- Posts: 2510
- Thank you received: 0
Please be mindful that there are many different views on the forums. The only thing we all agree on is the AR-10 is an awesome rifle!
Manchin-Toomey amendment, expand background checks
11 years 7 months ago - 11 years 7 months ago #22635
by OleCowboy
Manchin-Toomey amendment, expand background checks was created by OleCowboy
Got this from a guy I know:
"Hi,
>
> The vote on the Manchin-Toomey amendment to expand background checks for gun sales at gun shows and over the internet shows that the compromise on rules reform that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid agreed to at the start of this Congress is clearly not working.
>
> Although 86% of Americans supported the Manchin-Toomey amendment and 54 Senators voted to pass it, the amendment failed because, under the Senate rules, it was subject to the same 60-vote threshold ordinarily reserved for ending filibusters.
>
> Enough is enough. Tell Senator Reid that you expect him to use his power as Majority Leader to enact meaningful filibuster reform so that we can end this obstructionism and restore accountability to the U.S. Senate.
>
> That's why I signed a petition to Sen. Harry Reid (NV-1).
>
> Will you sign this petition? Click here:
>
> signon.org/sign/background-checks-for-2?...s.em.mt&r_by=5425442 "
And this was my reply:
Jay, of course I had to reply to this.
I just wrote an OpEd on Gun Control which I have attached and you may want to peruse this:
Summary of Select Firearm Violence Prevention Strategies
Greg Ridgeway, Ph.D.
Deputy Director
National Institute of Justice
January 4, 2013
www.nraila.org/media/10883516/nij-gun-policy-memo.pdf
WOULD BANNING FIREARMS REDUCE
MURDER AND SUICIDE?
A REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL AND
SOME DOMESTIC EVIDENCE
DON B. KATES* AND GARY MAUSER**
www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/V...atesMauseronline.pdf
As for the oft touted 86% of Americans support background checks…well its all in how you ask the question. This magic number appears to have come from a Gallup poll (attached file) where they simply ask 'would you vote for a law that would 'require background checks for all gun purchases?'
www.gallup.com/poll/162083/americans-wan...cks-pass-senate.aspx
If you ask me that question I too would answer yes, that said the devil is in the details and when the Govt is left to the details the answer is not going to be good.
Here is the basic law congress is trying to pass:
"(t)(1) Beginning on the date that is 180 days after the date of enactment of the Fix Gun Checks Act of 2013, it shall be unlawful for any person who is not licensed under this chapter to transfer a firearm to any other person who is not licensed under this chapter, unless a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer has first taken possession of the firearm for the purpose of complying with subsection (s). Upon taking possession of the firearm, the licensee shall comply with all requirements of this chapter as if the licensee were transferring the firearm from the licensee's inventory to the unlicensed transferee.
`(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to--
`(A) bona fide gifts between spouses, between parents and their children, between siblings, or between grandparents and their grandchildren;
`(
a transfer made from a decedent's estate, pursuant to a legal will or the operation of law;
`(C) a temporary transfer of possession that occurs between an unlicensed transferor and an unlicensed transferee, if--
`(i) the temporary transfer of possession occurs in the home or curtilage of the unlicensed transferor;
`(ii) the firearm is not removed from that home or curtilage during the temporary transfer; and
`(iii) the transfer has a duration of less than 7 days; and
`(D) a temporary transfer of possession without transfer of title made in connection with lawful hunting or sporting purposes if the transfer occurs--"
This comes from Thomas and I extracted it from Senate Bill 649:
Bill Text
113th Congress (2013-2014)
S.649.PCS
thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c113:1:./temp/~c113d2E2ur:e12552 :
So here is the real deal: THINK 'end game'! There is NOTHING at almost any state and at the federal level that would prevent what has occurred at Sandyhook, Columbine etc, NOTHING!!!!!! WHY? Simple, that is NOT the goal, never was, never will be. Its NOT about gun control, its about people control.
