• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

MI democrats to introduce AWB, large cap mag ban, and "universal backround checks"

detroit_fan

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
1,196
Location
Monroe, Michigan, USA
MI democrats to introduce AWB, large cap mag ban, and "universal backround checks"

FERNDALE, MI – State Rep. John Townsend (D -Royal Oak) said in the Detroit suburb of Ferndale Sunday that he and his peers in Lansing are creating three-pronged gun control legislation.

"The issue of closing the loophole on gun purchases and requiring background checks and permitting, the issue of limiting the sizes of these bullet magazines and the issue of banning assault weapons, all three can be dealt with at the state level," Townsend told the Metro Coalition of Congregations at St. James Catholic Church. "I am very privileged to be preparing legislation on all three of those issues that I will be introducing with my colleagues in the very near future."


http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/i...sentative_from_metr.html#incart_river_default


I know a lot of people who claim to be "pro-gun democrats" here in MI, and that really confuses me. How can any pro-gun person continue to support a party that consistently attempts to strip you of your rights or stop you from further advancing them? Last year the dems rallied together to try and stop SB59, now they are planning an all-out attack on the 2A here in MI. I hope you "pro-gun democrats" remember this when you hit the ballot box next time.

(i'm not saying the MI GOP is a strong ally to us, just saying it's obvious the MI dems are against us and will continue to attack the 2A every chance they get)
 

xmanhockey7

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2010
Messages
1,492
Location
Portage, MI
Hopefully we can close the gun show loophole. Long guns are used in so many more crimes than pistols. Must be because we have registration and background checks for all pistols.
 

casper

Guest
Joined
Feb 10, 2013
Messages
266
Location
Holland, MI.
They just don't get it, and never will. They should have to wear signs saying their against the 2nd amendment, so we know who we don't have to protect in a bad situation.
 

Raggs

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2012
Messages
1,191
Location
Wild Wild West Michigan
Question for someone who can explain, the gun show loop hole is that people can buy rifles at gun shows without background checks? or any firearm without a background check?

They just don't get it, and never will. They should have to wear signs saying their against the 2nd amendment, so we know who we don't have to protect in a bad situation.
 

FreeInAZ

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2012
Messages
2,514
Location
Secret Bunker
Re: MI democrats to introduce AWB, large cap mag ban, and "universal backround

Hopefully we can close the gun show loophole. Long guns are used in so many more crimes than pistols. Must be because we have registration and background checks for all pistols.

You Sir are a master of sarcasm. Nicely played. ;)
 

DrTodd

Michigan Moderator
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,337
Location
Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
FERNDALE, MI – State Rep. John Townsend (D -Royal Oak) said in the Detroit suburb of Ferndale Sunday that he and his peers in Lansing are creating three-pronged gun control legislation.

"The issue of closing the loophole on gun purchases and requiring background checks and permitting, the issue of limiting the sizes of these bullet magazines and the issue of banning assault weapons, all three can be dealt with at the state level," Townsend told the Metro Coalition of Congregations at St. James Catholic Church. "I am very privileged to be preparing legislation on all three of those issues that I will be introducing with my colleagues in the very near future."


http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/i...sentative_from_metr.html#incart_river_default


I know a lot of people who claim to be "pro-gun democrats" here in MI, and that really confuses me. How can any pro-gun person continue to support a party that consistently attempts to strip you of your rights or stop you from further advancing them? Last year the dems rallied together to try and stop SB59, now they are planning an all-out attack on the 2A here in MI. I hope you "pro-gun democrats" remember this when you hit the ballot box next time.

(i'm not saying the MI GOP is a strong ally to us, just saying it's obvious the MI dems are against us and will continue to attack the 2A every chance they get)


Wasn't it a Republican that DID "kill it"?
 

detroit_fan

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
1,196
Location
Monroe, Michigan, USA
Wasn't it a Republican that DID "kill it"?

