Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

BFA helping Dewine stab gun owners in the back

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • BFA helping Dewine stab gun owners in the back

    I want to thank JIM IRVINE for his guidance on (More violation of the Bill Of Rights) for adding more Unconstitutional information to the NICS. - Jon Husted

    WTH are you doing?

    You can’t Enter warrants, red flag laws against someone when you know they will never be taken off. You get the govt to remove VETERANS from the NICS for PTSD that WERE NEVER ADJUDICATED .

    You should be fighting to repeal the corrupt and useless NICS.

    You should be ashamed!

    You are supporting an Authoritarian State and Corrupt politicians create a national database. And the criminals will do what they want. And you know it.

    The criminals are Laughing at you idiots.

    BTW, it’s not the job of government to keep us as individuals safe, it’s their Job to protect and uphold the constitution and FREEDOM.

    There is a reason the founders wanted the Government limited and not the people.
    And you are supporting the Authoritarian Totalitarian Govt.


    https://ohiochannel.org/collections/...or-mike-dewine
    I carry a firearm because a cop is too heavy and takes too many breaks.

    Montani Semper Liberi - (Mountaineers Are Always Free)

  • #2
    What are you talking about?

    If you are so familiar with how the eventual bill will read, why don't you just go ahead and post it here for all to read and discuss.
    Then when it comes out, you can point to it and say "See! I told you."
    And everyone will know how smart you are.
    Jim

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by jirvine View Post
      What are you talking about?

      If you are so familiar with how the eventual bill will read, why don't you just go ahead and post it here for all to read and discuss.
      Then when it comes out, you can point to it and say "See! I told you."
      And everyone will know how smart you are.
      Jim
      I'm going by what the man said. Why are you are willing to accept any new gun control laws? I thought that is what your members were paying you to do, to stop ALL gun control laws in Ohio? That's what you claim you do.

      Your compromising on our 2nd Amendment skirt is showing again.
      I carry a firearm because a cop is too heavy and takes too many breaks.

      Montani Semper Liberi - (Mountaineers Are Always Free)

      Comment


      • #4
        Our members don't pay me anything. Directly or through BFA. I work as a volunteer.
        What new gun control laws did we accept???

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by jirvine View Post
          Our members don't pay me anything. Directly or through BFA. I work as a volunteer.
          What new gun control laws did we accept???
          So, that means you don’t have to represent them when they join BFA?

          Explains a lot.


          I carry a firearm because a cop is too heavy and takes too many breaks.

          Montani Semper Liberi - (Mountaineers Are Always Free)

          Comment


          • #6
            Enough already! If you are going to criticize be constructive.

            Did BFA leadership get too close to DeWine and make mistakes? Yes. Did DeWine lie to BFA leadership? Yes! Is BFA anti-freedom? No! Is their mistake in the past where it cannot be undone? Yes.

            Can we all admit that politicians lie, that people make mistakes, and now have conversations about how to deal with DeWine and his potential influence on legislation in order to protect our rights?
            "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms**disarm only those who [don't] commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides." - Thomas Jefferson.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by wvriflemannoh View Post

              So, that means you don’t have to represent them when they join BFA?

              Explains a lot.

              I didn't say that, because I didn't mean that. I work for BFA and for BFA's cause. To defend and restore your rights.

              If you don't believe in our cause, then don't support our organization. That is one of many reasons why freedom is so great.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by liberty View Post
                Enough already! If you are going to criticize be constructive.

                Did BFA leadership get too close to DeWine and make mistakes? Yes. Did DeWine lie to BFA leadership? Yes! Is BFA anti-freedom? No! Is their mistake in the past where it cannot be undone? Yes.

                Can we all admit that politicians lie, that people make mistakes, and now have conversations about how to deal with DeWine and his potential influence on legislation in order to protect our rights?
                I'm not sure what lies you think DeWine made to BFA leadership. Heck I don't know what truths you think he said to us.

                Yes, people lie. Politicians and non-politicians. All politicians are different. We judge each of them on their own merits.

                Yes, people make mistakes. And being human, I've made my share. (Some will say a lot more than my share)

                On having conversations with DeWine and his administration on potential legislation and protecting our rights - Yes we are doing that. Have been for a long time. Will continue to do so.

                What will be the outcome? Time will tell. So far there is no DeWine gun control bill. There are lots of gun control bills out there, so if the objection really is about gun control bills, they are out there. Go rage on them. See today's Senate Government oversight and reform committee for several examples.

