NRA Warns Members That Confiscation Could Be Next | TPMMuckraker
Because regardless of what we liberals say, we really want to take all your guns and turn you into slaves--well, just before we load you into railroad cars to ship to concentration camps.
Yep. Reasonable. Sane. That's your NRA
6 comments:
I read the NRA letter and it seemed as panicky as most of their stuff, but I didn't see anything about turning people into slaves. As for confiscation, look at the some of the proposed legislation. That is in it. I doubt it would pass, but to say it hasn't been considered is not true.
Is there a grandfather clause (GFC) in this "ban" too that would allow existing owners to keep them? Wasn't there a GFC in the last one, which sounds like it made it kinda pointless.
I do believe it has a limited grandfather clause. As for bills related to giving up guns, this was introduced last week:
HR 226 IH
113th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 226
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a credit against tax for surrendering to authorities certain assault weapons.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
January 14, 2013
Ms. DELAURO (for herself and Mr. GRIJALVA) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means
Oops, that last post was me.
Ok. Like you I don't think that will pass, but the letter seemed to imply that we liberals wanted to take away all your guns, not just the ones being banned. That is their message, isn't it? That we hate the second amendment and want to ban all guns?
I will concede there is some confiscation discussion, but again, I don't see much in the NRA's position that is about reason.
There was a bill in Massachusetts introduced that would require "assault weapons" to be stored at some type of police facility where the owner wold be allowed to check it out. I agree that not all liberals want to confiscate all the guns, but some do. I would rather the NRA not be so much like Chicken Little, but that is better than ignoring it.
Post a Comment