In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Options
New Ban, H.R. 1022
Badgerman1987
Member Posts: 9 ✭✭
Sorry if this is a repeat thread, I've been spreading the word on forums for a while, and I didn't even look, but this is information you might feel is interesting concerning the new gun ban, or the previous gun ban and possible alternatives to the new one.
I can tell you now that this ban will have no real impact on crime, as most of you already know. My basis for this, in case anyone wants to challenge me, is that in March 1999 the National Institiute of Justice (the research arm of the Department of Justice) Issued a report titled "Impacts of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban: 1994-96." The authors of the report were Jeffery A. Roth and Christopher S. Koper. This was GOVERNMENT study, not a private organization or a special intrest group. The report basically stated that the 94 ban didn't do any good nor was it going to do any good because "assault weapons" were rarely criminally misused. That is what the report said, time and time again. In fact on the first page, it stated that the authors had a hard time discerning the effects of the ban.
Anyone who thinks that sounds awefully familiar, you may have read it in "Guns, Freedom, and Terrorism," by Wayne LaPierre, it is an excellent book with some very good common sense methods to reducing gun crimes without banning them. If you don't have it, you should buy it, it gives you plenty of ammunition to use against the anti-gun people when you debate about gun rights with them. Enough ammunition to win them over, I personally feel it is my duty to inform them the truth about guns and crime statistics, because so many people are mis-informed about the link between guns and crime.
If you don't want to read the book, here is one very, VERY effective motion that could be taken to drastically reduce crimes committed with firearms. STRICT enforcement of current federal firearms laws. Virginia, and Texas have both adopted a system called Project Exile (same basic thing, but texas' system is named something else, it was George Bush's baby). Its a "do not pass go, do not collect 200 dollars, go directly to jail" approach to people who are illeagally in possesion of firearms, and a minimum of 85 percent of the people who are prosecuted under this system do exactly that, they have no chance for bail, giving them no opportunity to commit more crimes on the street, the system requires that 85 percent of all sentences handed out are completed, and the minimum sentence for this system is 5 years FEDERAL time, not state prison, which means they won't see any of their buddies in prison, and they won't see much of their family and friends. I personally, not being a criminal, or being in violation of current firearms laws have no problem with it. When this system was enacted in virginia in 97, it had the second highest homocide per capita rate in the nation, then this system came along, and homocides dropped 45 percent. In 2001, Richmond experienced the lowest number of homocides since 1983.
If your no criminal, and if you don't plan on becoming one, this is a very appealing alternative to taking away our right to defend ourselves, and enjoy a very wholesome hobby. I believe it would eliminate the "need" for any assault weapons ban. In the end, people don't realize the simple truth that most of the people who have guns and use them for criminal purposes, already are breaking federal firearms laws, and if we'd simply lock these guys up when we got the chance, it would solve alot of problems.
I believe that we are responsible for representing our rights, and we must stand up when we are threatened. If the government's solution to the problem is as rediculous as the one we now face, it may just be up to us, the people, to present them with an effective, and very reasonable alternative, such as widespread adoption of a "Project Exile" type system. I may only be 20, but I know that if your not part of the solution, then when it comes down to it, you are the problem. It is our RESPONSIBILITY as gun owners to stand up for what we believe in, and that means more than complaining to your friends, it means getting the real truth out there.
I can tell you now that this ban will have no real impact on crime, as most of you already know. My basis for this, in case anyone wants to challenge me, is that in March 1999 the National Institiute of Justice (the research arm of the Department of Justice) Issued a report titled "Impacts of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban: 1994-96." The authors of the report were Jeffery A. Roth and Christopher S. Koper. This was GOVERNMENT study, not a private organization or a special intrest group. The report basically stated that the 94 ban didn't do any good nor was it going to do any good because "assault weapons" were rarely criminally misused. That is what the report said, time and time again. In fact on the first page, it stated that the authors had a hard time discerning the effects of the ban.
Anyone who thinks that sounds awefully familiar, you may have read it in "Guns, Freedom, and Terrorism," by Wayne LaPierre, it is an excellent book with some very good common sense methods to reducing gun crimes without banning them. If you don't have it, you should buy it, it gives you plenty of ammunition to use against the anti-gun people when you debate about gun rights with them. Enough ammunition to win them over, I personally feel it is my duty to inform them the truth about guns and crime statistics, because so many people are mis-informed about the link between guns and crime.
If you don't want to read the book, here is one very, VERY effective motion that could be taken to drastically reduce crimes committed with firearms. STRICT enforcement of current federal firearms laws. Virginia, and Texas have both adopted a system called Project Exile (same basic thing, but texas' system is named something else, it was George Bush's baby). Its a "do not pass go, do not collect 200 dollars, go directly to jail" approach to people who are illeagally in possesion of firearms, and a minimum of 85 percent of the people who are prosecuted under this system do exactly that, they have no chance for bail, giving them no opportunity to commit more crimes on the street, the system requires that 85 percent of all sentences handed out are completed, and the minimum sentence for this system is 5 years FEDERAL time, not state prison, which means they won't see any of their buddies in prison, and they won't see much of their family and friends. I personally, not being a criminal, or being in violation of current firearms laws have no problem with it. When this system was enacted in virginia in 97, it had the second highest homocide per capita rate in the nation, then this system came along, and homocides dropped 45 percent. In 2001, Richmond experienced the lowest number of homocides since 1983.
If your no criminal, and if you don't plan on becoming one, this is a very appealing alternative to taking away our right to defend ourselves, and enjoy a very wholesome hobby. I believe it would eliminate the "need" for any assault weapons ban. In the end, people don't realize the simple truth that most of the people who have guns and use them for criminal purposes, already are breaking federal firearms laws, and if we'd simply lock these guys up when we got the chance, it would solve alot of problems.
I believe that we are responsible for representing our rights, and we must stand up when we are threatened. If the government's solution to the problem is as rediculous as the one we now face, it may just be up to us, the people, to present them with an effective, and very reasonable alternative, such as widespread adoption of a "Project Exile" type system. I may only be 20, but I know that if your not part of the solution, then when it comes down to it, you are the problem. It is our RESPONSIBILITY as gun owners to stand up for what we believe in, and that means more than complaining to your friends, it means getting the real truth out there.
Comments
We are on the same page, here....but that is where you and I part company.
Nearly the entire rest of your post deals with enforcing UnConstitutional gun laws...something the NRA pushes and the government is DELIGHTED to do...
I am actually interested...where did you find in the Constitution any basis for the Federal Government making up laws concerning guns...then spending MY money to enforce them ?
Want to do something intelligent, and designed to eliminate crime ? DEMAND that violent criminals be put to death...or imprisoned for life. That will control crime FAR better then controlling decent citizens under the guise of 'fighting crime'...
I prefer the Constitution, myself.
The fact that you reognize that the government infringes upon our Rights is good.
The fact that you have no problem with it is bad.
Just exactly HOW do you suppose governments go bad...????
Project exile is a bad thing how?
"Shall not be infringed"
Americans have a right (many would say duty) to bear arms to defend themselves and the community. There are many who choose not to obey unconstitutional laws. Project Exile is merely another weapon with which the antis can bludgeon the American people to give up freedoms our forefathers fought and died for.
Where the hell was the NRA in the Parker case? In case you didn't know, the NRA did its best to bring the whole case crashing down....
I'm sick of the NRA........
quote:Originally posted by Badgerman1987
Project exile is a bad thing how?
"Shall not be infringed"
Americans have a right (many would say duty) to bear arms to defend themselves and the community. There are many who choose not to obey unconstitutional laws. Project Exile is merely another weapon with which the antis can bludgeon the American people to give up freedoms our forefathers fought and died for.
Where the hell was the NRA in the Parker case? In case you didn't know, the NRA did its best to bring the whole case crashing down....
I'm sick of the NRA........
They tried crashing it because they don't want to see an unfavorable decision in the Supreme Court come about.
They should really quit second guessing it....
