Shotgun Forum banner

Will guns be taken from us?

6454 Views 62 Replies 18 Participants Last post by  8PointDuck
All I can say is this, people keep giving up freedoms for a sense of more security, and if this keeps going, the government is going to want to take guns from people as a sign that they are making the people feel secure. I feel more secure knowing that I have shotguns and handguns and can use them to defend myself, as if only the government has them, we are all doomed. I say this, we as law abiding citizens who love our right to keep and bear arms, must stick together and make a stand against the enemies of the second amendment. I can't understand why a right that has been granted to us for over 200 years, is on the brink of possible destruction now? What can one individual do to make a stand? I am sorry to sound dumb, but I really want to be able to keep this right, so I can someday pass my guns onto my kids to enjoy them the way I have.

"If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns"
1 - 20 of 63 Posts
National Rifle Association

Give what you can
Volunteer for the NRA-ILA
They won't be taken from us if we are vigilant.

If the gov't were to attempt it, then the very purpose for the Second Amendment will come into play, remove a tyrannical gov't from power.

Believe it or not, there are other Rights enumerated ,they were not granted BTW, that are in more danger of being infringed than the Second. We cannot focus on just one or two Rights, they all depend on each other for their survival
You probably don't want to hear this but pro-gun democrats like myself are becoming quite common and the people we hang out with have become very accepting of guns.All my friends were surprised when I finally told them that I hunt and shoot and they said "but you're a democrat" after talking to them they understood why I love it so much and now they want me to take them shooting! so like marland said if we remain vigilant they can't do anything.But if we also remain calm even in a heated political discussion, I believe we eventually can dispell the myth that all gun owners are ultra right-wing emotional hot-headed red-necks that was given to the public by misinformed anti-gunpeople and reclaim shooting as it truly is a gentlemen's (and ladies) sport to be enjoyed by all Forever.
This is the first time I have logged on to this forum. It seemed like a good place for me to ask this question that has been on my mind for quite a while. Is there any good resource that any of you are aware of that I can use to become more informed on what each candidate represents. I am definately a pro-gun guy, but that is not the only thing that matters to me. So I would like to know of a good way that I can find out what each of the candidates will do to protect the rights that I believe in, but I don't know of any good ways to do this.
A good place to start would be

They have a database recording representative votes on gun issues. The votes speak for themselves. :)

Also, I would suggest donating to GOA rather than the NRA. The NRA has made it their business to preserve gun control rather than restore our rights. It is apart of the machine. GOA on the other hand does not compromise. Just my 2.
If the Democrats continue to espouse their extreme socialist
agenda, they will certainly do all they can to disarm America.
I believe that a majority of Americans can easily see through
the elitist agenda of the Democrats and I for one will do all I can to make sure they feel our pain in each and every election
as long as they stand against the Constitution that I risked my life to defend.
We democrats don't want to take guns away. (though some do and quite a few republicans want guns taken away)
And we do not stand "against" the Constitution. What your saying is just right-wing nonsense.
Democrats against guns. Not nearly as many as you think.
I refer you to Louisiana's governor.
It is people like you 20ga that give many good republicans a bad name.
Not all democrats are Anti-gun, but I suggest that there is a far larger percentage of Dems spouting anti-gun rhetoric than republicans.

PH, I'm glad that you enjoy fireamrs, and I hope you take as many of your anti-gun friends as you can hunting with you. This isnt really a dem vs rep arguement. It is more of a liberal vs conservative issue. However, if you want to have zero confusion while discussing gun control, the correct phrasing would be anti-gun and pro-gun.

Please try to be as concise as possible in these debates. We don't want to offend somebody like PH who will soon be changing his voter affiliation.

This may be a little premature, but it is inevitable ...

Pigeonhunter, Welcome the party of Abraham Lincoln!!!
Pigeonhunter, if you think you are a Jeffersonian Democrat...your side surrendered at Appomatox in 1865!
You need to check in with the 2003 Democrats...especially in your state of California. You and half a dozen Democrats do not
seem to have any impact on the movers and shakers in the DNC...I wish it wasn't so.
Pigeonhunter: How in the world can you state that Democrats don't want to take away our guns?! :shock:

Every anti-gun bill I've ever seen has been sponsored by Democrats. Feinstein, Schumer, McCarthy, Kennedy, Rangel, Conyers, Clinton, Nusbaum, Waxman, Daly, etc., etc., are all Democrats that are vehemently anti-gun.

