Obama wants the federal government to know everything about you gun owners

[stix213]

Originally Posted by From The Article

In the near future, Americans who own or want guns likely will be subject to rafts of new questions from social scientists, medical researchers and law enforcement officials intent to discover just what guns they own, why they own them and what they intend to use them for — not to mention where and how they keep them.

They will also likely have more researchers poring over such issues as whether childhood education programs against gun violence actually work; whether there actually is any relationship between violence in the media and in real life; and whether the safety plans that were drawn up by schools, colleges and communities in the wake of highly publicized mass shootings actually are effective.

Those and many other gun-related questions are the thrust of a new social science research agenda that the Obama administration hopes will keep the push for gun control alive for years to come.

The research agenda is intended to produce mammoth amounts of raw data on American gun owners, users and their circumstances, meaning that violence resulting from firearms use will be studied for “its causes, approaches to interventions that could prevent it, and strategies to minimize its health burden.”

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/06/26...est=latestnews

[CessnaDriver]

I am happy to provide a complete answer for them.


"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

[Milsurp Collector]

So far, the study has drawn plaudits from liberal sponsoring foundations, and a cautious level of support from the National Rifle Association, which took part, according to NRA Director of Research and Information John Frazer, “because some of the research that is already out there is due for an update.”

Among other things, the NRA argued, the steep drop in American violent crime —about a 46 percent decline between 1994 and 2011— deserves study in the context of the spread of “right-to carry” laws permitting citizens to bear firearms in public.

The NRA would also like to see more research work on the deterrent effect of firearms on crime, and the benefits of firearm ownership, including “socialization into lawful gun use.”

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/06/26...#ixzz2XN3rlHm8

[POLICESTATE]

"Because I like it and I have the right to the pursuit of happiness. I also have the right to keep and bear arms which has already been upheld by the SCOTUS. If you don't like that explanation that's your problem not mine and I suggest you seek some professional psychiatric help with your problem."

[covingtonhouse]

I'm sure there will be some tax a la Obamacare if you don't answer their questions

[naeco81]

I welcome any Federal attempt to research gun ownership so we can create sensible gun control laws that aren't just an ineffective burden on responsible gun owners. Quite frankly I don't see why this is so sensational and why the first reaction is OMG NO NOT RESEARCH!

Without this sort of measure you can expect laws to be drafted purely out of fear in a reactionary model, just as they have been.

What I'm more interested in is how we at CGF can assist with these projects to ensure responsible gun owners have a voice in the process. If our party line is pro-gun-everything then we are going to lose our rights at the hands of those that don't understand us. Instead we are far better served by recognizing public safety goals and contributing to the discussion with suggestions on how to accomplish them in a manner aligned with our interests.

[Rickrock1]

Dam dictatorship

[cdtx2001]

Why do I own guns you ask Mr Gubbament?

Well, it's none of your damn business, that's why.

[exercion]

Disappointing that Fox would repeat the lie that it would be "value-neutral" as there is no way this administration would create a study for anything other than banning of guns. The CDC is anti, the liberal groups are as well, and the administration is beyond hope.

I would agree with naeco87's post *if* there were a possibility that the claims of reason why they want the research were true. And I'd like to be wrong, however the track record of the people involved says otherwise. I'd perhaps be more inclined to believe it if Bloomberg, Fienstein et al were screaming in horror at the idea of gun research. The things the NRA would like studied I doubt is what this is for, but they are pretty much required to display the "cautious level of support". Mind you, I would love to be wrong on this, but until that's proven (and even after) information about my possessions, of any sort, is strictly on a need to know basis.

[whlgun]

He can XXXk off.

[MontClaire]

POS!

[naeco81]

Originally Posted by exercion

I would agree with naeco87's post *if* there were a possibility that the claims of reason why they want the research were true. And I'd like to be wrong, however the track record of the people involved says otherwise. I'd perhaps be more inclined to believe it if Bloomberg, Fienstein et al were screaming in horror at the idea of gun research. The things the NRA would like studied I doubt is what this is for, but they are pretty much required to display the "cautious level of support". Mind you, I would love to be wrong on this, but until that's proven (and even after) information about my possessions, of any sort, is strictly on a need to know basis.

We can't exclude ourselves from the discussion because we're afraid it might not be productive. While I understand your concern, you can expect that gun laws will be far more restrictive if responsible gun owners don't participate now.

I'd much rather have laws based around scientific research than the whims of any politician seeking reelection.

