Freedom4um

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Dead Constitution
See other Dead Constitution Articles

Title: Rhino Peter King Joins Dems to Give Eric Holder Final Say on Gun
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://www.ammoland.com/2015/02/rhi ... say-on-gun-buys/#axzz3T3j8nJoL
Published: Feb 28, 2015
Author: AWR Hawkins
Post Date: 2015-02-28 11:53:50 by James Deffenbach
Keywords: None
Views: 80
Comments: 10

Washington DC - -(Ammoland.com)- On Wednesday, Rep. Peter King (R-NY) joined Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) to introduce a bill giving Attorney General Eric Holder final say on who does or doesn’t pass National Instant Criminal Background Checks (NICS) for gun purchases.

The twelve other Democrats co-sponsoring the Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorist Act of 2015 include “Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Dick Durbin (D-Ill), Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Barbara Boxer (D-CA)… [and] Christ Murphy (D-CT),” among others.

According to San Diego Jewish World, the act is meant to stop a “known or suspected terrorist from buying firearms or explosives.” Yet as Feinstein, one of the bill’s central sponsors explained, the terrorists who would be barred from buying firearms are also barred from traveling to the United States in the first place — so why give the AG new powers over gun sales for people who are banned from even entering the USA?

Here’s how Feinstein put it:

The Kouachi brothers, responsible for the attacks in Paris, were on U.S. terrorist watch lists, including the no-fly list. However, if the brother had instead been in the United States, they would have been able to legally purchase weapons.

Of course, the brothers were not present in the United States — and of course, they were banned from boarding a plan to get here.

Nonetheless, the Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorist Act of 2015 would give the AG new powers, allowing him to “deny the purchase or transfer of a firearm or explosive to a known or suspected terrorist if the perspective recipient may use the firearm or explosive in connection with terrorism.”

There are questions regarding what the measure for ascertaining a “suspected terrorist” for the purposes of banning gun sales will be, but none regarding the fact that the bill gives AG Holder the final say on who gets a gun and that can not be good for anyone.


Poster Comment:

Feinstein is probably close to certifiably insane, could even be over qualified in that regard. Just like that hag, Barbara Boxer. And Peter King has been a traitor for years so his endorsement of this foolishness shouldn't surprise anyone.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 6.

#5. To: James Deffenbach (#0) (Edited)

Further incentive to buy from an individual versus a gubbermint- approved/licensed dealer. At this point in time so many people own various weapons that a more honest question for FedGov is who doesn't own a gun or two?

X-15  posted on  2015-02-28   14:49:05 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: X-15 (#5)

A couple of years ago, liberal goof Justin Peters wrote an article entitled How Many Assault Weapons Are There in America? How Much Would It Cost the Government To Buy Them Back?

He estimated that out of the 310 million privately held firearms in the US, almost 4 million were of the AR-style "assault" type weapons that strike such deadly fear in the hearts of anti-gun weenies that they fantasize about Australian type campaigns where the government buys weapons back. Note the language in "How Much Would It Cost the Government To Buy Them Back?"

Like the government owned them in the first place. This kind of treasonous weenie-think infests much of the Peter King Republicrat party who called on my phone this week looking for dough.

I told them to take a flying **** at a rolling dough-nut.

randge  posted on  2015-02-28   15:06:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 6.

#7. To: randge (#6)

I told them to take a flying **** at a rolling dough-nut.

I admire your remarkable restraint.

James Deffenbach  posted on  2015-02-28 15:12:32 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: randge (#6)

liberal goof Justin Peters wrote an article entitled How Many Assault Weapons Are There in America? How Much Would It Cost the Government To Buy Them Back?

"The most effective way for the government to reduce the existing gun stock would be to buy them back from their owners. When Australia imposed strict gun control measures in 1996 in the aftermath of a mass shooting, the Aussie government bought back 643,726 newly illegal rifles and shotguns at market value. The gun buyback program, which cost an estimated $400 million in U.S. dollars, was funded by a temporary 1 percent income tax levy.

Would such a plan fly in America? Extrapolating from Australia's numbers, a similar buyback in this more gun-laden country would cost billions. While a tax increase isn't the only way to raise that much money—the federal government could have a bake sale, or auction off some of its lesser-known historical treasures—it's certainly the most obvious way to do it. We might soon see what voters and politicians hate more: guns or taxes."

Justin Peters is not playing with a full deck.

Australians didn't hand in even a fraction of their weapons, they're still out there. A similar hare-brained scheme in America would be a joke. Just look at Connecticut: gun owners largely have not complied with a registration program.

X-15  posted on  2015-02-28 16:09:29 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 6.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest