"Pause for Safety" gun confiscation act

[VMI77]

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/0 ... cate-guns/

BREAKING: Dianne Feinstein Introduces Federal Bill to Confiscate Guns
By Nick Leghorn on June 6, 2014

Dianne Feinstein and friend (courtesy humanevents.com)

We all saw this one coming. Two weeks after Elliot Roger stabbed three people and shot three more, a trio of legislators from California (including Dianne Feinstein) have proposed a new federal law called “The Pause for Safety Act” which would allow anyone at any time to seek a “firearms restraining order” against an individual to prevent them from purchasing any new firearms and also confiscate any firearms they may already own. From Barbara Boxer’s website, here are the details we have at the moment:

[anygunanywhere]

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/0 ... cate-guns/

BREAKING: Dianne Feinstein Introduces Federal Bill to Confiscate Guns
By Nick Leghorn on June 6, 2014

Dianne Feinstein and friend (courtesy humanevents.com)

We all saw this one coming. Two weeks after Elliot Roger stabbed three people and shot three more, a trio of legislators from California (including Dianne Feinstein) have proposed a new federal law called “The Pause for Safety Act” which would allow anyone at any time to seek a “firearms restraining order” against an individual to prevent them from purchasing any new firearms and also confiscate any firearms they may already own. From Barbara Boxer’s website, here are the details we have at the moment:

They will continue until one way or another they succeed in their goal. Whether it be by legislation or executive order, it will happen. It is inevitable.

Anygunanywhere

[Purplehood]

It should be modeled on the Politically Incorrect Language restraining order that is already in effect.

[mamabearCali]

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/0 ... cate-guns/

BREAKING: Dianne Feinstein Introduces Federal Bill to Confiscate Guns
By Nick Leghorn on June 6, 2014

Dianne Feinstein and friend (courtesy humanevents.com)

We all saw this one coming. Two weeks after Elliot Roger stabbed three people and shot three more, a trio of legislators from California (including Dianne Feinstein) have proposed a new federal law called “The Pause for Safety Act” which would allow anyone at any time to seek a “firearms restraining order” against an individual to prevent them from purchasing any new firearms and also confiscate any firearms they may already own. From Barbara Boxer’s website, here are the details we have at the moment:

They will continue until one way or another they succeed in their goal. Whether it be by legislation or executive order, it will happen. It is inevitable.

Anygunanywhere

At which point they will violated the social contract they have with their people and can be removed by any means. If they don't get that pursuing this in the manner they are is setting this nation up for bloodshed then they are fools. If they do get it and think that yet again the ends justify the means....then they are simply evil.

[VMI77]

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/0 ... cate-guns/

BREAKING: Dianne Feinstein Introduces Federal Bill to Confiscate Guns
By Nick Leghorn on June 6, 2014

Dianne Feinstein and friend (courtesy humanevents.com)

We all saw this one coming. Two weeks after Elliot Roger stabbed three people and shot three more, a trio of legislators from California (including Dianne Feinstein) have proposed a new federal law called “The Pause for Safety Act” which would allow anyone at any time to seek a “firearms restraining order” against an individual to prevent them from purchasing any new firearms and also confiscate any firearms they may already own. From Barbara Boxer’s website, here are the details we have at the moment:

They will continue until one way or another they succeed in their goal. Whether it be by legislation or executive order, it will happen. It is inevitable.

Anygunanywhere

At which point they will violated the social contract they have with their people and can be removed by any means. If they don't get that pursuing this in the manner they are is setting this nation up for bloodshed then they are fools. If they do get it and think that yet again the ends justify the means....then they are simply evil.

Personally, I don't think the rank and file get it, but the progressive leadership does. Obama has vigorously attempted to stir up unrest and divide people since day one of his office. The progressive leadership wants bloodshed to hasten their socialist utopia, and they know they can't achieve their goals as fast, or at all, as long as too many of us Constitutionalists are alive to oppose them. Hence, the 24/7 demonization of the Tea Party, Republicans, the NRA, southerners, rural Americans, gun owners, conservatives, Christians, ex military personnel, white males, homemakers, married mothers, and self-defense. They know exactly who stands in their way and like every other "progressive" before them that ever got control of a government, they intend to imprison and execute their opposition. I think the only part they don't get is that this isn't Germany, Cambodia, Uganda, Russia, or China, and their plans are not likely to yield their desired results.

[gthaustex]

The article says:

allow anyone at any time to seek a “firearms restraining order” against an individual to prevent them from purchasing any new firearms and also confiscate any firearms they may already own

If this is allowed to fly, I propose that we all submit the names of anyone on any protective detail for these politicians. I'm sure that the bill would make them exempt somehow, although one could argue that they could snap just as easily as anyone else....

