Proposed Government action on Firearms - Regulation I can get behind [Archive] - Debate Policy

View Full Version : Proposed Government action on Firearms - Regulation I can get behind

darin

01-16-2013, 06:20 AM

Got this via email, no link.

Time for a Mandatory Federal Firearms Law, Enter the Affordable Firearms Act.

With today’s Supreme Court ruling that The Affordable Care Act is constitutional it is now unquestionably time for those members of congress representing Conservative Americans to write and pass a law requiring all American Citizens over the age of 18 to purchase or show proof of ownership of a firearm or suffer a massive tax penalty. 

The SCOTUS ruled that the Commerce clause could not be used to require citizens to purchase health insurance, but that congress as so accorded in the United States Constitution could levee a tax against any citizen that did not engage in a financial transaction that was deemed by congress as necessary and proper. 

Unlike healthcare which cannot be found mentioned in any place in the United States Constitution, the ownership of a firearm is not only explicitly enumerated in the 2nd amendment as a right, it is likewise implicitly implied by the 2nd amendment as a responsibility. 

Amendment II

'A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.' 

The only question involved here, is, are there any members of the GOP Aristocracy willing to side with the people of the United States against the United States Federal Government. In light of the recent and growing coverage of the Obama Administrations “Operation Fast and Furious” scandal, under which the Obama Justice Department intentionally provided firearms to Mexican Narcotics Cartel members for the specific purpose of being used in violent acts so that they could gin up statistics and provide a justification for stricter firearms regulations. 

Just such legislation requiring a penalty tax be imposed upon every citizen over the age of 18 who fails to purchase or prove ownership of a firearm would provide a unique juxtaposition of moral and ethical values between the American people and the Obama administration. Since the SCOTUS ruling on ACA states that the Commerce Clause cannot be employed to coerce individuals to engage in financial transaction as dictated by Congress, but that punitory taxation can be employed the Democrat Administration of Barack Obama would be placed in a odious position of defending why the Affordable Care Act is good and acceptable legislation while a nearly identically worded Affordable Firearms Act legislation would not be. 

Let us then in that case see how the ruling on the Affordable Care Act stands up when worded thusly. 

See §5000A(b). That, according to the Government, means the mandate can be regarded as establishing a condition — not owning health insurance/a firearm — that triggers a tax—the required payment to the IRS. Under that theory, the mandate is not a legal command to buy insurance/a firearm. Rather, it makes going without insurance/a firearm just another thing the Government taxes, like buying gasoline or earning income.

mundame

01-16-2013, 08:25 AM

http://www.trbimg.com/img-50f64cb8/turbine/la-na-tt-obamas-gun-control-20130115-001/600

Trigg

01-16-2013, 09:20 AM

mundame

01-16-2013, 09:28 AM

Allowing family members to admit someone for longer than a 72 hour observation period. would be A GREAT START.

Amen to that!! You are so right.

Tyr-Ziu Saxnot

01-16-2013, 10:04 AM

DMP has posted informative videos regarding the gun violence in this country did you bother to watch?

Weapons bans aren't going to do anything to curb the violence. Chicago has the toughest gun laws in the country and still had 500 murders last year. Commited by felons who didn't care about the laws.

90% of the murders in Oakland CA are commited by gang members who are already banned from owning guns.

Taking guns away from LAW ABIDING PEOPLE will do nothing. BECAUSE law abiding people aren't the ones shooting others.

Instead of this kneejerk political move to take away guns. The gov. would do better to look into the mental health system and how that works. Allowing family members to admit someone for longer than a 72 hour observation period. would be A GREAT START.

THE GOVERNMENT TARGETS AND WANTS TO TAKE GUNS FROM TE LAW ABIDING CITIZENS!

For they know that's the last group which will STAND AGAINST their seizing total power!!
That is their true reason for wanting to to take ALL the guns.. Fact--Tyr

The lying maggot today will have the children there as props while he illegally attacks the 2nd Amendment. -- the ffing traitor..
in essence he says Congress will not pass the laws and edicts that he wants so he will preempt them by issuing his royal decrees. -TRUTH..

gabosaurus

01-16-2013, 11:36 AM

Marcus Aurelius

01-16-2013, 11:44 AM

That has to be one of the stupidest and most illogical pieces of redneck legislation I have ever heard of. Though I am sure it would be a boon to backwoods hillbillies everywhere.
It would basically turn our country into a pseudo terrorist state, where everyone would have a gun and be welcomed to use it.
Don't like the way your city, state or country is run? Organize an armed takeover!!
What will these idiots think of next? :lame2:

familiar with this???

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

jimnyc

01-16-2013, 11:58 AM

Chicago has the toughest gun laws in the country and still had 500 murders last year. Commited by felons who didn't care about the laws.

90% of the murders in Oakland CA are commited by gang members who are already banned from owning guns.

And it's pretty much the same story all around the country. NY already had perhaps some of the toughest laws on the books, didn't matter. Now they think removing a few rounds from the clip will solve all the problems. Idiots.

aboutime

01-16-2013, 09:15 PM

After reading, and laughing at Gabby's post below. I am now convinced how She, Like Obama today. Are dumber than a box of hammers if they refuse to see what Obama is really trying to do.

