Tactical Response CEO Threatens To 'Start Killing People' Over Possible Obama Gun Mea

RLN said:

I'm sorry, I disagree.

Many Mentally Ill Can Buy Guns

By making it legally mandatory that individual states comply with tracking them.

A good start might be a person that not only wants to hurt themselves but others as well.

Click to expand...

Lutherf said:

Please refer to post #70....which you already replied to.

Click to expand...

notquiteright said:

You said what another 'inch' would be, however you dodged what 'all means necessary' is....

Click to expand...

Deuce said:

How about someone with a documented history of mental illness like the person who shot Giffords? Can we not sell someone like that a gun?

Click to expand...

Lutherf said:

I figured that part was pretty self explanatory.

There are Constitutional procedures in place for when a President commits high crimes. It would be expected that Congress would act appropriately under such circumstances. If they do not act then it becomes incumbent upon the people to act.

Click to expand...

Deuce said:

How about someone with a documented history of mental illness like the person who shot Giffords? Can we not sell someone like that a gun?

Click to expand...

notquiteright said:

Act how? YOU used 'by any means NECESSARY' now you are as shy as a debutante!

I know you won't give a straight answer, you just had to jump on the howler monkey cart. Fling some poo and sound tough eace

Click to expand...

Lutherf said:

I know what answer you want to hear but, as I keep on saying, "by whatever means necessary" and that indicates a process. The goal, as always, is compliance with the law and should someone choose to comply before force is used that is always preferable but sometimes they don't comply and then force becomes necessary. The level of force necessary is always related directly to the level of resistance.

Click to expand...

notquiteright said:

Nice dive, yet another sounded tuff until asked to speak clearly. You won't say where that means ends but let me tie this together-

Should Citizens rise up in armed revolt if mag caps get restricted or the 40% of gun sales that don't get back round checked are restricted?

Click to expand...

notquiteright said:

Nice dive, yet another sounded tuff until asked to speak clearly. You won't say where that means ends but let me tie this together-

Should Citizens rise up in armed revolt if mag caps get restricted or the 40% of gun sales that don't get back round checked are restricted?

Click to expand...

Lutherf said:

Again, maybe.

Why is this so hard for you to grasp? Violence is a LAST RESORT and in a circumstance like this a little of it is likely to have pretty big ramifications.

If the administration oversteps then we have a whole judicial process to go through and legislative process to go through before anything else should happen but if the federal government tries to regulate private transactions that don't involve interstate commerce then they have very seriously overstepped their bounds and it is the obligation of every law abiding American to take them to task for that. If magazine capacity gets limited and those same limits aren't imposed on law enforcement, the military and federal LE then they have created a second class of citizen and THAT needs to be addressed. Nobody should stand for a privileged political class in this country.

Click to expand...

notquiteright said:

Oh I just noted you apparently was having a Patrick Henry moment- all buff and bluster but no personal commitment to the issue yourself. 'Someone should' 'the citizens should'. There is an I in Liberty.

When you walk into a 'gun' shop to purchase a weapon on the rack there was no interstate commerce between you and the shop owner, yet you are subject to a back round check. Why not at a 'gun' show?

Law Enforcement, the Military and feds are already in a different category. The testimony of a cop outweighs the testimony of the citizen accused of the violation, illegal lane change, following too close, speeding.... The Military uses a wide variety of select/full auto weapons, destructive devices, cannons.... Fed LEO isn't any different than other LEOs. There is no second class citizen, strawman argument. IF a group of people are singled out but not others outside of LE, and military such as blacks, or Californians THEN ya might have something, but as most citizens don't hold commissions they are not the same as LEO.

But you answered my questions- if the Gubmint crosses your line 'SOMEONE' should do SOMETHING... :roll:

When Bush the Elder limited magazine size where was the 'outrage'?

Click to expand...

notquiteright said:

When you walk into a 'gun' shop to purchase a weapon on the rack there was no interstate commerce between you and the shop owner, yet you are subject to a back round check. Why not at a 'gun' show?

Click to expand...

SMTA said:

Gun shows are a private transaction.

Click to expand...