I, uniquely, have about the only openly pro-gun Democratic Congressional Representative in the USA. His name is John Dingell and he is a life member of the NRA. I simply can't name another pro-gun Democrat!!

The facts are so obvious that I can't believe you think that Democrats want to allow private firearms ownership. They are CLEARLY against private firearms ownership.

What in the world makes you think that I'm wrong?! I sincerely have to admit that your statement is one of the most ridiculous I've ever heard. :eek: One of us is living on another planet.
See less See more

This is a very difficult issue, let me just say that I have my problems with the current assault rifle bill. I think that it is too vague and bans too many things. But I am not against banning assault rifles if it could be proved to me that the legislation was effective. After all we ban full auto guns don't we?

I think that many of the people on these boards fundamentally believe that any attempt at gun control is part of a long term effort to take their guns. Neither side offers the least possiblility of compromise.

I disagree with your statement that "The facts are so obvious that I can't believe you think that Democrats want to allow private firearms ownership. They are CLEARLY against private firearms ownership."

This is not the black and white issue that so many people paint it to be. Many non gun owners want assault weapons and handguns off the street. Since I bought a shotgun I have informally polled my coworkers and friends about gun ownership. I am lucky to know people from many countries, with a number of beliefs. I know a vehemently liberal lawyer for the city of Chicago, and 2 of the most conservative Republicans in Illinois. Nobody wanted to prohibit private firearms ownership other than handguns and assault rifles.

Non gun owners may not like hunting but nobody wanted to ban it. This is not a statisticaly valid poll, but it is interesting to get these results in one of the most liberal citys in America.

Is this message getting through to the democratic leadership? I don't know. I do know that banning assault rifles and banning private gun ownership are two different issues that may or may not have the same result.


Mark Trulock
See less See more
Define assault weapon.

Ban handguns? Why? In EVERY state that has implemented concealed carry crime has gone down, concealing a shotgun is really hard.
Besides banning handguns will not stop criminals from getting them. It's a feel good measure cried for by those who do not understand the issues or implications.

"Define assault weapon"

An AK47, M16 etc. or the variants thereof. Something that can be quickly converted to full auto and that fires large magazines. Not an M1 garrand for example, or something with a pistol grip, or barrel shroud or whatever.

I did not advocate banning handguns. I reported that the people that I spoke to suggested it. This does not make them the enemy, as many of the people on these boards would suggest. It means that they have a difference of opinion with you. It seems like a good idea to non gun owners to remove or restrict handguns from a society with the largest number of deaths per year from handguns.

"In EVERY state that has implemented concealed carry crime has gone down" The crime rate has gone down every year in Chicago too, but a average private citizen has not been able to legally purchase a handgun here in 20 years. I am not comfortable with the statistics used by the NRA or gun control lobbies. I don't know if there is any objective group left out there.

I'm not advocating gun control, because frankly I am not sure that it works. I'm saying that this is a more complex issue than most give it credit for.


See less See more
I don't believe that the US government will completly ban private ownership of firearms. There are those in Washington that would like to (Dem. or Rep. it matters not), but the fact is that action would spark an uprising that no politician in their right mind would want to deal with.

The problem with our system of representation is that the extreamists usually voice their opinions louder than the moderates. It doesn't matter if these extreamists are liberal or conservative, any action taken to an extream brings about negative results. Moderates however, do not yell, shout, or protest by negative means resulting in a very quiet platform. If you want to make a difference in the leadership of our government, vote. We can't complain about the way things are if we don't first do something to make a difference. I'm not old enough to vote yet, but believe me I will as soon as can.

As far as Democrats banning private ownership of firearms, I know plenty of Democrats and most of them own firearms and hunt regularly. I agree with AG, the proper phrasing should be "Liberals vs. Conservatives" or "Pro-Gun Control vs. Anti-Gun Control". Not all Demorats are Liberals, but many are.
See less See more
Mark , I did not say you advocated banning handguns. Did I? I merely expressed an opinion.

I would not believe Daley's statistics about crime going down too much either he's the most anti-gun mayor around and has to combat the statistics given by the cities of other states. my statistics do not come from the NRA, I support their lobby but think LaPierre is a self-serving ego-maniac.

You want to know one reason why crime is going down in Chicago? it's vouchers to move those displaced by government housing closures. In my area crime is rising, especially gang crime because the local big town mayor made some sort of aggreement for section 8 housing. We've got a huge complex here just for Chicago transplants so does a half a dozen other small cities. And they get paid to move here.

