PDA

View Full Version : Gun grabbers won't give up!


muleman
08-03-2012, 11:46 AM
UN Gun Treaty on Hold, but Democrats Persist

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined." --Patrick Henry http://image.patriotpost.us/2012-08-03-digest.jpg
Throughout July, the United Nations worked to hammer out the details of its Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) (http://patriotpost.us/editions/14116). We and many other liberty-loving organizations oppose the document because it threatens the Second Amendment rights of American citizens. It's cloaked in the feel-good language of preventing illicit arms trade, but its solution is, essentially, to register all guns with the UN. The good news is that the UN failed to adopt the treaty. The bad news is that's not the end of it.
Action was indefinitely suspended after the United States and a few other countries asked for more time to consider it. However, when the UN General Assembly reconvenes in September, it could renew a negotiation schedule for the treaty, or it could declare it open for signature. The UK, France, Germany and 87 other nations argue that the treaty is ready, saying the "compromises" reached had "overwhelming support of the international community," and they all but blamed Barack Obama and the U.S. for its failure.
Suzanne Nossel, executive director of Amnesty International USA, blasted the White House, saying, "This was stunning cowardice by the Obama administration, which at the last minute did an about-face and scuttled progress toward a global arms treaty, just as it reached the finish line." The truth is, as Obama told then-Russian President Dmitri Medvedev earlier this year on missile defense, the president hopes to have more "flexibility" after his re-election.
If Obama signed the treaty now, it would fail in the Senate because 51 senators already signed a letter (http://moran.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/files/serve?File_id=9cd86202-9498-47ca-8b8d-534bf60b52f7) opposing ratification. Democrats are extremely unlikely to add to their Senate majority in November -- in fact, they're more likely to lose it. So what's Obama's end-game?
Simple: He's reset his sights (http://patriotpost.us/alexander/14234) on the Second Amendment. The groundwork for his desired assault was laid in Operation Fast and Furious, a now well-known charade concocted to bolster the false claim that American weapons were the cause of Mexican drug-gang violence and, therefore, needed to be more tightly regulated.
Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA), ranking member of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, released their first of three reports (http://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/7-31-12-FF-Part-I-FINAL-REPORT.pdf) on Fast and Furious this week. The report implicated three Justice Department officials and five ATF agents. William Hoover, No. 2 at ATF, is no longer employed there. Two more final reports will highlight "the devastating failure of supervision and leadership" at the Obama Justice Department, as well as an "unprecedented obstruction of the [congressional] investigation by the highest levels of the Justice Department, including the attorney general himself."
Meanwhile, Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) and Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) used the Aurora, Colorado, shooting as an excuse to introduce legislation that would effectively outlaw the online purchase of ammunition. The Stop Online Ammunition Sales Act would live up to its name by requiring that ammo buyers who aren't dealers must present photo ID at the time of purchase. Several Democrat senators likewise attached an amendment to an unrelated bill banning magazines with a capacity of more than 10 rounds.
Make no mistake, the Left will take every opportunity, employing any and every excuse, to take away our Second Amendment rights. Remember that when you go to the polls in November.

jimbo
08-03-2012, 12:08 PM
If Obama is responsible for the failure of the arms treaty, it is the first thing he has done right so far. If he opposed it due to pressure from the constituents, than good for them. This treaty needs to go, along with most of what the UN believes.

Danang Sailor
08-03-2012, 06:57 PM
If Obama is responsible for the failure of the arms treaty, it is the first thing he has done right so far. If he opposed it due to pressure from the constituents, than good for them. This treaty needs to go, along with most of what the UN believes.

It seems that 51 Senators were responsible for the failure of this fiasco. Obama simply saw that it had no chance of ratification
and clammed up.

EastTexFrank
08-04-2012, 01:20 AM
It seems that 51 Senators were responsible for the failure of this fiasco. Obama simply saw that it had no chance of ratification
and clammed up.