Lutherf said:

In the case of an FFL he IS covered by interstate commerce laws, I'm not. Even FFL's at gun shows have to run NICS checks, it's the private sellers who do not and should not.

The cops are not classified differently than anyone else but they are considered experts in such matters as traffic laws and it is that expertise that gives additional weight to their testimony, not their badge.

The 1994 AWB was a Clinton thing, not a Bush thing and there was a lot of outrage over it.

Click to expand...

notquiteright said:

Why shouldn't 'private' sellers do back round checks on those purchasing their firearms?

Nice attempted dodge on LEO, their expertise and badge both stem from the same place, far more extensive training and a COMMISSION. they are COMMISSIONED and if they ever have to surrender that commission THEN they are 'like us'. Their badge is a symbol of that COMMISSION.

As far as throwing this all on Clinton, it was Bush the Senior who used an Executive Order in 1989 to halt the importation of 19 named 'assault weapons'. he justified the ban as the weapons are not suited for hunting or target practice.

Read up on his 'Comprehensive Violent Crime Act of 1989' Under the inspired leadership of Bill Ruger,sr the president of Ruger Arms, the idea was to save 'guns' by restricting rifle mag cap to 15 and pistols to 10.

Click to expand...

Goshin said:

He's a hothead, but I'm hearing a lot of similar talk from a lot of other gun owners also... people need to realize that if they push too far on this issue there really will be violence... possibly a lot of it.


I hope it doesn't come to that, but Pelosi's bill has some really outrageous, insane stuff in it and the notion of Constitutional infringement by one-man fiat (Executive Order) has many people already beyond enraged.

Click to expand...

Captain America said:

Well, you got your gun owners and you got your gun nutters.

I am a gun owner. I am this kinda gun owner:
View attachment 67140859

Then you got your gun nutters. (I suspect many of these Napoleon types also drive Corvettes and crotch rockets but I digress.)

Now, one thing most everybody agrees with is that an unstable mind and deadly weapons do not mix.

I have to wonder if the "nutter's" realize, while making the same argument regarding unstable people and guns, that THEY are the unstable people America is worried about?

I mean, look at the most outspoken nutters on TV, heck, even here on this forum. Is anyone, (other nutters notwithstanding,) comfortable knowing people like these are allowed to have guns? Much less mini-arsenals?

Click to expand...

Lutherf said:

Where are you getting your information?

The 1989 bill is here - Comprehensive Violent Crime Control Act of 1989 (1989; 101st Congress H.R. 2709) - GovTrack.us. It died but was reintroduced in 1991 (Comprehensive Violent Crime Control Act of 1991 (1991; 102nd Congress H.R. 1400) - GovTrack.us) where it died. The text of the proposed legislation can be found here - Bill Text - 101st Congress (1989-1990) - THOMAS (Library of Congress) and in a brief read I sure don't see anything about banning magazines.

With regard to the police, the only power they have that private citizens do not is a full blown power to detain and arrest but even then that power is limited to probable cause and subject to judicial review.

A list of George Herbert Walker Bush's executive orders can be found here - Executive Orders Disposition Tables. If you would like to point out which one contained the ban I'll be happy to look at it but I checked out 1989 and didn't see anything that seemed to relate to what you are contending.

Click to expand...

notquiteright said:

EO 12680 for importation ban

You keep using the word ban when the correct term is capacity restriction. Bush the Elder's bill didn't pass into law, as much as he and Bill Ruger tried and it became the framework for and helped paved the way for the AWB of 1994. (FYI the AWB passed with bi-partisan support, it wasn't just a Clinton EO, it was BOTH houses of Congress)

In regards to the PO-lice this isn't about 'power', this is about a group of professional men and women who train very hard to get a COMMISSION you lack. You keep denigrating that simple fact, where many conservatives ran out of the twin towers these dedicated men and women ran INTO the building. They get special stuff as you and your ilk complain constantly but truth is they have a much bigger job than simple home or self defense.

You can't even give a straight answer on what YOU would do if the Gubmint goes that extra inch, you damn sure won't chase down a serial killer.

Cops are different- get over it.

Click to expand...

