• 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.

Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban OLD NEWS

yankees98a

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2007
Messages
144
Location
, ,
imported post

The Obama administration will seek to reinstate the assault weapons ban that expired in 2004 during the Bush administration, Attorney General Eric Holder said today.
abc_assault_holder_090225_mn.jpg
Wednesday Attorney General Eric Holder said that the Obama administration will seek to reinstitute the assault weapons ban which expired in 2004 during the Bush administration. (AP Photos/ABC News Graphic ) "As President Obama indicated during the campaign, there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons," Holder told reporters.
Holder said that putting the ban back in place would not only be a positive move by the United States, it would help cut down on the flow of guns going across the border into Mexico, which is struggling with heavy violence among drug cartels along the border.
"I think that will have a positive impact in Mexico, at a minimum." Holder said at a news conference on the arrest of more than 700 people in a drug enforcement crackdown on Mexican drug cartels operating in the U.S.
 

yankees98a

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2007
Messages
144
Location
, ,
imported post

"There are rumors that parts of Blair Holt's HR-45 will be added to this Assault Weapons bill. Not only do they want to ban most semi-autos, they want Illinois style licensing, and require all states to adopt California rules. Holder was one of the strongest proponents of HR-45 before it died in the House. Finally, the rules proposed will make California's AWB look good in comparasion."

(From another message board)
 

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,837
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
imported post

You know. They could try this all they wanted but if states decided that they were not going to abide by any such nonsense, they could do that. All it takes is balls and an AG who is willing to tell the feds where to go and where to put it.
 

cloudcroft

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2007
Messages
1,908
Location
El Paso, TX (formerly Colorado Springs, CO)
imported post

"I think that will have a positive impact in Mexico, at a minimum." -- Holder.

I couldn't care less about what happens in that sorry, corrupt, hates-Americans-but-loves-their-moneyMexico!

Why should American citizens (to hell with the illegals here)have THEIR rights infringed upon because some naiveliberal fool like Holder believes it will "have a positive impact in Mexico?"

Don't youjusthate it when you don't have any real Americans running this country?

Just look at his picture...that long-distant ignorant vacant-in-the-head stare so common among liberals...no real purpose in life for him and his ilk except to mess up things for everyone else.Traitors all of them.

-- John D.
 

Gunfreak25

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
16
Location
Yuma, Arizona, USA
imported post

What are we now, scapegoats for Mexico? I live in Yuma, about as close to the border as you can get without leaving the USA. I can tell you for a fact that Mexicans aren't getting all of their weapons from illegal smuggling from the US. The VAST majority of weapons that Mexico receives come from ships that are subject to pirating out on the open sea. Hundreds of thousands of guns per year and smuggled onto and off of ships. And if you haven't noticed, Mexico has this big body off water just off their coast, it's called the Gulf of Mexico. :lol:

To Mr.Holder and the entire Obama administration, I say to you. "COME AND GET EM!"
While the idea of such a ban being reinstated is indeed a scary thought, and as much as I support writing to your congressmen and making your voice loud and clear, I wouldn't loose too much sleep over this bill. I can tell you exactly what would happen if it did get passed, crime rates would sky rocket and MILLIONS of Americans would barricade themselves in their homes refusing to give up their arms without a fight. So there would probably be a lot of shootouts. Course the media would call such people psychopaths or even terrorists, but in our founding fathers eyes these people would be called patriots! Not only that, I can only imagine there would be some form of "government overthrow" plan taken up by law abiding joes such as ourselves. Did anyone see Glenn Becks tea party march last year? Of course the media barely covered that one, but it was estimated over 2 million people attended. There are youtube videos to prove it! And that was sparked just mainly over healthcare, can you imagine how many ticked off gun wielding Americans would be marching up to the white house for fear of loosing their 2nd Amendment rights?

You guys can stick a fork in me now, i'm done. :lol:
 

cloudcroft

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2007
Messages
1,908
Location
El Paso, TX (formerly Colorado Springs, CO)
imported post

Gunfreak25,

May we designate an "express corridor" through your state to deport the millions of illegals here back to Mexico (yes, it CAN be done)...along with a few million more of their so-called American "citizens" (joke) supporters/sympathizers (almost all Democrats anyway)? NM, CA and TX would also have such "corridors." Sort of like NAFTA but in reverse and one-way-trip only.

If so, I'd like Holder to be on the first rusted-out flatbed red/white/green painted hog truck heading South to the Border.

:cuss:

-- John D.
 

Bookman

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
1,424
Location
Winston Salem, North Carolina, United States
imported post

Here's a thought.

  1. How could Heller be applied to this?
  2. Didn't the USSC say that the Federal Government couldn't infringe on our 2nd Amendment RTKBA?
  3. Couldn't a new ban, therefore, be challenged on constitutional grounds?
 

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,837
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
imported post

Bookman wrote:
Here's a thought.
  1. How could Heller be applied to this?
  2. Didn't the USSC say that the Federal Government couldn't infringe on our 2nd Amendment RTKBA?
  3. Couldn't a new ban, therefore, be challenged on constitutional grounds?
I really doesn't matter what the Supreme Court, the congress, or the president says. The Bill of Rights is clear on the issue as is most of the state constitutions. If our state AG's would just ban together and refuse any sort of federal infringement, Second Amendment or anything else for that matter, there wouldn't be a damned thing the feds could do about it. Their hands would be tied.
 

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,837
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
imported post

cloudcroft wrote:
"I think that will have a positive impact in Mexico, at a minimum." -- Holder.

I couldn't care less about what happens in that sorry, corrupt, hates-Americans-but-loves-their-moneyMexico!

Why should American citizens (to hell with the illegals here)have THEIR rights infringed upon because some naiveliberal fool like Holder believes it will "have a positive impact in Mexico?"


Don't youjusthate it when you don't have any
real Americans running this country?

Just look at his picture...that long-distant ignorant vacant-in-the-head stare so common among liberals...no real purpose in life for him and his ilk except to mess up things for everyone else.Traitors all of them.

-- John D.
:exclaim:

Amen to that. I could not agree more.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
2,381
Location
across Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsi
imported post

Bookman wrote:
Here's a thought. Didn't the USSC say that the Federal Government couldn't infringe on our 2nd Amendment RTKBA? Couldn't a new ban, therefore, be challenged on constitutional grounds?
I-ANAL

In Heller, no, the USSC said no such thing because Heller addressed two very narrow points of DC's gun law. There were opinions by the Justices that provide guidance to their thoughts, but no such judgment. Of course such a law may be challenged but only after an appropriate case wends its way through the lower courts just as has McDonald.
 

cloudcroft

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2007
Messages
1,908
Location
El Paso, TX (formerly Colorado Springs, CO)
imported post

Again, I have to say I am still waiting for a strong governor(s) to stand tall on thisissue and so many others comng from the Feds as well.

We need strong no-nonsense "states rights" governors AT LEAST to counterbalancean imperialistic and arrogant President...and his unqualified/nepotistic flunkies.

-- John D.
 

Deanimator

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2007
Messages
2,083
Location
Rocky River, OH, U.S.A.
imported post

This tells me that the only people that Obama hates more than gun owners are Democrats in Congress.

They can't pass the "healthcare" scam and are scared to death of their constituents, other than in Berkley.

The November elections are going to be a bloodbath.
 

Bookman

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
1,424
Location
Winston Salem, North Carolina, United States
imported post

Master Doug Huffman wrote:
Bookman wrote:
Here's a thought. Didn't the USSC say that the Federal Government couldn't infringe on our 2nd Amendment RTKBA? Couldn't a new ban, therefore, be challenged on constitutional grounds?
I-ANAL

In Heller, no, the USSC said no such thing because Heller addressed two very narrow points of DC's gun law. There were opinions by the Justices that provide guidance to their thoughts, but no such judgment. Of course such a law may be challenged but only after an appropriate case wends its way through the lower courts just as has McDonald.
Good point! Because of the recent decision by the Washington State Supreme Court, I forgot (How, I have no idea) that the 2nd Amendment hasn't been incorporated to the states.

In case you're wondering, on 2/18 our state Supreme Court ruled that 2nd Amendment does indeed apply to the state of Washington.
 

Curmudgeon

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2009
Messages
307
Location
York, Pennsylvania, USA
imported post

detroit_fan wrote:
Is this current?I remember Holder saying those EXACT same words last year and the ACB link is from Feb of 2009?


Ding! Ding! Ding! Thread winner!

I can't believe the number of folks who apparently overlooked that. :facepalm:
 
Top