this could be abused so easily it's stupid to deny it.

another trojan horse from the left.

The terrorist watchlist issue is a trojan horse.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jun/15/charles-schumer/charles-schumer-terror-watch-list-buy-guns-got-the/

"A 2009 U.S. Justice Department audit showed that 35 percent of the people on the list were "associated with FBI cases that did not contain current international terrorist or domestic terrorism designations" and should have been removed from the list.

There also are multiple entries for slight variations of the same name, which means people with the same name as a person on the watch list were stopped at airports, a problem that experts say has largely been resolved."

So, our INjustice dept, and the political hack lynch, as well as holder... who the hell doesn't

think all...NRA members would be "temporarily" added to the list? Anybody who disagrees with

gay "marriage" added to the list? All combat veterans, all veterans...added to the list?

Tour, you can't possible be serious if you think that isn't a worry. Once you cross the line

of leftist gov control over the 2nd Amendment, this corrupt gov would do just that.

who should not have them.

Confiscation hasn't happned here, because we have our 2nd Amendment. And I'm talking national outlawing of owning

guns.

That's world history, obviously. But history does tend to repeat itself. We already have Sotomeier sp? who is ardently

anti-2nd Amendment, and ginsburg, the low information liberal supreme court hack, who is, too.

In our history, the Constitution delineates ABSOLUTELY, our rights to free speech and to bear arms..

and the rest of our Constitutional rights.

And "victimization/political correctness, as well as giving up the internet, and legalization

of prosecution for ....using freedom of legit speech... is happening.

On guns, higgardly has openly favored the Australian national gun ban.

That is the point.

And, the left has spoken of ALL veterans, ALL the elderly, as suspect to not own guns.

Like mud seeping through the cracks, the left (that's you, higgardly guy), the left dreams

of having the power to put all gun owners on the defensive. Which has nothing to do with

the real problem criminal activity.

Universal registration is absolutely a double edged sword, so spare us a few examples where it

came in handy.

In our history, cal? The USA's history? Forgive me if citing the Weimar Republic, Ottoman Empire or some other foreign history does not impress me.

Googling "History of Mass US Gun Confiscations" or minor variations turns up reputable sources citing:

• a post-Katrina, NOLA example of citizens who were "in the streets" carrying in violation of an emergency ordinance, but no reference to registration info was referenced except in the ultimate, court-ordered return of the guns;
• a California law where registration info is used to seize arms from newly disqualified owners, e.g., "... a gun owner who’d recently spent two days in a mental hospital;" apparently NY state adopted a similar law in 2013; and
• a NYC effort to enforce a 2012 law banning the ownership of "... shotguns and rifles capable of holding more than five rounds;" notifications were sent to owners for the guns to be "...surrendered, altered or taken out of the city"; they were mailing 500 reminders at the end of 2013 to those who had not yet surrendered or given notice that they had complied.

That's it...

Universal registration is the gov knowing where all guns are. Just like the publication of names and addresses,

which is an arrogant, dangerous, vindictive toward gun owners move,

anybody with any sense can figure if the anti-gun fascists have universal background checks,

they WILL use that to intimidate, harrass, and outlaw gun owners.

Nobody with any common sense at all can dispute that.

Criminals do illegally buy guns. No doubt about it. But why not insure that ethical sellers cannot unknowingly sell to criminals?

NRA is for keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill. As I understand it their proposed means is to create a data base of the mentally ill. Setting aside the privacy issues that approach raises, how does that work without universal background checks? What happens in cases were ownership precedes illness?

For the record I also favor nationwide gun registration... shocker I am sure. I can favor this as I do not fear "mass confiscation by a tyrannical government". All I can see is the good stemming from the traceability that it allows.

Want to give a gun to a son or daughter without them going through a background check? OK... just file to transfer the registration as a gift and not a sale and retain responsibility in the event of any future misuse of the weapon.

waiting for it to fill it's own magazine by itself, and go out and kill republicans.

But it just kept sitting there in his closet, he became enraged, and turned it in

to a a liberal city gun buyback for program for a cheeseburger.

@westside-steve said:

I have no real problem with background checks as ineffectual as I am positive they will be. The downside? The slippery slope of course every inch the left can take toward confiscation will be utilized. Much like restrictions on abortion. But...

WSS

Yes the unintended consequences of trying to fix one problem and creating other problems that might be worse than the original problem. ....and sometimes irreversible.

private owners, even shotguns, semi-auto .22's ("assault weapons for the liberal stupids),

you won't be able to hand down your guns to your kids, or sell them to another private person

you know.

They registered guns in NY , and the asswipe liberals published all names and addresses

in the newspaper.

Anybody not see the problem with that? Anybody think that "keeps the guns out of the hands of criminals" ?

More gun control has nothing to do with criminals. Real criminals don't follow the law. Even Tour should

stop and think about that, since obviously, gun control simpleton emotional knee jerkies don't.

WSS

that he's a conservative because he knows how to assemble a gun. Emotional triggers for democratic

emotional knee jerk voters. He supports runaway corruption in gov - supports higgardly. nah

****************************************************************

In addition to Castle Doctrine expansion, HB668 also lowered Missouri’s concealed carry age from 23 to 21. Kander was a vote against that age reduction. Although Kander cites a 2011 vote to lower the CCW age from 23 to 21 for Missourians and to 18 for military members, he doesn’t tell you that he voted against it in 2009 before he voted for it. This is a typical politician looking to have it both ways, and it is behavior that voters are fed up with.

In 2014, Kander did not support Amendment 5, The Missouri Right to Bear Arms. He failed to publicly support Missouri gun owners who overwhelmingly voted Yes on Amendment 5 and supported enshrining their Second Amend rights against the anti-gun policies of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

Jason Kander has endorsed Hillary Clinton for president, which means he will vote to confirm her anti-gun Supreme Court nominees. It also means that he has endorsed a presidential candidate who said the Supreme Court got it wrong on the Second Amendment with their landmark Heller ruling, said that an Australia style gun confiscation system is worth looking at and has equated the NRA with Iranians and communists by calling us her enemy.

He supports “universal” background checks, which will only work if accompanied by a national gun registry.

He refused to fill out the NRA-PVF candidate questionnaire regarding his views on the Second Amendment.

and is a liberal.

pro abortion? anti-castle doctrine?

nah.

http://www.guns.com/2016/09/16/shots-fired-nra-doubles-down-on-attack-against-kander-2a-record/