By virtue of the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America, including section 621 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended and section 301 of Title 3 of the United States Code, and in order to delegate certain functions to the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Section 1-102(a) of Executive Order No. 12163, as amended, is further amended by amending paragraphs (9) and (10) to read as follows:

"(9) section 536 of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 1989 (Public Law 100-461), to be exercised by the Administrator of the Agency for International Development within IDCA; and

"(10) the first proviso under the heading 'Population, Development Assistance' contained in Title II of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 1989 (Public Law 100-461), to be exercised by the Administrator of the Agency for International Development within IDCA."

Sec. 2. Section 1-201(a) of Executive Order No. 12163, as amended, is further amended by amending paragraphs (26), (27), (28), and (29) to read as follows:

"(26) sections 513, 526, 527, 539, 556, 564, and 565 of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 1989 (Public Law 100-461);

"(27) the fourth proviso under the heading 'Southern Africa, Development Assistance' contained in Title II of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 1989 (Public Law 100-461);

"(28) the proviso relating to tied aid credits under the heading 'Economic Support Fund' contained in Title II of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 1989 (Public Law 100-461), which shall be exercised in consultation with the Administrator of the Agency for International Development within IDCA;

"(29) subsection (c)(2) under the heading 'Foreign Military Sales Debt Reform' contained in Title III of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 1988 (Public Law 100-202), and section 573(c) of that Act, both of which shall be exercised in consultation with the Secretary of Defense. In addition, section 573(c) shall be exercised in consultation with the Director of the United States Arms Control and Disarmament Agency;"

Sec. 3. Section 1-201(a) of Executive Order No. 12163, as amended, is further amended by inserting the following new paragraphs at the end thereof:

"(30) Section 566(d) of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 1989 (as enacted in Public Law 100-461), which shall be exercised in consultation with the Secretary of Defense: and

"(31) sections 4101(b), 4205(d), 4307(a), and 4309 of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-690). The Secretary of State in implementing the functions delegated to him under section 4205(d) shall consult with the Secretary of Defense."

Sec. 4. Section 1-301 of Executive Order No. 12163, as amended, is further amended by amending section (f) to read as follows:

"(f) The functions conferred upon the President under section 566(c) of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 1989 (Public Law 100-461)."

Sec. 5. Section 1 of the Executive Order No. 11958, as amended, is further amended:

(1) by inserting in the first paragraph "and related legislation," after "the Act,".

(2) by inserting the following new paragraphs at the end of the section:

"(q) Those under Section 2(b)(6) of the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945 (b)(6)) to the Secretary of State.".

"(r) Those under Section 588(b) of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 1989 (Public Law 100-461), to the Secretary of Defense, except with respect to the determination of an emergency as provided by subsection (b)(3). The Secretary of Defense in implementation of the functions delegated to him under section 588(b) shall consult with the Secretary of State."

Sec. 6. Section 1(e) of Executive Order No. 11958, as amended, is further amended by inserting "and section 580 of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 1989 (Public Law 100-461)." after "Section 23 of the Act".

Sec. 7. Section 1(l) of Executive Order No. 11958, as amended, is further amended by striking out the semicolon at the end of the second sentence of paragraph (l) and inserting a period in lieu thereof, and by adding the following sentence at the end of paragraph (l):

"The authority to undertake activities to ensure compliance with established export conditions may be redelegated to the Secretary of Defense, or to the head of another department or agency as appropriate, which shall exercise such functions in consultation with the Secretary of State;".

Sec. 8. Section 2(a) of Executive Order No. 11958, as amended, is further amended by deleting "and" after "International Development Cooperation Agency" and inserting "and the Chairman of the Export-Import Bank," after "Arms Control and Disarmament Agency,".

George Bush
The White House,
July 5, 1989.

Click to expand...

Lutherf said:

I'm reading it now and I'm still confused as to what you're talking about.



And for the other...did you happen to read the text of the proposed legislation? It involved prohibiting the domestic manufacture of firearms that were prohibited from import for various reasons.

edit -

As far as cop powers.....I'm pretty damned familiar with them because I was a cop while in the service and worked extensively with cops (and Customs and DEA and other law enforcement agencies) after I got out.

Click to expand...