Oh and your definition of Assault weapon is flawed, it has nothing to do with converting to fully auto, that was covered in 1934. no, it's about guns that look "military" , no where in the "assault weapons" ban is full-auto mentioned.
See less See more
Hi Marland

Thanks for your views. This issue has been bothering me for a while. I keep thinking that I should have some important input in the discussion because I live in Chicago, an anti-gun city and that I'm new to gun ownership. Maybe LaPierre is not the only ego-maniac around.

I know my definition of assault weapons is flawed, so is the most current version of the assault weapons ban in the house of representatives.

Well it time to go back to the best shotgun deals section. I'm trying to convince my wife that I should pick up a wingmaster so I can take her or my buddy with me trapshooting.


Mark Trulock
See less See more
Mark, I asked the definition question earlier sort of as a trick question , sort of as a trap. Too many do not know , other than what they read in the papers, what is what. The saddest part is you cannot fully trust the information sources from either side of an arguement.

Good luck on the Wingmaster
Murphy here-
Oldskoolfattieg posted this earlier. I don't know if it helps or not.

HR 2038 IH


1st Session

H. R. 2038
To reauthorize the assault weapons ban, and for other purposes.


May 8, 2003
Mrs. MCCARTHY of New York (for herself, Mr. SHAYS, Mr. CONYERS, Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mr. NADLER, Ms. LOFGREN, Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas, Ms. WATERS, Mr. MEEHAN, Mr. DELAHUNT, Mr. WEXLER, Mr. WEINER, Ms. LINDA T. SANCHEZ of California, Mr. EMANUEL, Mr. CASE, Mrs. MALONEY, Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida, Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island, Mr. RANGEL, Ms. WOOLSEY, Mr. ACKERMAN, Ms. SCHAKOWSKY, Mr. HONDA, Mr. STARK, Ms. SOLIS, Ms. LEE, Mr. VAN HOLLEN, Mr. WAXMAN, Mr. TOWNS, Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD, Mr. GRIJALVA, Ms. CARSON of Indiana, Ms. NORTON, Mr. LIPINSKI, Mr. RUSH, Ms. WATSON, Mr. DAVIS of Illinois, Mr. LEWIS of Georgia, Mr. JACKSON of Illinois, Mr. GUTIERREZ, Mr. OWENS, Mr. BLUMENAUER, Mr. CUMMINGS, Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas, Mr. FARR, Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ of California, Mr. MORAN of Virginia, Mr. MARKEY, Mr. ANDREWS, Mr. HOLT, Mr. PAYNE, Mr. MCGOVERN, Mr. PASCRELL, Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts, Mrs. TAUSCHER, Ms. DELAURO, Mr. ENGEL, Mr. CAPUANO, Mr. HOEFFEL, Mrs. LOWEY, Mr. MENENDEZ, Ms. VELAZQUEZ, Mr. TIERNEY, Mr. BRADY of Pennsylvania, Mr. ROTHMAN, Mr. FATTAH, Ms. HARMAN, Mr. BISHOP of New York, and Mr. LANGEVIN) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary


To reauthorize the assault weapons ban, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,


This Act may be cited as the `Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2003'.


(a) IN GENERAL- Section 921(a)(30) of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

`(30) The term `semiautomatic assault weapon' means any of the following:

`(A) The following rifles or copies or duplicates thereof:

`(i) AK, AKM, AKS, AK-47, AK-74, ARM, MAK90, Misr, NHM 90, NHM 91, SA 85, SA 93, VEPR;

`(ii) AR-10;

`(iii) AR-15, Bushmaster XM15, Armalite M15, or Olympic Arms PCR;

`(iv) AR70;

`(v) Calico Liberty;

`(vi) Dragunov SVD Sniper Rifle or Dragunov SVU;

`(vii) Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, or FNC;

`(viii) Hi-Point Carbine;

`(ix) HK-91, HK-93, HK-94, or HK-PSG-1;

`(x) Kel-Tec Sub Rifle;

`(xi) M1 Carbine;

`(xii) Saiga;

`(xiii) SAR-8, SAR-4800;

`(xiv) SKS with detachable magazine;

`(xv) SLG 95;

`(xvi) SLR 95 or 96;

`(xvii) Steyr AUG;

`(xviii) Sturm, Ruger Mini-14;

`(xix) Tavor;

`(xx) Thompson 1927, Thompson M1, or Thompson 1927 Commando; or

`(xxi) Uzi, Galil and Uzi Sporter, Galil Sporter, or Galil Sniper Rifle (Galatz).