That in itself is unusual. He voices his opinion, however well unfounded, on everything. Pity that it's only a temporary condition. :biggrin:

Kane
08-10-2012, 08:40 PM
Is this the First Gun Built By a 3D Printer? This Is a Real Blow to the Gun Grabbers. Just 'Print' Another One.

by Kyle Wintersteen | August 10, 2012 2 (http://www.gunsandammo.com/2012/08/10/tech-whiz-uses-3d-printer-to-build-own-guns/#idc-container)
10 (http://www.gunsandammo.com/2012/08/10/tech-whiz-uses-3d-printer-to-build-own-guns/#)
http://www.gunsandammo.com/files/2012/08/Guslick-22-caliber-pistol-300x209.jpg (http://www.gunsandammo.com/files/2012/08/Guslick-22-caliber-pistol.jpg)

The lower of this fully functioning .22-caliber pistol was built by Michael Guslick using a 3D printer. Guslick also built a functioning semi-auto rifle in the same manner. (Photo from The Huffington Post)

The term “revolutionary” gets thrown around way too often in our marketing-saturated culture, but the 3D printer warrants it. Essentially, the machine can take a blueprint and “print” a variety of materials, including jewelry, architecture, automobiles, artificial organs and apparently firearms.

In a move that has gun-control proponents in pants-wetting hysterics, Extreme Tech reports (http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/133514-the-worlds-first-3D-printed-gun) amateur gunsmith Michael Guslick has used blueprints from the Internet to print two different guns, including an AR-15.

For his first test, Guslick, who posts under the screen name “HaveBlue” at the forum AR15.com (http://www.ar15.com/), attempted to build a .22-caliber pistol using his 3D printer. With an ease that surprised even Guslick, he printed a plastic polymer lower receiver for the pistol, then simply slid a commercial steel upper into position along with the presumed addition of a few other store-bought parts. He put 200 rounds through his essentially homemade gun without issue.

“Everything ran just as it should, magazine after magazine,” Guslick wrote in a blog post. “To be honest, it was acting more reliably than a number of other .22 pistols I’ve shot.”

Guslick then set out to build an AR-15 using a similar process, first printing a 75-percent model for fine-tuning. More or less, he got it right on the first try, noting to the Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/08/man-3d-printer-rifle_n_1753513.html?utm_hp_ref=technology) that it “wasn’t that difficult.” The gun worked, but had a few feeding and extraction issues that need tweaking.
Through his work on the pistol and rifle, Guslick has been widely credited for creating the first “3D gun,” a notion he disputes.

“Firearms manufacturers have been doing exactly that for prototyping and testing for many years, and I’m certain many hobbyists have used 3D printed gun parts as well,” he told HuffPost.

But that’s done little to dissuade the panic of hoplophobic Americans. To paraphrase some of the comments from our anti-gun friends, “A man built a gun in his own home? This technology must be stopped or every criminal can just get a 3D printer and build a spray fire military-grade assault rifle!”
Not so fast, says Guslick.

“Though such tools are equally available to criminals as well, I cannot foresee criminals turning to 3D printing as an avenue to obtain illicit arms when the black market continues to serve as a far simpler means of acquisition — and does not require any level of technical acumen,” Guslick told HuffPost.

Given how recently 3D printing technology was developed, there are no laws against what Guslick did. There is speculation that legislation will follow, but how would you enforce a law against printing a lower receiver? Could a 3D printer be designed that would recognize it’s printing a gun? Or could you ban the printing of certain shapes (User “wilNva” joked on the AR15.com forum, “Who will they blame when some nut-job goes postal with one of these illegal shapes?”)? Such laws are doubtful, but let’s face it, politicians have sought to regulate civilian arms through equally dubious means.

The debate is reminiscent of arguments by anti-gunners against commercial firearms manufacture. “If we just quit making guns,” they reckon, “they’d never end up in the wrong hands.” Not only does this ignore the many benefits of an armed civilian population, but it’s ignorant of the number of arms already in circulation. If global firearms manufacture were banned today (perish the thought, not that it could ever be enforced), just think how many years it would take for millions (billions?) of guns to rust away.

The fact is, firearms will always exist, as will a criminal element that breaks laws in order to obtain them. There’s little use in worrying yourself sick over a technically skilled civilian who built his own.

muleman
08-10-2012, 08:46 PM
That is a lot of hoopla over nothing. The cost alone would deter almost everybody and he sure as hell did not print the barrel and cartridge handling parts of the gun.