• Mossberg Owners is in the process of upgrading the software. Please bear with us while we transition to the new look and new upgraded software.

What to do when they actually come for your guns.

From the Associated Press On this day:

"Russian gun rights activist Maria Butina was sentenced to an 18-month prison term Friday in Washington after failing to register as a foreign agent for conspiring to infiltrate conservative U.S. political circles for the Kremlin."

So the Russians want us to have gun rights? Or they don't want us to have gun rights?

What the hell is the Crooked media trying to say here?

Why are the Russian sending us any gun rights Advocates when they don't have gun rights?

I think the media totally mischaracterizes her, I'm considering that somebody will notice the malaprop.
 
From the Associated Press On this day:

"Russian gun rights activist Maria Butina was sentenced to an 18-month prison term Friday in Washington after failing to register as a foreign agent for conspiring to infiltrate conservative U.S. political circles for the Kremlin."

So the Russians want us to have gun rights? Or they don't want us to have gun rights?

What the hell is the Crooked media trying to say here?

Why are the Russian sending us any gun rights Advocates when they don't have gun rights?

I think the media totally mischaracterizes her, I'm considering that somebody will notice the malaprop.

I believe the idea was to tie her to the NRA. But that kinda failed. So the NRA said hold my musket.....
 
Looks like Oli North is stepping down as he tried to get LaPierre to step down but he refused.
 
I'm convinced the "Stop Red Flag" bozos are actually antis... I'm having trouble finding a REPUTABLE source of their angst. If someone can put up a post from a REPUTABLE source and not Salon or Snopes or NPR or MSNBC or similar, I will digest it. And stand corrected. And do something about it...

The same issue also ties in with Buttina wanting to be an NRA member or something innocuous along those lines. The NRA supports many out-of-country orgs with similar philosophies and name as is in their best interest. Left media continues to report a "collusion tie" but can't verify it yet continues to spew the same shix always including the term "with ties to the NRA" in their propaganda. :mad:

I commented on a post on FB about the SRF goobers. And the "greedy" NRA. In essence, my response was similar to above: I need PROOF from a BELIEVABLE source. And to which I posed this question: Would you rather the NRA just go away? This is EXACTLY what the antis want because they will EASILY crush a lesser organization. Who will speak for you then?

Does the NRA spend money wisely? I firmly believe so, and they spend it supporting pro-gun candidates and fighting anti-gun legislation and equally importantly, training LEOs and providing gun safety training. This takes a LOT of money! Do you really think there is an organization that could do any better?

Sure, there may be improper spending but a lot of it is due to antis using their cadre of lawyers to sue the NRA into submission. Cumhole and his banking/insurance suits come to mind. And the NRATV fiasco which I do not know enough about to comment adequately...

Another fallacy is the NRA is "in the pocket of the gun manufacturers". While the NRA DOES get funding from mfgs, they also get a good amount of revenue from its members and the NSSF.

I am deeply concerned about developments with North stepping down. I NEED to know more information. This wouldn't be the first rift in the NRA and he wouldn't be the first President to leave after only a term. Is LaPierre and/or Cox the problem? Maybe. But I need to know more. Keep in mind that the only ones benefiting from this development are the antis...

And speaking of gnashing of teeth, outspoken "never-NRA-ers" may as well just give up your guns now because if the NRA goes away, your gun rights will soon after...
 

Perhaps, includes a little bit of each of,our,passionate views. Each of our perception is our own reality.
May calmer wiser heads prevail.
 
Last edited:
I'
And speaking of gnashing of teeth, outspoken "never-NRA-ers" may as well just give up your guns now because if the NRA goes away, your gun rights will soon after...

Bobster, here is one article that you probably have no seen. But you may be interested in reading it. It does have some details and name some names that you may recognize. https://www.thetrace.org/2018/07/red-flag-laws-pennsylvania-nra-stephens/

Since you do not want crazy left wing sources, perhaps going to the source is the answer you are looking for.

NRA sucks.PNG
Also please notice that the following webpage from the NRA doesn't say it opposes red flag laws. On the contrary, it just says it opposes the lack of due process. Which to me is nothing more than double speak. I oppose anyone just being able to make false reports and allegations with no evidence of wrong doing in the first place, which is where they seem to stand on the subject. Oh, and it's from the NRA so there is no wishy washy media spin on it.

https://www.nraila.org/get-the-facts/emergency-risk-protection-orders-erpos/

I will copy and paste it here in case it changes sometime in the future or is removed altogether. Emphasis in bold is mine, just so you know where the conditions on which the NRA said they supported red flag laws.

----------
1/8/19
What is the NRA's position on emergency risk protection orders (ERPOs)?
The NRA’s position on emergency risk protection orders (ERPOs) has recently been mischaracterized by some who haven't taken the time to understand our position, including the anti-gun mainstream media and organizations that purport to support the Second Amendment. Many of the individuals mischaracterizing our position are using misinformation to simply attack the NRA.
The NRA fights for the constitutional freedoms, including the due process rights, of all law-abiding Americans, every day in Congress, the statehouses and the courts. Our record on this is clear. Due process of law is a bedrock of our constitutional freedoms. Without it, we would cease to exist as a free country.
All fifty states currently have civil commitment procedures and many lack basic due process protections. This is unacceptable. The NRA believes that no one should be deprived of a fundamental right without due process of law.
Some have raised the issue of current ERPO laws in California, Oregon, Vermont and other states, suggesting that the NRA supports those laws. This is false. The NRA strongly opposed these laws because they do not protect due process rights. We will continue to oppose confiscation schemes such as these.
In addition, the NRA opposes any effort to create a federal ERPO law, in which federal agents would be tasked with seizing firearms after a hearing in federal court. As states consider ERPO laws, the NRA will continue to push for the inclusion of strong due process protections.
The NRA believes that any effort should be structured to fully protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens while preventing truly dangerous individuals from accessing firearms.
The requirements of an ERPO process that the NRA could support should include the following:

  • The process should include criminal penalties for those who bring false or frivolous charges.
  • An order should only be granted when a judge makes the determination, by clear and convincing evidence, that the person poses a significant risk of danger to themselves or others.
  • The process should require the judge to make a determination of whether the person meets the state standard for involuntary commitment. Where the standard for involuntary commitment is met, this should be the course of action taken.
  • If an ERPO is granted, the person should receive community-based mental health treatment as a condition of the ERPO.
  • Any ex parte proceeding should include admitting the individual for treatment.
  • A person’s Second Amendment rights should only be temporarily deprived after a hearing before a judge, in which the person has notice of the hearing and is given an opportunity to offer evidence on his or her behalf.
  • There should be a mechanism in place for the return of firearms upon termination of an ERPO, when a person is ordered to relinquish their firearms as a condition of the order.
  • The ERPO process should allow an individual to challenge or terminate the order, with full due process protections in place.
  • The process should allow firearms to be retained by law-abiding third parties, local law enforcement, or a federally licensed firearms dealer when an individual is ordered to relinquish such firearms as a condition of the ERPO. The individual must also have the ability to sell his or her firearms in a reasonable time without violating the order.
Again, the NRA will continue to oppose any proposal that does not fully protect due process rights. We will only support an ERPO process that strongly protects both Second Amendment rights and due process rights at the same time.
 
@Bobster I'm curious if you have had a few minutes to read ^ yet? I'm curious of your thoughts about them.
 
1/8/19
What is the NRA's position on emergency risk protection orders (ERPOs)?
The NRA’s position on emergency risk protection orders (ERPOs) has recently been mischaracterized by some who haven't taken the time to understand our position, including the anti-gun mainstream media and organizations that purport to support the Second Amendment. Many of the individuals mischaracterizing our position are using misinformation to simply attack the NRA.
The NRA fights for the constitutional freedoms, including the due process rights, of all law-abiding Americans, every day in Congress, the statehouses and the courts. Our record on this is clear. Due process of law is a bedrock of our constitutional freedoms. Without it, we would cease to exist as a free country.
All fifty states currently have civil commitment procedures and many lack basic due process protections. This is unacceptable. The NRA believes that no one should be deprived of a fundamental right without due process of law.
Some have raised the issue of current ERPO laws in California, Oregon, Vermont and other states, suggesting that the NRA supports those laws. This is false. The NRA strongly opposed these laws because they do not protect due process rights. We will continue to oppose confiscation schemes such as these.

In addition, the NRA opposes any effort to create a federal ERPO law, in which federal agents would be tasked with seizing firearms after a hearing in federal court. As states consider ERPO laws, the NRA will continue to push for the inclusion of strong due process protections.
The NRA believes that any effort should be structured to fully protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens while preventing truly dangerous individuals from accessing firearms.
The requirements of an ERPO process that the NRA could support should include the following:

