• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Assault Weapons Bill

LkWd_Don

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Messages
572
Location
Dolan Springs, AZ
Here are two videos of the same news agency stating that the AR15 was in the car and not used in the shooting. You be the judge.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AUTDMWBEoM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30sjtuXcvOE

And.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=fC31bQ973GY&feature=endscreen

The video I just put a link to explains about the confusions without clearing anything up. It talks about there being 4 firearms going into the school with the shooter and that they were all hand guns, then shows them at the trunk of a car clearing what looks like a semiautomatic shotgun (see pictures below) as it has a side charging handle just below the ejection port, and finally it goes into the Medical Examiners statement that all of the people were killed by the rifle that was carried in.

Interesting, if the shooter was found with 4 hand guns and no rifles, yet all the victims were shot by a rifle, where is the absent shooter and rifle?

As far as the car goes, do we know for certain that this is actually the car the shooter drove there in?

Still too many unanswered questions, too many changes in stories, and all coming from the same News Media outlet.. NBC.
2-LEGIZH-109.jpg

A%20Tac.jpg

saiga-shotguns.jpg

semi-automatic-shotgun.gif
 

Greg Bradburn

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2011
Messages
139
Location
Cary, North Carolina, United States

zack991

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
1,535
Location
Ohio, USA
I would not hold my breath on that.

There have been far too many (supposedly) spontaneous events (no one can convince me these are not Government set-ups) that have occurred that will play on the emotions of a lot of usually rational people, (almost like they were designed to do just that) that might not go along with such legislation, that may now be willing to capitulate.


Yea just like Obama care were more than half if Americans did not want it, but those "true" constitutional reps were more than happy to vote for it. Treat all of our reps as your sworn enemy plain and simple. Most of all of them deserve the death penalty, this country is going to hell and they are more than happy to see it burn. I have called and emailed my reps and most have given me the same BS, we will fight for you when in reality when they get a few $$ they will sell you out EVERY SINGLE TIME. Both parties are one in the same. The democrats are holding EBT cards above their zombie followers heads for votes. Spineless republicans are preaching freedom for votes. Yet they are eager to compromise for money and have the very same views as liberals behind the scenes. Mindless people watch fox, nmc,msnbc news telling them who to vote. Most Americans are so blind to believe that these "serpents" are being honest with them and while in their other hand they are voting for bills that fatten their own wallets while at the same time killing your freedoms. Stupid Americans are eating their words as if God himself had said it. If you believe in your precious D or R you are a complete fool both party's Will sell you all out, if you know your history you know their exact next move. Every election has been bought and paid for, don’t think so listen to the interview where the Romney sons talking about how the GOP spoke to Romney to run even though he did not want to run. The GOP told Romney WOULD be their nominee no matter who was wanting to run. Congrats, you have all been scamed.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/...-president-tagg-says-191236665--election.html

Fixed RNC voting

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJ_ylYNbAlY



THE US ELECTIONS ARE RIGGED
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4blibFGOqNw


Uncounted: The New Math of American Elections (Full Length)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pisBdNLmo-A
 
Last edited:

jackjack

Regular Member
Joined
May 25, 2011
Messages
31
Location
Louisville, Ky
It's funny how individualsstate they don't trust the media, but are quick to quote the media if it backs what they're asserting.


Like I said, "you be the judge." The post was a citation of information that is being discussed. :lol:

I'd rather discuss how to stop any effort to further gun control, namely the assault weapons bill. Let's motivate others to take action through the peaceful measure of petitioning our representatives. The price of petitioning in the USA is small compared to what much of the world experiences when vocal against tyrannical policies.

Kudos to all that contacted their representatives.

Nice letter Eye95. Also, it is nice to see a discerning mind at work before jumping to conclusions.
 

unreconstructed1

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2008
Messages
695
Location
Tennessee, ,
Interesting, if the shooter was found with 4 hand guns and no rifles, yet all the victims were shot by a rifle, where is the absent shooter and rifle?

Who is Christopher Rodia...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETkrxfYoQtc

at 30:15 an officer requests a tag check for a vehicle with the plate 872 YEO. Dispatch clearly returns the owner as a man named Christopher Rodia. They even spell out his last name. A little research shows a man matching with that name and approximate age lives in that area and is a known felon facing several charges at this moment.

A fox news article shows a vehicle with the caption "The car driven by Connecticut school shooter Adam Lanza is towed from Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn."

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/12/1...ticut-gunman-was-on-medication/#ixzz2GgPtOz5W

the license plate can clearly be seen. The vehicle is mentioned in several articles as belonging to Lanza's mother, and it was also the vehicle where the supposed "AR style rifle" was found.

on another note, I believe it is this video (but I'll need to double check) there is a scanner recording where an officer reports that he has "the suspects (plural) proned out"

I'm sorry if this post de-railed the thread. I'll quit now before I accidentally get it locked.
 

Sig229

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2006
Messages
926
Location
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
Personally, I wouldn't be put out if I had to carry ten round magz, instead of fifteen. Magazine capacity limits mean little in the whole scheme of things, IMO.



