Grau_Tek 0 Posted March 27, 2005 Report Share Posted March 27, 2005 New AWB read down the list of weapons youll see the term "Saiga" i feel sick im going to puke Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Grau_Tek 0 Posted March 27, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 27, 2005 maybe im just freaking out supposedly its going to get shot down but who knows Quote Link to post Share on other sites
McUZI 1 Posted March 27, 2005 Report Share Posted March 27, 2005 (edited) They have been proposing bills like that forever, and they never see the light of day. Schumer proposed "Brady Bill II" every year from 1994-2004 and it never got any attention. That way, he could go back to all of his hook-nosed constituents and talk about how "tough" he was being on guns. Fucking asshole. That said, the AWB will be back... Tommorow, next week, next year, a few years from now- hell, maybe we get real lucky and it's TEN years from now. It will be back. Anyway, for arguments sake, of all the provisions of this bill, these are the ones that would Goatse us all a new asshole... `(L) A semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General. In making the determination, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any Federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.'. That would essentially ban Remington 11/87P (got it), Benellis (got it), *ALL* Bushmaster AR's (got a couple), Colt AR's, Ruger Mini-14's (Yes, even the plain jane Wal-Mart ones, unless the "director" was so kind to exclude it) But the REAL kicker in there? It would also make unlawful Ruger 10/22's, since "there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any Federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes". Welcome to the beauty of the language of the law. One poorly written bill by a bunch of fucktards who don't know shit about firearms can screw people they had no intention to. Let there be no doubt, they have no qualms about fucking us, but so long as the government agency or a LE agency has procured a 10/22 (which plenty have), it's presumed to be an "illegal assault weapon" too, thus fucking every Elmer Fudd that they didn't want to touch! Let there be no doubt, any bill that, in it's attempt to get us "assault weapons owners" inadvertently does some fuddfucking is good for us all. It then wakes up those moron assholes who believe that their duck guns are exempt. When their kids 10/22 is now an "assault weapon" due to a legislative snafu, they will wake the hell up. And this one... `(37) Conversion Kit- The term `conversion kit' means any part or combination of parts designed and intended for use in converting a firearm into a semiautomatic assault weapon, and any combination of parts from which a semiautomatic assault weapon can be assembled if the parts are in the possession or under the control of a person....would make it illegal for you to buy a flash hider, an upper, a telestock, etc...All of those turds who buy "lowers" thinking that they are somehow in-the-golden-door are waiting to be saddled with a bunch of useless aluminum trigger group housings that don't mean shit. This little gem... Section 922(v) of title 18, United States Code, as added by section 2(a) of this Act, is amended by adding at the end the following: `(5) It shall be unlawful for any person to transfer a semiautomatic assault weapon to which paragraph (1) does not apply, except through-- `(A) a licensed dealer, and for purposes of subsection (t) in the case of such a transfer, the weapon shall be considered to be transferred from the business inventory of the licensed dealer and the dealer shall be considered to be the transferor; or `( a State or local law enforcement agency if the transfer is made in accordance with the procedures provided for in subsection (t) of this section and section 923(g) ...would make the private sale of an AR a felony. But even if you took the time to make that private sale through a FFL dealer, you had better not transfer it with any 20 or 30 round mags, because (a) Ban on Transfer of Semiautomatic Assault Weapon With Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device- (1) IN GENERAL- Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after subsection (y) the following: `(z) It shall be unlawful for any person to transfer any assault weapon with a large capacity ammunition feeding device.'. Sale of an AR in conjunction with a 30 rounder is a felony too! Woot Edited March 27, 2005 by McUZI Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Guest Posted March 27, 2005 Report Share Posted March 27, 2005 New AWB read down the list of weapons youll see the term "Saiga" i feel sick im going to puke <{POST_SNAPBACK}> that's old news. i saw that same link posted here over a year ago. i posted it at shotgunworld, and the general attitude about it over there was that it was nothing to worry about. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Bvamp 604 Posted March 27, 2005 Report Share Posted March 27, 2005 they just want to disarm the public. assault weapons are an easy target to start with. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rusty 0 Posted March 27, 2005 Report Share Posted March 27, 2005 (edited) Welcome to the "Mean-looking-gun-thingy ban II." "Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2005" My ASS. I hope she realizes that under the Equal Protection clause of the 14th amendment, Police, Tactical response teams, and THE NATIONAL GUARD are BANNED from owning and using these mean, evil looking gun thingys. If she or somebody else decides to amend the bill to allow the above groups to own and use these weapons, it violates the 14th amendment, and is unconstitutional. But, to quote Bender: "We're boned". I'm sure the great and all knowing SCOTUS could pull a ruling out of their ass that makes it constitutional... I'm starting to wonder what it would take to kick the psyco ultra liberal parts of NE and the West coast out of the union... Anybody know what state and district the author is located in? I feel the need to contribute to her opponent in 2006. Edit: It's in the Senate too. Link Edited March 27, 2005 by Rusty Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Onepoint 0 Posted March 27, 2005 Report Share Posted March 27, 2005 (edited) It went to committee. Which means it could come out for a vote but more than likely will die in committee and then those who support it can point and say "See we tried, but those damn Republicans and the NRA.." There hasn't been a session of comngress that at least half a dozen bans or registration bills have been submitted to committee. Edited March 27, 2005 by Onepoint Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Bvamp 604 Posted March 27, 2005 Report Share Posted March 27, 2005 the gun laws should apply to police and national guard. they are not federal military, and as such, are bound by the law, or at least are supposed to be. gun control is ok when you use it to keep guns out of a criminals hands or a crazy person's. BUT, you cannot take away law abiding citizen's rights because of something that was done that already breaks laws and penalize the common person. that is wrong, it is illegal, and is unconstitutional. they want us all unarmed because they cant do thier job. watch the next time an incident occurs. most of the cops carry inadequate firearms. its thier own fault they dont properly arm themselves. ive said it before and ill say it again... how did they stop the two bank robbers in the infamous bank shootout in california years back? with guns that came out of a CIVILIAN gun shop. if those guns were illegal then, the crooks woulda been armed still, and the cops wouldnt have stopped it when they did because there wouldnt have been CIVILIAN LEGAL ARMS in local shops for them to TAKE. arm the cops, dont disarm the public. its criminal legligence to not arm the police properly, and against my rights as an american to take away my gun, regardless of what kind it is. next they will ban those evil telescopic sights. you all know as well as I do how lethal they make a firearm. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
G O B 3,516 Posted March 28, 2005 Report Share Posted March 28, 2005 Guys-That bill is nearly identical to BS legleslation introduced in STATE legislatures (especially in "battleground" states like Maryland). If it passes several states, it WILL gain federal approval. They want to perpetrate it on state level first, because federal firearms law and constitutional liberties are overriden by state law. Don't blink, or you may find yourself with an empty gun safe and in need of a new door to replace the one that has just been kicked in! G O B Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.