Another interesting tidbit. Daniel Webster published the Websters dictionary so that slimey politicians could not change the meaning of the Constitution, by changing the meaning of words in the English language. I am in awe of the founders and thier knowledge of human nature. I am humbled when I repeat their words.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
This is HORRIBLE ... Time for a Change
Collapse
X
-
-
Oh no doubt Mike...
On the part about Supreme Court and the people.
Tipping point...banning semi-autos. Maybe. It would start with a few "crazies" shooting at gov. entities. Them being hauled away...then slowly more and more saying "this is BULLSHIT" seeing gun owners overun. More and more skirmishes until complete chaos as by then rioting and looting take place since police are so busy. I was shocked it didn't start with confiscating weapons in New Orleans after hurricane.
Comment
-
Originally posted by wickedfarmer View PostOn the part about Supreme Court and the people.
Tipping point...banning semi-autos. Maybe. It would start with a few "crazies" shooting at gov. entities. Them being hauled away...then slowly more and more saying "this is BULLSHIT" seeing gun owners overun. More and more skirmishes until complete chaos as by then rioting and looting take place since police are so busy. I was shocked it didn't start with confiscating weapons in New Orleans after hurricane.
Comment
-
The cops didn't take away guns from Blackwater who was guarding the millionare mansions.
Comment
-
From Mike : "First off the Supreme court is not the end all be all entity that everyone gives them credit for, the people are. It is only by the consent of the governed that our government is allowed to exist. Second of all the word regulated as it was defined in the 18th century means disciplined, the militia was a citizen militia. The founders were stating the obvious, we needed a well disciplined citizen militia."
Ditto - the few that understand the above statement are enough.
Also Mike, when you say semi-auto ban are you referring only to rifles? And, are you suggesting a law similar to the 90's AWB or are you including confiscation?
In a nutshell the only action taken by the government is the prohibition of the sale and manufacture of certain arms, I'm yet to hear rumblings of anything beyond that
and am interested in a source if you have.
You might like the article below. The Happy Valley Oregon Mall shooter faced a concealed carry holder who drew and obtained a sight picture - the shooter is dead, and it will be impossible to prove. However, the way the timing went down, the shooter shot himself right after he realized there was an armed individual drawing on him. He retreated
and shot himself. The concealed carry holder saw innocents directly behind the perpetrator and chose not to fire, the right thing to do.
Everyone that carries has thought through this situation and prayed they never have to make that decision.
http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-ma...183593571.htmlLast edited by Twin Locusts; 12-19-2012, 04:40 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Twin Locusts View PostFrom Mike : "First off the Supreme court is not the end all be all entity that everyone gives them credit for, the people are. It is only by the consent of the governed that our government is allowed to exist. Second of all the word regulated as it was defined in the 18th century means disciplined, the militia was a citizen militia. The founders were stating the obvious, we needed a well disciplined citizen militia."
Ditto - the few that understand the above statement are enough.
Also Mike, when you say semi-auto ban are you referring only to rifles? And, are you suggesting a law similar to the 90's AWB or are you including confiscation?
In a nutshell the only action taken by the government is the prohibition of the sale and manufacture of certain arms, I'm yet to hear rumblings of anything beyond that
and am interested in a source if you have.
You might like the article below. The Happy Valley Oregon Mall shooter faced a concealed carry holder who drew and obtained a sight picture - the shooter is dead, and it will be impossible to prove. However, the way the timing went down, the shooter shot himself right after he realized there was an armed individual drawing on him. He retreated
and shot himself. The concealed carry holder saw innocents directly behind the perpetrator and chose not to fire, the right thing to do.
Everyone that carries has thought through this situation and prayed they never have to make that decision.
http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-ma...183593571.html
I can only speculate as to what is coming. I don't think that this will be like the 94 ban at all. They are reaching much deeper. The bushmaster rifle that was used in Conneticut was a Conneticut compliant rifle, which would make it identical to a post Clinton ban configuration. Prior to the 94 AWB "The Supreme Court" ruled that they couldn not name a gun by name or single out a manufacturer. (I know, tell that to Norinco) Herein lies the problem, say that they ban the AR-15 which actually does not exist. There has never been a rifle named the AR-15. There was an AR-10, but never an AR-15.
For the sake of discussion, they ban the AR-15, the manufacturer, changes the way that the barrel attaches to the reciever, or changes the color and they call it the AR-16. The problem that these "experts" have is that they cannot define an assault rifle. Does an assault rifle have a wood stock or a plastic stock? What makes it an assault rifle? The only thing that they could legally do is ban certain features that have little tactical value in the first place. These people are beyond dumb. The very first version of the AWB actually banned importation of Black rifles. H&K started producing white and pink versions of the SL-8. I remember buying one and then buying a bottle of black Rit dye to change the color. Wish I still had that gun.