If you want to call snyder a republican, sure. but from his tendency to raise taxes and fees and his willingness to ignore most conservatives social agenda, i think the argument can be made he is clearly a RINO.

that's why included the last part about thestate GOP not necessarily being a strong ally.

with that said, he did sign a couple somewhat-pro2A bills, like HB5225. Those bills would not have been signed by Bernero if he had won. The MI GOP may not be advancing gun rights, but they aren't attacking them like the MI dems are.
 

DrTodd

Michigan Moderator
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,337
Location
Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
If you want to call snyder a republican, sure. but from his tendency to raise taxes and fees and his willingness to ignore most conservatives social agenda, i think the argument can be made he is clearly a RINO.

that's why included the last part about the state GOP not necessarily being a strong ally.

with that said, he did sign a couple somewhat-pro2A bills, like HB5225. Those bills would not have been signed by Bernero if he had won. The MI GOP may not be advancing gun rights, but they aren't attacking them like the MI dems are.

If Bernero would have signed them or not is pure conjecture, he's not in office, Snyder is. Snyder is the Governor and I believe received support from the Republican Party... and I believe he was present at the state convention and received many rounds of applause indicating that many members, if not most of them, continue to support his policies.

I must say, though, that the lack of any REAL changes in regards to the 2nd Amendment with a Republican majority in the house... and the senate... and with a Republican governor, still garner support from gun owners with legislation that you admit is only "somewhat-pro2A".

I also seem to remember a certain governor, a Democrat, who signed bills which furthered the 2A in Michigan and also gave a few opinions as Attorney General that did the same... DESPITE what her personal views may have been at the time.

I don't think the national GOP is any better than the state party... to even nominate Romney in the last election indicates that the 2nd Amendment was not even a passing consideration in choosing the Republican Party standard bearer.
 
Last edited:

detroit_fan

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
1,196
Location
Monroe, Michigan, USA
If Bernero would have signed them or not is pure conjecture, he's not in office, Snyder is. Snyder is the Governor and I believe received support from the Republican Party... and I believe he was present at the state convention and received many rounds of applause indicating that many members, if not most of them, continue to support his policies.

I must say, though, that the lack of any REAL changes in regards to the 2nd Amendment with a Republican majority in the house... and the senate... and with a Republican governor, still garner support from gun owners with legislation that you admit is only "somewhat-pro2A".

I also seem to remember a certain governor, a Democrat, who signed bills which furthered the 2A in Michigan and also gave a few opinions as Attorney General that did the same... DESPITE what her personal views may have been at the time.

I don't think the national GOP is any better than the state party... to even nominate Romney in the last election indicates that the 2nd Amendment was not even a passing consideration in choosing the Republican Party standard bearer.

Sure snyder received backing once he was nominated, but to be fair, we really had no idea where he stood on this issue, he was never pressed on it. I know i voted for someone else in the GOP primary, i think many gun owners did. Once he was nominated the choice of supporting the unknown commodity appeared better than the alternative, who was (and still is) an active opponent to our common goals.

I wouldn't say the state GOP has the support of gun owners, most that I know speak out against them pretty regularly, including myself. Personally I'm a libertarian, so i really don't have a horse in that race, but when presented with the option of having a party that doesn't advance but doesn't limit, and a party that attempts to limit, i am going to choose the former.

That gov that you mention said that she regrets signing those bills, and if she had to do it over again she would veto them. i interpret that as lack of knowledge as opposed to doing the right thing regardless of personal opinions.

The national GOP is no better, but to be fair, it was citizens that nominated romney. apparently the people voting in the GOP primaries were not concerned enough about gun rights to make it an issue, which is a shame. I know it is one of the reasons i did not vote for him in the primary, and voted for Ron Paul instead.

Please don't mistake me for a GOP apologist, I'm anything but that. What i do see here in MI though, is that the MI democratic party has made it clear it has NO intentions of working to advance gun rights, and fully intends to to attack them whenever given the chance. That is something that should be on every voters mind when they cast that vote.
 

