What's your opinion of gun control?

[C10H15N]

As a CCW license holder, I always carry a gun.  

Ever notice how the politicians advocating gun control are always surrounded by bodyguards carrying *gasp* guns? 

[1714672015]

1714672015

[1714672015]

1714672015

[1714672015]

1714672015

[1714672015]

1714672015

[Wilikon]

It’s Official: Social Security Admin Introduces Gun Ban For Some Beneficiaries



The Social Security Administration (SSA)has released details on the looming gun ban which was first discovered at it was being fashioned behind closed doors in July 2015.

Details of the ban seeped out over the next few months then it formerly introduced by President Obama on January 5, 2016.

On July 18 the Los Angeles Times reported that the ban would apply to SSA beneficiaries who are ruled mentally deficient or labeled with a “mental illness” moniker. Once categorized as having mental health problems the beneficiaries would be reported to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) and added to the prohibited persons list, thereafter barred from purchasing guns.

According to the Times, one of the measures of mental health stability would be whether beneficiaries could handle their own finances or not. Based on this measure alone up to “4.2 million” SSA beneficiaries were believed to be susceptible to losing their Second Amendment rights because they have other people handle their finances for them.

On January 4 Breitbart News reported that Obama would be incorporating the SSA gun ban into his executive gun controls. The White House executive order preview said:

    Current law prohibits individuals from buying a gun if, because of a mental health issue, they are either a danger to themselves or others or are unable to manage their own affairs. The Social Security Administration (SSA) has indicated that it will begin the rulemaking process to ensure that appropriate information in its records is reported to NICS. The reporting that SSA, in consultation with the Department of Justice, is expected to require will cover appropriate records of the approximately 75,000 people each year who have a documented mental health issue, receive disability benefits, and are unable to manage those benefits because of their mental impairment, or who have been found by a state or federal court to be legally incompetent. The rule-making will also provide a mechanism for people to seek relief from the federal prohibition on possessing a firearm for reasons related to mental health.

And now the SSA has released details making it clear that beneficiaries who do not receive benefits themselves–but have them sent to someone who manages finances for them–take the risk of afoul of the SSA and being prohibited from purchasing guns.

On pages 19 of the SSA’s 41-page overview of the gun ban, we read:

    Under our representative payee policy, unless direct payment is prohibited, we presume that an adult beneficiary is capable of managing or directing the management of benefits. However, if we have information that the beneficiary has a mental or physical impairment that prevents him or her from managing or directing the management of benefits, we will develop the issue of capability. If a beneficiary has a mental impairment, we will develop the capability issue if there is an indication that the beneficiary may lack the ability to reason properly, is disoriented, has seriously impaired judgment, or is unable to communicate with others.

Once the beneficiary has the SSA’s attention–by having someone help with finances–the process of determining mental health status begins, becoming incrementally intrusive. And if a ruling of mental illness sufficient to meet the reporting threshold is handed down, then the beneficiary will be reported to NICS and prohibited from purchasing firearms.



http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/05/05/official-social-security-admin-introduces-gun-ban-benefeciaries/

[Spendulus]

It’s Official: Social Security Admin Introduces Gun Ban For Some Beneficiaries

.... if we have information that the beneficiary has a mental or physical impairment that prevents him or her from managing or directing the management of benefits, we will develop the issue of capability. If a beneficiary has a mental impairment, we will develop the capability issue if there is an indication that the beneficiary may lack the ability to reason properly, is disoriented, has seriously impaired judgment, or is unable to communicate with others.....

So Hillary, Saunders and Obama are put on the no guns list?

[C10H15N]

[So Hillary, Saunders and Obama are put on the no guns list?

Hillary and Obama don't care.  They will receive taxpayer funded armed Secret Service protection for the rest of their lives.

[TheButterZone]

[So Hillary, Saunders and Obama are put on the no guns list?

Hillary and Obama don't care.  They will receive taxpayer funded armed Secret Service protection for the rest of their lives.

Or in a more perfect world, by prison guards for the rest of their lives.

In adjoining cells next to every living POTUS and their minions, in a desert labor camp with no possibility of ever leaving it alive.

[TECSHARE]

[So Hillary, Saunders and Obama are put on the no guns list?

Hillary and Obama don't care.  They will receive taxpayer funded armed Secret Service protection for the rest of their lives.

Or in a more perfect world, by prison guards for the rest of their lives.

In adjoining cells next to every living POTUS and their minions, in a desert labor camp with no possibility of ever leaving it alive.

[BADecker]

[So Hillary, Saunders and Obama are put on the no guns list?

Hillary and Obama don't care.  They will receive taxpayer funded armed Secret Service protection for the rest of their lives.

Or in a more perfect world, by prison guards for the rest of their lives.

In adjoining cells next to every living POTUS and their minions, in a desert labor camp with no possibility of ever leaving it alive.

This is the thing that nobody seems to understand. The United States is a corporation, just like any other corporation. Like every corporation, it has control over the people who are part of the corporation, BY THEIR AGREEMENT.