                But Liberty is dead right on something here. We need to be constructive. We need to fight together, or we will lose. We are in a battle we have never won against an opponent who we can't compete on with money. We have a ballot initiative next year forcing UBC on us financed by Michael Bloomberg. We have a deluge of anti-gun bills and we have Republicans carrying and championing them. (A tiny minority of Republicans, but still we have not faced that threat in years) The leaders of the Democratic party have declared outright war on our rights, though there are sill D's who are very strong supporters of your rights.

                It's simple. Either you are with us, or against us.

                We will work with those who want to join us.

                We will work to defeat those who want destroy us, to kill good legislation, to pass dangerous legislation, to deny freedom and the American way.

                Choose sides - the games are well underway.

                Note: I quoted Liberty, but much of this post is not directed at him specifically. It is to his point that we all need to work constructively toward solutions to real problems and threats we face.

                Comment


                • #9
                  If DeWine said he supports the 2nd Amendment--he lied. People like him, Kasich, Strickland, Taft, and those Republican legislators you referenced only know how to speak in support of their political campaigns. As such, some things might be true some things might be false and some things might not the the whole truth, but everything is motivated by their quest for power. I think you guys intellectually understand this, but I don't know if you really understand how evil DeWine and some others around him and in the legislature are.

                  DeWine is very dangerous. When he spoke to Bob Frantz about his yet-to-be proposed red flag law, he sounded very concerned and very reasonable to the untrained ear. But I know Ohio criminal law (because I teach it) and I know what lawyers like DeWine know or must know about Ohio law. DeWine has to know that every example he gave for the need for a red flag law already has an adequate remedy in Ohio law. He was Attorney General for crying out loud! He also sounded very concerned about making sure there is adequate due process in any new red flag law, but what he described, and what we know about other state's red flag laws is that their very purpose is confiscation without due process. Due process exists with current remedies. The purpose of red flag laws do is take away due process and base permission to own firearms upon what they define as mental stability, which will become if you own an AR-15 the only reason must be to kill many people and you must therefore be mentally unstable--and since Trump is a racist (even though there is no evidence of such but the media says so) anyone who votes for him must also be and are therefore mentally unstable, dangerous and must have their firearms taken. It is the same playbook used by the former soviet union, the nazis and others.

                  The Republicans who are supporting the gun control laws need to be named and challenged in the primaries. I suspect that they have been the force behind the stalling, watering down, and adding poison pills in the past. I suspect they and some others were Kasich's stealth force while he was pretending to support freedom.

                  The UBC ballot issue is very dangerous. Ohioans were tricked into repealing the collective bargaining limits for people who did not want to participate back in 2011 (i.e., forced donations to democrats) and just last year into depriving elected officials of redistricting authority--because democrats cannot win enough elections to have an influence. These things were done with ballot issues because democrats lacked power in the legislature. And they were successful because of well funded misinformation campaigns that fooled many voters into voting against their own interests and contrary to how they voted for their legislator. These things indicate to me that Bloomterd has a chance of being successful, and everybody needs to unite in order to fight that ballot issue. There has to be a united campaign to counter the coming misinformation. And we have to be careful not to accept their false narratives and argue what they want us to argue. If we lose that, it is a big deal, but it is a bigger deal because they will do it again, and if it is put in the Ohio Constitution, the legislature cannot change it.
                  "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms**disarm only those who [don't] commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides." - Thomas Jefferson.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Actions, not words.
                    Billary/Schumer/Inhofe/Curz/DeWine/pro/anti/anyone - I don't worry near as much about what someone is saying as what someone is doing.

                    I understand why there is concern with DeWine. All I'm saying is wait till you see his legislation to form an opinion on it. (No, I have not seen it - they are still discussing and drafting) But I will say if all he wanted to do was take guns, it would not take this long to draft something. Doing it right takes more time. Taking time is not scoring him political points, so I'll let you form your own opinions as to why.

                    You can't target someone in a primary when they are term limited out. Such is the case with Peggy Lehner (R-6). There is nothing that takes power away from the people like term limits. Hands the power to political parties and lobbyists. Full disclosure - I voted for them. God willing, it will be the worst vote I ever cast. I didn't understand a lot of things back then, but I've sure learned a lot since. Live and learn.

                    UBC and ballot initiative. That is the mother of all fights, and we are way behind. Bloomberg is smart and evil. Win or lose, the battle will not end there. He will keep coming as long as he's able. If we want our kids to enjoy the American we grew up in, we better raise our game and do it fast. The threat he poses can not be overstated.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I think it is more complicated as whether DeWine wants to take guns or not. He wants power for himself and other left leaning republicans. Part of that is getting reelected, and BFA's support may be necessary for that to happen. I think they are working on making their proposals so they achieve the anti-freedom agenda while appearing to be acceptable to BFA and other groups. That is what people like DeWine are good at--pander to the base while surreptitiously stabbing them in the back. The democrat party has done that to the black community for years. Now, many republicans are doing that to us.

