The Liberal Gun Club Forum

Sorry I haven't learned to link to articles but in Slate Magazine there is and article by Eliot Spitzer on how Pres. Obama could institute gun control without congress. He could declare that any company that sold semi-automatics or large capacity magazines to civilians would be barred from doing business with the federal government and state and local government that sign on. Interesting. That is why I am liberal philosophically but suspicious of liberal politicians. I know liberals who a few years back tried to ban the sale of ammunition that could be used in handguns using public health laws citing accidental shootings.

beto wrote:Sorry I haven't learned to link to articles but in Slate Magazine there is and article by Eliot Spitzer on how Pres. Obama could institute gun control without congress. He could declare that any company that sold semi-automatics or large capacity magazines to civilians would be barred from doing business with the federal government and state and local government that sign on. Interesting. That is why I am liberal philosophically but suspicious of liberal politicians. I know liberals who a few years back tried to ban the sale of ammunition that could be used in handguns using public health laws citing accidental shootings.

And I could have Brussels sprouts for breakfast tomorrow (but that isn't apt to happen, either).

Gun confiscation = a blood bath, politicians know how crazy the right wing is, and they know there's 270 million guns out there. they aren't stupid. So any reform to stop the sale of weapons is going to be nothing more than token, because it won't work without confiscation.

Ammunition on the other hand... That'd be a way to choke the industry ... if they weren't so afraid of the NRA.

My point is be alert or be blind sided. The anti-gun lobby will try anything. So far they have failed. But in the future -----? We have to let liberal politicians know we exist but we do have issues.

beto wrote:My point is be alert or be blind sided. The anti-gun lobby will try anything. So far they have failed. But in the future -----? We have to let liberal politicians know we exist but we do have issues.

Nah, politicians are fully bought out. Letting the proletariat have their weapons makes them feel safe, and in control. So until you start seeing the owning class actually being threatened by guns, our guns are safe. It's a corporate raid, not some evil fascist plan. Their actions may be evil, but they aren't evil for evil's sake they are evil for greeds sake. And targeting gun owners means nothing, actually it means cutting into the profits of a lot of gun manufacturers. So they'll be more apt to protect gun ownership, than fight it.

beto wrote:Sorry I haven't learned to link to articles but in Slate Magazine ...

Highlight the url the article is on...copy it...hit the "URL" button in the menu bar above the dialogue box and paste the copied url in-between the brackets...


Obama can do a lot of things; listening to Spitzer isn't likely to be one of them.

The firearms industry creates how many jobs? They bring in how much revenue into the state coffers? Destroying that industry will reflect positively on this administration how?

The article in question is from 2009. Here is the link:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_ ... _laws.html

In the article, Spitzer makes the point that Obama can affect some measure of gun control by refusing to buy from companies who also sell to criminals. That is a one sentence condensation, omitting details.

While I agree this is possible, I don't think Obama will take this route. I think he will concentrate more on background checks as he rolls out very mild suggestions.

CDFingers

CDFingers wrote: In the article, Spitzer makes the point that Obama can affect some measure of gun control by refusing to buy from companies who also sell to criminals.

(Emphasis added.)

Thank you for that explanation.

I thought selling to criminals was already illegal. So it seems to me the reason which would enable Obama to refuse to buy from those companies would already allow for criminal charges.

Ah. I get it! This strategy would avoid the courts and the need to prove anything. So Obama could refuse to buy from those companies he just happens to not like, for whatever reason, even if it has nothing to do with "selling to criminals." This is actually brilliant: the president could arbitrarily regulate a market but do it under the guise of "who will think of the children."

Thanks for the URL information. I didn't realize the article was from 2009 as it was one high-lighted in last nights Slate. It is still there and the article states they could stop sales of semi automatics to civilians not just criminals. He may have modified his 2009 article. I agree that this is unlikely now but prior to Ronnie the clown Regan I thought moderate conservatives dominated the Republicans and people like Bachman (sp) would be sitting on the fringes not in congress. Unfortunately we have to depend on The NRA to defend or rights. The NRA turns off moderates and liberals who might become interested in shooting sports , I know it did me. The democrats do not have to cater to the NRA except in a few districts. They know they won't get their votes. If we do have another landslide election for the Dems RKBA will be in danger. We must get active on the local level so some politicians are looking over their shoulder at us. I agree that severe restrictions on the firearm industry would hurt the economy, but look at congress and tell me that they act rationally.

beto wrote:We must get active on the local level so some politicians are looking over their shoulder at us.

Get active in your local Democratic Party. Wear your LGC shirt and cap to meetings. Be mellow but visible and always willing to help do grunt work - your opinion will start to count. (You'd be amazed at how many brownie points one acquires by showing up with a pick-up truck to haul yard signs. Don't forget the LGC shirt and cap.)

We must then organize at that local level

There's some recent commentary on the Volokh Conspiracy:

http://www.volokh.com/2012/08/08/elliot ... urchasers/

http://www.volokh.com/2012/08/08/oddly- ... t-spitzer/

Eugene Volokh is an interesting character. Worth a read, IMO.

Sebudei

Sebudei wrote:There's some recent commentary on the Volokh Conspiracy:

http://www.volokh.com/2012/08/08/elliot ... urchasers/

http://www.volokh.com/2012/08/08/oddly- ... t-spitzer/

Eugene Volokh is an interesting character. Worth a read, IMO.

Sebudei

The article makes a good point. Spitzer overestimates the impact of the federal gov. and New York. I am sure their are manufacturers that sell to neither and would just ramp up production. There might even manufacturers that would drop their government contracts to pursue the more lucrative civilian market ------ maybe they should try it and watch it backfire