CapnMac
Member
Before the lock, let us remember Haynes v. US, where SCOTUS firmly asserted that criminals could not be forced to obey gun control (and that was an NFA 34 violation.
I'm not interested in their taqqiya. We know to a certainly what the ultimate goal is. Anything else is just stepping stones toward it.Introduced bills are opening gambits. They are the "maximum demands" or "wish lists" for upcoming legislation. They may be watered down in committee consideration, but they are hardly ever made stricter.
It's very telling that the antigunners would include grandfathering in their "opening gambit." Normally you would think they would reserve it as a possible later sop to gunowners. (Which, BTW, is exactly what's happening in Virginia with Gov. Northam's state-level AWB bill. No grandfathering.)
The truth of the matter is that any AWB with grandfathering is toothless, because of the huge number of such weapons already out there. This is not 1994.
Haynes, I believe was settled on 5th Amendment grounds as one of the last decisions of the Warren Court but was undercut to some degree when Congress changed the law as the felon claimed that to require them to register an NFA item meant that they would have to admit to being a felon in possession of a firearm. "The National Firearms Act was amended after Haynes to make it apply only to those who could lawfully possess a firearm. "Before the lock, let us remember Haynes v. US, where SCOTUS firmly asserted that criminals could not be forced to obey gun control (and that was an NFA 34 violation.
That isn't the point. The point is that the antigunners are tipping their hand with these introductions. We should be paying attention. It's a preview of what's going to go down in 2021, if they win in 2020.Introduced bills go nowhere all the time.
Assuming that you are correct, what are we going to do about it?I'm not interested in their taqqiya. We know to a certainly what the ultimate goal is. Anything else is just stepping stones toward it.
That isn't the point. The point is that the antigunners are tipping their hand with these introductions. We should be paying attention. It's a preview of what's going to go down in 2021, if they win in 2020.
There is a defined class of weapon called an assault rifle.I don't think we here should refer to semi-automatic rifles as "assault weapons". It's OK to use the term in quotes, or to say there is a proposed law that would classify x, y and z as "assault weapons", but *WE* should not call them that.
I don't think we here should refer to semi-automatic rifles as "assault weapons". It's OK to use the term in quotes, or to say there is a proposed law that would classify x, y and z as "assault weapons", but *WE* should not call them that.
The same thing the other side does, RESIST.Assuming that you are correct, what are we going to do about it?
No, "assault weapon" is everything and nothing at all. It has no fixed meaning.There is a defined class of weapon called an assault rifle.
Assault weapon is one thing, but assault rifles are assault rifles.
Introduced bills go nowhere all the time.
Theres nothing being said in this bill that isn't being pressed in many other venues that are just as persuasive.
Our foremost defender as an organization has lost moral authority...
One of the reasons for the decline in NRA membership may have had to do with embracing right wing politics and the Republican Party.
Introduced bills are opening gambits. They are the "maximum demands" or "wish lists" for upcoming legislation. They may be watered down in committee consideration, but they are hardly ever made stricter.
It's very telling that the antigunners would include grandfathering in their "opening gambit." Normally you would think they would reserve it as a possible later sop to gunowners. (Which, BTW, is exactly what's happening in Virginia with Gov. Northam's state-level AWB bill. No grandfathering.)
The truth of the matter is that any AWB with grandfathering is toothless, because of the huge number of such weapons already out there. This is not 1994.
I'm not interested in their taqqiya.
I have been holding my tongue just waiting for someone with some intelligence to point this out.
As pointed out WE need to change the conversation to Modern Sporting Rifles.
WE need to stop calling them anti gun politicians and start using the description of what they are - ANTI 2nd AMENDMENT Politicians, and anti Punishment for Criminals Politicians.
My God, how on this board could this be going on?
Yes, I agree.No, "assault weapon" is everything and nothing at all. It has no fixed meaning.
It can be anything from a 2.36mm Kolibri pistol to the Paris gun.
It's whatever some sociopath wants to ban at any given instant.
Exactly. In the end, all of the other attributes that make the AR uniquely "AR" is purely cosmetic. Our entire argument for the fence is that they are no more deadly, sometimes much less so, than the semi-auto that Elmer thinks is safe, if he gives up his neighbor's rights.We should refer to ARs as semi auto rifles
Agree 100% on "anti 2nd Amendment politicians".I have been holding my tongue just waiting for someone with some intelligence to point this out.
As pointed out WE need to change the conversation to Modern Sporting Rifles.
WE need to stop calling them anti gun politicians and start using the description of what they are - ANTI 2nd AMENDMENT Politicians, and anti Punishment for Criminals Politicians.
My God, how on this board could this be going on?