get my tools back and then I had to take the department to court to get them. Background checks just don't take that long, 24hrs tops, or they should return the firearm regardless.

              6) This would imply that Obama intends to force (through legislation or EO if that doesn't work) universal background checks, which is one of the biggest issues in the fight right now. The only way you can guarantee universal backgrounds checks is to force registration of all forearms. So this is just a backdoor way to get to the final goal of full registration and eventually confiscation of all civilian firearms.

              16) please explain to me why my doctor needs to know if there are firearm in my home.

              19) Houses of worship are private gathering places and the government shouldn't and doesn't have any control that would allow this to happen.

            4. Exactly why does a Dr. need to know if there is a gun in the home? Do they ask if the home has a pool? No they don't. Do they ask if your medications are locked up? No they don't. Do they ask if you drink then drive? No they don't. Each of those things, cause more deaths than guns do.
              From the CDC: Yet, drownings are the leading cause of injury death for young children ages 1 to 4, and three children die every day as a result of drowning.
              Also from the CDC: Every day, almost 30 people in the United States die in motor vehicle crashes that involve an alcohol-impaired driver. This amounts to one death every 48 minutes.1 The annual cost of alcohol-related crashes totals more than $51 billion.
              And Again, from the CDC: Every day in the United States, 87 people die as a result of unintentional poisoning, and another 2,277 are treated in emergency departments (ED).

              When I pointed this out to a friend who is a pediatrician, and is defending the gun questioning, she had no response for me.

  6. How many people have been prosecuted and jailed for lying on a gun purchase form?
    How many people who didn't lie, but knew they could not legally own a gun and still tried to purchase one have been prosecuted and jailed?
    How many Drs, who are mandated to report mental health issues that make a person ineligible to own a firearm have been prosecuted and jailed for failing to comply?
    Anyone see any of these current laws being enforced?

      1. Not that big of an issue really. The current way it works is, if a doctor deems you unfit to own a firearm they can have a red flag placed in your law enforcement maintained records, No medical history is shared, only that you can't buy a firearm due to a medically flagged issue. That is all the gun store needs to know and should be enough for any government agency as well. But this doesn't leave room to use that information to obtain more information, which is what the "new" law is for, to create loopholes that the government can use to squeeze more information.

        1. I think you will find that medical records are on-line if you have at any time signed a release to any hospital or doctor’s office that uses a records sharing site. This was done to facilitate fast access for doctors to records for people when they are in serious medical trouble, like a heart attack. This does exist right now. I signed one of these forms a while back not even thinking about what this could do to me.

          1. Yes, they are online, but the access is suppose to be limited, you have to sign a consent form before they can be accessed. This legislation (if it can be called that) would remove the need for consent and open up those files to anyone that wants to do a background check.

            1. I had a discussion with massage therapist who was looking at several of her clients leaving once several changes to HIPAA when into effect as the information from her records would endanger their jobs. The more that the government meddles, the more fouled up our lives become.

                1. Due to HIPAA concerns she could not give details, but the way it was presented employers would deem her patients as unfit for duty if they had to reveal the details of the symptoms. I do know that she has patients that are employed by branches of service.

          2. The information is already being fed to the government. My last two appointments were followed by a call from a government registered phone number, with a person wanting to ask me more information about my visit to the Dr.
            I think in the future, I will not use my name and pay cash. At this point, I do not trust the government, nor did I give permission for my information to be shared with them. I'm done with them sticking their nose into my private life. And it doesn't get much more private than your relationship with your Dr.

      1. Here is a link to the 4473. As you can see, lying or attempting to buy a firearm that you can not legally own is a felony.
        http://pdfdownloadfree.net/?pdfurl=1qeXpurpn6Wih-

        In 2011 there were over 100k instances of felons attempting to purchase a firearm. All just walked away, even though they had committed a crime. Eventually, charges were brought against 154 people but only after breaking other laws.
        If they can't enforce this simple law (which Biden has already said they can't) why do they need another one? Especially when it has nothing to do with catching criminals, just documenting law abiding citizens?

    1. Good questions.

      What is holding us up from enforcing these existing laws?

      Seems to me that these laws were enacted with a purpose, and by enforcing these laws, we could save lives.

      On the other hand, if these laws run afoul of the 2nd Amendment or have other Unconstitutional aspects concerning privacy, then, well, let's have it out rather than just add more laws that are even more flawed and also going to not be enforced!

      Lets put these laws to test.
      1. Enforce them.
      2. Throw test cases at them.
      3. Take it to the Supreme Court.

      Figure it out dammit!

      Right now we're just twiddling our thumbs.

      1. ”The great body of our citizens shoot less as times goes on. We should encourage rifle practice among schoolboys, and indeed among all classes, as well as in the military services by every means in our power. Thus, and not otherwise, may we be able to assist in preserving peace in the world… The first step – in the direction of preparation to avert war if possible, and to be fit for war if it should come – is to teach men to shoot!”
        ~President Theodore Roosevelt

        A perfectly reasonable thing to say from someone who has had aim issues.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.