No ma'am, I won't register my guns

usamamasan1usamamasan1 Posts: 4,695
edited May 2013 in A Moving Train
Senator Dianne Feinstein,
 
I will not register my weapons should this bill be passed, as I do not believe it is the government's right to know what I own. Nor do I think it prudent to tell you what I own so that it may be taken from me by a group of people who enjoy armed protection yet decry me having the same a crime. You ma'am have overstepped a line that is not your domain. I am a Marine Corps Veteran of 8 years, and I will not have some woman who proclaims the evil of an inanimate object, yet carries one, tell me I may not have one.
 
I am not your subject. I am the man who keeps you free. I am not your servant. I am the person whom you serve. I am not your peasant. I am the flesh and blood of America.
I am the man who fought for my country. I am the man who learned. I am an American. You will not tell me that I must register my semi-automatic AR-15 because of the actions of some evil man.
 
I will not be disarmed to suit the fear that has been established by the media and your misinformation campaign against the American public.
 
We, the people, deserve better than you.
 
Respectfully Submitted,
Joshua Boston
Cpl, United States Marine Corps
2004-2012




WOOT
Post edited by Unknown User on
«13456734

Comments

  • usamamasan1usamamasan1 Posts: 4,695
    Contact your members of Congress and urge them to oppose any "assault weapon" or magazine ban  

    Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)--author of the federal "assault weapon" and "large" ammunition magazine ban of 1994-2004--has said for weeks that she will soon introduce an even more restrictive bill.  Leaders in the U.S. Senate have stated that January 22 will be the first day on which new Senate legislation can be proposed, so that is the most likely date for the new, sweeping legislation to be introduced. 

    On Dec. 17th, Feinstein said, "I have been working with my staff for over a year on this legislation" and "It will be carefully focused."  Indicating the depth of her research on the issue, she said on Dec. 21st that she had personally looked at pictures of guns in 1993, and again in 2012. 

    According to a Dec. 27th posting on Sen. Feinstein's website and a draft of the bill obtained by NRA-ILA, the new ban would, among other things, adopt new definitions of "assault weapon" that would affect a much larger variety of firearms, require current owners of such firearms to register them with the federal government under the National Firearms Act, and require forfeiture of the firearms upon the deaths of their current owners.  Some of the changes in Feinstein's new bill are as follows:

    Reduces, from two to one, the number of permitted external features on various firearms.  The 1994 ban permitted various firearms to be manufactured only if they were assembled with no more than one feature listed in the law.  Feinstein's new bill would prohibit the manufacture of the same firearms with even one of the features.
     
    Adopts new lists of prohibited external features.  For example, whereas the 1994 ban applied to a rifle or shotgun the "pistol grip" of which "protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon," the new bill would drastically expand the definition to include any "grip . . . or any other characteristic that can function as a grip."  Also, the new bill adds "forward grip" to the list of prohibiting features for rifles, defining it as "a grip located forward of the trigger that functions as a pistol grip."  Read literally and in conjunction with the reduction from two features to one, the new language would apply to every detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifle.  At a minimum, it would, for example, ban all models of the AR-15, even those developed for compliance with California's highly restrictive ban.
     
     Carries hyperbole further than the 1994 ban. Feinstein's 1994 ban listed "grenade launcher" as one of the prohibiting features for rifles.  Her 2013 bill goes even further into the ridiculous, by also listing "rocket launcher." Such devices are restricted under the National Firearms Act and, obviously, are not standard components of the firearms Feinstein wants to ban.  Perhaps a subsequent Feinstein bill will add "nuclear bomb," "particle beam weapon," or something else equally far-fetched to the features list.
    Expands the definition of "assault weapon" by including:

    --Three very popular rifles: The M1 Carbine (introduced in 1941 and for many years sold by the federal government to individuals involved in marksmanship competition), a model of the Ruger Mini-14, and most or all models of the SKS.

    --Any "semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds," except for tubular-magazine .22s.

    --Any "semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches," any "semiautomatic handgun with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds," and any semi-automatic handgun that has a threaded barrel.
     
    Requires owners of existing "assault weapons" to register them with the federal government under the National Firearms Act (NFA).  The NFA imposes a $200 transfer tax per firearm, and requires an owner to submit photographs and fingerprints to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), to inform the BATFE of the address where the firearm will be kept, and to obtain the BATFE's permission to transport the firearm across state lines.
     
