CURRENTLY 1907 VISITORS

(Forum Home)--->(System Info & Announcements)--->(WE WIN!!!)
Thread Admin: AuctionArmsCeo (6-0-0) (Last 10 Posts) Posted: 06/26/2008 at 17:53:31
Total Posts: 55
Thread Title: "WE WIN!!!"
AuctionArmsCeo Today the Supreme Court of these United States ruled that the 2nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects and individual right to keep and bear arms. I'm so relieved that law has caught up with reality. I'm going to remember this day forever...
-manny
(Start a Thread) (Forum Rules)

Former Seller: Petesguns(782-0-0) Post#6 - Posted: 06/28/2008 at 19:13:20
Petesguns All this is going to accomplish is to produce a new proliferation of laws to try to do an end run around this decision. Guess we'll have to have the Supremes define exactly what a HANDGUN is now, no? The battle is FAR from over and ANY celebration now only gives the antis time to muster a new attack. Before you know it, the only HANDGUN we will be allowing under this ruling will be flintlock dueling pistols. As usual, the stupid no brain idiots think that criminals are going to obey the laws, and that these laws will keep them gun free. Amazing show of brilliance, no? Obvioulsy, tnere is a problem, but more laws only provide more LAWFUL CITIZEN control, not crime control. Gotta go, I feel a storm of four letter words comin' on REAL quick.

Former Seller: kats(438-0-0) Post#7 - Posted: 06/28/2008 at 21:43:32
(no avatar) The more I thought about the DC PD and what they are doing I sat down and wrote the following to Chief Cathy Lanier at Cathy.Lanier@dc.gov.

The Washington DC Metropolitan Police Department web site, http://mpdc.dc.gov/mpdc/cwp/view.asp?a=1237&q=547431&pm=1, states:

'In the coming days the District of Columbia will be implementing new rules and regulations regarding the Supreme Court decision in the District of Columbia v. Heller (handgun) case. The Supreme Court ruled that residents will be allowed to possess handguns in their homes. It is critical that all Metropolitan Police Department members know the immediate impact of this ruling:

  • All Firearms including handguns must be registered with the Metropolitan Police Department’s Firearms Registration Section before they may be legally possessed.
  • Automatic and semi-automatic handguns remain ineligible for registration.
  • The Supreme Court’s ruling is limited to handguns in the home and does not affect the legality of firearms carried outside of the home.
  • The Metropolitan Police Department will urge residents that do obtain licenses to carry weapons in the home to also keep that weapon either disassembled or secured with a locking device (not a current legal requirement).'

You will find the following comments contradict each other:

' All Firearms including handguns must be registered…' & ' Automatic and semi-automatic handguns remain ineligible for registration.'

The Supreme Court Ruling states handguns and made no distinction between types of handguns.  A reasonable person would take the term "handguns" to mean just that - handguns and not a specific type of handgun.

I also see on the MPD web site published homicide and assaults with 'guns' from 1998 to 2007.  Your statistics show an outstanding increase in homicides where a 'gun' is used.  Do you believe that bans / restrictions have been a contributing factor to that increase?  From 73% in 1998 to 80% in 2007.  That's big…

I firmly believe that a government agency that concentrates on the criminal element rather than restricting the law abiding members of their community is a more effective agency.

From the information provided on your web site I see that Washington DC and its elected/appointed/anointed officials are truly anti firearm folk.  I shouldn't get that impression from looking at this web site.  I should see how the MPD, with the assistance of the community, has reduced crime.

Respectfully

Joe Botsko

Phoenix, AZ

 

BC:

600+ names in my address book


I hope some of the 600+ get inspried to insprie another 600 each.

Former Seller: Petesguns(782-0-0) Post#8 - Posted: 06/29/2008 at 09:01:46
Petesguns kats, WELL DONE. Probably going to fall upon deaf ears, but well written, polite, and to the point. Unfortunately, the antis will continue to do whatever they can, including trying to redefine what a "handgun" is, exactly as they have defined "assault weapon", just to try to make more laws, which do nothing to control crime. Too bad being a politician doesen't have a pre-requisite of having a brain.

Former Seller: kats(438-0-0) Post#9 - Posted: 06/29/2008 at 13:38:44
(no avatar) Petes - I know what you mean...

The more I looked at that web site the more pissed I got...

Buyer: spikedmike(9-0-0) Post#10 - Posted: 07/02/2008 at 10:24:15
(no avatar) WON WHAT???????? Anybody now notice (as of the July 1st laws) NO CALIFORNIA SALES ??? NUFF SAID

Former Seller: kats(438-0-0) Post#11 - Posted: 07/02/2008 at 22:47:45
(no avatar) spikedmike - where did you get this from 'NO CALIFORNIA SALES'?

CA has a new law into effect on 7/1/2008 which requires any FFL to get an approval before shipping a firearm into CA or within CA.

There are some dealers that are refussing to sell to CA residents as a result of that - but I've not heard of anything banning sales in CA.

Former Seller: ELDORADO 1(221-0-0) Post#12 - Posted: 07/03/2008 at 01:43:04
(no avatar) ksts....He didn't say anything about banning sales. He is refering to dealers like myself that refuse to conspire with them in this violation of the Constitution.

Go to one of my auctions and you will see what he is refering to.

Former Seller: kats(438-0-0) Post#13 - Posted: 07/03/2008 at 08:29:34
(no avatar) eldorado1 - Thanks for your interpretation of 'Anybody now notice (as of the July 1st laws) NO CALIFORNIA SALES ??? NUFF SAID'.

Now that you bring that up - I can see that. That's what I get for responding to stuff when I'm ready for a nap.

Former Seller: Hagrid(23-0-0) Post#14 - Posted: 07/04/2008 at 16:07:45
Hagrid Seems like Tom of Petesguns and I are the only ones who think the SJC sold us down the river. They left so much unsaid that they might have well said nothing. they ruled that the 2nd is an individual right. and that DC' ban was unconstitutional period.Then they spoke out the other side of their mouths and declared the State and Local govts can regulate firearms. So what they gave they took away. DCs new regs are just the tip of the iceberg.They will throw everything they can at us and do so legally because the SJC said they could. They cannot reverse themselves and they will allow liberal courts such as Cal and mass decide whos is to have what kind of gun when they think it is convient for the state. I predict that the laws we have here in mass will spread through out the land and saftey regs and 10lb trigger pull requirements and cocking indicators and no semi-autos and no semi-auto shotguns. Sound familiar? Try checking out Austrailia. They melted down millions of hunting arms in the name of public saftey. Thanks for nothing. Trapper

Former Seller: Petesguns(787-0-0) Post#15 - Posted: 07/04/2008 at 16:47:50
Petesguns Come on Trapper, tell us what you REALLY think! Actually, it was good to see the decision in our "favor", but I agree that they left the door open. I also fear that we will see little net gain from this, though, I always HOPE we do. I guess that I feel this way from years of having our rights eroded away one at a time in Massholeachusetts. BUT, one can always hope. I sincerely hope Elitist is correct in his assessment, but as a former resident of, and still a shop owner in Stalag MA, I expect more of the same.

(Beginning)   (Go Back 10 Posts)   (Next 10 Posts)   (Ending)