Patty

How Orwellian of them.

Like clockwork, just a couple of weeks after 22-year-old La Isla Shooter Elliot Rodger — who had been taking the psychotropic mediation Xanax for at least six months prior — reportedly k**led seven people and injured another 13 — vehement anti-gun Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein joined fellow Dem. California Senator Barbara Boxer and Dem. Representative Lois Capps to introduce “The Pause for Safety Act”.

The legislation would limit a person’s ability to purchase or possess a gun if that person’s family member(s) or “others” believe him or her to pose a threat to him/herself or others should he/she purchase or have a gun.




According to the press release on Sen. Barbara Boxer’s website, The Pause for Safety Act would “empower families to prevent gun violence” three ways:
One, ensure that families and others can go to court to seek a gun violence prevention order to temporarily stop someone close to them who poses a threat to himself, herself or others from purchasing a firearm.
Two, ensure that a court can issue a gun violence prevention warrant that would allow law enforcement to take temporary possession of firearms that are in an individual’s possession if the court determines that the individual poses a threat to himself, herself or others.
Three, ensure that law enforcement makes full use of all existing state and local gun databases when assessing a tip, warning or request from a concerned family member or other close associate. [emphasis added]

“It is haunting that the family of the gunman who committed this massacre in Isla Vista was desperate to stop a tragedy, and yet they lacked the tools to do so,” Senator Boxer said in her statement. “My bill would give families and associates who fear someone close to them could commit violence new tools to help prevent these tragedies.”

Her statement goes on to say the bill would essentially bribe states via a grant program:


The measure would create a new grant program – the Pause for Safety Grant Program – to help support these efforts. States that take action to enact these preventive measures would be eligible for the grants to provide resources for courts and law enforcement as they implement these measures.




Clearly you can see where this act would (quite easily) lead to potential abuse and outright subversion of a person’s 2nd Amendment rights.

If anyone who is a family member or claims to be a “close associate” can submit a tip that someone else poses a potential threat (wh**ever that criteria is), that person’s gun purchasing and ownership rights can apparently be (at least temporarily, if not longer) stripped.

Every time someone hopped up on psych meds k**ls a bunch of people, our supposed public servants use it as an excuse to go after the general public at large’s Constitutional rights.

Sad, but typical.


Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/06/anti-gunner-dianne-feinstein-barbara-boxer-push-gun-confiscation-pause-safety-act/#LwCcgYBADt4VGqgT.99

Brian Devon

[quote=Patty]

Brian Devon

**************
Barbara Boxer and Diane Feinstein are highly educated compassionate women. They both have been our state's senators for 22 years, easily and repeatedly winning re-e******n. The v**ers of this state are quite proud of them.

I support them both 100% in their desire to reign in some of the gun disease in this nation, where our firearms death rates are dramatically higher than Canada, Japan, and Europe.

Many of us don't care to dine with Yosemite Sam goobers fondling their AR-15s.

Gun restraining orders would be a small but good step for bringing us online with the gun restrictions of the other first world developed nations, who have significantly lower gun death rates.

Kudos to Barbara and Diane. I have v**ed for both of them many times.

Many of us feel that our right to live trumps your right to be paranoid and have a gun arsenal.

Unless you are a member of a state m*****a (they disappeared in the 1860s), you can shut up about your 2nd amendment right to have no infringements on your guns.

The overwhelming majority of this nation wants sensible gun control. Most of the gun owners want sensible gun control. Most are not members of the NRA, the honey bucket carriers, for the gun manufacturers. Those manufacturers? Their motto is, "Buy our products to protect yourself from the other users of our products".

Hey, what could go wrong if Americans are stupid enough to buy that line of thinking?

The casket makers are rooting for Americans to continue to be that gullible.

Patty

"Unless you are a member of a state m*****a (they disappeared in the 1860s), you can shut up about your 2nd amendment right to have no infringements on your guns."
com·ma [kom-uh]
noun

1. the sign (,), a mark of punctuation used for indicating a division in a sentence, as in setting off a word, phrase, or clause, especially when such a division is accompanied by a slight pause or is to be noted in order to give order to the sequential elements of the sentence.

It is not open to debate.
Of course we have the God-given right to keep and bear arms, to self-defense, etc., etc. Our Declaration of Independence recognizes that our Rights come from God and are unalienable.

The 2nd Amendment to our federal Constitution recognizes that this God-given right to keep and bear arms is to be free from any interference WHATSOEVER from the federal government.

Our Framers were all for an armed American People – they understood that arms are our ultimate defense in the event the federal government oversteps its bounds. See, e.g., what James Madison, Father of Our Constitution, writes in the second half of Federalist Paper No. 46! The reason the Citizens – the M*****a – are armed is to defend ourselves, our families, our neighborhoods, communities, and States from an overreaching, tyrannical federal government.

RetNavyCWO Loc: VA suburb of DC

I am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment, own firearms myself, and have a concealed carry permit. Even so, I strongly support legislation that would recognize a family member's report of another family member's mental instability and danger to society to initiate an investigation of that family member with the purpose of denying gun ownership. I think anyone who has had a family member with severe mental illness, such as schizophrenia, understands what I am talking about.

Firebird17

You can believe what you want but leagal gun owners do not commit the crimes you say they do as for Feinstein and boxer there going to be put out to pasture believe me when some tries to break I your house in the middle of the night what are you going to do call 911 sure you can wait but it's going to be to late when you watch a love one murderedor reaped then k**led what are you going to do I'll bet you you wish then you had some way they you can defend your self I'll bet Feinstein and boxer have body guards with guns to protect them so whatdoyou say to that you'll probably say they don't open your eyes you want the guns in the criminals hands so you can say see all people with guns are crazy the only one I see as crazy and stupid is you believe me every dog has it's day don't come running looking for help when something happens to you or your family get the guns from all the gangs that holder and obumer gave to them to make the law abiding person look bad so he can try to take the guns the obumer admin. Is the criminals so all you liberals your day is coming and you are doing it to your self

Patty

“The Pause for Safety Act” is clearly unconstitutional and should be completely disregarded as such.
Alexander Hamilton says re ex post facto laws (and of the importance of the writ of habeas corpus):
“…The creation of crimes after the commission of the fact, or, in other words, the subjecting of men to punishment for things which, when they were done, were breaches of no law, and the practice of arbitrary imprisonments, have been, in all ages, the favorite and most formidable instruments of tyranny…”
Ssuch a law would be an ex post facto law in violation of Art. I, Sec. 9, cl. 3 of the Constitution (if the Congress passed the law) or Art. I, Sec. 10, cl. 1 (if a State passed such a law). At the time a person acquired the gun, it was completely legal to possess it. To then make it unlawful to not turn in your guns – or to do as Connecticut did and say you have to register all your existing guns or it’s a felony – makes unlawful something which was lawful when you did it.

Patty

This will have the same effect as PFA's failed legislation have had and get many women k**led. Pieces of paper do not stop people from k*****g if that is what they are set on.

Brian Devon

******************
There are no God given gun rights. There is not a single mention of God given rights anywhere in the constitution of this nation. As a matter of fact, God is not mentioned at all.

If you want to live in a theocracy, run on religious principles, move to Iran.

Patty

I am not less worthy of protection than Obama is and probably more entitled as an actual US citizen.
:thumbup:

Patty

“We hold these t***hs to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. – That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, – That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it…”
Generally, the word "God" will appear in two places in most constitutions. The first place is in the preamble to the constitution. The second place is in the religion clauses in the bill of rights. For example, the word "God" appears in the preamble in eight state constitutions. In four states, the "Supreme Ruler of the Universe" is used instead. By far, the most popular divine reference in a preamble is "Almighty God." This appears in the preamble of 30 state constitutions. In some states, the state constitution does not have a preamble. However, a divine reference can be found in the religion clauses in the bill of rights in each instance. There is only one state constitution which has a preamble that does not have a divine reference of any kind. This is the Constitution of Oregon. But here the words "Almighty God" appear in the state religion clauses.

Patty

Brian calling me "stupid, gullible and telling me to move to Iran" Is not the way to back up your claims.

Brian Devon

**************
Nice try Einstein. The mention of a creator is from the Declaration of Independence, not the U.S. Constitution. Only the constitution is a governing legal document.

The U.S. Constitution is not one and the same with state constitutions.

Like I said, if you want to live in a country run on religious principles move to Iran. You can find lots of God talk in their rules for living.

Inyourface Loc: East Coast

Another day ,another moronic rant from some rightwing know nothing. Rightwing ,women are the most pathetic creatures on this planet.

BearK Loc: TN

That legislation has the typical 'sounds good,' basic principal of taking guns out of the hands of kooks - BUT, it is written in such general terms it would allow Brain Devon to have the authorities come and take your guns.