OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO BAN AR-15 AMMO

Tim,
Being young and naive only last a short while. After several decades of age they call it something less flattering. Do not believe that the feds stop at one type of projectile. They have never stopped. Look at it from the NFA OF 1934 to what your First Half-White Full Time Commie POTUS plans for the 5.56mm today. It never ends, they always come back for more, and each time another chunk of liberty is lost. Maybe it doesn't effect you so you don't care. Tomorrow it could be something different, maybe something important to you. What if no one else gives a damn ?

LINK :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_law..._United_States Originally Posted by rioseco

Did you not notice the positives in the previous article you posted? It wasn't all about limiting gun ownership. You know the citizenry outnumbers the govt when it comes to guns, yes?

You claim that they won't stop but it's 2015 and you still have guns. How exactly do you explain that?

If that's the case, which I don't believe it is, is a terrible way to go about it. Do you honestly believe the govt wants your guns? Originally Posted by UnderConstruction

Well they sure as hell act like it. After all Diane Feinstein said if she had her way Mr and Mrs America would turn them all in. What's her problem? The Government has no true legal authority to totally confiscate or ban all firearms so they attempt to limit magazine capacity, make certain ammo difficult to obtain, or induce price increases. These issues constantly keep coming up and none of them ever really last for very long. America is a gun country and our constitution protects our ownership of firearms and the law protects lawful citizens to use firearms legally for self protection. On the flip side laws are in place for those that use firearms in the commission of crimes. Then obviously some types of firearms really don't belong in the hands of civilians such as military type of firearms that have long range capabilities such as Bazookas, RPG's and fully automatic weapons that can fire continuously with one single pull of the trigger. The gun issue is getting over exaggerated and totally ridiculous.

Jim

Well they sure as hell act like it. After all Diane Feinstein said if she had her way Mr and Mrs America would turn them all in. What's her problem? The Government has no true legal authority to totally confiscate or ban all firearms so they attempt to limit magazine capacity, make certain ammo difficult to obtain, or induce price increases. These issues constantly keep coming up and none of them ever really last for very long. America is a gun country and our constitution protects our ownership of firearms and the law protects lawful citizens to use firearms legally for self protection. On the flip side laws are in place for those that use firearms in the commission of crimes. Then obviously some types of firearms really don't belong in the hands of civilians such as military type of firearms that have long range capabilities such as Bazookas, RPG's and fully automatic weapons that can fire continuously with one single pull of the trigger. The gun issue is getting over exaggerated and totally ridiculous.

Jim Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

Feinstein is one person. And I'm well aware we are a gun country. 60 percent of homicides in the US involve a gun.

Feinstein is one person. And I'm well aware we are a gun country. 60 percent of homicides in the US involve a gun. Originally Posted by UnderConstruction

Usually small cal handguns 38 Special Rev. to 9mm Semi Auto and anything in between.


Jim

So why aren't most laws about controlling or punishing criminals instead of interfering with law abiding citizens or worse, making law abiding citizens into criminals?

Feinstein is one person. And I'm well aware we are a gun country. 60 percent of homicides in the US involve a gun. Originally Posted by UnderConstruction

"Feinstein is one person" ... I will never forget....when she ran for mayor.

Mexico is NOT A "GUN COUNTRY"* ... and Mexico has a higher death rate by firearms per capita than the United States .... You might also want to check out "Brazil"!!!! Columbia, El Salvador, Guatamala, Honduras, 2-4x the firearm deaths per capita.

* remember the Marine getting thrown in jail for bringing in firearms to Mexico?

So why aren't most laws about controlling or punishing criminals instead of interfering with law abiding citizens or worse, making law abiding citizens into criminals? Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

We have plenty of laws on the books "controlling or punishing criminals."

As for your question, if everyone followed basic rules of human decency in this country along the lines of Christian ethics and mores, there would be few, if any "laws on the books, a marginal number of lawyers, and few courts. Legislatures and Congress would have little to do and would probably be restricted to meeting ever 3-5 years to discuss whether any "tweaking" was necessary.

But that's now our reality .... I see that every day I travel down the toll road with frequent speed limit signs of 65 mph posted. Occasionally, I will see a "log jam" of vehicles ahead and think it's ANOTHER WRECK from "speeding," only to find out it is an LE patrol unit doing the speed limit. It's a lot worse just after a NASCAR OR INDY EVENT.

Didn't they ban the ammo Hinckley shot Reagan with?

So why aren't most laws about controlling or punishing criminals instead of interfering with law abiding citizens or worse, making law abiding citizens into criminals? Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Because, by definition, criminals don't follow laws? This is a non-issue anyway. There will still be 32 manufacturers making 168 different types of this ammo that will all be legal even if this particular ammo is made illegal. And it's the ATF that proposed the ban, not Obama.

http://news.yahoo.com/us-considers-b...-politics.html

You're wrong, UC. Anybody currently in the employ of or service to the United States is OBAMA, according to the extremist OP.

That's how Whir-LIE-turd rolls.

Should the private citizen be able to purchase ammo that can pierce a law enforcement officer's vest? I would say no. The courts have said no. There's still plenty of ammo that will shred a deer and/or target, your choice.

Didn't they ban the ammo Hinckley shot Reagan with? Originally Posted by i'va biggen

No. I think it was retained as evidence.

You're wrong, UC. Anybody currently in the employ of or service to the United States is OBAMA, according to the extremist OP. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

And BigBoy aka bigtex ... who says "Baker" is the same as Bush (President).

In other words: The Secretary of State is the same as the President.

Probably not good news for the Clinton team either.

Hallarious = Obaminable and Obaminable = Hillarious. Two peas in the same pod.

Or more likely: Two pea brains in the same booth.

Should the private citizen be able to purchase ammo that can pierce a law enforcement officer's vest? I would say no. The courts have said no. There's still plenty of ammo that will shred a deer and/or target, your choice. Originally Posted by UnderConstruction

You embrace a fallacious notion, you "#Grubered" Odumbo Minion. The M855 round was not purposefully "designed" nor "developed" to "pierce a law enforcement officer's vest", you "#Grubered" Odumbo Minion. In fact, the development of the M855 and soft body armor commonly utilized by police officers occurred simultaneously and independent of one another. Hence, your insinuation is a lie, you "#Grubered" Odumbo Minion. For decades now, it's been common knowledge that most rifle rounds -- and the M855 is a rifle round -- will penetrate most soft body armor used by police officers: and armor piercing rifle rounds predate body armor.