[cb1000rider]

The progressive leadership wants bloodshed to hasten their socialist utopia, and they know they can't achieve their goals as fast, or at all, as long as too many of us Constitutionalists are alive to oppose them. Hence, the 24/7 demonization of the Tea Party, Republicans, the NRA, southerners, rural Americans, gun owners, conservatives, Christians, ex military personnel, white males, homemakers, married mothers, and self-defense. They know exactly who stands in their way and like every other "progressive" before them that ever got control of a government, they intend to imprison and execute their opposition. I think the only part they don't get is that this isn't Germany, Cambodia, Uganda, Russia, or China, and their plans are not likely to yield their desired results.

Really, VM? The progressive (Obama) leadership WANTS bloodshed because it promotes their agenda? They're sitting a closed-door meetings figuring out what they can do to get more bloodshed, or at least make sure it's not prevented?

And if you stand in their way you'll be put in prison or executed?

Too much tin-foil for me, sir... I appreciate some good political dramatization, but I hope no one things this is the kind of thing that we really believe.

And women's groups aren't exactly praising the NRA and supporting pro-firearm legislation these days.. In fact, I'd say that a little too much conservatism has already started to cut some of that support out of the Republican party, which means more progressives...

[cb1000rider]

If this is allowed to fly, I propose that we all submit the names of anyone on any protective detail for these politicians. I'm sure that the bill would make them exempt somehow, although one could argue that they could snap just as easily as anyone else....

Well before we throw them all under the bus, what are the details? Does this only apply to people that have been convicted of crimes? Does it only apply to the mentally ill? Or does it apply to everyone willy-nilly where they can simply choose who they take firearms from?

[anygunanywhere]

The progressive leadership wants bloodshed to hasten their socialist utopia, and they know they can't achieve their goals as fast, or at all, as long as too many of us Constitutionalists are alive to oppose them. Hence, the 24/7 demonization of the Tea Party, Republicans, the NRA, southerners, rural Americans, gun owners, conservatives, Christians, ex military personnel, white males, homemakers, married mothers, and self-defense. They know exactly who stands in their way and like every other "progressive" before them that ever got control of a government, they intend to imprison and execute their opposition. I think the only part they don't get is that this isn't Germany, Cambodia, Uganda, Russia, or China, and their plans are not likely to yield their desired results.

Really, VM? The progressive (Obama) leadership WANTS bloodshed because it promotes their agenda? They're sitting a closed-door meetings figuring out what they can do to get more bloodshed, or at least make sure it's not prevented?

And if you stand in their way you'll be put in prison or executed?

Too much tin-foil for me, sir... I appreciate some good political dramatization, but I hope no one things this is the kind of thing that we really believe.

And women's groups aren't exactly praising the NRA and supporting pro-firearm legislation these days.. In fact, I'd say that a little too much conservatism has already started to cut some of that support out of the Republican party, which means more progressives...

I think VMI77's statement is accurate. The progressive leadership is well aware that they will not be the ones who force their dictate down our throats. It will be the front line men and women who are tasked to do it. The progressive leadership are cowards and are blind to what is on the horizon if they do not stop.

Anygunanywhere

[VMI77]

The progressive leadership wants bloodshed to hasten their socialist utopia, and they know they can't achieve their goals as fast, or at all, as long as too many of us Constitutionalists are alive to oppose them. Hence, the 24/7 demonization of the Tea Party, Republicans, the NRA, southerners, rural Americans, gun owners, conservatives, Christians, ex military personnel, white males, homemakers, married mothers, and self-defense. They know exactly who stands in their way and like every other "progressive" before them that ever got control of a government, they intend to imprison and execute their opposition. I think the only part they don't get is that this isn't Germany, Cambodia, Uganda, Russia, or China, and their plans are not likely to yield their desired results.

Really, VM? The progressive (Obama) leadership WANTS bloodshed because it promotes their agenda? They're sitting a closed-door meetings figuring out what they can do to get more bloodshed, or at least make sure it's not prevented?

And if you stand in their way you'll be put in prison or executed?

Too much tin-foil for me, sir... I appreciate some good political dramatization, but I hope no one things this is the kind of thing that we really believe.

And women's groups aren't exactly praising the NRA and supporting pro-firearm legislation these days.. In fact, I'd say that a little too much conservatism has already started to cut some of that support out of the Republican party, which means more progressives...

Yes, really. Your response makes it sound like I'm talking about something happening the the immediate future. Also, I said that's what they want, not that they going to get what they want. All you have to do to see this is to go read the comments they leave after various articles on HuffPo or the Daily KOS. There are many many comments calling for the extermination of their opposition and very few dissenting comments.

Futhermore, no, they're not sitting in closed door meetings discussing the strategy to promote bloodshed. They don't have to because those strategies have already been laid out by Saul Alinsky and Cloward-Piven. They're just following the progressive play book. Also, I made a distinction between people like you who think they're liberals (and are really closer to being either a classical liberal or a libertarian) and the leadership....people like Holder, Obama, Reid, and Pelosi.

Here's what Obama's bud Bill Ayers and friends had to say on the subject: http://voices.yahoo.com/fbi-informant-r ... 94830.html

They also believed that their immediate responsibility would be to protect against what they called the 'counter revolution.' And um, they felt that this counter revolution could best be guarded against by creating and establishing reeducation centers in the Southwest, ah, where we would take all the people who needed to be reeducated into the new way of thinking and teach them how things were going to be."

Grathwohl continued on with "I asked 'Well what is going to happen to those people that we can't reeducate - that are die hard capitalist?' And the reply was that they'd have to be eliminated. And when I pursued this further they estimated they would have to eliminate 25 million people in these reeducation centers. And when I say eliminate I mean kill . . . 25 million people."

Grathwohl expressed shock that as he sat in a room hearing these words he was with 25 people with graduate degrees from Columbia and other institutions, and "hear them figuring out the logistics for the elimination of 25 million people, and they were dead serious." (All emphasis in quotes is mine).

They are slowly acquiring the means to implement their utopia. Stop looking at what Obama says and look at what he does. He and many in his administration, like Holder, are radical leftists and 100% driven by agenda and lust for power.

Then there is history. There has never been a "progressive" government that didn't mass murder its citizens.

The left is already pushing to ruin the lives of people they disagree with. They don't want anyone who isn't "progressive" enough to even hold a job, and have been unbelievably successful at sending their opposition to the unemployment line, forcing them to shut up, or destroying their business.

But these things don't play out overnight. I'd put the time frame at around 10 years from now before we see the full horror that is coming. But if you're paying attention it should be rather obvious by now that they're laying the groundwork and a good deal of the necessary legal and political infrastructure is already in place.

[VMI77]

If this is allowed to fly, I propose that we all submit the names of anyone on any protective detail for these politicians. I'm sure that the bill would make them exempt somehow, although one could argue that they could snap just as easily as anyone else....

Well before we throw them all under the bus, what are the details? Does this only apply to people that have been convicted of crimes? Does it only apply to the mentally ill? Or does it apply to everyone willy-nilly where they can simply choose who they take firearms from?

The proposal, which btw, is pretty much the same as the one proposed in the Commiefornia legislature, is to apply to everyone....so that your anti-gun neighbor can report you as being dangerous, and essentially get you SWATed. You need not be a convicted felon or have been adjudicated mentally ill. All a family member, neighbor, or acquaintance will have to do is tell the authorities that you said something you didn't say. I've only seen summaries at this point so I can't point you to any details. But then, we didn't have to know any details of the legislation for Obamacare to pass...just that if we liked our doctor we could keep our doctor.

[cb1000rider]

I think VMI77's statement is accurate. The progressive leadership is well aware that they will not be the ones who force their dictate down our throats. It will be the front line men and women who are tasked to do it. The progressive leadership are cowards and are blind to what is on the horizon if they do not stop.

Anygunanywhere

This is not the same as indicating that they're pro-bloodshed.

[tbrown]

At which point they will violated the social contract they have with their people and can be removed by any means. If they don't get that pursuing this in the manner they are is setting this nation up for bloodshed then they are fools. If they do get it and think that yet again the ends justify the means....then they are simply evil.

What makes you think they're opposed to bloodshed? Have you seen their foreign policy in action?

Besides... look around. The majority want a Unified Soviet Socialist America and the scale tips further every day.

[cb1000rider]

What makes you think they're opposed to bloodshed? Have you seen their foreign policy in action?
Besides... look around. The majority want a Unified Soviet Socialist America and the scale tips further every day.

I think that indicating that the American government leadership is actively seeking bloodshed to promote their policy is one heck of a statement. If you're indicating that because I can't disprove that such closed-door meetings don't happen that it must be true, I won't argue with you. American presidents have been lots of things, but pro blood-shed? I assume we're talking about domestic bloodshed. It's just something that I just don't believe on face value. If I did believe it, I wouldn't live here anymore.. And I don't see why anyone else would either.

In terms of foreign policy, you can find fault in the foreign policy of every single administration since the beginning of time. It's the nature of hindsight. Note, I don't agree with the current foreign policy, but would hardly call our current policy blood seeking.

If you wanted to say that we're moving toward socialism, I buy it... and agree... That's different than seeking a socialist agenda through triggering domestic blood letting within our federal government.

If you wanted to say that extreme groups call for extermination of the other side, I buy that too. I don't buy it within rational government leadership. It's the nature of "extreme". It happens on both sides of the issues if you look at the fringes. It's largely noise, until some lone wolf decides to act out.

Basically I have more realistic fears than short term mass re-education centers and a government that is actively seeking domestic blood shed. I'm much more concerned about legislation that would allow confiscation of weapons based on nothing more than heresay from an angry neighbor, for instance... Keep it at least semi-real, people...

[Oldgringo]

It's times and things like this that make me glad that I'm in the September of my years. I fear that I have seen the best years of this republic...alas.