Thursday, October 19, 2006

Dems in Power

Election time is drawing close in the States and Kim du Toit has a reminder of just what is at stake if you're a hunter, survivalist (and want to have a stockpile of weapons or ammo for instance), paintballer, airsofter or just plain gun owner- Handgun Control Inc's wish-list. It makes for some pretty scary reading. As he points out the Republicans have not endeared themselves to their base recently but the prospect of Republicans staying home and not voting, or protest voting for someone else, would mean a Democrat win- and if you think that a Republican leadership was bad, then you're in for some nightmare times under the Dems. And at this critical juncture in the war on terrorism, a Democrat win would seriously embolden the enemies of the West. Don't believe me? Watch this and think on that this will be the mindset of those with a majority.

Anyway, here's the Brady Bunch's list- spread it around.

1. National Licensing of all handgun purchases.
2. Licenses for Rifle and Shotgun owners.
3. State Licenses for ownership of firearms.
4. Arsenal Licenses (5 guns and 250 rounds of ammunition).
5. Arsenal License Fees (at least $300.00, with a cap of $1,000.00).
6. Limits on Arsenal Licensing (None in counties with populations of more than 200,000).
7. Requirement of Federally Approved Storage Safes for all guns.
8. Inspection License. (Gun safe licenses, yearly fee for spot inspections).
9. Ban on Manufacturing in counties with a population of more than 200,000.
10. Banning all military style firearms.
11. Banning Machine Gun Parts or parts which can be used in a Machine gun.
12. Banning the carrying a firearm anywhere but home or target range or in transit from one
to the other.
13. Banning replacement parts (manufacturing, sale, possession, transfer, installation) except
barrel, trigger group.
14. Elimination of the Curio Relic list.
15. Control of Ammunition belonging to Certain Surplus Firearms. (7.62x54R and .303).
16. Eventual Ban of Handgun Possession..
17. Banning of Any ammo that fits military guns (post 1945).
18. Banning of any quantity of smokeless powder or black powder which would constitute
more than the equivalent of 100 rounds of ammunition.
19. Ban the possession of explosive powders of more than 1 kg. at any one time.
20. Banning of High Powered Ammo or Wounding ammo.
21. A National License for Ammunition.
22. Banning or strict licensing of all re-loading components.
23. National Registration of ammunition or ammo buyers.
24. Requirements of special storage safe for ammunition and licensing.
25. Restricting Gun Ranges to counties with populations less than 200,000.
26. Special Licensing of ranges.
27. Special Range Tax to visitors. ($85.00 per visit per person).
28. Waiting period for rentals on pistol ranges.
29. Banning Gun Shows.
30. Banning of military reenactments.


Ban of all clips holding over 6 bullets.
Elimination of the Dept. of Civilian Marksmanship.
Ban on all realistic replica and toy guns (including “air soft” and paintball).
The right of gun-violence victims to sue, with financial assistance from government programs,
the gun manufacturers.
Taxes on ammo, dealers, guns, licenses to offset medical costs to society.
The eventual ban on all semi-automatics regardless of when made or caliber.


R.J. said...

A disturbing list, Cryptic, as is the clip with Charlie Rangell. Yet, with this new Military Comissions law, doesn't the President get to say who is an "enemy combatant"? Could that not include American citizens who criticize the gov't? If so, President Bush just destroyed the entire Bill of Rights.

Jay.Mac said...

I doubt very much if any government- Bush's or whoever replaces him- would last for long if they started using the military tribunals to silence their critics. I'm not sure is the law is a good idea or not but the simple fact is that if groups like the ACLU hadn't tried to provide the same legal guarantees that American citizens have to foreign born enemy fighters captured during trying to kill American soliders and civilians then this law wouldn't have been considered. In past conflicts captured enemy figthers were held- without recourse to the courts- for the duration of the conflict. We didn't try to give German or Japanese soldiers trials to see if they really should be held prisoner- why do the same to Al Qaeda and co, groups that do not fight by the rules of law?