                      And this whole thing is based upon a false premise--that taking firearms from someone who wants to harm others will prevent violence. It is an absurd premise, and we already have a mechanism in place to deal with that situation--the 72 hour hold and mental evaluation, which removes the person from society. The media changed the narrative to blame the tool used, which DeWine accepted so that he can put a structure in place that would enable other government officials to take our firearms without due process.

                      So, I believe that DeWine is disingenuous, and I would advise you to be very,very cautious.
                      "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms**disarm only those who [don't] commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides." - Thomas Jefferson.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        We agree about the 72 hour hold (pink slip) in current law.
                        See:
                        https://www.buckeyefirearms.org/curr...lized-properly

                        But there are a couple problems with that section that could be improved.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by liberty View Post
                          The media changed the narrative to blame the tool used,
                          Agree!

                          Originally posted by liberty View Post
                          which DeWine accepted
                          Maybe - I don't know.

                          Originally posted by liberty View Post
                          so that he can put a structure in place that would enable other government officials to take our firearms without due process.
                          I disagree. He has been very clear to us and in press conferences that he will respect due process.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by jirvine View Post

                            I disagree. He has been very clear to us and in press conferences that he will respect due process.
                            If it were Kasich or another non-lawyer politician I might not question motivation, but DeWine is a lawyer and was Ohio's attorney general. I know there are some lawyers that lack depth of understanding with complex laws and lawyers who might not have enough knowledge in certain areas of law, but DeWine is not one of those. From what I understand, DeWine is a very smart man and understands Ohio law very well.

                            Red flaw laws by their very nature have been mechanisms of disarmament without due process. In addition to the 72 hour hold, Ohio already has the following protection order authority: (CrPO) R.C. § 2903.213, (DV TPO) R.C. § 2919.26, (CSPO or CSOOPO) R.C. § 2903.214, (JCPO) R.C. § 2151.34, (DV CPO) & (DV JCPO) R.C. § 3113.31. Imposition of a 72 hour hold or any of these orders triggers both the federal firearms prohibition and Ohio's prohibition found in R.C. § 2923.13.

                            All of those mechanisms provide for disarmament and due process later. DeWine knows this. What we already have, by their very nature, can be construed as red flaw laws. So existing law does not respect due process very well, and DeWine thinks it is inadequate.

                            We will have to wait an see what he comes up with, but I am very skeptical. He may also be working behind the scenes like Kasich and others have done with the current onslaught of gun control bills.
                            "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms**disarm only those who [don't] commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides." - Thomas Jefferson.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by jirvine View Post

                              I disagree. He has been very clear to us and in press conferences that he will respect due process.
                              LOL. OMG, Dewine has lied to your face when he was running for office and you think you can believe him now?! I still can’t believe you said that. LOL

                              It’s another lie and you know it. The only reason I can think of that you would even entertain this notion is because you agree with the Red Flag Gun Confiscation Laws on principle. And that would be a disgrace and treachery to the cause. You still understand what the Cause is, right?

                              Here, let me remind you again.


                              In Federalist 46, Alexander Hamilton explained why the right to bear arms was so fundamental in preserving American Liberty. In Europe, governments didn't "trust the people with arms". However, their history was filled with examples of leaders and governments trampling on rights of the people with impunity. This is what the founders desperately wanted to avoid.

                              An armed populace, the "militia" that the 2nd Amendment refers to, is an additional check on power of Government, a last resort for those who may be oppressed.


                              As National Review's David French wrote:

                              "The Musket was the principle weapon of armed conflict in the 18th century. An American Leaving his home with a musket was on par with a member of the Continental Line. Not so with an American who possesses any number of AR-15'S or AK-47's. The contemporary gap between civilians and the military is vast and growing".

                              The advancement of weapon Technology would likely NOT have surprised the Founders, who after all lived in an era of remarkable innovation. What would shock them is the Government would have become so powerful and capable of depriving people of their liberty in an blink of an eye.

                              You notice the word “Militia” is ignored by most in this argument?


                              The 2nd Amendment Recognizes the Militia as "necessary" to this peculiar type of political system known as "a free State".

                              You get it now?

                              Anyone awake?




                              I carry a firearm because a cop is too heavy and takes too many breaks.

                              Montani Semper Liberi - (Mountaineers Are Always Free)

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X