VanceMack said:

If the rifle you used to bag that dear has a detachable magazine and a scope Ms Feinstein has already said it qualifies for her gun ban. They don't give a **** what kind of a gun owner you are...all they care about is taking your gun.

Click to expand...

notquiteright said:

My bad, President Bush the Elder ordered the BATFE to ban semis like the AK from importation. He didn't upset the US made apple cart however.

Google it and see, the importation of ban of 1989. Because of it the AK and Uzi to name the two most popular imports were already banned before the 1994 AWB, which as noted passed both Houses- something Bush the Elder didn't bother with in 1989.

Now I remember 1989, I don't recall rioting in the streets, no 'by any means necessary' reaction. I remember 1994 and the political gain some 'conservatives' feel they got from that ban, even as Republicans voted for it in enough numbers to pass it :roll:

Now IF you ever was a Cop and/or in the military you know BOTH are very different from civilians and BOTH are charged with the responsibility of running TO trouble instead of away from it. No way No how is a civilian guaranteed the 'right' to own 'what a cop/soldier carries'

Click to expand...

Also, 27 C.F.R. § 478.39 states:

…

(a) No person shall assemble a semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun using more than 10 of the imported parts listed in paragraph (c) of this section if the assembled firearm is prohibited from importation under section 925(d)(3) as not being particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes ….
(b) The provisions of this section shall not apply to:
(1) The assembly of such rifle or shotgun for sale or distribution by a licensed manufacturer to the United States or any department or agency thereof or to any State or any department, agency, or political subdivision thereof; or (2) The assembly of such rifle or shotgun for the purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the Director under the provisions of [§478.151(formerly 178.151)]; or (3) The repair of any rifle or shotgun which had been imported into or assembled in the United States prior to November 30, 1990, or the replacement of any part of such firearm.
(c) For purposes of this section, the term imported parts [tabulated below] are:
(1) Frames, receivers, receiver castings, forgings, or castings.
(2) Barrels.
(3) Barrel extensions.
(4) Mounting blocks (trunnions).
(5) Muzzle attachments.
(6) Bolts.
(7) Bolt carriers.
(8) Operating rods.
(9) Gas pistons.
(10) Trigger housings.
(11) Triggers.
(12) Hammers.
(13) Sears.
(14) Disconnectors.
(15) Buttstocks.
(16) Pistol grips.
(17) Forearms, handguards.
(18) Magazine bodies.
(19) Followers.
(20) Floor plates.

…

As a result of a 1989 study by the U.S. Treasury Department regarding the importability of certain firearms, an import ban was placed on military-style firearms. This ban included not only military-type firearms, but also extended to firearms with certain features that were considered to be “nonsporting.”

Among such nonsporting features were the ability to accept a detachable magazine; folding/telescoping stocks; separate pistol grips; and the ability to accept a bayonet, flash suppressors, bipods, grenade launchers, and night sights.

Please note that the foreign parts kits that are sold through commercial means are usually cut up machineguns, such as Russian AK-47 types, British Sten types, etc. Generally, an acceptable semiautomatic copy of a machinegun is one that has been significantly redesigned. The receiver must be incapable of accepting the original fire-control components that are designed to permit full automatic fire. The method of operation should employ a closed-bolt firing design that incorporates an inertia-type firing pin within the bolt assembly.

Further, an acceptably redesigned semiautomatic copy of nonsporting firearm must be limited to using less than 10 of the imported parts listed in 27 CFR § 478.39(c). Otherwise, it is considered to be assembled into a nonsporting configuration per the provisions of 18 U.S.C. 925(d)(3) and is thus a violation of § 922(r).

Individuals manufacturing sporting-type firearms for their own use need not hold Federal Firearms Licenses (FFLs). However, we suggest that the manufacturer at least identify the firearm with a serial number as a safeguard in the event that the firearm is lost or stolen. Also, the firearm should be identified as required in 27 CFR 478.92 if it is sold or otherwise lawfully transferred in the future.

Click to expand...

Captain America said:

We've been here before. Nobody is coming for my guns. Everytime the paranoia kicks in, gun sales go up, and the gun industry lobby, aka, NRA, increases its revenue. fear is the marketing tool. Rinse and repeat.

Click to expand...