While we do not have gun registration per sec the fact is the govt knows that I have bought several guns over the years, they just do not know what kind. Fact is we have low level gun registration, the feds can come to my house and confiscate my guns because they KNOW I bought some. No such thing as a govt, ANY govt not keeping data it collects and the govt is collecting data.
The 2nd Amend right to keep and bear arms and it states definitely that it "shall NOT be infringed". The founders papers said the purpose of the 2nd was "to DEFEND against Tyranny".
We are in the midst of a takeover and change of govt led by communist-Marxist radicals. The basics are simple:
1) Transfer allegiance from a higher deity such as God and family to the Federal Govt and its leaders. Accomplish thru massive social programs providing cradle to grave govt benefits, welfare, food stamps, cell fones, fee medial care etc etc etc. Identify the leader as God like, a messiah and a father figure.
2) Crush the workers and business owners with taxes and regulations
3) Last and most important is to remove all barriers against uprising and rebellion of the people…Register and subsequently confiscate their means of defense…GUNS!
The Revolutionary War was started and fought due tot he British attempting to confiscate the colonists weapons. Any study of history will show the aforementioned basics as the being accomplished in the take over of every communist country or other dictatorship.
Were you here, in my home I would tell you to look into my eyes and I would say: There is NOTHING you can sign, NOTHING Harry Reid, Diane Feinstein, Schumer, Obama, the ATF, CIA, FBI or anyone else can do, pass a law or regulation that will force me to to not live by the 2nd Amendment. I am unconcerned about the Supreme Court definition, I AM the Supreme Court, I am a sovereign free man. On 25th Jan 1967 YOU asked me to take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the US and I wrote that check in blood for I was and still am willing to give up my life, let, me assure you that check is still good as of today and I am serious as a heart attack that the only way you will take my gun is to take it from my cold dead hands and that has been tried before and this combat soldier is still alive after all these years…
STRONGLY suggest you think hard about what you are signing, you can sign away your freedoms but NOT MINE!
"Hi,
>
> The vote on the Manchin-Toomey amendment to expand background checks for gun sales at gun shows and over the internet shows that the compromise on rules reform that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid agreed to at the start of this Congress is clearly not working.
>
> Although 86% of Americans supported the Manchin-Toomey amendment and 54 Senators voted to pass it, the amendment failed because, under the Senate rules, it was subject to the same 60-vote threshold ordinarily reserved for ending filibusters.
>
> Enough is enough. Tell Senator Reid that you expect him to use his power as Majority Leader to enact meaningful filibuster reform so that we can end this obstructionism and restore accountability to the U.S. Senate.
>
> That's why I signed a petition to Sen. Harry Reid (NV-1).
>
> Will you sign this petition? Click here:
>
> signon.org/sign/background-checks-for-2?...s.em.mt&r_by=5425442 "
And this was my reply:
Jay, of course I had to reply to this.
I just wrote an OpEd on Gun Control which I have attached and you may want to peruse this:
Summary of Select Firearm Violence Prevention Strategies
Greg Ridgeway, Ph.D.
Deputy Director
National Institute of Justice
January 4, 2013
www.nraila.org/media/10883516/nij-gun-policy-memo.pdf
WOULD BANNING FIREARMS REDUCE
MURDER AND SUICIDE?
A REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL AND
SOME DOMESTIC EVIDENCE
DON B. KATES* AND GARY MAUSER**
www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/V...atesMauseronline.pdf
As for the oft touted 86% of Americans support background checks…well its all in how you ask the question. This magic number appears to have come from a Gallup poll (attached file) where they simply ask 'would you vote for a law that would 'require background checks for all gun purchases?'
www.gallup.com/poll/162083/americans-wan...cks-pass-senate.aspx
If you ask me that question I too would answer yes, that said the devil is in the details and when the Govt is left to the details the answer is not going to be good.