Comment
-
Back to your question
I believe that they will try to classify ALL semiauto rifles and all pistol magazines with a capacity greater than 10 as title 2 weapons. If they do this, all hell will break loose. They did this with the streetsweeper shotgun (which is a turd, BTW). If there is another shooting, which I think there will be, we may even see a total registration.
Here is exactly what will happen with a magazine ban. If they limit capacity to 10 rounds people and the gun manufacturers will gravitate to larger caliber weapons with lower capacity. Instead of being shot with a .380 or a 9mm, people will start being shot with 45 ACP and 10mm. Remember I said this, people will gravitate to larger caliber weapons.
On a side note, I can slide lock reload in .5 seconds, so the mag ban means nothing to me, these morons can kiss my ass. It amazes me how stupid they are. Shall I continue with how worthless legislation is, or do the gun grabbers here still think that the criminals will obey the law?Last edited by Mike Goff; 12-19-2012, 05:08 PM.
Comment
-
The reason that I think they will include all semi-autos is that they will grab all that they can, while they can, and for all practical purposes an M1a1 is just as effective a killer as an AR type rifle, actually more.
Comment
-
Originally posted by wickedfarmer View PostI thought there was actual definition/criteria for assult rifle. Without looking...intermediate range cartridge capable of full auto or burst with a shoulderable stock.
Comment
-
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mike Goff View PostI believe that they will try to classify ALL semiauto rifles and all pistol magazines with a capacity greater than 10 as title 2 weapons. If they do this, all hell will break loose. They did this with the streetsweeper shotgun (which is a turd, BTW). If there is another shooting, which I think there will be, we may even see a total registration.
Here is exactly what will happen with a magazine ban. If they limit capacity to 10 rounds people and the gun manufacturers will gravitate to larger caliber weapons with lower capacity. Instead of being shot with a .380 or a 9mm, people will start being shot with 45 ACP and 10mm. Remember I said this, people will gravitate to larger caliber weapons.
On a side note, I can slide lock reload in .5 seconds, so the mag ban means nothing to me, these morons can kiss my ass. It amazes me how stupid they are. Shall I continue with how worthless legislation is, or do the gun grabbers here still think that the criminals will obey the law?
The degree to which the "American perspective" on rights and freedoms has been skewed by public education is staggering. Stalin and Khrushchev's 'Useful Idiots' are now the majority, and only took a few decades since the Cold War. Now that Generation Duck Face can vote all bets are off; we're at greased-pig speed toward an Orwellian theme park.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mike Goff View Post
Never shot a G17, I've 50 round qualified twice with a G19, 100's on both. There are a lot of Glock detractors out there,
but I love my 19, most consistent, true grouping I can produce. Ironically, the only jam I've ever had on it was while
qualifying, whole range had to cease fire. The bad part was, by the rules, I couldn't clear my own jam - instructor had
to come over and do it. Out of 10 in the class though, six were Glock carriers. The rest were hammerless revolvers.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Twin Locusts View PostAgreed, whatever comes down will be similar to, and more comprehensive than, Clinton AWB. The irony about the process is how that when legislation passes and the know-nothings see the headlines, "Assault Weapons Banned" they think that magically all these, as defined, arms disappear or become illegal to own. The ban only effects new sales and manufacturing, there many millions of these arms owned currently and nothing about that changes. An AWB will have no impact whatsoever on spree killers for the next 50 years.
The degree to which the "American perspective" on rights and freedoms has been skewed by public education is staggering. Stalin and Khrushchev's 'Useful Idiots' are now the majority, and only took a few decades since the Cold War. Now that Generation Duck Face can vote all bets are off; we're at greased-pig speed toward an Orwellian theme park.
So far the word that I am getting is that it will not be retroactive, I say bullshit. The idea of reclassifying title 2 weapons was being talked about before the shooting, so I definately think they are on it hard. Here is the deal, I doubt that congress has the votes to do this, and even if they did, they don't have the athority. If they are going to do it in such a way that it will not be thrown out in the supreme court, they will have to have a constitutional ammendment. They have precedence for reclassification, but even that was illegal. I think that the reason noone challenged the street sweeper is because nobody cared. That may have been a mistake. What it really comes down to is what people will tolerate, and I believe that we will have an answer to that very soon.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Twin Locusts View PostI'm not even in the same zip code as this guy - I don't have to take my eyes off range but have never practiced speed.
Never shot a G17, I've 50 round qualified twice with a G19, 100's on both. There are a lot of Glock detractors out there,
but I love my 19, most consistent, true grouping I can produce. Ironically, the only jam I've ever had on it was while
qualifying, whole range had to cease fire. The bad part was, by the rules, I couldn't clear my own jam - instructor had
to come over and do it. Out of 10 in the class though, six were Glock carriers. The rest were hammerless revolvers.
Comment
Comment