`( The following pistols or copies or duplicates thereof:

`(i) Calico M-110;

`(ii) MAC-10, MAC-11, or MPA3;

`(iii) Olympic Arms OA;

`(iv) TEC-9, TEC-DC9, TEC-22 Scorpion, or AB-10; or

`(v) Uzi.

`© The following shotguns or copies or duplicates thereof:

`(i) Armscor 30 BG;

`(ii) SPAS 12 or LAW 12;

`(iii) Striker 12; or

`(iv) Streetsweeper.

`(D) A semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine, and that has--

`(i) a folding or telescoping stock;

`(ii) a threaded barrel;

`(iii) a pistol grip;

`(iv) a forward grip; or

`(v) a barrel shroud.

`(E)(i) Except as provided in clause (ii), a semiautomatic rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.

`(ii) Clause (i) shall not apply to an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.

`(F) A semiautomatic pistol that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine, and has--

`(i) a second pistol grip;

`(ii) a threaded barrel;

`(iii) a barrel shroud; or

`(iv) the capacity to accept a detachable magazine at a location outside of the pistol grip.

`(G) A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.

`(H) A semiautomatic shotgun that has--

`(i) a folding or telescoping stock;

`(ii) a pistol grip;

`(iii) the ability to accept a detachable magazine; or

`(iv) a fixed magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds.

`(I) A shotgun with a revolving cylinder.

`(J) A frame or receiver that is identical to, or based substantially on the frame or receiver of, a firearm described in any of subparagraphs (A) through (I) or (L).

`(K) A conversion kit.

`(L) A semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General. In making the determination, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any Federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.'.
( RELATED DEFINITIONS- Section 921(a) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(36) BARREL SHROUD- The term `barrel shroud' means a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel of a firearm so that the shroud protects the user of the firearm from heat generated by the barrel, but does not include a slide that encloses the barrel, and does not include an extension of the stock along the bottom of the barrel which does not encircle or substantially encircle the barrel.

`(37) CONVERSION KIT- The term `conversion kit' means any part or combination of parts designed and intended for use in converting a firearm into a semiautomatic assault weapon, and any combination of parts from which a semiautomatic assault weapon can be assembled if the parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.

`(3 DETACHABLE MAGAZINE- The term `detachable magazine' means an ammunition feeding device that can readily be inserted into a firearm.

`(39) FIXED MAGAZINE- The term `fixed magazine' means an ammunition feeding device contained in, or permanently attached to, a firearm.

`(40) FOLDING OR TELESCOPING STOCK- The term `folding or telescoping stock' means a stock that folds, telescopes, or otherwise operates to reduce the length, size, or any other dimension, or otherwise enhances the concealability, of a firearm.

`(41) FORWARD GRIP- The term `forward grip' means a grip located forward of the trigger that functions as a pistol grip.

`(42) PISTOL GRIP- The term `pistol grip' means a grip, a thumbhole stock, or any other characteristic that can function as a grip.

`(43) THREADED BARREL- The term `threaded barrel' means a feature or characteristic that is designed in such a manner to allow for the attachment of a firearm as defined in section 5845(a) of the National Firearms Act (26 U.S.C. 5845(a)).'.


Section 110105 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 is amended--

(1) by striking `--' and all that follows through `(1)'; and

(2) by striking `; and' and all that follows through `that date'
Guys: Your posts are great. I know a lot of individual Democrats own guns and don't want them prohibited. However, the facts clearly indicate that the Democratic leadership is vehemently anti-gun. It's just that simple. Don't fight the facts. It is a Democrat v. Republican issue.

I honestly believe that the assault weapons ban was just the beginning of what the anti-gunners really want - complete gun prohibition. Just ask Josh Sugarman, who has been very influential in anti-gun matters. (He was/is the head of the Violence Policy Center, a group devoted vehemently to anti-gun leglislation.) One of his quotes indicated that that was one of the primary intents of the ban.

The anti-gunners that were instrumental in passing the assualt weapons ban would have loved a total ban on ALL semi-automatic firearms as well as handguns. Then they would have turned to passing leglislation that would eventually prohibit ANY firearms ownership in the USA.

Even Bill Clinton blamed the anti-gun regulations of 1994 for Democrats losing the majority in the House of Reps. They've never recovered that majority either.
See less See more
1 - 20 of 63 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.