  • The process should include criminal penalties for those who bring false or frivolous charges.
  • An order should only be granted when a judge makes the determination, by clear and convincing evidence, that the person poses a significant risk of danger to themselves or others.
  • The process should require the judge to make a determination of whether the person meets the state standard for involuntary commitment. Where the standard for involuntary commitment is met, this should be the course of action taken.
  • If an ERPO is granted, the person should receive community-based mental health treatment as a condition of the ERPO.
  • Any ex parte proceeding should include admitting the individual for treatment.
  • A person’s Second Amendment rights should only be temporarily deprived after a hearing before a judge, in which the person has notice of the hearing and is given an opportunity to offer evidence on his or her behalf.
  • There should be a mechanism in place for the return of firearms upon termination of an ERPO, when a person is ordered to relinquish their firearms as a condition of the order.
  • The ERPO process should allow an individual to challenge or terminate the order, with full due process protections in place.
  • The process should allow firearms to be retained by law-abiding third parties, local law enforcement, or a federally licensed firearms dealer when an individual is ordered to relinquish such firearms as a condition of the ERPO. The individual must also have the ability to sell his or her firearms in a reasonable time without violating the order.
Again, the NRA will continue to oppose any proposal that does not fully protect due process rights. We will only support an ERPO process that strongly protects both Second Amendment rights and due process rights at the same time.

I fixed it for you, John... ;) Interpretation: NRA OPPOSES Federal "Red Flag" laws. BUT, if a state creates their own RF law, the NRA will push for due process inclusions. Think of the "list" as making it easy for state legislatures to adopt a sensible strategy because there are MANY states that have NOT... This is obviously open to very NEGATIVE interpretation by many looking to beat on the NRA either for or against more gun or mental health laws.

And thank you for the info, John. I appreciate the debate and perhaps I will convince others and perhaps you that there is a lot of mis-interpreted and mis-presented info on the subject out there. People seeing only what they want to see...

I was aware of the bump-stock condemnation and the NRA's attempt to blame it on Nobama. :rolleyes: They soon walked this back if I remember correctly. It was a knee-jerk attempt to appease those who will not be appeased (ie: antis). You can bet your petutie I let them know that ANY capitulation was NOT acceptable. NO giving them an inch--not even a millimeter! Because they will try to take 10 miles! In the end, bumpys lost but I don't think they will be missed and there are many ways to replicate automatic fire that don't require a commercial device.

I'm not necessarily a fan of LaPierre or Cox nor am I sticking up for them but who should we put in their place? Imagine having a job where you are constantly under attack from a propaganda press and any number of well-funded elitists looking to disarm the citizenry so they can make "subjects" out of us...

I should add that a whole lot of knee-jerking went on here in FL after the MSD shooting. An onerous law was put up that could have been worse but still resulted in "A" rated legislators get bumped down to "C" rated simply for voting for it. Currently, the FL legislators are voting to allow teachers to be armed but that will be superfluous because they are leaving it up to the school boards to decide and many have said "no". I'll be at my county meeting tomorrow around this time to voice my opinion...

Excerpt from the initial bumpy statement below. I think the goal was to give up bumpys in order to gain National Reciprocity but that never happened...



nragreat.jpg
 
Last edited:
Actually, you didn't fix it for me Bobster.

I pasted it verbatim from what's on their website.

Further, in my opinion, there is no difference between state or federal red flag laws. I dislike both equally.

And any organization who supports it, whether in full, or in part, does not align with my beliefs.
 
Further, in my opinion, there is no difference between state or federal red flag laws. I dislike both equally.

And any organization who supports it, whether in full, or in part, does not align with my beliefs.

I dislike RF laws as well. I don't believe the NRA supports RF laws either but more so supports the inclusion of due process and thoughtful storage of seized firearms. States are going to make their laws regardless of what the NRA thinks. And it sounds to me that some states have just knee-jerked laws into place that do not provide for due process or return of private property (ie: guns).
 
. . .The process should allow firearms to be retained by law-abiding third parties, local law enforcement, or a federally licensed firearms dealer when an individual is ordered to relinquish such firearms as a condition of the ERPO. The individual must also have the ability to sell his or her firearms in a reasonable time without violating the order. . . .

This is the situation here, but you must pay about $30 per gun to the FFL, plus his storage fees, and pay each way ($60) if you are allowed to get them back. Storage fees for guns are prohibitive. There are liabilities to the FFL. It's a big PITA.

Everyone in this situation usually sells off the guns, because of this.

But also because the prices have risen and selling becomes economically attractive if you save $30 each plus profit on the prices. Used gun sales are pretty brisk IMO, so the FFLs will make a buck fast, and no storage issues.
 
Yes, FFL's are not interested in storing a bunch of guns that don't belong to them and likely never will belong to them. They are actually liable for any damage or theft or loss due to natural disasters or fire or whatever for each item. Plus, the paperwork is going to be a PITA too. Not only will they have to deal with the normal federal acquisition and disposition stuff that they always have to abide by, they're also going to have to deal with police department criteria, state/local paperwork, likely from the state attorney general.

If Joe Doe has an old single shot shotgun seized that might have a resell value of $100 that he wont' be getting back, the FFL would be out more money for insurance and clerical time than the gun would be worth.
 
Back
Top