Search results for query: *

Maybe have a protocol for carry on a plane, such as magazines removed, or some type of “amnesty collection point” in the cabin as you board and deplane or something? I remember transporting foreign soldiers, some of which had a propensity for possibly yelling a certain phrase, right before...

While totally understanding that there are anti gun republicans out there as well, at the federal level it seems we are only one house rep away from draconian gun control. Colorado notwithstanding, I fear this discussion is about to become national. We haven’t been this close since the 90’s or so.

Maybe Colt should sue FN for use of the letters “AR”.

Exactly. So often, people go gaga over some country when they profess to “like guns”, etc, when in reality their laws are horribly oppressive. Sometimes the grass is greener on the other side because that’s where the septic system is.

I wonder if this means they are going to change their gun ownership laws.

Dodo birds. With heads buried in the sand.

That IS interesting…

Next thing you know, there’ll be those saying that she’s actually pro NRA, and was only working in good conscience to get the bad apples out of there.

I bet anti- gunners LOVE reading these kinds of threads!

Exactly. Big Data is already here. That ship has already sailed.

Big Data.

Side charging AR?

You could remove all the guns from a society, and have a closed system for humans that looks like an ant farm, and there would still be those that are armed. Either with sticks, stones, spears, hammers, etc, or, with pure physical ability. There will always exist inequities of force that can be...

😂 The “Thompson Method”. I love it!

And ironically, Prohibition was the catalyst for the federal gun control laws.

That’s good, but I’m not really seeing the delineation from what is required to be an FFL. I thought at first it was five firearms per year according to their new ruling in order to be considered “in the business”. The only exception I now see, that is actually clear and not poorly written is...

So does this new rule mean the end of private sales without being an FFL?

That’s for sure, but this seems to go even further than requiring sales to go through and FFL. This seems that even a single sale will require the seller to actually BE an FFL, except for sale to a family member. And it’s a rule change, not even legislation. Seems pretty bad, unless I’m way off...

So, I’ve seen emails stating that after this proposed ATF rule change takes effect, selling even one firearm could potentially require an FFL. Here is the .gov link...

Assault weapon