What's new
  • Check out our new Group Buy Program! We're kicking it off with Baja Designs! $10 Flat rate shipping no matter how much you order!

Gun laws, how drastic.

Gun laws, how drastic.

  • In 2021 POTUS will sign into law limiting mags, and EBR's (Including things like Mini 14)?

    Votes: 28 38.9%
  • In 2021 will new law be struck down by SCOTUS?

    Votes: 9 12.5%
  • In 2021 will 2a be replaced with new amendment outlawing citizen ownership of firearms?

    Votes: 6 8.3%
  • Nothing will change.

    Votes: 29 40.3%

  • Total voters
    72

Roc Doc

2A SNBI
Joined
May 20, 2020
Member Number
580
Messages
2,932
Loc
Way out West.
There's been a lot of talk about new gun laws that would violate 2a. So is congress going to pass laws that are in violation of 2a, I think we all know that's coming, but will SCOTUS strike it down, or worst of all repeal 2a. If you think any of the three will happen, but not in 2021, say when and why.
 
law will get signed, linger in SCOTUS for 5-10yrs.

schools will teach about how guns are bad, ammo shortages will become more widespread (govt buys it all up), next generation has no exposure to guns, scared of them and the 2a loses its value.
 
I voted nothing will change.

there will be a bunch of political theater, some bullshit will happen, both sides will blame the other side for whatever bullshit happens and try to look like they actually fought for their constituency, but the reality is that it's all bullshit and nothing will change.
 
I voted nothing will change.

there will be a bunch of political theater, some bullshit will happen, both sides will blame the other side for whatever bullshit happens and try to look like they actually fought for their constituency, but the reality is that it's all bullshit and nothing will change.

Agree with manche. There are enough democrat gun owners out there to make actually passing anything politically dangerous. There are also enough dumbasses on the left that lip service must be paid to gun control so they keep everyone happy.
 
missing a very important option...

2021 - a new law will be passed by congress/POTUS blatantly violating the 2nd amendment... and SCOTUS will refuse to hear the case.

OK smart guy, why would SCOTUS refuse to hear the case? Remember Trump got 3 nominations to the bench.
 
OK smart guy, why would SCOTUS refuse to hear the case? Remember Trump got 3 nominations to the bench.

Because it's easier to not hear the case than deal with the politics of the case... Just like they did with the TX vs. PA voting case.... claim "lack of standing" and ignore it all together.

I'm losing faith in Trump's nominees to stand hard on the COTUS, to be honest.

EDIT: I do agree with Manche that ultimately, nothing major will change. I just think the option is important to have in the poll.
 
Last edited:
I voted nothing will change.

there will be a bunch of political theater, some bullshit will happen, both sides will blame the other side for whatever bullshit happens and try to look like they actually fought for their constituency, but the reality is that it's all bullshit and nothing will change.

giphy.gif
 
Because it's easier to not hear the case than deal with the politics of the case... Just like they did with the TX vs. PA voting case.... claim "lack of standing" and ignore it all together.

I'm losing faith in Trump's nominees to stand hard on the COTUS, to be honest.

EDIT: I do agree with Manche that ultimately, nothing major will change. I just think the option is important to have in the poll.

I don't think you understand the process. And remember, SCOTUS appointments are not term limited, so they don't have to appease voters only interpret the law as being lawful under the Constitution or not.
 
I don't think you understand the process. And remember, SCOTUS appointments are not term limited, so they don't have to appease voters only interpret the law as being lawful under the Constitution or not.

but they are human, have their agendas, and as i understand it cant be forced to hear a case.
 
I think this is too much of a party line vote they don't have the cooperation to get anything passed, and they won't be able to stop a filibuster.
 
Agree with manche. There are enough democrat gun owners out there to make actually passing anything politically dangerous. There are also enough dumbasses on the left that lip service must be paid to gun control so they keep everyone happy.

And how are gun laws now compared to 30 years ago?
 
I voted nothing will change.

there will be a bunch of political theater, some bullshit will happen, both sides will blame the other side for whatever bullshit happens and try to look like they actually fought for their constituency, but the reality is that it's all bullshit and nothing will change.

And I'll ask you....how are gun laws now compared to 30 years ago? But nothing will change....lol
 
I think they will pass something and the SCOTUS will either refuse to hear it or it will get drug out for years. I do think that it's pretty coincidental that gun control is a major talking point right now and all of a sudden we have a shooting at a grocery store.

I also think the the theory of banning now and waiting for the next generation to allow the 2A to go away is a possibility. However, people probably thought the same thing about the 93 AWB and guns are more popular than ever.
 
The new bill is already Drafted.... Feinstein's 2021 AW Ban is in the works.

It's far worse than the Clinton era AW Ban. There is no sunset, and the amount of ridiculous is "ridiculous".

I see an AW Ban coming down the line. This admin is the MOST anti gun I can ever remember, and it has a congress to back them. Not a good time for the 2A.
 
I don't think you understand the process. And remember, SCOTUS appointments are not term limited, so they don't have to appease voters only interpret the law as being lawful under the Constitution or not.

educate me on the process that I'm misunderstanding... there's nothing, perhaps unfortunately, that forces SCOTUS to hear a case.

And if you believe some reports, Roberts refused to hear the TX case because of concern of protests and political fallout. Whether they are supposed to only interpret a law based on the COTUS, they have many times swayed from that position... like "rewriting" ACA from the bench to allow taxation for not engaging in commerce.
 
educate me on the process that I'm misunderstanding... there's nothing, perhaps unfortunately, that forces SCOTUS to hear a case.

And if you believe some reports, Roberts refused to hear the TX case because of concern of protests and political fallout. Whether they are supposed to only interpret a law based on the COTUS, they have many times swayed from that position... like "rewriting" ACA from the bench to allow taxation for not engaging in commerce.

Everyone expects the SCOTUS to react like a well oiled machine.... then gets surprised when they are completely human and full of errors and flawed logic. Of course Roberts wet his pants with the prospect of huge civil unrest and mass mob style rule. "The better good" is prolly his favorite court standard.
 
I'm losing faith in Trump's nominees to stand hard on the COTUS, to be honest.
I don't think you understand the process. And remember, SCOTUS appointments are not term limited, so they don't have to appease voters only interpret the law as being lawful under the Constitution or not.
but they are human, have their agendas, and as i understand it cant be forced to hear a case.
The shaming of people who don't toe the line has been a national story here lately, there has been rumors for years that it goes on in DC all the time, your kid goes to DC schools want them to have an easy time of it, make friends, get good grades? Toe the line! Want your wife to know about the best places to shop, get in to the better resturants, get invited to the good parties toe the line
 
Can always count on this topic to bring out the best in people.
 
In states like MT, WY, and ID no new federal guns laws will be enforced and the peoples constitutional rights will be preserved. It will be the start of the succession of free states, and the second civil war. MT holds a shitload of nukes, so the communist states can fawk right off. The free states also control most of the country's oil, we will join OPEC and butfuck the rest of the world on prices, and all be driving lamborghini's and flying private planes. :flipoff2:
 
The new bill is already Drafted.... Feinstein's 2021 AW Ban is in the works.

It's far worse than the Clinton era AW Ban. There is no sunset, and the amount of ridiculous is "ridiculous".

I see an AW Ban coming down the line. This admin is the MOST anti gun I can ever remember, and it has a congress to back them. Not a good time for the 2A.

Yep along with HR 127, 8, and 1454. They have four years and they’re going to go all in. I don’t even know if the Senate would be able to stop them...
 
Pretty much every gun law on the books is unconstitutional. The kangaroo court is complicit in the trampling of constitutional rights and there is no reason to expect a reversal. If by chance the court does end up overturning some new gun laws (which will take years to wind through the courts) the democratic party will add justices to the court. The lunatics are truly in charge of the asylum.
 
Well, I think the more important thing here is to openly state that you don't recognize any authority of a legislature or presidency seated by fraud.


illegitimate law makers making illegitimate laws, us discussing what laws they may make, gives their authority credibility.

I do not recognize their authority.
In fact, it even kinda looks like our government might have been infiltrated by foreign interests.
 
"Assault weapons" ban, uuuh, Brady act, and uhm.. bump stock? What'd I miss?

Look man... I really don't think you're a terrible guy. I don't. I have but one question to eliminate the entire argument. Do we have NOW, more freedom than we did 100 years ago... or less?

It's one thing to be ignorant of history, it's another to not even look at it when it matters and yet, put zero effort in to understanding the mistakes/ downsides of the past.
 
I think the big thing is to promote juror education

take the next generation shooting so that they become gun owners

educate citizens on liberal/ socialist/ communist tactics, so that they recognize them, and recognize that they have been working their way down a punch list

frankly, promote "the grand conspiracy" that this election was a fraud, and that they have no authority

judges don't like to allow "grand conspiracy" arguments in court, we as a population need to move the Overton window to create more distrust
 
Look man... I really don't think you're a terrible guy. I don't. I have but one question to eliminate the entire argument. Do we have NOW, more freedom than we did 100 years ago... or less?

It's one thing to ignore history, it's another to not even look at it when it matters.

We have less freedom. The more government you have, the less freedom you get, but that's with all aspects of life, not just gun laws. I can't drive 85 mph past a school when it's letting out. Should I be able to if I want to?
 
I believe they will sign a shiton into law and let the sc decide..
Gawd help us!
 
Top Back Refresh