[Fastattack]

If only they would use all this wasted effort on researching criminals. They might discover that criminals don't obey laws.

[Maltese Falcon]

Which reminds me I am going to my first physical in many years.

I wonder if Dr. will ask me if I own any of the dreaded firearms.

Me: Nope.

.

[SonofWWIIDI]

Currently holding up one finger, you guess which one!

[cmichini]

Originally Posted by Maltese Falcon

Which reminds me I am going to my first physical in many years.

I wonder if Dr. will ask me if I own any of the dreaded firearms.

Me: Nope.

.

When asked by Dr. Bedwetter do you own any guns:

"No. Do you think it's a good idea? Where could I learn more about buying a gun. I'll have to look into it when I get home".

He'll fudge his Huggies thinking that he may have just created another gun owner. If the AMA or Bloomberg find out he's gonna have a lotta 'splaining to do.

[The Fugitive]

I'll answer the question when you can tell me why police have them.

[LBDamned]

Originally Posted by Rickrock1

Dam dictatorship

no kidding!

The first question I had (to myself) was - "what country are we in?"

[mag360]

So after all this research is done, and it shows the vast majority of our population owns guns, uses them safely what will they do? How will they spin the reality that it is poor minorities in inner cities that perpetrate 99.999% of "gun violence", and 99.999% of that is against other street gang types.

[sl0re10]

Originally Posted by naeco81

We can't exclude ourselves from the discussion because we're afraid it might not be productive. While I understand your concern, you can expect that gun laws will be far more restrictive if responsible gun owners don't participate now.

I'd much rather have laws based around scientific research than the whims of any politician seeking reelection.

if we exclude ourselves we can say the results are bogus since gun owners.... excluded themselves....

If you can't get a proper sample... garbage in garbage out....

[LBDamned]

Originally Posted by The Fugitive

I'll answer the question when you can tell me why police have them.

or when they can answer the question "why does it matter?"...

millions of gun owners and a handful of whackos does not justify the kookiness that we are seeing...

I have never exhibited any characteristics that would lead anyone to believe I would go on a killing spree... any question they would ask, and answer they would receive would not change that.

Why would they ask me those questions? If they didn't have a reasonable answer (that pertained to me) then the discussion would go no further.

[SilverTauron]

Not to veer into tinfoil territory, but this is a backdoor means of making a gun registry down the road.

Obama doesn't have the political capitol to openly campaign for a national gun registry, and its logistically impossible to make an accurate consolidated Federal database out of existing info.

Enter the "medical" questionnaires . Each time LE contacts someone and asks what guns they have, it goes into a file folder. The same thing goes for the medical establishment. All that info gets retained so that when our nation is overrun by statist voters, the enforcement agencies can promptly get to work taxing and registering guns and their owners.

Even if your gun isn't registered or has a 4473 attached to it, answers you-or your spouse- gave on "Document X" years ago will flag you for a visit by the Confiscation Fairy.

[JDay]

Originally Posted by covingtonhouse

I'm sure there will be some tax a la Obamacare if you don't answer their questions

Obamacare prohibits asking about and/or collecting this information. It's in the bill.

[LBDamned]

Originally Posted by JDay

Obamacare prohibits asking about and/or collecting this information. It's in the bill.

you have more faith in the system (that is still being created) than I do.

[Findout]

Originally Posted by naeco81

I welcome any Federal attempt to research gun ownership so we can create sensible gun control laws that aren't just an ineffective burden on responsible gun owners. Quite frankly I don't see why this is so sensational and why the first reaction is OMG NO NOT RESEARCH!

Without this sort of measure you can expect laws to be drafted purely out of fear in a reactionary model, just as they have been.

What I'm more interested in is how we at CGF can assist with these projects to ensure responsible gun owners have a voice in the process. If our party line is pro-gun-everything then we are going to lose our rights at the hands of those that don't understand us. Instead we are far better served by recognizing public safety goals and contributing to the discussion with suggestions on how to accomplish them in a manner aligned with our interests.

If this is a bit of trolling, I'll admit that it's good. If this was supposed to be a serious post... oh my..

[Zenja]

NYGB

Z

[Findout]

Originally Posted by naeco81

We can't exclude ourselves from the discussion because we're afraid it might not be productive. While I understand your concern, you can expect that gun laws will be far more restrictive if responsible gun owners don't participate now.

I'd much rather have laws based around scientific research than the whims of any politician seeking reelection.

We're never going to have laws regarding firearms with any shred of scientific backing to them. If we did, we'd have nothing but the second amendment.

