NRA: Congress will not pass weapons ban

You always seem to have good posts with good, valid news stories.

Thanks

I think this is all a dog and pony show. No way anything major gets passed. Just theatrics as usual. They know how powerful the gun lobby is.

Weapons are useless without ammo. They'll go after the ammo.

I don't trust the NRA either...
The NRA says congress will not act...correct.
The pres will act and the NRA seems silent on that...curious

Fact 1: No assault weapon was used on that day to shoot anyone.

Fact 2: The AR-15 in question was removed from the locked trunk of a car in the parking lot after the incident.

Last Edited by PIR on 01/14/2013 10:33 AM

Exactly!!! Never take your eyes off your enemy!!!!!!!

NRA may be playing both sides. Trust no one.

I think the Senate might pass something, but whatever they pass is dead in the House...

I think executive order from "Da Fuhrer"
and then gun owners will be dead in their house

a few more false flags may cinch it

Why is the NRA being so cocky about this?

THIS. How do you think O got in the White house to begin with? HINT: Wasn't the black vote.

You talking about Sandy Hook? There was no assault rifle used that day?

This is what I am thinking.

The House wont pass a ban on "assault" weapons, but the "O" most ceartainly will want to try an EO. It would take a couple of months to a couple of years to recind it. In the mean time, they will try to come and take them.

That would be a call to arms in my book.

I think you are starting to get it. Congrads Trin. lol

Thread: Kentucky Sheriff to Feds: 'You Are Never Going to Pull Guns Out of Jackson County'

Manchin will stab WV in the back. Just watch.
He already said you don't need more than 3 bulletts.

This dude is talking truth.

The Dick act of 1902 may offer assistance but emperor Bari Malik Shabazz, clouded the future is, the dark side covers everything.

^^this!^^

They'll post a few "unbiased" polls claiming "most Americans want a ban" and the rest of the sheep will follow.

A lot of politicians will come out supporting one side or the other to give it that democratic flavor and then ALL off them will vote FOR it at the last minute.

There will be MANY news stories quoting "reliable sources" regarding the righteous indignation of the nonspeaking victims around the world. Minus the "insurgancy" stats of course.

False Flags can and are often political in nature. They are not restricted to tragic event scenarios.

Good luck with that...

NRA don't give a fuck about you they represent the people who manufacture and sell guns. If they can sell more guns to the army then the citizens then that works for them. They will follow the money.

Ppfffffftttttttt-----

Obama said the words out of his own mouth this morning during his news conference:

"An assault weapons ban with meaning"

The NRA needs threats to the 2nd Amendment in general and towards weapons/ weapon owners in specific just like the DEA/ State/ and Local Law Enforcement need the Drug Cartels. Without this faceless "enemy" or "boogie man" to demonize - the money dries up. Just as importantly; they need to take advantage at every turn possible to claim "victories" for the 2nd/ gun owners when capitulation to the very rights they purport to preserve is given.

Otherwise, there would have NEVER been anything even remotely close to "compromises", or the touted "victories" associated with such.

The 2nd Amendment, as well as the balance of the BoR has ZERO room for compromise. ZERO. Consider for just a moment that a "compromise" had been reached regarding the 1st Amendment - specifically that regarding Freedom of the Press - since there's no way the Founding Fathers could have ever conceived the Internet, the proliferation of pornography, garbage reporting that is openly slanted towards Progressive/ Liberalism/ Marxism/ Socialism under the guise of "journalism", etc. The outrage would be deafening - specifically from every liberal, lying, US hating "journalist" and their associated rag of tripe out there.

Oh wait, that only works when one refers to suppressing Christianity.

What of the 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th? Where is the line of compromise we should be willing and even celebratory in accepting on these Amendments?

To acknowledge that there is, in fact, current heavy movement in the direction of greater restrictions/ bans/ or even talk of confiscation would be a direct admission that their rhetoric over the past 30 or so years has been just that - rhetoric, translating into monies from donations and memberships have been wasted, and the coffers would dry up so quickly that their heads would spin.

The Constitution and the Bill of Rights were written in the late 18th Century. During this composition, there was great concern, concentration, debate, and ultimate decision reached on the core issues believed to A) be inalienable as granted by the Creator, and B) necessary to ensure both the construction and continued success of the Nation. It was written in plain English specifically so that even the most elementary of education would be able to understand the Spirit of the Constitution, as well as cautious enough to not leave open any windows for skewing or taking out of context.

"...Shall not be infringed" fit those two(2) aforementioned requirements - it is very simple, straightforward, and closes the door immediately on any attempt to disarm or otherwise restrict the arming of the people.

I, nor the balance of this nation, do not need some slick-talking Charlatan, whether elected and taking my money or an employee of a commercial organization begging for my money, to travel to Washington in order to beg for my ability to interpret this document any differently than it was written, nor to freely exercise the GOD-GIVEN RIGHTS DENOTED THEREIN.

FREE MEN DON'T ASK PERMISSION

Last Edited by ClydeX on 01/14/2013 02:49 PM