typo -- important to import

Would Jamie Dimon try and enforce the ban?

Cuz he would be the *perfect* Treasury Sec.

LMAO!

Actually, controlling (or at least taxing) imports is one of the few legitimate functions of the federal government. Any limitation on domestic manufacture or ownership is not legitimate, of course.

I did a lot of reading up on this guy last evening. He's no dummy. He comes to the table armed with his version of "the facts" and gets everything he wants. Watch this guy.

Step 1 : ban import.
Step 2 : buy US manufacturers using fiat money.
Step 3 : close them.
Step 4 : total power.

Putting on my advocatus diaboli hat for a moment, wouldn't this be a win for US jobs? Especially if foreign manufacturers end up opening facilities in gun-friendly right-to-work states such as Texas? It'd be nice to see Sig, FN, Izmash, CZ, Glock, etc. manufacturing in the USA..

Sig already manufactures in N.H.

In the plans all along. Damn these people are evil. Every single one of them are traitors to the Republic, and unfortunately, those who took the oath to "protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic" apparently did not take that path seriously.

We're ****ed.

Vitchilo,

I don't think anyone will bother to buy American gun manufacturers. Instead, government will just lean on the banks to shut down the lines of credit for gun manufacturers.

It may not put gun manufacturers out of business, but it will sure slow down supply.

I suspect the same strategy will be used on ammunition manufacturing.

As was pointed out above, Glock, Sig, H&K, FNH and others are already doing some portion of manufacturing in the US. And many American companies would probably welcome the unfair advantage...

Why is it so difficult to get any number of congressmen into office that believe in the TRUE meaning of the 2nd amendment?

Have so many of them already been bought? Is it that easy and cheap?

he will do whatever Obama wants banksters want

fify.

"does not have a sporting purpose"

The key here is how "sporting purpose" is defined. Where exactly is their _precise_, and therefore _legal_ definition of that? Seriously, anyone know? If there isn't one, that should be legally challenged.

A glance at the Outdoor Channel programming will reveal the very many varieties of national-level rapid fire marksmanship competitions where hi cap mags and AR type rifles are absolutely essential. Are those not sports? I ask not because they're of foreign manufacture and therefore vulnerable to importation bans, I ask because "no sporting purpose" is also being used as a reason to ban even these domestically manufactured types.

If the NRA wants to throw a wrench in their works, they should come up with a rapid fire "classic foreign rifle" competition where foreign imports with the potential to be banned would be _required_ for use, replacing, for instance, AR type rifles with AKs.

And here's more non-solution, knee-jerk idiocy. The Brady's redux:

Gabby Giffords launches group to counter gun lobby

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/....

Their so-called web site which contains nothing of any substance:

http://americansforresponsiblesolutions.....

Just found this article on "sporting purpose" from way back in 1994, but its points are probably still valid. Short description of its contents - the "definition" of "sporting purpose" is determined on a whim:

The "Sporting Purpose" Issue in Gun-Control Policy
by Preston K. Covey
A paper orginally presented at the Second International Symposium on Leisure & Ethics Denver, CO, April 11,1994

http://www.saf.org/journal/6/6_covey.htm

Interesting info from the notes to that paper:

The 1991 Chicago Police Department in-depth study of 20,264 homicides from 1965-91 found that 75% of criminal homicides are committed by recidivists with prior records of criminal violence.

On this sample, assume that recidivists with prior records commit 75% of our homicides; then, 25% of our annual gun homicides are committed by previously law-abiding gun owners, such that less than 1/100th of 1% of the law-abiding gun-owning public turn homicidal each year: 18,000 gun homicides x .25 = 4500/60 million lawful gun owners = .000075 . .0075% = less than 75/10,000ths of 1% = .75/100ths = less than 1/100ths of 1%.

This estimation is comparable to another measure of the minuscule number of irresponsible armed citizens: since the new concealed carry law in Florida was enacted in 1987, less than 1/100th of 1% of the issued licenses have been revoked for the commission of any crime involving a firearm (Snyder, 1993, p.49).

Another telling indicator of the relatively low incidence of harm done by armed citizens is the following: only 2% of civilian shootings involve an innocent person mistakenly identified as a criminal, compared with an error rate of 11% for the police, while at the same time armed citizens justifiably kill three times the number of felons a year as do police (Snyder, 1993, p. 50).

We're heading for a showdown, one way or another. That's for sure.

Quote:

I can hear a great big giant sucking sound that originates in the U.S., and reaches down into Mexico (and cartel country) and throughout Central America, and then reaches overseas to Kalishnikof (sp?) land, or something like that.

http://tickerforum.org/cgi-ticker/akcs-w....
That "giant sucking sound" is getting louder.

..."sporting purposes"? WTF? The 2A was about duck hunting? I never knew.....

This is so obviously and hilariously stupid, especially Ken James' comment which is so incredibly stupid that he should be immediately be given an IQ test, that I had to mention it here:

Shootings Prompt New Gun Bill

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/50394120

Excerpt:

California assembly member Nancy Skinner answered that call with a proposal to restrict ammunition sales in the state.

“2,800 people in California were killed last year by gunfire," Skinner said. "It is easier to buy bullets than cough medicine or alcohol. It should not be that easy. We need to have much more scrutiny when it comes to the purchase of guns."

Monday she unveiled Assembly Bill 48. It would require bullet buyers to show identification. It would also require ammunition dealers to be licensed and report all sales to the department of justice.

Emmeryville police chief Ken James supports the tighter restrictions.

”Right now you can buy bullets in any store and the sale is not recorded”, James said. "Gun violence will continue unless we control the sale of bullets."

Well, they can't exempt big bore handguns then. They're definitely "sporting purpose" - for when your rifle just*****es off what you're shooting at and it's charging you.

You would be shocked to find out what the Secretary can do.

Maybe the secretary (along with every other politician) would be shocked to learn a bit of history and what can be done TO them....

Yea! you need a cowboy as Treasury Secretary someone like Clint or Arnie or Charlton.

To hell with the economy as long as you can keep your weapons of choice.

What about carrying guns on your internal airlines? surely there is some infringement of your constitutional right to bear arms here, yet it seems to have been accepted without any airport shootouts.

Quote:

To hell with the economy as long as you can keep your weapons of choice.

Maybe you forgot the dick-sucking part of the problem with him, which is NOT limited to Second Amendment concerns.

DJM

WTF?



I miss the point you were trying to make. Please explain further.

He's going to have a problem doing that