Questions for the 'confiscation' advocates...

I believe the ATF under Obama was looking into basically outlawing the .223/5.56 ammo.

"Nothing more worthless than an unloaded gun."

-Tony Soprano Originally Posted by grean

Was reading something about this. Military was talking about adopting a new bullet and new rifle.

With this in mind, they can out law certain types of ammo like 5.56 or 30.08. govt would use a different type of ammo not found in the market and prohibit its use in the civilian market. Supply of old ammo would dry up over time and become more expensive to buy. Blackmarket guys would make a killing.

Obama never said that IB. Point blank Lie

“I don’t believe people should be able to own guns.” - Odumbo

[/QUOTE]

Obama never said that IB. Point blank Lie

“I don’t believe people should be able to own guns.” - Odumbo

Originally Posted by themystic

Odumbo's colleague says Odumbo said it, mistake. Care to wager on whose administration it was that lied about a video killing an Ambassador in Benghazi and who didn't, mistake?

I believe the ATF under Obama was looking into basically outlawing the .223/5.56 ammo.

"Nothing more worthless than an unloaded gun."

-Tony Soprano Originally Posted by grean

Which is why states like CA are looking at making it so you pay high ass taxes to buy ammo, so no one can claim they are infringing on your 'gun rights'..

Which is why states like CA are looking at making it so you pay high ass taxes to buy ammo, so no one can claim they are infringing on your 'gun rights'.. Originally Posted by garhkal

The 9th might uphold it, but I'm afraid the SCOTUS might interpret that as an infringement based on disparate treatment (lack of equal protection). Example:

Caveat: Recently I don't know what the "status" is, but ....

For a long time Mexico had a much broader and more protective "Freedom of the Press" provision in its Constitution for newspapers than the U.S., but ....

the only place a newspaper could purchase news print (paper) for their presses was from the Government.

I don't think that would pass muster in the U.S. given 1st amend.

BUT as has been increasingly obvious California continues to lead the nation in ridiculous, overreaching, and unconstitutional attempts to impose Hollywood's impaired thinking on the rest of the U.S.

An interesting announcement yesterday.

"President Trump on Tuesday directed Attorney General Jeff Sessions to craft new regulations to ban firearm modifiers including the “bump stock” used in the Las Vegas massacre, amid bipartisan calls to strengthen gun laws in the wake of recent shooting rampages."


Congratulations to him!! In a recent thread on this forum I supported a ban on the bump stock. I'm glad to see that people are not simply sitting on their hands after the most recent tragedy in Florida but are moving forward to prevent a recurrence of the Las Vegas shootings in which the bump stock was used.

Odumbo's colleague says Odumbo said it, mistake. Care to wager on whose administration it was that lied about a video killing an Ambassador in Benghazi and who didn't, mistake? Originally Posted by I B Hankering

https://www.npr.org/sections/paralle...aise-questions

This what you're talking about

Porn, in Florida, is now an official risk to health.

.....but are moving forward to prevent a recurrence of the Las Vegas shootings in which the bump stock was used. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

It won't.

Can you think of anything else that's been "banned" by a law?

Definition: "to ban" ...

"to prohibit, forbid, or bar; interdict:"

https://www.npr.org/sections/paralle...aise-questions

This what you're talking about Originally Posted by themystic

The word "video" was no where to be found in that article, mistake. The "murderous video" was rampant on Odumbo's watch, mistake.

Do not, for a even for a moment think I am advocating this...

In Australia when this crazy guy killed a whole lot of people with an ill-gotten M-16/AR-15

They then confiscated ALL semi-automatic firearm with compensation

Only firearms untouched were revolvers, single shot, pump shotguns, lever action, bolt action
even the venerable Browning Auto-5 shotgun was confiscated.

Only firearms untouched were revolvers, single shot, pump shotguns, lever action, bolt action.... Originally Posted by instfixer

#1: Do the Aussies have the equivalent of a 2nd Amendment?

#2: Many countries (Mexico!) restrict/prohibit firearm possession.