Words are important, especially in a contract. There is no place that the people who set up the U.S. government way back when, ever gave themselves over to it. But if you have signed paperwork stating that you have done this, it is your own doing. According to standard contract law that has been around long before the U.S. government, you can get out of the agreement, because there was no meeting of the minds. But if they changed the terms without telling you, they broke the contract. However, if they didn't break the contract by changing the terms, you can still get out by rescinding your signature off whatever docs you agreed to.

The government corporation people would like it if they could be dictators. But because of the structure of government, the only way they could come close is to dissolve the government. And there are too many of them that don't want to do this for it to happen.

Here is key. Let them rule as they want until they become a real threat or actually harmful to you. Then, take the man or woman to court for repayment. Make the court your court, and hold court at, not in, the standard court building. You may want to take government to court as well. But litigate the human being who did the harm to you.

[TECSHARE]

[So Hillary, Saunders and Obama are put on the no guns list?

Hillary and Obama don't care.  They will receive taxpayer funded armed Secret Service protection for the rest of their lives.

Or in a more perfect world, by prison guards for the rest of their lives.

In adjoining cells next to every living POTUS and their minions, in a desert labor camp with no possibility of ever leaving it alive.

This is the thing that nobody seems to understand. The United States is a corporation, just like any other corporation. Like every corporation, it has control over the people who are part of the corporation, BY THEIR AGREEMENT.

Words are important, especially in a contract. There is no place that the people who set up the U.S. government way back when, ever gave themselves over to it. But if you have signed paperwork stating that you have done this, it is your own doing. According to standard contract law that has been around long before the U.S. government, you can get out of the agreement, because there was no meeting of the minds. But if they changed the terms without telling you, they broke the contract. However, if they didn't break the contract by changing the terms, you can still get out by rescinding your signature off whatever docs you agreed to.

The government corporation people would like it if they could be dictators. But because of the structure of government, the only way they could come close is to dissolve the government. And there are too many of them that don't want to do this for it to happen.

Here is key. Let them rule as they want until they become a real threat or actually harmful to you. Then, take the man or woman to court for repayment. Make the court your court, and hold court at, not in, the standard court building. You may want to take government to court as well. But litigate the human being who did the harm to you.

If you want to learn more about this, search for Karl Lentz on Youtube.

[ahad999]

I see gun control as disarming the law obeying people (and keep the criminals armed, as they don't care about gun control), for eliminating the ability of citizens to resist/challenge the state/tyranny.

True for the entire world!

Gun control is very necessity in nowadays . if we don't take action now the criminal won't let us live in this world.

[TheButterZone]

I see gun control as disarming the law obeying people (and keep the criminals armed, as they don't care about gun control), for eliminating the ability of citizens to resist/challenge the state/tyranny.

True for the entire world!

Gun control is very necessity in nowadays . if we don't take action now the criminal won't let us live in this world.

Correct, the criminal government won't let us live by "gun controlling" us out of our human right to self-defense.

[btcbunny]

I think background checks could be a safety measure ex criminal or mentally disable persons should not be allowed to get the guns ... So we should check the roots of the crime such as poverty we dont want a world with full of people who are dangerous to society

[BADecker]

I think background checks could be a safety measure ex criminal or mentally disable persons should not be allowed to get the guns ... So we should check the roots of the crime such as poverty we dont want a world with full of people who are dangerous to society

We don't want a world full of people who are a threat to society. The best way is to get rid of governments and banks. In the past we couldn't do this. But if we keep the technology we have, we can do it now, because everyone can be his/her own government in our world.

Let people all have guns. Most people, if they had a gun, would not harm others except in times of great need... like self defense. "Most" is way bigger than "least." Soon the "least" (the crooks and criminals who would use guns to harm people) would be dead. Or they would have joined the "most." There would be peace.

With the world as it is, there will always be trouble. People will always die from something. But guns would be the least of our problems if everybody had them. So, to avoid more bloodshed than necessary in killing off the crooks and criminals who won't live peacefully, let us gradually initiate a program, over, say, 5 years, to get guns and ammo out to everyone. Phase it in slowly, so that people learn to respect each other, and to keep their mouths shut with derogatory statements against each other, so that there will be peace.

[adelhmdt]

Gun control is about control. It isn't about guns.

Originally in the world, control was imbedded in respect for other people. The respect has withered so that control has been lost.

Probably in America (and many other countries) gun freedom should be re-introduced gradually. People will die, of course. But they are dying anyway. Guns aren't the cause of death. Lack of control is.

Once there is gun freedom, the people who don't respect others will die off. Respectful people will live on in peace.

Think about it. If we could remove all guns from the world like poof!, people would simply start making them again. Do you trust the police and military to be the only ones to have them? Better to arm all the people to the hilt, and let the disrespectful ones kill themselves off.

[Wilikon]

Zimmerman gun bids reach $65M on second auction site



 Bidding for the handgun George Zimmerman used to shoot and kill Trayvon Martin in 2012 topped $65 million after Zimmerman moved the sale to a new auction site.

