Obama going after both the first and 2nd amendments 2 birds one stone style

[m>s]

So what are they going to try to shut down all the gun forums? TSA get in here.

http://m.washingtonexaminer.com/nra-gun-blogs-videos-web-forums-threatened-by-new-obama-regulation/article/2565762

[m>s]

NRA: Gun blogs, videos, web forums threatened by new Obama regulationBY: Paul Bedard (http://washingtonexaminer.com/author/paul-bedard) June 7, 2015 | 10:10 am
394COMMENTS (http://m.washingtonexaminer.com/nra-gun-blogs-videos-web-forums-threatened-by-new-obama-regulation/article/2565762/comments#disqus_thread)
880 (http://m.washingtonexaminer.com/nra-gun-blogs-videos-web-forums-threatened-by-new-obama-regulation/article/2565762#)




http://cdn.washingtonexaminer.biz/cache/r620-e6bb709120c0f4e985d08bb6200ae2c9.jpg (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/gallery/articleid/2565762/pictures/2771824?display=mobile&thumbs=true)AP Photo
WASHINGTON SECRETS (http://m.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/washington-secrets) GUN CONTROL (http://m.washingtonexaminer.com/section/gun-control) STATE DEPARTMENT (http://m.washingtonexaminer.com/section/state-department) NRA (http://m.washingtonexaminer.com/section/nra)
Commonly used and unregulated internet discussions and videos about guns and ammo could be closed down under rules proposed by the State Department, amounting to a "gag order on firearm-related speech," the National Rifle Association is warning.
In updating regulations governing international arms sales, State is demanding that anyone who puts technical details about arms and ammo on the web first get the OK from the federal government — or face a fine of up to $1 million and 20 years in jail.



The number of kids who call home once a day from campus may be higher than you think.PROMOTED BY FORD




RELATED: House votes to let nonviolent ex-felons restore gun rights (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2565685)
According to the NRA, that would include blogs and web forums discussing technical details of common guns and ammunition, the type of info gun owners and ammo reloaders trade all the time.
"Gunsmiths, manufacturers, reloaders, and do-it-yourselfers could all find themselves muzzled under the rule and unable to distribute or obtain the information they rely on to conduct these activities," said the NRA in a blog posting (https://www.nraila.org/articles/20150605/stop-obamas-planned-gag-order-on-firearm-related-speech).
RELATED: Should guns be allowed on college campuses? (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2565685)
"This latest regulatory assault, published in the June 3 issue of the Federal Register (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-06-03/pdf/2015-12844.pdf), is as much an affront to the First Amendment as it is to the Second," warned the NRA's lobbying shop. "Your action is urgently needed to ensure that online blogs, videos, and web forums devoted to the technical aspects of firearms and ammunition do not become subject to prior review by State Department bureaucrats before they can be published," it added.
https://securesubs.intermediaoutdoors.com/images/Digital/AMO/AMOJun2015_2.jpgWebsites like the popular Guns & Ammo have forums to discuss gun and ammo technical details.

At issue is the internet. State is updating International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), which implement the federal Arms Export Control Act (AECA). The rules govern everything from guns to strategic bombers.
The NRA said that the rules predate the internet, and now the federal government wants to regulate technical arms discussions on on the internationally available web.
RELATED: Bam: Arms maker to sell 6,134 guns a day to benefit NRA (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2565480)
State's proposal is highly technical. It took 14 pages in the Federal Register to explain. But the NRA boiled it down for gun owners with this warning:
"In their current form, the ITAR do not (as a rule) regulate technical data that are in what the regulations call the 'public domain.' Essentially, this means data 'which is published and which is generally accessible or available to the public' through a variety of specified means. These include 'at libraries open to the public or from which the public can obtain documents.' Many have read this provision to include material that is posted on publicly available websites, since most public libraries these days make Internet access available to their patrons.
"The ITAR, however, were originally promulgated in the days before the Internet. Some State Department officials now insist that anything published online in a generally-accessible location has essentially been 'exported,' as it would be accessible to foreign nationals both in the U.S. and overseas.
"With the new proposal published on June 3, the State Department claims to be 'clarifying' the rules concerning 'technical data' posted online or otherwise 'released' into the 'public domain.' To the contrary, however, the proposal would institute a massive new prior restraint on free speech. This is because all such releases would require the 'authorization' of the government before they occurred. The cumbersome and time-consuming process of obtaining such authorizations, moreover, would make online communication about certain technical aspects of firearms and ammunition essentially impossible."
Below are the State changes drawing the NRA fire:

Paragraph (b) of the revised definition explicitly sets forth the Department's requirement of authorization to release information into the ''public domain.'' Prior to making available ''technical data'' or software subject to the ITAR, the U.S. government must approve the release through one of the following: (1) The Department; (2) the Department of Defense's Office of Security Review; (3) a relevant U.S. government contracting authority with authority to allow the ''technical data'' or software to be made available to the public, if one exists; or (4) another U.S. government official with authority to allow the ''technical data'' or software to be made available to the public.