Yes, we CAN and SHOULD exclude ourselves from every single one-sided questionnaire that seeks only to gather incriminating information. The side gathering the information is always the side with the power. Why do you think wire tapping and other forms of surveillance are going on? Information is power. I'm not going to give them any information that might help them in any way restrict my rights.

This is insane. The government is supposed to work for US. Why would anyone who cares about freedom advocate caving into their system of games and playing on their turf? They have every advantage and a track record of deceit and tyranny. How could you possibly see any benefit in sharing this kind of information with your doctor/teacher/boss/whoever?

Wake up already!

[naeco81]

Originally Posted by Findout

We're never going to have laws regarding firearms with any shred of scientific backing to them. If we did, we'd have nothing but the second amendment.

This is so naive and ignorant. What you're effectively saying is that people should be allowed to buy any weapon they want. We can have no laws regarding firearms because consensus in the scientific community is that firearms are completely safe in every circumstance without any regulation whatsoever.

Can you see why that sounds absurd? Negligent discharge with a rocket launcher sure sounds like a fun neighborhood activity.

Originally Posted by Findout

Yes, we CAN and SHOULD exclude ourselves from every single one-sided questionnaire that seeks only to gather incriminating information. The side gathering the information is always the side with the power. Why do you think wire tapping and other forms of surveillance are going on? Information is power. I'm not going to give them any information that might help them in any way restrict my rights.

Not sure you understand how research works. I'll give you another example related to the prohibition of marijuana. For quite some time the scientific community has known there are medical applications of this plant. However, as part of the war on drugs the CSA was passed and listed marijuana as a schedule I drug - i.e. no medical application and the most prohibited class.

For the past few decades people fighting for marijuana decriminalization have been begging for a Federal study on the effects of the drug. Unlike you, they understand the value in empirical data. It isn't a guaranteed win but it is a hell of a lot better than hoping one day people wake up and change their minds without any catalyst.

The logic is simple. If the truth is on your side then you have every motivation to expose it.

Originally Posted by Findout

This is insane. The government is supposed to work for US. Why would anyone who cares about freedom advocate caving into their system of games and playing on their turf? They have every advantage and a track record of deceit and tyranny. How could you possibly see any benefit in sharing this kind of information with your doctor/teacher/boss/whoever?

The government does work for us just not always for you or me individually on our terms. If you can't grasp this then think about who "us" is.

Us includes gun owners, it includes the larger population of non-owners, it includes liberals, democrats, republicans, and every single American out there. Guess what? Americans don't agree on everything. That means for any given law about any given thing there are going to be people that disagree with it. If you keep ranting from this perspective it just underscores your inability to think beyond yourself and pretty much disqualifies you from legitimate commentary about public policy.

Originally Posted by Findout

No one is free until everyone is free. If you champion your own rights, but won't stand up for the rights of others, you're no better than those who wish to take our rights away.

This is in your signature. How ironic. Ever read the preamble of the Constitution? You know, "We the people...?" Everyone in America has a right to feel safe in this country. That means people who fear guns too. Yet here you are unwilling to even consider that they may have rights you should stand up for as well.

And you wonder why our gun control laws suck... have a mirror handy?

[greg36f]

Originally Posted by naeco81

I welcome any Federal attempt to research gun ownership so we can create sensible gun control laws that aren't just an ineffective burden on responsible gun owners. Quite frankly I don't see why this is so sensational and why the first reaction is OMG NO NOT RESEARCH!

Without this sort of measure you can expect laws to be drafted purely out of fear in a reactionary model, just as they have been.

What I'm more interested in is how we at CGF can assist with these projects to ensure responsible gun owners have a voice in the process. If our party line is pro-gun-everything then we are going to lose our rights at the hands of those that don't understand us. Instead we are far better served by recognizing public safety goals and contributing to the discussion with suggestions on how to accomplish them in a manner aligned with our interests.

I'm sorry, but what right do you have to bring reason, common sense and and open mind to this thread. If you even talk to or listn to the "enemy" (an ever expanding list here on Cal Guns) You are a troll, a statist and / or a traitor.

That attitude is doing more to harm us than most of us will ever admit and it's sad. Some people here are so black and white that there is no room for any grey area or respect for any other point of view.

[njineermike]

Originally Posted by naeco81

We can't exclude ourselves from the discussion because we're afraid it might not be productive. While I understand your concern, you can expect that gun laws will be far more restrictive if responsible gun owners don't participate now.

I'd much rather have laws based around scientific research than the whims of any politician seeking reelection.