    Prohibits the transfer of "assault weapons."  Owners of other firearms, including those covered by the NFA, are permitted to sell them or pass them to heirs.  However, under Feinstein's new bill, "assault weapons" would remain with their current owners until their deaths, at which point they would be forfeited to the government.
     
    Prohibits the domestic manufacture and the importation of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition.  The 1994 ban allowed the importation of such magazines that were manufactured before the ban took effect.  Whereas the 1994 ban protected gun owners from errant prosecution by making the government prove when a magazine was made, the new ban includes no such protection.  The new ban also requires firearm dealers to certify the date of manufacture of any >10-round magazine sold, a virtually impossible task, given that virtually no magazines are stamped with their date of manufacture.
     
    Targets handguns in defiance of the Supreme Court. The Court ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects the right to have handguns for self-defense, in large part on the basis of the fact handguns are the type of firearm "overwhelmingly chosen by American society for that lawful purpose."  Semi-automatic pistols, which are the most popular handguns today, are designed to use detachable magazines, and the magazines "overwhelmingly chosen" by Americans for self-defense are those that hold more than 10 rounds.  Additionally, Feinstein's list of nearly 1,000 firearms exempted by name (see next paragraph) contains not a single handgun. Sen. Feinstein advocated banning handguns before being elected to the Senate, though she carried a handgun for her own personal protection.
     
    Contains a larger piece of window dressing than the 1994 ban. Whereas the 1994 ban included a list of approximately 600 rifles and shotguns exempted from the ban by name, the new bill's list is increased to nearly 1,000 rifles and shotguns.  But most of the guns on the list either wouldn’t be banned in the first place, or would already be exempted by other provisions. On the other hand, the list inevitably misses every model of rifle and shotgun that wasn’t being manufactured or imported in the years covered by the reference books Sen. Feinstein’s staff consulted. That means an unknown number of absolutely conventional semi-auto rifles and shotguns, many of them out of production for decades, would be banned under the draft bill.
    The Department of Justice study:  On her website, Feinstein claims that a study for the DOJ found that the 1994 ban resulted in a 6.7 percent decrease in murders.  To the contrary, this is what the study said: "At best, the assault weapons ban can have only a limited effect on total gun murders, because the banned weapons and magazines were never involved in more than a modest fraction of all gun murders.  Our best estimate is that the ban contributed to a 6.7 percent decrease in total gun murders between 1994 and 1995. . . . However, with only one year of post-ban data, we cannot rule out the possibility that this decrease reflects chance year-to-year variation rather than a true effect of the ban.  Nor can we rule out effects of other features of the 1994 Crime Act or a host of state and local initiatives that took place simultaneously."

    "Assault weapon" numbers and murder trends:  From the imposition of Feinstein's "assault weapon" ban (Sept. 13, 1994) through the present, the number of "assault weapons" has risen dramatically. For example, the most common firearm that Feinstein considers an "assault weapon" is the AR-15 rifle, the manufacturing numbers of which can be gleaned from the BATFE's firearm manufacturer reports, available here.  From 1995 through 2011, the number of AR-15s--all models of which Feinstein's new bill defines as "assault weapons"--rose by over 2.5 million. During the same period, the nation's murder rate fell 48 percent, to a 48-year low. According to the FBI, 8.5 times as many people are murdered with knives, blunt objects and bare hands, as with rifles of any type.

    Traces:  Feinstein makes several claims premised on firearm traces, hoping to convince people that her 1994 ban reduced the (already infrequent) use of "assault weapons" in crime.  However, traces do not indicate how often any type of gun is used in crime.  As the Congressional Research Service and the BATFE have explained, not all firearms that are traced have been used in crime, and not all firearms used in crime are traced.  Whether a trace occurs depends on whether a law enforcement agency requests that a trace be conducted. Given that existing "assault weapons" were exempted from the 1994 ban and new "assault weapons" continued to be made while the ban was in effect, any reduction in the percentage of traces accounted for by "assault weapons" during the ban, would be attributable to law enforcement agencies losing interest in tracing the firearms, or law enforcement agencies increasing their requests for traces on other types of firearms, as urged by the BATFE for more than a decade. 

