Well, if the bolded part is in reference to Dr. Coburn, you are wrong. He is a physician.
US Senator Coburn (R-OK) Introduces Gun Control of His Own (not kidding!!!)
- Thread starter Cougar
- Start Date
Well, if the bolded part is in reference to Dr. Coburn, you are wrong. He is a physician.
It's kind of like the old saying "Locks only keep honest people out". Laws only affect the law abiding. We can strip our rights and implement UBC but it will do nothing to prevent criminals from breaking the law. Most prohibited persons currently get a family member or someone else to perform a straw purchase for them. Those are already against the law but are seldom prosecuted.
He's motivated by fear if he's "trying to stay in front of a steamroller". I think he's up to something even worse, but that's another topic. He's been playing this little fence sitting scam since this latest attack on 2A started. He needs to either grow a pair and stand up for us or get out of our way.
"So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth."
This proposal isn't as objectionable as most other gun laws, because compliance is voluntary. I do not support it though, because paying the taxes that are required to fund it are not voluntary.
Coburn's rhetoric is ridiculous. He seems to think that if you want to keep your commercial dealings private and do not care to have the government poking its nose into your business, you are for arming illegal aliens and criminals. Which itself brings up a good point... illegal aliens have violated the immigration laws, but do they have no right to life? Criminals may have violated some of daddy gov's many rules for our lives, but when they have done their time or paid their penalty and are back in society, do they also have no right to life?
We need to be getting rid of the existing background check/FFL requirements, not expanding them.
Coburn's rhetoric is ridiculous. He seems to think that if you want to keep your commercial dealings private and do not care to have the government poking its nose into your business, you are for arming illegal aliens and criminals. Which itself brings up a good point... illegal aliens have violated the immigration laws, but do they have no right to life? Criminals may have violated some of daddy gov's many rules for our lives, but when they have done their time or paid their penalty and are back in society, do they also have no right to life?
We need to be getting rid of the existing background check/FFL requirements, not expanding them.
^^^ This
"lukewarm" Now that's just plain Biblical, just don't know how a guy can add to that!
Seriously, I hold our politicians in about as low esteem as the next reasonable man, but I guess I've always pretty much agreed with one of them, that being Colburn. He's about as far "Right" as Ron Paul when it comes down to it, at least judging from everything I've heard him say and everything I've read. He surprised me with his vote on the BGCs and I wrote his office, along with six other congressmen and senators, as I've done in the past on 2A issues. He answered and I was somewhat satisfied with the answer. Based on his views and work to address debt, social issues, State-Rights, based on his work exposing government waste, on his advocacy for limited government and on his own political philosophies (including his own self-imposed term limits) and on a record which stands by those philosophies, I think he's a stand-up guy and one of the very very few in Washington.
I do not believe we enforce the laws we have and enforce laws we DO NOT have and I don’t argue for more laws but I think that’s where he’s coming from and I think sometimes strategy can be devised to take the steam out of a movement or a steamroller. Seems to me he offered something that takes nothing away from me as a gun owner. And there are a lot of folks wanting to put as much as .02-.05 cents per bullet tax to fund dramatic expansion of Background Checks and do some serious infringement. Will his suggested proposals help, will criminals and low life’s still get guns? Not to sure about the first part of that question but certain about the second part… yes they will. Would it prevent me the imposition of something far more dramatic and intrusive future efforts in this political gamemanship from the left? I’m thinking it might. Did I see anything that limits me. No. But more importantly, might it put this frenzy to bed without giving up rights… I believe that Coburn believes it will. In other words I believe he is sincere. And I believe his is one person in Washington undeserving of character assassination. Once again, just 'my humble opinion', lest anyone feel the need to remind me -- rest assured I understand that already and am aware we all have our own.
Seriously, I hold our politicians in about as low esteem as the next reasonable man, but I guess I've always pretty much agreed with one of them, that being Colburn. He's about as far "Right" as Ron Paul when it comes down to it, at least judging from everything I've heard him say and everything I've read. He surprised me with his vote on the BGCs and I wrote his office, along with six other congressmen and senators, as I've done in the past on 2A issues. He answered and I was somewhat satisfied with the answer. Based on his views and work to address debt, social issues, State-Rights, based on his work exposing government waste, on his advocacy for limited government and on his own political philosophies (including his own self-imposed term limits) and on a record which stands by those philosophies, I think he's a stand-up guy and one of the very very few in Washington.
I do not believe we enforce the laws we have and enforce laws we DO NOT have and I don’t argue for more laws but I think that’s where he’s coming from and I think sometimes strategy can be devised to take the steam out of a movement or a steamroller. Seems to me he offered something that takes nothing away from me as a gun owner. And there are a lot of folks wanting to put as much as .02-.05 cents per bullet tax to fund dramatic expansion of Background Checks and do some serious infringement. Will his suggested proposals help, will criminals and low life’s still get guns? Not to sure about the first part of that question but certain about the second part… yes they will. Would it prevent me the imposition of something far more dramatic and intrusive future efforts in this political gamemanship from the left? I’m thinking it might. Did I see anything that limits me. No. But more importantly, might it put this frenzy to bed without giving up rights… I believe that Coburn believes it will. In other words I believe he is sincere. And I believe his is one person in Washington undeserving of character assassination. Once again, just 'my humble opinion', lest anyone feel the need to remind me -- rest assured I understand that already and am aware we all have our own.
hmmmm
Yes sometimes laws do help - it all depends on context. Sen Coburn's proposal seems like a properly caveated and limited step to allow citizens who want additional ways to, at least try to, ensure they aren't selling to felons and nuts to do so without a registry and (I hope) voluntarily.
BTW - when you say things like "That's just your opinion" - isn't that kind of redundant around here unless you are implying what he says is opinion and what you're saying is fact? Basically all we ever do is spew our opinions on this board. Even when we cite facts we mostly just use them to shore-up opinions and so we interpret those facts in light of whatever we want to prove or already happen to believe. I have yet to meet anyone here who is the picture of objectivity and deductive reasoning, which is pretty much to be expected since politics isn't about science it is about human interactions and emotions and beliefs (and that's a fact).
Similar threads
