Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 19
Thanks Tree23Thanks

Thread: Vermont governor signs sweeping gun control measures

  1. #1
    Veteran Member Micro Machines Champion, Race Against Time Champion Tedminator's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    24,404
    Thanks
    14341

    From
    South Florida

    Vermont governor signs sweeping gun control measures

    Vermont governor signs sweeping gun control measures
    https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/11/us/vermont-gun-control/index.html


    Vermont Gov. Phil Scott on Wednesday signed sweeping gun control measures -- including limits on the size of magazines -- that the Legislature passed last month after contentious debate.

    The measures:
    -- Raise the minimum age for gun buyers to 21;
    -- Ban bump stocks, which allow semiautomatic weapons to fire more rapidly;
    -- Require all gun transactions to be facilitated by a licensed dealer who would perform background checks, except for law enforcement or military members acting within their duties, or for gun transfers between immediate family members;
    -- Limit rifle magazines to 10 rounds. State residents will be permitted to keep larger-capacity magazines they already own.

    As he signed the measures, Scott, a Republican, called himself a Second Amendment supporter who owns guns and has hunted his whole life. But he said continued mass shootings in the United States and a recently foiled school shooting plot at Fair Haven Union High School in Vermont "forced me to do some soul searching." "I want every student and every school, every mom and dad, every victim of violence in any form to know that today we stand together as we take steps towards making our community safer for all of us," Scott said.
    ..snip..



    Good for VT

  2. #2
    Veteran Member beatleboy's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    12,049
    Thanks
    3915

    From
    east coast
    Wow, a Republican with some balls to do the right thing, a Republican who defies the NRA. Giving me some hope there are some GOPers with brains.
    Thanks from Friday13 and KnotaFrayed

  3. #3
    Human Bean KnotaFrayed's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    14,242
    Thanks
    11770

    From
    Here
    Quote Originally Posted by Tedminator View Post
    Vermont governor signs sweeping gun control measures
    https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/11/us/vermont-gun-control/index.html


    Vermont Gov. Phil Scott on Wednesday signed sweeping gun control measures -- including limits on the size of magazines -- that the Legislature passed last month after contentious debate.

    The measures:
    -- Raise the minimum age for gun buyers to 21;
    -- Ban bump stocks, which allow semiautomatic weapons to fire more rapidly;
    -- Require all gun transactions to be facilitated by a licensed dealer who would perform background checks, except for law enforcement or military members acting within their duties, or for gun transfers between immediate family members;
    -- Limit rifle magazines to 10 rounds. State residents will be permitted to keep larger-capacity magazines they already own.

    As he signed the measures, Scott, a Republican, called himself a Second Amendment supporter who owns guns and has hunted his whole life. But he said continued mass shootings in the United States and a recently foiled school shooting plot at Fair Haven Union High School in Vermont "forced me to do some soul searching." "I want every student and every school, every mom and dad, every victim of violence in any form to know that today we stand together as we take steps towards making our community safer for all of us," Scott said.
    ..snip..



    Good for VT
    "Sweeping"???? It didn't sweep all the guns out of people's hands as the NRA and some very vocal (but not all) gun owners always seem to contend, suggesting that any effort to place human lives over inanimate deadly weapons is tantamount to doing away with Amendment II and "they're coming to take your guns away".....which was NOT the case. For Vermont, the law may be described as "sweeping", since there were few gun laws to begin with, but it hardly took anyone's guns away, for all it may have place limitations on some ownership. I know that's not what you suggested or said, but with relatives in Vermont, the resistance to the law was supported mostly by the same old NRA memes.

    "On pp. 54 and 55, the majority opinion, written by conservative bastion Justice Antonin Scalia, states: “Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited…”. It is “…not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”

    “Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”

    “We also recognize another important limitation on the right to keep and carry arms. Miller (an earlier case) said, as we have explained, that the sorts of weapons protected were those “in common use at the time”. We think that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of ‘dangerous and unusual weapons.’ ”


    The Supreme Court Ruling on the 2nd Amendment Did NOT Grant an Unlimited Right to Own Guns | Big Think

    It would appear the NRA and some, not all of their membership would prefer to turn the U.S. into a combat zone where everyone is armed and arms are everywhere. Of course, gun manufacturers would love nothing more than to see that as well, but just the notion of doing so has divided this nation severely and as anyone can see, if more guns were the solution to gun violence the U.S. would be the least gun violent nation on the planet.

    Is the NRA rhetoric or agenda, merely to sell more arms for the arms industry or are they trying to foment chaos and division in our nation with their dictated, skewed interpretation of Amendment II, which even their "conservative" hero did NOT support in his cautions in his agreement with the majority decision, that there is a reason total bans are unconstitutional, but limitations on the types of arms and who shall have an Amendment II right to keep and bear them, is constitutional.
    Last edited by KnotaFrayed; 15th April 2018 at 10:44 AM.