As for Australia:

Gun laws were the responsibility of each colony and, since Federation in 1901, of each state. The Commonwealth does not have constitutional authority over firearms, but it has jurisdiction over customs and defence matters. Federally the external affairs powers can be used to enforce internal control over matters agreed in external treaties.

As the saying goes and applies to the U.S.:

"The cow is out of the barn."

In a couple of weeks another semi-porn star will surface claiming to have fucked Trump and the dead in Florida will be history just like the dead in Columbine within a few months. (Who's fretting over the INCOMPLETE INVESTIGATION over the Las Vegas deaths by GUNFIRE?) Trashing Trump is more important to the Liberals.

Do not, for a even for a moment think I am advocating this...

In Australia when this crazy guy killed a whole lot of people with an ill-gotten M-16/AR-15

They then confiscated ALL semi-automatic firearm with compensation

Only firearms untouched were revolvers, single shot, pump shotguns, lever action, bolt action
even the venerable Browning Auto-5 shotgun was confiscated. Originally Posted by instfixer

That's reactionary and dumb. Revolvers up until recent years were the weapon of choice in murders.

In 2016 hand guns were still ranked on top and even knives, at some 1600 deaths, killed many more people than rifles in the US with less than 400.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/195325/murder-victims-in-the-us-by-weapon-used/

Revolvers aren't as sexy of a political football, I guess so no one cares. They are cheap, and deadly.

vehicles kill more people every year BUT no one talks about better driver training or restricting access

It won't.

Can you think of anything else that's been "banned" by a law?

Definition: "to ban" ...

"to prohibit, forbid, or bar; interdict:"
Originally Posted by LexusLover

If I remember correctly, M-16s and AK-47s are banned for most citizens in this country. However, there is a very long list of requirements citizens can go through and legally purchase an M-16:

The following was from an article dated Nov. 12, 2014:

Is it legal for a normal citizen to buy a military grade fully automatic assault rifle in the US?

1. You need to be eligible to possess firearms in general.
2. You must live in a state where NFA items are permitted and machine guns, specifically, are legal to possess.
3. The machine gun you wish to acquire must have been manufactured on or before May 19, 1986. That is the cutoff date for entries to be made in the NFRTR (National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record), the registry of all NFA items in the United States including machine guns.
4. You must locate a Class III dealer (FFL01+SOT) that sells or can transfer in the machine gun you wish to acquire in your state of residence.
5. You must purchase the machine gun upfront prior to transfer and have it shipped to your Class III dealer. For a full-auto M16, this will be anywhere from $12,000 and up. Typical prices for an M16 hover around $14,000 to $16,000.
6. Once purchased and with your dealer, the dealer will fill out the Form 4 application on your behalf to submission to the BATFE and collect your $200 NFA transfer stamp tax.
7. The application will be submitted. Now you wait 8+ months for the full FBI background check and BATFE processing to complete.
8. Once the Form 4 is processed, it will be returned to the dealer along with the tax stamp which is part of your paperwork. You can then take possession of your military grade fully automatic firearm and take it home.
9. The tax stamp must be kept with the firearm it belongs to at all times! The tax stamp is your only affirmative defense to prove you are not in possession of an illegal machine gun. The tax stamp is proof you paid the transfer tax and legally transferred the machine gun. Ranges that allow Class III will want to see the stamp. If you get pulled over and the gun is discovered/inspected, law enforcement will definitely want to see it too. You may be required to present the firearm for inspection on demand by the BATFE.
10. You may not transport the fully automatic firearm across state lines for any purpose without prior consent of the Federal government. You must request this in advance and provide details on where the firearm is going, when you are leaving and when it will return to its registered location of residence.
11. You cannot leave the presence of your fully automatic firearm. If someone else is shooting it, you must be with it, legally speaking. The one exception to this is if you have formed a legal trust for the purpose of possessing the firearm, in which case all beneficiaries of the trust (usually family or employees) may have access to the firearm.

So yes, provided you meet and abide by all of conditions above, a normal citizen can purchase and possess a fully automatic military grade assault rifle.

I personally think the "ban" on public ownership of M-16s has worked very well in this country.