doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Shotgun News Editorial

"Our culture's future is legally in the hands of people who want to end it."

That's the most cogent comment I've read here on the issue.

That's why I wrote earlier that the man I'm watching with greatest interest in the US is John Boehner, criticized here as a RINO at my mention.

Americans vote for what they want. John Boehner is trying to preserve his party and serve the country. If he can't do the former, god help the country without a viable opposition.

JohnM is a man valued for his contributions. If the GOP continues its suicidal internecine course, condemning it to a radical rump in national affairs, I join John in "Being glad that I'm old."

I don't want to see the consequences.

Well done indeed,very please to have been on this forum for many years and Dave Weber moderation is why it is still the best !

Hey wait a minute. My Small Munsterlander inquiry is off topic? Then an questions about favorite hunting photos etc are off topic. jeez man, If fine hunting dogs are not directly connected to fine guns, then we need to go back to the strictest interpretation of the double gun BBS. LOL.

The BBS site description states the following: Questions & Answers - Side-by-side shotguns, Doubleguns, GameGuns...etc. English, European & American. As well as Double Rifles, Drillings, Combination Guns and other fine firearms.
No where does it mention, hunting, reloading, gunsmithing, losing friends or wives or dogs, someone getting cancer, someone dying, etc. so, lets either tighten our shot groups or stop pointing fingers and whining about trivial stuff when the very core of our gunrights is in the process of a very possible cataclysmic change.

Myself, I think that we are doing fine with regards to the content on the BBS, and that this issue is extremely relevant and important to all of our futures as gun owners. While under other circumstances, an isolated gun control bill at the local level might not warrant posting here, we are talking about a monumental change in our rights as Americans. So to dismiss, quarantine or remove this topic would not be our best interests as a group.

While many of you dont like the black guns, so be it. I dont care for all of the dress up, costume party types and the jackets and ties but I would hunt with anyone who wore it (as long as they were a safe and ethical hunter or huntress) but that�s my prerogative. I don�t call anyone those names and I know there may be one or two people out there who may think I am just not sophisticated enough to understand why they do what they do. Doesn�t matter. That�s their choice. Just like we can choose to not read a post. BTW, my choice is Filson, LL Bean and Danners.

But the bigger question that I find hard to fathom is why there are many gun owners who either claim to be Obama supporters but will parrot that he has not and shows no indication of taking away our guns or are those that are for �reasonable restrictions� on our guns (aka our gun rights).

It was presented in several news forums today that the administration is proposing a national database of firearms and their owners. That�s national registration. What other item in this country that is used by private citizens who have a constitutional right to own is registered in a national database. There is evenb talk of confiscation in my home state of New York; proposed by a Democrat State Senator and endorsed by a Democrat governor. A newspaper in NY that published the names and addresses of thousands of gun owners, by a newspaper editor that is a staunch democrat, confirmed by the publc records of campaign contribution records.

How many of you who are in favor of �reasonable controls� would be willing to accept the same thing for your cell phones? Your home computers? Your alcohol? Your tobacco? How about waiting periods to buy alcohol? What about for cell phones. What about a permit system for cell phones? Just think how many pedophiles and child molesters we could stop from committing crimes if we only registered computers and cell phones and place reasonable restrictions on them?

How about the drunk drivers. With waiting periods for alcohol, the weekend would be over before they got a drink. And no more serving alcohol at home. Only in licensed drinking establishments. And you would have to have your ID called in to a national background check before you could be served.

What about regulating cell phones. The overwhelming majority of people arrested in this country have cell phones on their person when they are arrested. Cell phones facilitate drug crime, sex crimes, etc. I could go on and on.
People would not stand for those �reasonable restrictions for those items which aren�t even covered in our constitution. Yet so many are willing to have their rights restricted if just one life is saved.

Last year, when 20 illegals were killed in a speeding overloaded pick-up truck down in texas, no one called for any controls on pick up trucks or anything.

You don�t like black guns. Okay, fine, don�t buy any. You don�t like hand guns, fine, don�t buy any. I have never in my 54 + years ever heard a handgun owner, a black rifle owner, a pump shotgun or semi auto shotgun owner say one thing negative about double shotguns or over unders. NOT ONE THING, NEVER. I cant say that about gun owners talking about black guns or handguns or semi auto or pump guns.

The same folks who want to severely control guns are the same ones who approve of murdering hundreds of thousands of unborn children every year, the same ones who say a woman has a right to kill her unborn child all the way up to the point when the baby is in the birth canal and the head is visible. (Partial birth abortion) These are the same folks who want to legalize marijuana and other drugs. And don�t you out there who disagree say that this isn�t true and it isn�t the Democrats� and Obama. These are tenants and planks of the Democrat party.

So, getting back to the reason for my response. As off topic as some will claim it to be. Bury your heads in the sand, hold your high priced double close to your bosom, sip your single malt and smoke that Cuban, while you are sitting in the den of your house, watching Chris Matthews; and watch as our gun rights are destroyed if this national registration, being proposed by the Obama administration, and according to Biden will be passed by the end of the month comes to fruition. At least that�s what the administration wants. Take advantage of a crisis, right?

So, some of you will call it garbage, call it trash but we will all be able to call the outcome , if unfavorable to gun owners, a travesty and the point of no return for our country and our individual liberties. Then all of you who voted for and said Obama would never do it will have your humble pie. I pray to god I am wrong and that this will not come to pass, but we are on the brink of constitutional fratricide.

I'm with you Dave, keep it on this forum.

Thank you Dave. We really appreciate what you've done and what you said.

keith

Good call, Dave. Thanks to you once again for this forum.

All my best, SRH

What changes in the law are valid regulation of the militia within the bounds of the 2nd Amendment which unquestionably holds we have a right to bear arms?

Some history on gun control you will not hear from the complicit media-be ready for well planned attack on guns by the media/administration when the left brings the many bill up at the end of the month and tries to ram them through

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.

You won�t see this data on the U.S. evening news or hear politicians disseminating this information. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens.

I am hoping with Dave's support that the majority who have remained silent here, but I expect activly support our RTKABA, will now be more willing to voice your opinions and that everyone realizes we are all in this together. Get involved it's going to take more than paying for an annual NRA membership this time.
Don't be averse to contacting your Congressman even if they are ultraliberal and let your thoughts be known. Keep in mind that unlike Obama most of them will have to stand for re-election and they have a lot to lose. We made a big difference in the Clinton mid-term elections on "gun" control in 1994 and we can do it again.
Once more I would like to thank Dave Weber for hanging tough on this most important issue to us.
Jim

What changes in the law are valid regulation of the militia within the bounds of the 2nd Amendment which unquestionably holds we have a right to bear arms?

I support and defend the right of citizens in good standing to be armed in order to defend themselves from criminals and governmental tyranny. The Supreme Court made it clear that some regulation was valid and that our rights were not without some restraint or better said regulation.

In other words the right can be regulated and it is important that reasonable people seek common ground at ensuring the preservation of our rights through sound regulation.

Regulations are already thick and while some appear silly to me many are not.

I do not believe we want mental cases to carry, I do not believe we want innocents killed. I do not believe we want armed guards at every school.

What change or improvement can be made in our current law that can make a difference?