You can say what you like about me, but all your doing is bashing me. Your not trying to change my mind, your not giving me any alternatives, and your not giving me any reason as to why my mind should change. There's nothing in the original constitution about crack, but thats only because we didn't have it then. Federal firearms laws aren't all fair, quite a few of them are bull, but if you think this country would be a better place without any restrictions at all on our rights to own a firearm, explain to me why it would be.
Hey buddy, I am too. My understanding of the NRA is that it is a group dominated by its membership. If that group finds that its majority consists of idiots that believe banning a machine gun or a silencer is a good idea because it is not useful for traditional hunting, what are they to do, and still keep their membership??
I am all for civil disobedience. I am the first guy to tell you to never submit to unjust laws. Your stuff gets banned, the last thing you want to do it turn them in. there's a reason it is subject to being banned, and it isn't to reduce crime, it is to increase your dependency on the gov't, and your refusal to do so is you waging your own campaign of civil disobedience on oppressors.
If someone was to tell you to turn around, you don't turn around, because they are about to do something to you with the hopes that you will not react. If someone wants to tie you up, you don't allow it. It will make you unable to fight off an attack they plan on doing to you. If someone tells you to turn in your guns, you flip the bird at them and tell them to come get 'em. If you submit, it puts you at the mercy of others who will not obey.
Sometimes a law is for a wise man to break, and a fool to obey.
I cannot undo the many years of brain-washing you and most gun owners have endured for how every many years you have been alive....in a thirty second net bite.
No disrespect intended..but it is what it is.
I do not fear gun bans any more...in fact...they well may be the only salvation for our rights.
Why should I say that ? BECAUSE...20,000++++gun laws...PLUS many many more laws, regulations, and invasions of our privacy ..indicates to me that we are well down the path of tyranny.
A total gun ban will force the fence sitters to make a decision.
Defend the Constitution...or defend tyranny.
You CANNOT DEFEND THE cONSTITUTION ...and defend the corruption that flourishes in America .
I think he's coming along nicely. I am not here to reverse anyone's thinking, because I find people are best reversing their own thinking. I don't think it requires open mindedness, either, as i see that as a person with not a thought in their head, and must rely on someone else's thinking for them. Badgerman is definitely not one of them.
Don't try to convert him. let him see the truth for himself, and let him "convert" (I say that as loosely as I can, because knowledge is not conversion, it is learning) himself.
He's 20 years old, and I can appreciatethe fact that he's among us. I'm sure you will, too, in time.
-gunphreak
So you think the Founders were anarchists ?
Those men went to war over about 3% taxation...and the attempt by the Kings' men to confiscate firearms.
Obviously, that must make them anarchist...since you allude that to those of us screaming at that top of our lungs...IT AIN'T RIGHT"...what the Elites are doing to us...and if the rotten, corrupt sleezebags take just one more little step...ban guns...it will be time.
Just as an aside...the Elites really are not 'doing us'..we as a people are so ignorantly stupid, we willingly hand over to them control of our entire lives...gutless enuchs huddling fearfully in the footsteps of our forefathers..afraid to raise up and DEMAND justice ...
Given that I am understanding this statement correctly...that we labor under much more tyranny today then the Founders did we have found a basis for agreement.
The confusing portion is the rest ofyour post..seemingly excusing tyranny beause it is OURS..instead of the Canadians, ect...
The fact that'We are gooder then the rest of the world'
is in SPITE of...and not BECAUSE...of the growing-ever-more-powerful central government..
The only way tokeep even a sembalance of freedom is to have the courage to speak out against the outrage of excesses of the Elites...and not hide then under a bushell and pretend they don't exist.
Compromises on the Second...or ANY Right..is the surest path to destruction of ALL you hold dear that I can visualize.
Today, we pay much more in taxes, but can rely on (well, you can. I don't) gov't services, redistribution of wealth to keep the poor from uprising, a Sozialist Security system to keep the elderly in check, and a military and police system many people feel safe with (even though I don't).
There is some difference. We are under the illusion of freedom, now. They weren't under any illusion, then.
The problem is that in a society as anti-intellectual as the U.S., the sheeple just scoff at hard facts, and will insist that everything that their television tells them is true.