Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Possible underlying reason for Executive Actions
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="abajaj11" data-source="post: 2831649" data-attributes="member: 3553"><p><strong>I see 3 facts:</strong></p><p><strong></strong>1. The EOs themselves seem to skirt on the edge of redefining and extending what is already law, and folks on forums like this are reading those literally, and concluding that not much has been done with the new EOs. <em>Au Contraire. </em></p><p></p><p><u>Consider these two additional facts:</u></p><p><u></u>2. The MSM including <strong>ALL</strong> US cable news stations and international press , is "erroneously" reporting that all guns in the USA will be registered and all sales will require a background check. Bill O' Reilly, the liberal on Fox, today had an opening monologue where he pretty much assumed that the EOs meant gun registration. Is this deliberate?</p><p> </p><p>3. The administration including POTUS are making statements like <em>"If you sell a gun you must perform a background check". </em> This is clearly not in the EOs, so why are they making crazy statements like this at the highest level? </p><p></p><p>I conclude that the EOs were a means to open a discussion on gun ownership where outrageous statements can be made (like firearm registration, all sellers must be licensed, etc). these statements can be repeated till the non-gun owning public gets conditioned that this is the new "common sense" norm. After a year or so, people can be told, "Look, nothing bad happened. Why not pass universal background check laws?" This will pave the way for future gun laws that will indeed require universal background checks, leading to registration and eventually confiscation. </p><p></p><p><strong>So, the EOs may just be an excuse to float and test outrageous statements and conjure up a reality that doesn't exist yet, but will in the future. </strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p></p><p><strong><u>What can we do?</u></strong></p><p><strong><u></u></strong></p><p>I would suggest we contact NRA, GOA etc and make sure that the general public understands that <strong>UBC and gun registration is NOT the staus quo in America</strong>. In fact, it is <strong>inherently inimical to firearm ownership</strong>. The current EOs do nothing. <strong>We should DIMINISH the importance of these EOs, not paint them out to portray a false reality. </strong></p><p><strong> </strong></p><p></p><p><img src="/images/smilies/smile.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="abajaj11, post: 2831649, member: 3553"] [B]I see 3 facts: [/B]1. The EOs themselves seem to skirt on the edge of redefining and extending what is already law, and folks on forums like this are reading those literally, and concluding that not much has been done with the new EOs. [I]Au Contraire. [/I] [U]Consider these two additional facts: [/U]2. The MSM including [B]ALL[/B] US cable news stations and international press , is "erroneously" reporting that all guns in the USA will be registered and all sales will require a background check. Bill O' Reilly, the liberal on Fox, today had an opening monologue where he pretty much assumed that the EOs meant gun registration. Is this deliberate? 3. The administration including POTUS are making statements like [I]"If you sell a gun you must perform a background check". [/I] This is clearly not in the EOs, so why are they making crazy statements like this at the highest level? I conclude that the EOs were a means to open a discussion on gun ownership where outrageous statements can be made (like firearm registration, all sellers must be licensed, etc). these statements can be repeated till the non-gun owning public gets conditioned that this is the new "common sense" norm. After a year or so, people can be told, "Look, nothing bad happened. Why not pass universal background check laws?" This will pave the way for future gun laws that will indeed require universal background checks, leading to registration and eventually confiscation. [B]So, the EOs may just be an excuse to float and test outrageous statements and conjure up a reality that doesn't exist yet, but will in the future. [/B] [B][U]What can we do? [/U][/B] I would suggest we contact NRA, GOA etc and make sure that the general public understands that [B]UBC and gun registration is NOT the staus quo in America[/B]. In fact, it is [B]inherently inimical to firearm ownership[/B]. The current EOs do nothing. [B]We should DIMINISH the importance of these EOs, not paint them out to portray a false reality. [/B] :) [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Possible underlying reason for Executive Actions
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom
