• Mossberg Owners is in the process of upgrading the software. Please bear with us while we transition to the new look and new upgraded software.

It is Happening EVERYWHERE

LTB45

.30-06
Rest in Peace
Supporter
http://www.examiner.com/article/pa-...nd-their-families?CID=examiner_alerts_article

The Writer/Blogger David Codrea has been a friend of CCDL since its inception.
He will be the guest speaker at our rally on the steps of the state capitol, April 5

March 3, 2014
One of the more outrageous and offensive citizen disarmament proposals that has come to light in recent days and is being discussed on gun boards is a screed by Pennsylvania Rep. Ronald G. Waters, representing the 191st Legislative District in Delaware and Philadelphiacounties, titled “Responsible gun owners should welcome sensible gun laws.”

“Sensible,” in this case, means whatever Democratic Caucus Secretary Waters wants to include on his gun grab wish list.

“A sensible approach to gun laws dictates that firearms with reasonable recreational, self-defense and sporting uses be protected, but military-style guns are proven to be nothing more than killing machines in the hands of irresponsible civilians,” he asserts, as if doing so means he knows what he’s talking about. Still, his use of the word "dictates" says much.

“As a public servant, it is my duty to be inclusive and to address any issue from a position that encompasses the interests of many, so it is clear to me that the ‘people’ at the heart of this gun debate must include the victim and the criminal; the individual and the public,” Waters proclaims.

He’s saying criminals, as part of “the people,” have an interest in disarming the whole population. And it appears they do.

“Whether it is illegal ownership, ownership with criminal intent or with negligence, irresponsible gun ownership is the problem,” Waters pronounces, not explaining how “ownership,” which is a legal and moral term, can be applied to possessors of stolen/illegally obtained property. That, of course, is exactly what anti-gun “researchers” and their media cheerleaders do when conflating possession with lawful ownership in order to pollute the pool and manipulate results to make it look like everyone shares in collective guilt for the actions of a few.

“While most of the uproar over gun safety and gun control has centered on restriction versus Second Amendment rights, I believe that real change will happen only when we reframe the argument in the context of public safety,” Waters declares. Note that by couching it as a one-sided proposition, Constitutional impediments disappear entirely from his calculations. Yeah, here's a guy we want to give carte blanche to in terms of "reframing" our rights.

“There are responsible gun owners out there,” Waters acknolwedges, now presuming to be as much the sole arbiter of what is responsible as he is of what’s sensible.

“As their own personal health changes, they assess their ability to handle their guns responsibly,” he explains, setting the stage to introduce a proposal that has less to do with people assessing themselves and everything to do with the state taking over that pesky detail.

“This includes improved, thorough background checks; detailed, regular mental health evaluations for gun owners and potential gun buyers and similar evaluations for family members who share residency; improved methods of documenting private gun transfers; and, perhaps the most controversial, restrictions on high-capacity ammunition magazines,” he advocates.

Sorry, Rep. Waters. While unacceptable, meaning “Come and take them if you dare try,” the magazine restriction is hardly the most controversial of your many subversive schemes. Back up to that bit about mandatory mental health evaluations.

How about “No”? How about anyone suggesting that ought to have his head examined, and anyone trying to impose it warrants being repelled?

It’s revealing that mental health blanket dragnets are among the “reforms” being touted as “common sense” by more “moderate” voices. Waters has actually done us a favor here by showing where the antis want to drive us after they’ve secured a beachhead on that front, which they’re amassing for now.

So much for probable cause and due process. Hey, we're reframing the argument in terms of public safety, remember? (And doesn't the fact that you even want a gun for protection make you suspect in the first place?)

It’s also telling to see that the political leadership Waters and his ilk have provided over the decades has resulted in Philadelphia being given a crime index rating of “9” (with “100” being the safest) by NeighborhoodScout.com.

As with all things “progressive,” every day is Opposite Day, so naturally, the “City of Brotherly Love” is now a place where extreme violent crime dwarfs state and national medians, and the “Cradle of Liberty” is a place where collectivists would impose tyrannical disarmament edicts requiring citizens to continually prove themselves innocent before the state before exercising "privileges" will be allowed.

Still, Waters may at least have a partial point. Perhaps anyone irrational enough to trust him with political power is too irresponsible to be trusted with a gun.
 

carbinemike

Global Moderator
Staff member
Global Moderator
"Philanthropist"
Thank for that one LTB. I have not seen that one yet. Yes, it coming at us from all over. The Philly area reps in our capital are completely over the top. We stay on high alert as they seem to feel left behind by the liberal politicians that have forced through illegal gun laws in NY, NJ, MD and CT fir the northeast. They would like nothing better than to enact the crap laws like the states around us. So far we have done well fending them off.
 

carbinemike

Global Moderator
Staff member
Global Moderator
"Philanthropist"
To give you an idea what kind of a-hole we are dealing with here, below are his current bills he is pushing. Everyone of them was knocked down before and are being resubmitted. I added some notes to each. I'm proud that my rep. was instrumental in passing our castle doctrine and voting down these proposals. All it will take though is the wrong governor and the right "crisis" and they could pass one or more of these:
2013-14 Prime Sponsored Bills
  1. Typical ban along the lines of NY/CT. -0 HB 517 - Prohibiting certain assault weapons. “to prohibit the possession, use, control, sale, transfer, or manufacture of an assault weapon in the Commonwealth”
  2. Treyvon Law I. Effort to repeal parts of the Castle Doctrine. HB 518 - Further provides definitions, for use of force in self-protection, for use of force for the protection of property and for use of force by persons with special responsibility for care, discipline or safety of others.
  3. All guns to be sold with locks law. HB 519 - Provides for child firearm safety lock mechanisms; and prescribing penalties.
  4. Ramp up unlicensed carry punishments HB 520 - Provides for sentences for carrying a firearm without a license.
  5. Force all CCW holders to carry $1,000,000 in liability insurance HB 521 - Further provides for firearms and other dangerous article licenses.
  6. The Treyvon law II. Watch groups must be trained, carry liability insurance and can only CCW if the group agrees and they have state police training. HB 522 - Further provides antidrug and town-watch volunteer civil immunity; and adding crime prevention provisions relating to neighborhood watch groups.
  7. While he wants tougher punishments for illegal gun carry he wants lesser sentences for other crimes. HB 1799 - Provides for motion for departure from mandatory sentence.
  8. This will wipe out the castle Doctrine in PA HB 1812 - Further provides definitions, for use of force in self-protection, for use of force for the protection of property and for use of force by persons with special responsibility for care, discipline or safety of others.
 

Scott M

.270 WIN
"Philanthropist"
They are taking this BS to the legislatures in every State they feel they have a foothold or political advantage. The battle is on gentlemen. Now is not the time to sit and say, "Well, that is Connecticut, California, New York, New Jersey or Pennsylvania. Next they will come for your State!!

These are desperate times!
 

GunnyGene

Racist old man
BANNED
^^ The schism between States such as you mentioned, and those which are enacting laws to reduce the burden on gun owners (MS for example), seems to be widening over the past year or so. At some point the SCOTUS will have to address this on the Federal level whether they want to or not. They've been ducking the issue for decades, most recently a few days ago when they declined to hear the NRA petition about bearing arms.
 

Scott M

.270 WIN
"Philanthropist"
This is a blatant attempt by the Left to financially bankrupt the Pro Gun Organizations. My pockets aren't deep but by God; we have numbers!!
 

GunnyGene

Racist old man
BANNED
Are they counting the one in the chamber in this max of 10? :eek: Never mind, they probably don't know about that extra 'secret' bullet. Surprise!! ;) Or that I, and others, can empty a lever gun mag, nearly as fast as a semi-auto. :)
 

Frgood

.410
" “As a public servant, it is my duty to be inclusive and to address any issue from a position that encompasses the interests of many, so it is clear to me that the ‘people’ at the heart of this gun debate must include the victim and the criminal; the individual and the public,” Waters proclaims. "

If this was true then to encompass the interests of the many then there is not a safety issue. I said 'not'. as the percentage of those shot (or harmed) is rather small compared to those not affected. To follow his own argument, if we see numbers approaching 35 - 55% of the public being harmed (and I do not consider having 'a friend of a friend' a direct impact), then there is something to talk about. Mind you, if that would be the case the conversation should be more about root cause. (oops, did I just go full circle?)

At the risk of sounding cruel. the number of mass events does not reach a statistically significant number when compared to the number of human interactions on a given day.

Now, ask me about a constitution 'teacher' setting foreign policy and then we have an issue to be sorted out.
 

GunnyGene

Racist old man
BANNED
The teacher you're referring to is a globalist, so doesn't use the word foreign. And policy is not something he is familiar with. So the very concept of a foreign policy escapes him. Now, if you'd said community and organizer, we might have some hope of communicating with him. o_O
 

carbinemike

Global Moderator
Staff member
Global Moderator
"Philanthropist"
" “As a public servant, it is my duty to be inclusive and to address any issue from a position that encompasses the interests of many, so it is clear to me that the ‘people’ at the heart of this gun debate must include the victim and the criminal; the individual and the public,” Waters proclaims. "
What the %$#@?...the voice of the criminal? You have got to be kidding me! Typical liberal d-bag...I'm sure he's one of the those that blames society for the action of the criminal. He includes the voice of everyone but the gun owner. Waters district is a couple of counties away, toward the toilet we call Philadelphia. They really are a completely different world than the rest of the state. That s.ob. makes me sick.
 
Top