    Call Your U.S. Senators and Representative:  As noted, Feinstein will most likely introduce her bill on January 22nd.  President Obama has said that gun control will be a "central issue" of his final term in office, and he has vowed to move quickly on it.  And yesterday, a story from The Blaze noted that Obama's point man on gun control--Vice President Biden--has promised that Obama will pass a gun control bill by the end of the month.

    Contact your members of Congress at 202-224-3121 to urge them to oppose Sen. Feinstein's 2013 gun and magazine ban.  Our elected representatives in Congress must hear from you if we are going to defeat this gun ban proposal.  You can write your Representatives and Senators by using our "Write Your Representatives" tool here: http://www.nraila.org/get-involved-locally/grassroots/write-your-reps.aspx 

    Millions of Americans own so-called "assault weapons" and tens of millions own "large" magazines, for self-defense, target shooting, and hunting.  For more information about the history of the "assault weapon" issue, please visit www.GunBanFacts.com.
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    Senator Dianne Feinstein,
     
    I will not register my weapons should this bill be passed, as I do not believe it is the government's right to know what I own. Nor do I think it prudent to tell you what I own so that it may be taken from me by a group of people who enjoy armed protection yet decry me having the same a crime. You ma'am have overstepped a line that is not your domain. I am a Marine Corps Veteran of 8 years, and I will not have some woman who proclaims the evil of an inanimate object, yet carries one, tell me I may not have one.
     
    I am not your subject. I am the man who keeps you free. I am not your servant. I am the person whom you serve. I am not your peasant. I am the flesh and blood of America.
    I am the man who fought for my country. I am the man who learned. I am an American. You will not tell me that I must register my semi-automatic AR-15 because of the actions of some evil man.
     
    I will not be disarmed to suit the fear that has been established by the media and your misinformation campaign against the American public.
     
    We, the people, deserve better than you.
     
    Respectfully Submitted,
    Joshua Boston
    Cpl, United States Marine Corps
    2004-2012


    WOOT


    Sounds like a typical psychopath to me.


    "I am the man who keeps you free."

    "I am the flesh and blood of America."

    "You will not tell me that I must register my semi-automatic AR-15.."
  • usamamasan1usamamasan1 Posts: 4,695
    I don’t believe the crooks, bureaucrats  and tyrants in Washington DC should take our guns or neuter or 2nd amendment rights
     
    Speak up!!


    Woot
  • ofcourse its the government's right to know what you own..
    you need to pay taxis for what you own
    "...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
    "..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
    “..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 38,633
    I don’t believe the crooks, bureaucrats  and tyrants in Washington DC should take our guns or neuter or 2nd amendment rights
     
    Speak up!!


    Woot
    what part of well regulated do you not understand?

    The intent was a citizen militia to defend the state. Well it was later found that the general population SUCKED as an army so it was enacted to have a standing professional army that adhered to basic standards of dicipline.


    So own as many musket weapons that you want as these were the guns of the day when this recindable right was granted BY the government..
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • So wait...

    Some nutcase with a gun is essentially saying "because I joined the military, I can make my own laws and rule you. You may be a democratically elected leader but my joining the military trumps that and the laws of America don't apply to me."

    Chuck the asshole in jail and have done with it.

    It's the Crazy lunatics like that who end up walking into grade schools and shopping malls with guns.
  • usamamasan1usamamasan1 Posts: 4,695
    Ever read "the moon is down"

    Go and then come back and we can discuss.
  • you need to pay taxis for what you own

    No, you pay taxis to drive to the airport.
  • usamamasan1usamamasan1 Posts: 4,695
    Now that's a funny
  • unsungunsung Posts: 9,487
    ofcourse its the government's right to know what you own..
    you need to pay taxis for what you own



    I don't even know what to say to this. Should they know that I read certain books too? Should they know what type of dishwasher I have? Should they know when I use the toilet?
  • So let me get this straight; you will register your car with the DMV and your home but you won't register your semi automatic rifle because it isn't the government's business. Scary!
  • unsungunsung Posts: 9,487
    mickeyrat wrote:

    So own as many musket weapons that you want as these were the guns of the day when this recindable right was granted BY the government..


    Give up your cell phone and internet then since the communication of the day was the quill pen.
  • unsungunsung Posts: 9,487
    So let me get this straight; you will register your car with the DMV and your home but you won't register your semi automatic rifle because it isn't the government's business. Scary!


    I don't believe in registering my car each year. It was registered the day it was bought. It's only a revenue stream. Besides, there is nothing in the Constitution that says I have to register my private property.


    AND NO IT IS NOT THEIR BUSINESS!!! GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEADS.
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 38,633
    unsung wrote:
    mickeyrat wrote:

    So own as many musket weapons that you want as these were the guns of the day when this recindable right was granted BY the government..


    Give up your cell phone and internet then since the communication of the day was the quill pen.
    thing is though I have no arguement with The Gov on these things now do I?

    YOU become a part of a well regulated militia as the amendment states and I wont say anything more on your guns.
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • unsung wrote:

    I don't believe in registering my car each year. It was registered the day it was bought. It's only a revenue stream. Besides, there is nothing in the Constitution that says I have to register my private property.


    AND NO IT IS NOT THEIR BUSINESS!!! GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEADS.

    I've got it; you don't believe in regulation. Would I be correct in suggesting that you believe it's an individual's right to be irresponsible and let the dogs sort it out afterwords? If so, I apologize but I find that position completely irresponsible.
  • unsung wrote:
    I don't believe in registering my car each year. It was registered the day it was bought. It's only a revenue stream. Besides, there is nothing in the Constitution that says I have to register my private property.


    AND NO IT IS NOT THEIR BUSINESS!!! GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEADS.

    Oh spare me with the paranoid, blithering bullshit and Niagara Falls of tears about having the evil government make you do "unconstitutional" things like register your car and not jaywalk.

    Car registry is there for many reasons including making sure cars on the road are road worthy and not polluting our air.

    I guess next you're going to run shrieking down the street crying to mommy that the government is making you drive a car that isn't going to break down on the highway and cause a pile up. Or making you stop and stop lights when there is NOTHING in the constitution about having to stop at a red light.

    It's TYRANNY!!! Won't someone protect your poor soul from the government mind control of STOP LIGHTS!?!?!?!


    Wwwhhaaaaaaaaaa



    Vote Ron Paul.
  • unsung wrote:
    So let me get this straight; you will register your car with the DMV and your home but you won't register your semi automatic rifle because it isn't the government's business. Scary!


    I don't believe in registering my car each year. It was registered the day it was bought. It's only a revenue stream. Besides, there is nothing in the Constitution that says I have to register my private property.


    AND NO IT IS NOT THEIR BUSINESS!!! GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEADS.

    There is also nothing in the constitution that says I can't take a big steaming shit on your car if you park it at 6th and Howard.

    And yet... I got arrested for that.

    I say we start a revolution.

    Down with the government, I want to shit on cars.
  • otterotter Posts: 760
    The federal government is NOT your local government. The President isn't your mayor.

    One of the reasons people from around the world come/came to America is/was to get away from a government all up in their shit. Ya know?

    The Greek guy who thinks the f'n fed should know what everybody owns got it all wrong. This is why America is quickly becoming just like other oppressed countries.
    I found my place......and it's alright
  • otter wrote:
    The federal government is NOT your local government. The President isn't your mayor.

    One of the reasons people from around the world come/came to America is/was to get away from a government all up in their shit. Ya know?

    The Greek guy who thinks the f'n fed should know what everybody owns got it all wrong. This is why America is quickly becoming just like other oppressed countries.

    So let's get this straight; local laws and regulations are okay but federal regulations are a form of oppression? Not sure I understand that one. Isn't that why you have representative governments at the local, state and federal levels?
  • BentleyspopBentleyspop Posts: 10,770
    unsung wrote:
    So let me get this straight; you will register your car with the DMV and your home but you won't register your semi automatic rifle because it isn't the government's business. Scary!


    I don't believe in registering my car each year. It was registered the day it was bought. It's only a revenue stream. Besides, there is nothing in the Constitution that says I have to register my private property.


    AND NO IT IS NOT THEIR BUSINESS!!! GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEADS.

    What are you so afraid of?
  • bootlegger10bootlegger10 Posts: 15,946
    What are you so afraid of?

    A country where the government controls everyone and everything they do.
  • BentleyspopBentleyspop Posts: 10,770
    What are you so afraid of?

    A country where the government controls everyone and everything they do.

    Well this isn't North Korea, Cuba, or pre 1990 Soviet Union

    So again I ask... what are you so afraid of?
  • bootlegger10bootlegger10 Posts: 15,946
    What are you so afraid of?

    A country where the government controls everyone and everything they do.