I don't know about anyone else, but I carry at least one spare mag, more, if I'm going further from the house, say, out of town.




If I need more that the fifteen rounds I carry in my sidearm, well, I am somewhere I ought not have been.

If you want to go around with less firepower than your firearm can carry, good luck to you.

But should everyone else have to?
 

NCCobra

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2012
Messages
20
Location
Clayton,NC
Personally, I wouldn't be put out if I had to carry ten round magz, instead of fifteen. Magazine capacity limits mean little in the whole scheme of things, IMO.



I don't know about anyone else, but I carry at least one spare mag, more, if I'm going further from the house, say, out of town.




If I need more that the fifteen rounds I carry in my sidearm, well, I am somewhere I ought not have been.

And therein lies the problem. Its not about whether or not you need 15 rounds, it comes down to our rights slowly dissipating. First its "high capacity" magazines, next its owning more than one magazine, so on and so forth. They take take take till there is no more and we are left to defend ourselves with number 2 pencils...that are registered via serial numbers. To sit back and watch this take place and not take action is foolish.
 

PFC HALE

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
481
Location
earth
And therein lies the problem. Its not about whether or not you need 15 rounds, it comes down to our rights slowly dissipating. First its "high capacity" magazines, next its owning more than one magazine, so on and so forth. They take take take till there is no more and we are left to defend ourselves with number 2 pencils...that are registered via serial numbers. To sit back and watch this take place and not take action is foolish.

our government and the puppeteers that are pulling their strings arent eroding the foundation of our freedoms, not even the soil under the foundation but rather the bedrock everything sits on.

one day people will realize that they gave up their freedoms one vote out of fear at a time.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Remember, guys, she supported these clowns who are now in charge. She has no choice but to make what they are doing sound reasonable, or she looks foolish for having supported them.
 

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,264
Location
In My Coffee
Remember, guys, she supported these clowns who are now in charge. She has no choice but to make what they are doing sound reasonable, or she looks foolish for having supported them.



Wrong, I state, basically, that it is not realistic, and a waste of time to ban particular firearms, and limit magazine capacity.



The machine does what it wants.
 

Johnny W

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2010
Messages
60
Location
CT
Why are folks saying this stupid "AWB" will ban most rifles and handguns? Specifically, why do folks think this will ban most of the guns we carry for personal protection? Is there something I'm missing?

From what I've read on Feinstein's senate.gov page, it will sharply restrict self-loading rifles with thumbhole/pistol grip/adjustable stocks, which could be a large number of the rifles in the US today. It will ban a bunch of specifically-named guns, a list which I'd really like to see.

It will accomplish these infringements on our rights by moving the classification of "assault weapon" from a 2-characteristic test to a 1-characteristic test (and for those not already in states with an "AWB", it'll reimpose it). So as this affects handguns, it will ban semi-automatic handguns with detachable magazines AND 1) magazines that attach outside the pistol grip, 2) threaded barrels, 3) barrel shrouds, 4) manufactured weights of 50 oz or more. With the exception of the threaded barrel, I don't know anyone who carries a pistol like that, and the threaded barrel can be replaced without totally scrapping the gun, just like the full-capacity magazines (albeit the barrel is more expensive).

Now, I'm not saying that Feinstein's "AWB" isn't a huge infringement on our already-violated rights, and I'm not saying it's no big deal. I totally oppose it and am going to make sure my representatives know it as soon as the bill is submitted.

What I AM saying is that this isn't the step where they confiscate our carry handguns. This is the step before that. At least, as far as I've been able to determine by reading the summary from Feinstein, and assuming that she's sticking with the characteristics from the previous "AWB" as she's implied. Am I missing a key piece of information that says there will be additional "military characteristics" for handguns?
 

motoxmann

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2012
Messages
760
Location
Middletown, CT
Johnny, you're missing the part about how all of the guns you listed becoming a felony to possess, unless you either forfeit them to the government or pay a crapton of money and fly through hoops to register every individual gun and magazine. ($200 PER UNIT, including $200 PER MAG!). I think it's extremely safe to assume they will follow paper trails of who owns what, and if it isn't registered, they'll come a knockin to confiscate.

also note it will make it a felony to simply POSESS any of those weapons. whether they are carry weapons or not, if they're not registered, they will take them.
and if you note the wording, it basically says "handguns capable of accepting a magazine of more than 10 rounds". it does NOT state that handguns capable of this will simply be required to use a 10 round mag, it says handguns capable of accepting a 10 round mag. simply put, that'll make my Sig handgun illegal.

and if you notice the wording of guns able to accept external mags, well technically if the mag protrudes from the gun AT ALL, that is considered "outside the gun" aka "external", also making that gun illegal. I know it is supposed to imply stuff like belt-fed guns, but you and I both know they will twist it around to any which way that can conform to the english language

overall, it pretty much makes the ONLY legal guns: bolt action rifles without a pistol grip as long as the mag does not protrude, standard hunting shotguns, revolvers, and little pistols.