The requirements of paragraph (b) are not new. Rather, they are a more explicit statement of the ITAR's requirement that one must seek and receive a license or other authorization from the Department or other cognizant U.S. government authority to release ITAR controlled ''technical data,'' as defined in § 120.10. A release of ''technical data'' may occur by disseminating ''technical data'' at a public conference or trade show, publishing ''technical data'' in a book or journal article, or posting ''technical data'' to the Internet.

This proposed provision will enhance compliance with the ITAR by clarifying that ''technical data'' may not be made available to the public without authorization. Persons who intend to discuss ''technical data'' at a conference or trade show, or to publish it, must ensure that they obtain the appropriate authorization.

[ChumpDumper]

I'm going to call it bullshit until some halfway credible source covers it.

[Blizzardwizard]

Going after the 2nd one is perfectly fine, but don't worry, the gun fellators have prevented Obama taking the gun control measures that he initially had schemed.

[Clipper Nation]

Going after the 2nd one is perfectly fine, but don't worry, the gun fellators have prevented Obama taking the gun control measures that he initially had schemed.
And thank goodness for that. A country where only the criminals have guns is not a country anyone in their right mind would want to live in.

[boutons_deux]

And thank goodness for that. A country where only the criminals have guns is not a country anyone in their right mind would want to live in.

:lol

you gun fellators, with your decades-long anti-gun-regulation corrupt politics and "guns are fun, EVERYBODY shoot 'em up" culture, have enabled 10Ks of criminals EASY ACCESS to 100Ks of guns.

Thanks, gun fellators!

[Clipper Nation]

:lol

you gun fellators, with your decades-long anti-gun-regulation corrupt politics and "guns are fun, EVERYBODY shoot 'em up" culture, have enabled 10Ks of criminals EASY ACCESS to 100Ks of guns.

Thanks, gun fellators!


Libtards' "ban guns because I'm fraidy-scared of them" culture would be a boon to the black market, just like similar libtard views on alcohol and drugs.

[boutons_deux]

Libtards' "ban guns"

... ad nauseam straw man, GFY

[Clipper Nation]

Libtards' "ban guns"

... ad nauseam straw man, GFY




Not propaganda. Sure, it starts gradually with the oxymoron of "reasonable gun control," but it inevitably snowballs into the full-out ban that libtards really want. It's the same exact strategy the progressives used for Prohibition and the War on Drugs.

[Blizzardwizard]

And thank goodness for that. A country where only the criminals have guns is not a country anyone in their right mind would want to live in.

......actually quite a lot of people like it that way.

[boutons_deux]

it starts gradually with the oxymoron of "reasonable gun control," but it inevitably snowballs into the full-out ban that libtards really want.

wow, you're so fucking stupid, ignorantly duped by the paranoia, propaganda, and lies from NRA/GOA/gun industry.

link to where libtards want a full ban on all guns?

[Spurminator]

It's the same exact strategy the progressives used for Prohibition and the War on Drugs.
http://img.pandawhale.com/post-38536-steve-harvey-wtf-face-gif-Imgu-lJjr.gif

[TheSanityAnnex]

So what are they going to try to shut down all the gun forums? TSA get in here.

http://m.washingtonexaminer.com/nra-gun-blogs-videos-web-forums-threatened-by-new-obama-regulation/article/2565762

From what I have read it looks like this geared towards manufactures having to get clearance to release technical data, trade secrets, or classified material. Doesn't look like a gag order on firearm related speech for you and I, but like always they will most likely surprise us with their true intentions after the fact.

[TheSanityAnnex]

:lol

you gun fellators, with your decades-long anti-gun-regulation corrupt politics and "guns are fun, EVERYBODY shoot 'em up" culture, have enabled 10Ks of criminals EASY ACCESS to 100Ks of guns.

Thanks, gun fellators!



What demographic is this EVERYBODY shoot 'em up culture you are referring to?

[boutons_deux]

What demographic is this EVERYBODY shoot 'em up culture you are referring to?

NRA/GOA/gun industry promotes gun to ALL demographics, all ages, because it's all about gun industry profits, not :lol 2nd Amendment :lol Freedom! :lol Liberty!

[TheSanityAnnex]

NRA/GOA/gun industry promotes gun to ALL demographics, all ages, because it's all about gun industry profits, not :lol 2nd Amendment :lol Freedom! :lol Liberty!
You just said last week the NRA doesn't promote to blacks.

You also dodged the question like you did last week.