  4. #4
    the "good" prag pragmatic's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    30,789
    Thanks
    18936

    From
    between Moon and NYC
    Quote Originally Posted by Tedminator View Post
    Vermont governor signs sweeping gun control measures
    https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/11/us/vermont-gun-control/index.html


    Vermont Gov. Phil Scott on Wednesday signed sweeping gun control measures -- including limits on the size of magazines -- that the Legislature passed last month after contentious debate.

    The measures:
    -- Raise the minimum age for gun buyers to 21;
    -- Ban bump stocks, which allow semiautomatic weapons to fire more rapidly;
    -- Require all gun transactions to be facilitated by a licensed dealer who would perform background checks, except for law enforcement or military members acting within their duties, or for gun transfers between immediate family members;
    -- Limit rifle magazines to 10 rounds. State residents will be permitted to keep larger-capacity magazines they already own.

    As he signed the measures, Scott, a Republican, called himself a Second Amendment supporter who owns guns and has hunted his whole life. But he said continued mass shootings in the United States and a recently foiled school shooting plot at Fair Haven Union High School in Vermont "forced me to do some soul searching." "I want every student and every school, every mom and dad, every victim of violence in any form to know that today we stand together as we take steps towards making our community safer for all of us," Scott said.
    ..snip..



    Good for VT
    Nothing on that list seems too unreasonable to me.

    If the majority of his constituents favor the measures, the Governor is just doing his job.
    Thanks from KnotaFrayed, Devil505, One and 1 others

  5. #5
    Veteran Member Micro Machines Champion, Race Against Time Champion Tedminator's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    24,404
    Thanks
    14341

    From
    South Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by pragmatic View Post
    Nothing on that list seems too unreasonable to me.

    If the majority of his constituents favor the measures, the Governor is just doing his job.
    yup, its all very reasonable yet these irresponsible gun nuts complain and will probably sue VT just as they sued FL...


    NRA turns against Gov. Scott over gun control
    https://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/...rol/514839002/
    The National Rifle Association is calling on gun owners to abandon Gov. Phil Scott after he approved a package of gun-related laws this week.

    "This governor in Vermont completely gave a one-finger salute to the Constitution and to gun owners," said Dana Loesch, a national spokeswoman for the National Rifle Association, during her NRATV program Thursday.

    "He is no friend of firearm owners," Loesch continued, "and I hope that all firearm owners remember this betrayal the next time hes up for re-election."

    The NRA gave Scott an A rating during his first gubernatorial campaign in 2016, when Scott said he saw no need for new Vermont gun laws. The governor changed his position in February "after deep reflection" after an alleged school shooting plot came to light in Fair Haven, and on Wednesday he signed three gun-related bills into law.
    ..snip..
    Thanks from KnotaFrayed and Friday13

  6. #6
    the "good" prag pragmatic's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    30,789
    Thanks
    18936

    From
    between Moon and NYC
    Quote Originally Posted by Tedminator View Post
    yup, its all very reasonable yet these irresponsible gun nuts complain and will probably sue VT just as they sued FL...


    NRA turns against Gov. Scott over gun control
    https://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/...rol/514839002/
    The National Rifle Association is calling on gun owners to abandon Gov. Phil Scott after he approved a package of gun-related laws this week.

    "This governor in Vermont completely gave a one-finger salute to the Constitution and to gun owners," said Dana Loesch, a national spokeswoman for the National Rifle Association, during her NRATV program Thursday.

    "He is no friend of firearm owners," Loesch continued, "and I hope that all firearm owners remember this betrayal the next time hes up for re-election."

    The NRA gave Scott an A rating during his first gubernatorial campaign in 2016, when Scott said he saw no need for new Vermont gun laws. The governor changed his position in February "after deep reflection" after an alleged school shooting plot came to light in Fair Haven, and on Wednesday he signed three gun-related bills into law.
    ..snip..
    Meh.....it's sort of the NRA's role to "overreact" gun restriction legislation. Not unlike how the more extreme "gun control" activist tend to overreach with their proposals.

    I'm still a member/supporter of the NRA. They provide necessary balancing element in my view.


    (And Dana Loesch is kinda hot....!!)

  7. #7
    Human Bean KnotaFrayed's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    14,242
    Thanks
    11770

    From
    Here
    Quote Originally Posted by pragmatic View Post
    Meh.....it's sort of the NRA's role to "overreact" gun restriction legislation. Not unlike how the more extreme "gun control" activist tend to overreach with their proposals.