Zimmerman moved the auction to United Gun Group, an online firearms marketplace, on Thursday after it was rejected by Gunbroker.com. The starting bid of 5,000 quickly escalated to $65 million by 6 a.m. Friday

CNN reported United Gun Group initially put out a statement it would pull the auction, but later said it would give it more consideration. Todd Underwood, United Gun Broker founder, said it would release an official response by 10 a.m. Friday.

“We may still run it,” Underwood said.

Zimmerman, 32, was acquitted of manslaughter and murder charges after Trayvon’s February 2012 shooting, sparking a nationwide debate over Florida’s so-called “stand your ground” laws and race relations.

In the online listing, Zimmerman called the weapon an “American Firearm Icon.”

He said his gun is “fully functional as the attempts by the Department of Justice on behalf of B. Hussein Obama [President Barack Obama] to render the firearm inoperable were thwarted by my phenomenal defense attorney.”

Zimmerman said the sale date marked the one-year anniversary he was allegedly shot by Matthew Apperson during a dispute.

He said a portion of the proceeds would be used to “fight [Black Lives Matter] violence against law enforcement officers, ensure the demise of Angela [Corey’s] persecution career and Hillary Clinton’s anti-firearm rhetoric. “

Corey was appointed special prosecutor by Florida Gov. Rick Scott to investigate Martin’s death.

Gunbroker said it pulled the auction because, “We want no part in the listing on our web site or in any of the publicity it is receiving.”

“Listings on the GunBroker.com web site are user-generated, exactly like social media posts,” the company said. “Mr. Zimmerman never contacted anyone at GunBroker.com prior to or after the listing was created and no one at GunBroker.com has any relationship with Zimmerman. Our site rules state that we reserve the right to reject listings at our sole discretion, and have done so with the Zimmerman listing.”

Zimmerman said the auction was removed from Gunbroker because it was not “prepared for the traffic and publicity surrounding the auction of my firearm.”



http://www.breitbart.com/news/zimmerman-gun-bids-reach-65m-on-second-auction-site/

[TECSHARE]

I bet Gun Broker is kicking itself now after seeing the taste they could have got of that $65 mil. As a former Gunbroker.com customer, next time I buy a gun online, it will not be there.

[haseeb ahmed]

guns are made only for the purpose to kill either human or animal.Bullets does not recognize person it only enters in to the body.its impossible that if u use gun and use it perfectly every time, only one miss can cause severe damage.

[TECSHARE]

guns are made only for the purpose to kill either human or animal.Bullets does not recognize person it only enters in to the body.its impossible that if u use gun and use it perfectly every time, only one miss can cause severe damage.

Shooting a gun in order to use it to defend yourself is not necessarily required, so your logic is flawed. You can also make the same argument about cars, but no one is screaming to ban them (yet).

[iCEBREAKER]

I bet Gun Broker is kicking itself now after seeing the taste they could have got of that $65 mil. As a former Gunbroker.com customer, next time I buy a gun online, it will not be there.

The wailing and gnashing created by the auction is a thing of beauty.   

Behold:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/05/12/1525719/-He-murdered-Trayvon-and-now-he-seeks-to-auction-the-bloody-gun

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/05/12/1525767/-George-Zimmerman-announces-plan-to-auction-the-gun-he-used-to-kill-Trayvon-Martin

The low information types living in their tribal reality bubble just can't understand why

A. the gun isn't a murder weapon because the jury (and DOJ) declined to indicate GZ committed murder, and

B. it's the height of hypocrisy to advocate lynching GZ "BECAUSE CIVIL RIGHTS."

Tray-Bon Nebber Hert Nuffen^®   

[TheButterZone]

guns are made only for the purpose to kill either human or animal.

Then gun makers have roundly failed, as most GSWs (not fired by a master sniper and/or at a forcibly restrained target) are survivable and have been for centuries.

http://www.local10.com/news/weird-news/florida-man-finds-bullet-hole-in-arm-3-days-after-accidentally-shooting-self?source=wplg

[TECSHARE]

I bet Gun Broker is kicking itself now after seeing the taste they could have got of that $65 mil. As a former Gunbroker.com customer, next time I buy a gun online, it will not be there.

The wailing and gnashing created by the auction is a thing of beauty.   

Behold:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/05/12/1525719/-He-murdered-Trayvon-and-now-he-seeks-to-auction-the-bloody-gun

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/05/12/1525767/-George-Zimmerman-announces-plan-to-auction-the-gun-he-used-to-kill-Trayvon-Martin

The low information types living in their tribal reality bubble just can't understand why

A. the gun isn't a murder weapon because the jury (and DOJ) declined to indicate GZ committed murder, and

B. it's the height of hypocrisy to advocate lynching GZ "BECAUSE CIVIL RIGHTS."

Tray-Bon Nebber Hert Nuffen^®   

Maybe they can lighten the photos of the gun in Photoshop to make it look white and claim the gun is racist.