    Well this isn't North Korea, Cuba, or pre 1990 Soviet Union

    So again I ask... what are you so afraid of?

    This is ridiculous that I have to even respond. Use your brain and see that a country doesn't just wake up one day and find out it is Cuba or pre-1990 SOviet Union (or even current Russia). It is various actions over time that lead a country to that point. Putin shuts down the media in Russia. Liberals here want to shut down Fox News. We'll see where the country goes in the next 2-3 decades.
  • BentleyspopBentleyspop Posts: 10,770
    Unfounded paranoia is very entertaining

    Thanks for the laugh

    :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
  • unsungunsung Posts: 9,487
    So let's get this straight; local laws and regulations are okay but federal regulations are a form of oppression? Not sure I understand that one. Isn't that why you have representative governments at the local, state and federal levels?


    Have you ever read the Constitution? It was written to limit the powers of the federal government so that they (we) wouldn't have a repeat of living under a tyrannical King. It is specifically limited to the enumerations in Art I Sec VIII. Everyone that wants a huge federal government to control your every thought and move why don't you go live in prison? You'll get ALL of your big government that knows EVERYTHING about you and EVERYTHING you do.
  • unsungunsung Posts: 9,487
    Or making you stop and stop lights when there is NOTHING in the constitution about having to stop at a red light.

    It's TYRANNY!!! Won't someone protect your poor soul from the government mind control of STOP LIGHTS!?!?!?!


    Wwwhhaaaaaaaaaa



    Vote Ron Paul.


    Yep, you are right. However it falls under local and state laws that you have to stop. It's the 10th Amendment. Read the document.
  • unsungunsung Posts: 9,487
    otter wrote:
    The federal government is NOT your local government. The President isn't your mayor.

    One of the reasons people from around the world come/came to America is/was to get away from a government all up in their shit. Ya know?

    The Greek guy who thinks the f'n fed should know what everybody owns got it all wrong. This is why America is quickly becoming just like other oppressed countries.



    right on. someone gets it.
  • usamamasan1usamamasan1 Posts: 4,695
    Wonder what the futurist and historian Niall Ferguson thinks about this in a historical perspective ?
     
    History repeats itself in similar ways, maybe not exactly for the same reasons but human nature and the arrogance of power will never be different and when you have tyrants elected or come to power don’t be too quick to deny the facts of history!
    The police and the courts will not help protect you, your family or your assets. They will not be on your side as a result of political correctness,  pressure from the likes of Obama who has pushed class warfare, leftist laws and edicts and a racist philosophy.
    No I am not paranoid just a very concerned student of history.
     

    Subject: Gun Control

    It is not really about self defense, it is about freedom from a government to oppress a population.....although in the end, self defense is exactly what it ultimately becomes I guess.................

    In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
    ——————- ———–
    In 1911, Turkey established gun control. >From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
    ——————————
    Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
    ——————————
    China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated
    ——————————
    Guatemala established gun control in 1964. >From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
    ——————————
    Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
    ——————————
    Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated’ people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
    —————————–
    Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    unsung wrote:
    I don't believe in registering my car each year. It was registered the day it was bought. It's only a revenue stream. Besides, there is nothing in the Constitution that says I have to register my private property.


    AND NO IT IS NOT THEIR BUSINESS!!! GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEADS.

    Oh spare me with the paranoid, blithering bullshit and Niagara Falls of tears about having the evil government make you do "unconstitutional" things like register your car and not jaywalk.

    Car registry is there for many reasons including making sure cars on the road are road worthy and not polluting our air.

    I guess next you're going to run shrieking down the street crying to mommy that the government is making you drive a car that isn't going to break down on the highway and cause a pile up. Or making you stop and stop lights when there is NOTHING in the constitution about having to stop at a red light.

    It's TYRANNY!!! Won't someone protect your poor soul from the government mind control of STOP LIGHTS!?!?!?!


    Wwwhhaaaaaaaaaa



    Vote Ron Paul.

    :lol:
  • unsungunsung Posts: 9,487

    There is also nothing in the constitution that says I can't take a big steaming shit on your car if you park it at 6th and Howard.

    And yet... I got arrested for that.

    I say we start a revolution.

    Down with the government, I want to shit on cars.


    Shit on all the cars that you want, but someone might come out that decides that they are going to shit on you.

    You were arrested because there is a victim and you caused damage to private property. Again, a state law. You'll catch on.
Sign In or Register to comment.