Why for we need ANY more laws? The current ones are rarely enforced, and then only when it happens to be politically expedient, only create barriers to law-abiding citizens, and as pretty much every densely populated metro area in the country has proven, do NOT reduce crime, deaths, or injuries with or WITHOUT firearms.

If you think this will result in anything positive for us, you haven't been paying attention at all.

[RRangel]

Originally Posted by naeco81

I welcome any Federal attempt to research gun ownership so we can create sensible gun control laws that aren't just an ineffective burden on responsible gun owners. Quite frankly I don't see why this is so sensational and why the first reaction is OMG NO NOT RESEARCH!

Without this sort of measure you can expect laws to be drafted purely out of fear in a reactionary model, just as they have been.

What I'm more interested in is how we at CGF can assist with these projects to ensure responsible gun owners have a voice in the process. If our party line is pro-gun-everything then we are going to lose our rights at the hands of those that don't understand us. Instead we are far better served by recognizing public safety goals and contributing to the discussion with suggestions on how to accomplish them in a manner aligned with our interests.

It's crap first of all, be because it's the government wasting time and money, on something where no one is asking the question. As if what citizens own is any of their business. There is some good research already out there, it's just that the phony gun grabbers intend to use such opportunity, to push their own questionable studies as always. It's also Obama we're talking about here. He's never seen a gun he liked, and everything and anything, will be used to disparage gun ownership. You can bet on it.

[njineermike]

Originally Posted by greg36f

I'm sorry, but what right do you have to bring reason, common sense and and open mind to this thread. If you even talk to or listn to the "enemy" (an ever expanding list here on Cal Guns) You are a troll, a statist and / or a traitor.

That attitude is doing more to harm us than most of us will ever admit and it's sad. Some people here are so black and white that there is no room for any grey area or respect for any other point of view.

Says the guy that didn't see a problem with a police officer tasing a child in a school simply because the child didn't stop talking quickly enough during a safety demonstration......

[flatbedtruckin]

Wonder how many owners will "envoke the right to remain silent.."

[naeco81]

Originally Posted by RRangel

It's crap first of all, be because it's the government wasting time and money, on something where no one is asking the question. As if what citizens own is any of their business. There is some good research already out there, it's just that the phony gun grabbers intend to use such opportunity, to push their own questionable studies as always. It's also Obama we're talking about here. He's never seen a gun he liked, and everything and anything, will be used to disparage gun ownership. You can bet on it.

WE are asking the question because WE do not find the current laws equitable. If you don't want to participate in the democratic process then that's your prerogative. However, my understanding is this forum is dedicated to that task. Unfortunately, many CGF members seem to think this is a communal place to cry together but accomplish nothing.

[scarville]

Originally Posted by flatbedtruckin

Wonder how many owners will "envoke the right to remain silent.."

Whatever you don't say will be used against you.

[Findout]

Originally Posted by naeco81

This is so naive and ignorant - SNIP - have a mirror handy?

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Do you wish to continue your anti-gun tirade or are we finished here? Mind the sheepskin, guy.

[tuolumnejim]

Originally Posted by CessnaDriver

I am happy to provide a complete answer for them.


"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Mine wasn't going to be so eloquent, it's a lot shorter too.

Pound Sand!

[greg36f]

Originally Posted by njineermike

Says the guy that didn't see a problem with a police officer tasing a child in a school simply because the child didn't stop talking quickly enough during a safety demonstration......

You have me confused with someone else.

[huntercf]

Originally Posted by naeco81

We can't exclude ourselves from the discussion because we're afraid it might not be productive. While I understand your concern, you can expect that gun laws will be far more restrictive if responsible gun owners don't participate now.

[B]I'd much rather have laws based around scientific research than the whims of any politician seeking reelection. [/B]

Unfortunately there are several holes in this theory:

1. Libidiots ignore data unless it suits their cause.

2. Data can easily be manipulated through carefully worded questions and sample groups.

If the 0bummer administration is running the studies I will lump them in with all the other crap they keep doing (i.e. benghazi, IRS, NSA, AP, voter intimidation, increase of welfare rolls, obama phones, obamacare, failed stimulus, outlandish vacations, etc., etc., etc.) These studies will be heavily biased and wildly inaccurate.

[tuolumnejim]

Originally Posted by naeco81

Us includes gun owners, it includes the larger population of non-owners, it includes liberals, democrats, republicans, and every single American out there.

After they try and take them, these are the people that we're going to feed to our dogs.