Yooper

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2008
Messages
808
Location
Houghton County, Michigan, USA
I'll be watching closely to see how the new representative for the 110th district votes on gun bills. Unfortunately, the republican that held the seat last year lost in the election. On the plus side, for now, the democrat that replaced him was "A" rated. The democrats from the western U.P. can and do buck the trend of those downstate when it comes to the gun issue.
 

FreeInAZ

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2012
Messages
2,514
Location
Secret Bunker
Re: MI democrats to introduce AWB, large cap mag

The founding fathers would be shooting by now.

This is correct. They knew the stakes. Today's U.S. is far from motivated and easily made to bow to the will of the "elites". Most citizens today would sit by and watch their neighbors be carted off for offenses against the "crown". They would only become alarmed when the "authorities" came stomping up their front walk. :eek:

Hopefully we never have to count on their resolve...
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,169
Location
earth's crust
Hopefully we can close the gun show loophole. Long guns are used in so many more crimes than pistols. Must be because we have registration and background checks for all pistols.

Ya buy a piece of property from a private seller ..

they want regular people to all of a sudden become gun dealers?

Sell 5/yr and you need a ffl.

seems like sarcasm ...
 

DrTodd

Michigan Moderator
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,337
Location
Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
Sure snyder received backing once he was nominated, but to be fair, we really had no idea where he stood on this issue, he was never pressed on it. I know i voted for someone else in the GOP primary, i think many gun owners did. Once he was nominated the choice of supporting the unknown commodity appeared better than the alternative, who was (and still is) an active opponent to our common goals.

I wouldn't say the state GOP has the support of gun owners, most that I know speak out against them pretty regularly, including myself. Personally I'm a libertarian, so i really don't have a horse in that race, but when presented with the option of having a party that doesn't advance but doesn't limit, and a party that attempts to limit, i am going to choose the former.

That gov that you mention said that she regrets signing those bills, and if she had to do it over again she would veto them. i interpret that as lack of knowledge as opposed to doing the right thing regardless of personal opinions.

The national GOP is no better, but to be fair, it was citizens that nominated romney. apparently the people voting in the GOP primaries were not concerned enough about gun rights to make it an issue, which is a shame. I know it is one of the reasons i did not vote for him in the primary, and voted for Ron Paul instead.

Please don't mistake me for a GOP apologist, I'm anything but that. What i do see here in MI though, is that the MI democratic party has made it clear it has NO intentions of working to advance gun rights, and fully intends to to attack them whenever given the chance. That is something that should be on every voters mind when they cast that vote.

My point was that many people assume that the GOP is going to further gun rights and the fact of the matter is that they don't. People assume that the Dems are "against" gun rights... some are, some aren't. In fact, former Senator LeGrand(D) submitted bills the past few years that would have eliminated the "No CC zones". Whether a person is a Democrat or Republican is not a reliable indication of where a person stands in regards to the 2nd Amendment. Also, IF the Republicans were upset about Snyder's stance on the 2nd Amendment, we certainly would hear about it. I haven't heard anyone in the party publicly criticize his veto, nor of his negotiation tactics which turned a half-way decent bill into something that many felt gave up too much.

What IS a better indication of where a person stands is whether the district they represent is rural or urban, but even this is fraught with exception. Some of the most ardent supporters of the right to keep AND bear arms have been members of both parties, as have some of its most harsh critics.

My point in bringing up the former governor was not to give her a general endorsement but rather to express my longing for a governor that would choose to follow the will of the legislature instead of insert personal opinion into the process; I am unaware of her statements that she in any way regrets signing any bills. However, since she is now a private citizen she can spout off anything she desires. I would think that her interest in getting support for a spot in the national Democratic Party may be why she would make such statements. But, as I said, she can SAY whatever she wants to get whatever support she feels she needs from Big City dems to be able to do that. I look at what a person actually does versus what they say they will or will not do. That's why I feel that had Romney been elected, we would most likely face the same issues that we do today on the national level... his history speaks for itself as does Obama's.

I too am a libertarian; Ron Paul was my first vote for President... when he was the Libertarian Candidate. My position is more left-libertarian than I was then but still very much in support of many parts of the national Libertarian Party platform. I don't support the goals of the Democratic Party nor do I support those of the Republican Party. My thought is both parties support big government: Republicans focus on legislation that gets support from their constituency as do the Democrats. Their both using your money to buy votes from segments of this country.
 

detroit_fan

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
1,196
Location
Monroe, Michigan, USA
I don't really disagree with anything you said DrTodd. I do think that if we were to generalize though, it is clear the the majority of politicans who support the 2A are GOP, and the majority that want to restrict it are Democrats, of course there are examples on both sides that do the opposite. Under Democratic control I believe we are MUCH more likely to see Rights restricted than we are with a GOP controlled legislature. jmo
 

Michigander

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2007
Messages
4,836
Location
Mulligan's Valley
Under Democratic control I believe we are MUCH more likely to see Rights restricted than we are with a GOP controlled legislature. jmo

At the state level, I think it's kind of not so clear what could happen, though i doubt they really want to piss off all the CPL holders and others who like guns.

At the federal level, it's pretty simple. Reagan, after beating the anti war counter culture into submission as well as destroying gun rights as the PRK governer, became president and banned machine guns. His VP, Bush sr went on to become president and sign the ban on Norinco's. Then we have Bush jr who steadfastly said he'd sign another homeland defense weapon ban if it came across his desk.

I'm pretty much right in line with Dr Todd in everything he said in this thread. I'm a leftist libertarian, but tend to vote straight libertarian. The last time I voted for a non libertarian in fact I was living in Arizona, and that was over 4 years ago now.
 
B

Bikenut

Guest
The goal is NOT magazine limits or an "assault weapons ban" in the name of "safety and protection from mass murderers". The goal is to scare everyone with the threat of those so folks will they they are avoiding them when they "compromise" (now there is a dirty word!) and settle for universal background checks.

And we all know that "universal background checks" is really spelled "complete and total registration of all guns".... but ...

"complete and total registration of all guns" is really spelled....

Now that we know who owns what guns "we the government" can easily confiscate them and have total dominion and control over .......... "them the people".

"Compromise" is a false premise when the choices are only shades of evil presented by those who are evil.

There isn't any "compromise" when the bully offers you the choice of agreeing to being beaten by his fists or beaten by a stick. Your only choice is how badly you will get beaten but you still get beaten so why agree to it? The only way to win when presented with that kind of "compromise" is to refuse to play the bully's game and kick him in the nuts instead.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Sorcice

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2011
Messages
381
Location
Madison, WI
MI democrats to introduce AWB, large cap mag ban, and "universal backround chec

Question for someone who can explain, the gun show loop hole is that people can buy rifles at gun shows without background checks? or any firearm without a background check?

In some states(not sure if all) the "loophole" is that if sold by a private seller(most notably at gun shows even though it happens all the time in parking lots, living rooms, etc) you don't need a background check just as if you sold a spare tire.. Whereas if you are a ffl even at a gun show you must run a background check. The "loophole" is misinformation used to make an issue where there isn't one.
 
B

Bikenut

Guest
In some states(not sure if all) the "loophole" is that if sold by a private seller(most notably at gun shows even though it happens all the time in parking lots, living rooms, etc) you don't need a background check just as if you sold a spare tire.. Whereas if you are a ffl even at a gun show you must run a background check. The "loophole" is misinformation used to make an issue where there isn't one.
I'm sure you, and many others, understand that the big to do about the so called "loophole" isn't about keeping guns out of the hands of criminals... it is the government using that excuse in order to have a record of who owns what guns where .... so they know where to go to confiscate them.
 
Top