Here is the basic law congress is trying to pass:
"(t)(1) Beginning on the date that is 180 days after the date of enactment of the Fix Gun Checks Act of 2013, it shall be unlawful for any person who is not licensed under this chapter to transfer a firearm to any other person who is not licensed under this chapter, unless a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer has first taken possession of the firearm for the purpose of complying with subsection (s). Upon taking possession of the firearm, the licensee shall comply with all requirements of this chapter as if the licensee were transferring the firearm from the licensee's inventory to the unlicensed transferee.
`(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to--
`(A) bona fide gifts between spouses, between parents and their children, between siblings, or between grandparents and their grandchildren;
`(
a transfer made from a decedent's estate, pursuant to a legal will or the operation of law;`(C) a temporary transfer of possession that occurs between an unlicensed transferor and an unlicensed transferee, if--
`(i) the temporary transfer of possession occurs in the home or curtilage of the unlicensed transferor;
`(ii) the firearm is not removed from that home or curtilage during the temporary transfer; and
`(iii) the transfer has a duration of less than 7 days; and
`(D) a temporary transfer of possession without transfer of title made in connection with lawful hunting or sporting purposes if the transfer occurs--"
This comes from Thomas and I extracted it from Senate Bill 649:
Bill Text
113th Congress (2013-2014)
S.649.PCS
thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c113:1:./temp/~c113d2E2ur:e12552 :
So here is the real deal: THINK 'end game'! There is NOTHING at almost any state and at the federal level that would prevent what has occurred at Sandyhook, Columbine etc, NOTHING!!!!!! WHY? Simple, that is NOT the goal, never was, never will be. Its NOT about gun control, its about people control.
While we do not have gun registration per sec the fact is the govt knows that I have bought several guns over the years, they just do not know what kind. Fact is we have low level gun registration, the feds can come to my house and confiscate my guns because they KNOW I bought some. No such thing as a govt, ANY govt not keeping data it collects and the govt is collecting data.
The 2nd Amend right to keep and bear arms and it states definitely that it "shall NOT be infringed". The founders papers said the purpose of the 2nd was "to DEFEND against Tyranny".
We are in the midst of a takeover and change of govt led by communist-Marxist radicals. The basics are simple:
1) Transfer allegiance from a higher deity such as God and family to the Federal Govt and its leaders. Accomplish thru massive social programs providing cradle to grave govt benefits, welfare, food stamps, cell fones, fee medial care etc etc etc. Identify the leader as God like, a messiah and a father figure.
2) Crush the workers and business owners with taxes and regulations
3) Last and most important is to remove all barriers against uprising and rebellion of the people…Register and subsequently confiscate their means of defense…GUNS!
The Revolutionary War was started and fought due tot he British attempting to confiscate the colonists weapons. Any study of history will show the aforementioned basics as the being accomplished in the take over of every communist country or other dictatorship.
Were you here, in my home I would tell you to look into my eyes and I would say: There is NOTHING you can sign, NOTHING Harry Reid, Diane Feinstein, Schumer, Obama, the ATF, CIA, FBI or anyone else can do, pass a law or regulation that will force me to to not live by the 2nd Amendment. I am unconcerned about the Supreme Court definition, I AM the Supreme Court, I am a sovereign free man. On 25th Jan 1967 YOU asked me to take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the US and I wrote that check in blood for I was and still am willing to give up my life, let, me assure you that check is still good as of today and I am serious as a heart attack that the only way you will take my gun is to take it from my cold dead hands and that has been tried before and this combat soldier is still alive after all these years…
STRONGLY suggest you think hard about what you are signing, you can sign away your freedoms but NOT MINE!
Last edit: 11 years 7 months ago by OleCowboy.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
All content of this site is copyright 2003 - 2017
AR-10(T)™, AR-10™, are trademarks of ArmaLite, Inc.®
AR10T.com is NOT endorsed or affiliated with ArmaLite, Inc.®
About AR10T.com
AR-10(T) is a community focused on rifles, optics, scopes, gear, accessories, and components used by the professional operator and skilled marksman. Enthusiasts, shooters, and gunsmiths alike contribute to our gallery, articles, and reviews Thank you for visiting!