then in a couple years there will be psy-ops massacres involving bolt-action rifles and shotguns and revolvers, and guess what will happen then?

on a side note, watch what the gun companies do if this ban passes. I'm curious to see what kinds of configurations they'll invent. $5 says someone will come out with a gun that has multiple mag ports. 3 mag ports, each containing 10 rounds, is 30 accessible rounds without reloading. but technically it'd be legal according to this bill if the mags don't protrude :p

I'm trying to find the link to the full bill so you can see what I'm referring to...
...interesting, I can't find it anywhere now. it was only like 3 days ago I read the FULL details of the bill, wonder where it went. I read that thing like 5 times too to memorize as much of it as possible. I do recall exact wording of 1 thing in regards to one of the many things that would be banned: "any handgun that can accept a magazine capable of more than 10 round capacity"

well, here's one for now:
http://www.examiner.com/article/report-obama-gun-ban-list-leaked?CID=obinsite

notice how it says:
"A semiautomatic rifle that accepts a detachable magazine and has:...
(iii) a pistol grip (which includes ANYTHING that can serve as a grip, see below),
(iv) a forward grip; or a barrel shroud"

umm, ALL rifles have foreward grips and/or barrel shrouds. how the heck else are you supposed to hold a rifle? one-handed??
 
Last edited:

Johnny W

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2010
Messages
60
Location
CT
Yeah, I haven't been able to find the full bill anywhere, either. Ever. I'm pretty sure all we'll see until they introduce it officially in Congress is the summary, at http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/assault-weapons.

From which I quote, "Certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and have one or more military characteristics;" Now, motoxmann, you're also from CT so you're familiar with the way an "AWB" works, even if it doesn't include the magazines. In CT, is a Glock 26 with a 17-round magazine considered illegal? No, it's not. And while I don't put it past the ATF to issue a new "ruling" that if a magazine is not entirely encapsulated by the pistol's grip, it's considered "attaching outside the pistol grip" and therefore an "assault weapon". But then again they could do that even if the bill doesn't pass, or something similar (pistols can be inserted in stocks and then converted to full-auto fire with custom-made parts, so a new hypothetical ATF ruling makes them machine guns).

Those of us under state "AWB"s are also familiar with the way detachable magazines and self-loading capability (aka semi-automatic actions) play into a gun's classification. They're qualifiers. Only if a gun is self-loading AND can accept detachable magazines do the "evil features" or "military characteristics" apply. You could have a bolt-action rifle with a detachable 50-round drum, bayonet lug, grenade launcher (barrel-mounted rifle-grenade launcher, that is), pistol grip, collapsible stock, and threaded barrel. It's not self-loading, so the "characteristics" test doesn't apply. Same for a gun like the SKS, a self-loading gun without a detachable magazine (provided it hasn't been modified to accept a detachable magazine). An SKS can have all the "evil features" because it doesn't have a detachable magazine. Incidentally, this is how folks manage to have AR-15s in California--they use a "bullet button" instead of a magazine catch, which requires a tool (bullet) to release the magazine therefore exempting it from the "detachable" category.

Again, I'm not saying Feinstein's ban is a small deal; just that it does not ban self-loading pistols just because they can accept a detachable magazine. If you have, and carry, say a Springfield XD, you could just pin the mags to 10 rounds and keep/carry your current equipment. Not that you should have to, of course, and not that it's good. It's an infringement and makes us all less safe. But it would comply with the law, and that's what folks did the last time around.

I completely agree with motoxmann that this is another step toward confiscating all guns. If this "AWB" passes, and they actually do manage to restrict access to AR-15-style rifles (which the ban as written would probably not manage to do), then the next rash of school/church/post office shootings will be with handguns and 10-round magazines, and be just as deadly. So then there will be a call to ban self-loading handguns. After that there will be shootings with revolvers reloaded with speed loaders or moon clips, and we'll see a call to ban them, etc.

That said, again, this current "AWB" is not any of those further steps. It's just one step, unless there's a full copy of the bill out there and guns like "Glock, all models" and "Springfield XD/XDM" are specifically listed.
 

Keylock

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2012
Messages
196
Location
OKC
The crux of any gun control law is to give an unhindered monopoly of force to the .gov. Once all force is in the hands of government, then the people are nothing more than tax livestock with no recourse but to lick the hands of their masters.

If this edict passes, it's a violation of the enumerated powers and thus null and void. As Thomas Aquinas points out, a valid, just law is one that is binding on the conscience and derived from the natural law instituted by the Creator. Laws that are contrary to human good are unjust and should be rejected as they are not laws at all.

The right of self defense is a natural law. The only entity that ever infringes upon our natural rights is always government. This is why I view government as antithetical to the Creator and the natural laws he instituted. This is why I refuse to participate (vote) in a system that continually places men above me whose only object is to control me.

As John C. Calhoun stated in his Fort Hill Address of 1831:

The object of a Constitution, is to restrain the government, as that of laws is to restrain individuals.
 
Top