I borrowed this timely photo from the Drudgereport.....4325 Actually quite a Likeness of Obama's desires for Socialism.

KitchenKitten99

01-16-2013, 09:25 PM

4326

bingster

01-16-2013, 09:33 PM

Obama, today, came out with his executive orders and his call for legislation. Is it what you expected? Is it what you feared? Did he stomp all over your rights?
NRA, in an ad today, called Obama an elitist and a hypocrite for being “skeptical” regarding having armed guards at schools to protect children when his children are protected by the secret service. Do you even conceive how ignorant that argument is? What would happen if a child of the 1st family was kidnapped? Some of the more brazen of you would say “Goodie!”. But, really. That cannot happen and has nothing to do with the argument. As usual, the NRA leadership does not represent their members in this incendiary rhetoric. They want to scare people to buy guns. That’s all they care for.
Rush Limbaugh, on his show this morning, made fun of children begging for their lives. Where are the “Christian morals” in your party? Conservatives rail about their religious rights in all subjects except their own Christian responsibility to care for someone other than themselves. Rush went on to make blubbering noises like a child crying for his/her life. Is that funny in conservative world? Can you imagine what these 20 6-7 year old children looked like after taking 3 to 11 5.56 rounds to their four foot tall bodies? They weren’t just shot; their small precious bodies were turned to chum.
Obama called for legislation covering all subjects that are reasonable and responsible. He wants an assault weapons ban, background check, and large magazine ban. His executive orders were not over-reach; they involved setting up committees and prompting organizations to study. Your side was way wrong in their assessment of what he was going to do. They went on today to still say that he was over-reaching. There isn’t one single thing he’s proposing to do that doesn’t have the majority of the country’s support. In his executive orders, he even supported the NRA ideas. Is Obama really just trying to fix the symptoms or trying to fix the causes? He’s covered every facet and your party, in their silence (in most cases) and outrage (in too many cases) is setting itself up to be a minority party for decades. Keep it up extremists. To quote your hero George W., “Bring it on!”.

Robert A Whit

01-16-2013, 09:46 PM

Obama, today, came out with his executive orders and his call for legislation. Is it what you expected? Is it what you feared? Did he stomp all over your rights?
NRA, in an ad today, called Obama an elitist and a hypocrite for being “skeptical” regarding having armed guards at schools to protect children when his children are protected by the secret service. Do you even conceive how ignorant that argument is? What would happen if a child of the 1st family was kidnapped? Some of the more brazen of you would say “Goodie!”. But, really. That cannot happen and has nothing to do with the argument. As usual, the NRA leadership does not represent their members in this incendiary rhetoric. They want to scare people to buy guns. That’s all they care for.
Rush Limbaugh, on his show this morning, made fun of children begging for their lives. Where are the “Christian morals” in your party? Conservatives rail about their religious rights in all subjects except their own Christian responsibility to care for someone other than themselves. Rush went on to make blubbering noises like a child crying for his/her life. Is that funny in conservative world? Can you imagine what these 20 6-7 year old children looked like after taking 3 to 11 5.56 rounds to their four foot tall bodies? They weren’t just shot; their small precious bodies were turned to chum.
Obama called for legislation covering all subjects that are reasonable and responsible. He wants an assault weapons ban, background check, and large magazine ban. His executive orders were not over-reach; they involved setting up committees and prompting organizations to study. Your side was way wrong in their assessment of what he was going to do. They went on today to still say that he was over-reaching. There isn’t one single thing he’s proposing to do that doesn’t have the majority of the country’s support. In his executive orders, he even supported the NRA ideas. Is Obama really just trying to fix the symptoms or trying to fix the causes? He’s covered every facet and your party, in their silence (in most cases) and outrage (in too many cases) is setting itself up to be a minority party for decades. Keep it up extremists. To quote your hero George W., “Bring it on!”.

Well, you rush down to the FBI and get YOUR background check then.

I plan to defend my second amendment.

Even if you refuse to.

Do you understand that to obtain my appraisers license I had to FIRST pass an FBI background check?

Why hasn't Obama had to pass one. Isn't president more important than being an appraiser?

Then I go buy an M-1 Garand some years back. Two fecking weeks of my life spent to see if the Feds think I am safe to own a rifle.

Feck this.

We citizins must stand up to this crap. We figured he thought he was some dictaster.

He is proving it.

bingster

01-16-2013, 10:17 PM

Well, you rush down to the FBI and get YOUR background check then.

I plan to defend my second amendment.

Even if you refuse to.

Do you understand that to obtain my appraisers license I had to FIRST pass an FBI background check?

Why hasn't Obama had to pass one. Isn't president more important than being an appraiser?

Then I go buy an M-1 Garand some years back. Two fecking weeks of my life spent to see if the Feds think I am safe to own a rifle.

Feck this.

We citizins must stand up to this crap. We figured he thought he was some dictaster.

He is proving it.

I don't even know what an appraiser is, but I am willing to guess that status can't kill me. I think your ability to easily kill me should go through a background check. I don't even care what you think Obama is, I know you didn't vote for him and I know you won't be voting for the next two presidents to get elected.

red states rule

01-17-2013, 04:20 AM