What demographic is this EVERYBODY shoot 'em up culture you are referring to?

[boutons_deux]

You just said last week the NRA doesn't promote to blacks.

You also dodged the question like you did last week.


What demographic is this EVERYBODY shoot 'em up culture you are referring to?

NRA/GOA promotes ALL guns to everybody, all ages, with the unspoken racism that the blacks will shoot themselves, and in nearly 90% of black murders (same number for whites), that is the case.

[TheSanityAnnex]

NRA/GOA promotes ALL guns to everybody, all ages, with the unspoken racism that the blacks will shoot themselves, and in nearly 90% of black murders (same number for whites), that is the case.

What demographic is this EVERYBODY shoot 'em up culture you are referring to?

[Clipper Nation]

[FONT=Verdana]
http://img.pandawhale.com/post-38536-steve-harvey-wtf-face-gif-Imgu-lJjr.gif


Prohibition started with taxes on drinks with high alcohol content in order to "save grain for the war effort."

The War on Drugs started with taxes on opium.

Both seem pretty benign in a vacuum, but we all know what they turned into.

[Clipper Nation]

wow, you're so fucking stupid, ignorantly duped by the paranoia, propaganda, and lies from NRA/GOA/gun industry.

link to where libtards want a full ban on all guns?
"Confiscation could be an option…mandatory sale to the state could be an option."
- Andrew Cuomo

"If I could have banned them all – ‘Mr. and Mrs. America turn in your guns’ – I would have!”
- Dianne "Hypocrite" Feinstein

"We’re on a roll now, and I think we’ve got to take the–you know, we’re gonna push as hard as we can and as far as we can.... the assault weapons ban is just the beginning."
- Jan Schakowsky

[boutons_deux]

of course, reacting to the decades-old annual SLAUGHTER by guns of Americans, anti-gun people can and will say that stuff. Take that is their starting negotiating position.

Has any libtard legislator at ANY level had the balls to propose a "confiscate-all-the-guns" bill? :lol

[m>s]

Lel kike shills ITT you're not getting the guns and therefore the power. Like Mao said power comes out the barrel of a gun.

[Clipper Nation]

of course, reacting to the decades-old annual SLAUGHTER by guns of Americans, anti-gun people can and will say that stuff. Take that is their starting negotiating position.

Has any libtard legislator at ANY level had the balls to propose a "confiscate-all-the-guns" bill? :lol
A "ban all the guns" bill would fail miserably right now. That's why libtards are going with the "death by a thousand papercuts" approach, just like with Prohibition and the War on Drugs.

[Spurminator]

Prohibition started with taxes on drinks with high alcohol content in order to "save grain for the war effort."

The War on Drugs started with taxes on opium.

Both seem pretty benign in a vacuum, but we all know what they turned into.


Well I guess you could also say prohibition began with the invention of liquor, but that would also be stupid. Prohibition was put in place by Evangelical Conservatives who believed drinking was immoral. The War on Drugs was the baby of noted libtard Richard Nixon and was greatly expanded under his Democrappy butt-buddy Ronald Reagan.

[Wild Cobra]

What do you all expect from a president that doesn't support and defend the constitution?

[Clipper Nation]

Well I guess you could also say prohibition began with the invention of liquor, but that would also be stupid. Prohibition was put in place by Evangelical Conservatives who believed drinking was immoral. The War on Drugs was the baby of noted libtard Richard Nixon and was greatly expanded under his Democrappy butt-buddy Ronald Reagan.
Nice partisan talking points, but you are completely ignorant of history.

Prohibition was undeniably the brainchild of the Progressive movement; this is basic stuff that's taught in every history class. Why do you think we have an income tax now? It's because the liquor excise tax was funding much of the government before then, and the Progressives realized that would have to be addressed in advance before banning liquor. Even the 17th Amendment partially fed into Prohibition because the state legislatures who previously elected senators were doing lots of backroom dealings in saloons. And of course, the Wartime Prohibition Act was passed before the ratification of the 18th Amendment. All of those societal changes added up and slowly desensitized people into accepting a full-out liquor ban.

Likewise, the War on Drugs greatly predates Reagan. In fact, it was known libtard Woodrow Wilson, not Reagan, who signed the first federal drug regulation, the Harrison Narcotics Tax Act of 1914. Marijuana started being taxed in 1937 under known libtard FDR. Mandatory sentencing was introduced with libtard Truman in office via the Boggs Act of 1951. Believe it or not, Nixon, who was as anti-drug as it gets, actually repealed some of those mandatory minimums.

Of course, the "death by a thousand papercuts" approach only delays the inevitable: the rise of the black market and cartels. We saw it with alcohol, we're seeing it with drugs, and there's no reason to believe that a gun ban would be any different.