    I'm still a member/supporter of the NRA. They provide necessary balancing element in my view.


    (And Dana Loesch is kinda hot....!!)
    I was a member of the NRA for a long time, BEFORE it became mostly a political lobbying organization. The Constitution, Congress, the SCOTUS and the President signing or vetoing law, decide what the Constitution means, NOT the NRA.

    The NRA initially had no interest in firearms legislation and was not founded for that purpose or with that mission. Now, it consumes most of its purpose.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation...le_Association


    At least one President of the U.S. also felt unlike you do, with regard to any sort of "balancing element".

    https://www.nytimes.com/1995/05/11/u...sociation.html

    As with President Bush, but earlier than he and with additional reasons than he states for quitting, the NRA has poised itself as some sort of "protector" of Amendment II and dictator of it's interpretation, usurping both from the only body that "the people", NOT paid membership, empowered to do so. It has also promoted the idea that the federal government is the enemy of the American people or at least, the enemy of those who own firearms. There are plenty of Americans, many of them also gun owners, who have the same problems with the NRA that G.H.W Bush expressed. The NRA has done more to drive wedges and divide the American people than perhaps any other private organization that exists. It has done more than any organization to promote the idea that the federal government, the same government that protects the right of the people of the nation, is a greater threat to the people of America, than a protector of the rights of the same people and protector of a means of checks and balances to any singular power.

    Ironically, the NRA has done nothing, once it went political, especially in recent decades, but pursue its own singular power, without being elected to do so, by anyone, but paid membership.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...ssociation-nra

    http://fortune.com/2016/01/05/nra-gun-owners-obama/

    http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank...d-experiences/

    https://www.rollingstone.com/politic...erica-20130131


    A further irony is that the NRA's most powerful spokesperson and leader to the current NRA, was not interested in guns, but is a skilled "marketeer", selling some on the ideas that have become the NRA's current ideology, even if they do not reflect the ideology of many gun owners or the majority of Americans.
    https://newrepublic.com/article/1125...ns-softer-side
    Last edited by KnotaFrayed; 15th April 2018 at 07:26 PM.
    Thanks from Friday13

  8. #8
    Civis americanus borealis Singularity's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    26,076
    Thanks
    17245

    From
    Kansas
    Quote Originally Posted by Tedminator View Post
    yup, its all very reasonable yet these irresponsible gun nuts complain and will probably sue VT just as they sued FL...


    NRA turns against Gov. Scott over gun control
    https://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/...rol/514839002/
    The National Rifle Association is calling on gun owners to abandon Gov. Phil Scott after he approved a package of gun-related laws this week.

    "This governor in Vermont completely gave a one-finger salute to the Constitution and to gun owners," said Dana Loesch, a national spokeswoman for the National Rifle Association, during her NRATV program Thursday.

    "He is no friend of firearm owners," Loesch continued, "and I hope that all firearm owners remember this betrayal the next time hes up for re-election."

    The NRA gave Scott an A rating during his first gubernatorial campaign in 2016, when Scott said he saw no need for new Vermont gun laws. The governor changed his position in February "after deep reflection" after an alleged school shooting plot came to light in Fair Haven, and on Wednesday he signed three gun-related bills into law.
    ..snip..
    Would the NRA prefer a liberal Democrat? In Vermont, they're liable to get one.
    Thanks from Friday13

  9. #9
    Moderator HCProf's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    20,273
    Thanks
    10729

    From
    USA
    Quote Originally Posted by pragmatic View Post
    Meh.....it's sort of the NRA's role to "overreact" gun restriction legislation. Not unlike how the more extreme "gun control" activist tend to overreach with their proposals.

    I'm still a member/supporter of the NRA. They provide necessary balancing element in my view.


    (And Dana Loesch is kinda hot....!!)
    LOL....sure if you are into nutjob, crazy eyed women. She is dark and sinister.

  10. #10
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    58,842
    Thanks
    28829

    From
    Vulcan
    Quote Originally Posted by pragmatic View Post
    (And Dana Loesch is kinda hot....!!)
    Yes, she is ... but she is also a nutjob supreme (as is often the case with hot women).
    Thanks from Friday13 and KnotaFrayed

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 22
    Last Post: 2nd March 2018, 09:59 PM
  2. Voters Strengthen Gun Control Measures in 3 States
    By thrilling in forum Current Events
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 13th November 2016, 05:20 PM
  3. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 15th June 2016, 04:59 PM
  4. Measures to control Sudan water pollution to be taken soon
    By FRANCIS21 in forum Current Events
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 27th November 2010, 02:48 AM
  5. Obama signs sweeping financial overhaul into law
    By Devil505 in forum Current Events
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 21st July 2010, 11:00 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed