Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 68

Thread: 2009 AWB

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    leesburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    15

    Post imported post

    Need help straighting things out about this. If i own a assualt rifle prior to aAWBis it still legal to shoot it at ranges? or you really cant do any thing with them and they will just sit in the safe until the ban is over.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,882

    Post imported post

    That would depend on the particulars of whatever laws might be passed in the future. I'm not greatly worried, for my own part. The last so-called "assault weapons ban" didn't apply to existing inventory in any case.

    -ljp

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    293

    Post imported post

    The previous 'ban' was a prohibition on the manufacture and importation of certain rifles with 'military' features and magazines over a certain capacity. Everyone was able to keep what they already had, but the prices of 'banned' magazines and rifles shot up dramatically until 2004 due to lack of adequate supply. The current proposed AWB is largely the same, but probably will not have a sunset clause. You will be able to keep your rifle (unless they enact confiscation legislation) but stocks, magazines, and other accessories for it will become unavailable.

  4. #4
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849

    Post imported post

    frgntsmtn wrote:
    Need help straighting things out about this. If i own a assualt rifle prior to aAWBis it still legal to shoot it at ranges? or you really cant do any thing with them and they will just sit in the safe until the ban is over.
    I would imagine that most all public ranges do not allow the use of an assault rifle on their premises. They are just too dangerous in crowded areas. That and the fact that there may be local ordinances against their use, so definitely check ahead before taking your class 3 rifle out to a public range.


    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Springfield, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    737

    Post imported post

    frgntsmtn wrote:
    Need help straighting things out about this. If i own a assualt rifle prior to aAWBis it still legal to shoot it at ranges? or you really cant do any thing with them and they will just sit in the safe until the ban is over.
    Just to clarify, are you talking about an assault rifle (capable of fully automatic fire, requires an FFL and tax stamp) or a so-called "assault weapon" (semi-automatic, functions exactly like other semi-autos, but has "military styling")?

    ...Orygunner...

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Fort Collins, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    263

    Post imported post

    Merriam-Webster doesn't seem to care if their definition is the same as TRADOC.

    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/assault+rifle

    assault rifle One entry found.


    Main Entry: assault rifle Function:noun Date:1972 : any of various automatic or semiautomatic rifles with large capacity magazines designed for military use




  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    147

    Post imported post

    frgntsmtn wrote:
    Need help straighting things out about this. If i own a assualt rifle prior to aAWBis it still legal to shoot it at ranges? or you really cant do any thing with them and they will just sit in the safe until the ban is over.
    I imagine they could only ban the transfer and sale of "assault weapons" but not punish current ownership. If they tried, wouldn't it violate ex post facto?

  8. #8
    Regular Member MetalChris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    SW Ohio
    Posts
    1,215

    Post imported post

    Brigdh wrote:
    frgntsmtn wrote:
    Need help straighting things out about this. If i own a assualt rifle prior to aAWBis it still legal to shoot it at ranges? or you really cant do any thing with them and they will just sit in the safe until the ban is over.
    I imagine they could only ban the transfer and sale of "assault weapons" but not punish current ownership. If they tried, wouldn't it violate ex post facto?
    I wouldn't put anything past them, especially with the support of a "progressive" Supreme Court.

  9. #9
    Regular Member compmanio365's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pierce County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,013

    Post imported post

    There is a serious lack of "balance of power" or "check and balance" in the government now.....with the Democrats like Obama, Pelosi, etc, controlling all aspects of US government now, I wouldn't put it past them to try to repeal the 2A within the next 4 years.......followed by door-to-door confiscation.....why not? The people at large have shown their willingness to throw away their freedoms for a handout. They are your enemy now. Always remember that.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Mobile, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    341

    Post imported post

    why not?
    Because many Democrats remember that the Adequate Magazine Ban was a major catalyst for the Republican Revolution of the 90s. It's hard to create social welfare programs if you anger gun owners and are subsequently kicked out of office.

  11. #11
    Regular Member compmanio365's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pierce County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,013

    Post imported post

    You keep telling yourself that if it comforts you.....when they come to your door to confiscate your arms it will be too late to change your mind.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,882

    Post imported post

    Brigdh: Well, certain laws have been upheld despite their ex post facto aspects, like adding misdemeanor domestic violence convictions as a criterion for making someone a "prohibited person" with regard to buying or possessing firearms. The ban applies retroactively to anyone ever so convicted, even if it were legal for them to have guns with this record before the change. Likewise, the "street sweeper" shotgun was reclassified as a "destructive device" and banned altogether, even though it was just a "shotgun" when introduced.

    -ljp

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    145

    Post imported post

    Who is going to come door to door? That would be like rounding up all the illegal aliens in the United States to deport them. There are just too many of them and not enough "agents" to do it with. Besides, if the govt. started a "door to door" confiscation, they would find out the hard way what the 2nd Amendment is all about.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Mobile, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    341

    Post imported post

    compmanio365 wrote:
    You keep telling yourself that if it comforts you.....when they come to your door to confiscate your arms it will be too late to change your mind.
    Are you operating under the assumption I would cooperate with such a confiscation? No, in such a situation, I would change THEIR minds. A .223 tumbling through it ought to change it enough.

  15. #15
    Regular Member compmanio365's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pierce County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,013

    Post imported post

    Good, I hope you are ready. Because I don't think it's as unlikely as you seem to think. They have control now of all of it, the presidency, senate, house, congress......who is going to veto a bill that takes away your gun rights when the majority of elected officials are gun grabbers? Those crying out against it would be quickly silenced since they are but a small, impotent minority........I think these people are just crazy enough to start the second civil war in this country, and laugh all the way while doing so.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Mobile, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    341

    Post imported post

    compmanio365 wrote:
    Good, I hope you are ready.* Because I don't think it's as unlikely as you seem to think.* They have control now of all of it, the presidency, senate, house, congress......who is going to veto a bill that takes away your gun rights when the majority of elected officials are gun grabbers?
    Ignoring the legislative redundancy in your above statement, "they" controlled all those things when the Adequate Magazine Ban was passed. Mere months later, the very same gun grabbers were kicked out of office by the constituents they had angered.

  17. #17
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849

    Post imported post

    thorvaldr wrote:
    Merriam-Webster doesn't seem to care if their definition is the same as TRADOC.

    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/assault+rifle

    assault rifle One entry found.


    Main Entry: assault rifle Function:noun Date:1972 : any of various automatic or semiautomatic rifles with large capacity magazines designed for military use


    While I use that dictionary link to check spelling, I have to tell you that it is corrupted by political correctness and outright mistakes. For example, look up the word "gender". Gender is a word which defines the use of proper parts of speech in language. It does not describe human sexual differences. That is a more recent invention brought about by feminists in order to reduce and eliminate the use of the correct word for this: sex.

    Read the description of assault rifle in wikipedia. It is much closer to the actual definition of the weapon. It must be capable of fully automatic fire or it does not qualify as an assault rifle.


    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  18. #18
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849

    Post imported post

    We are assuming that an order could come down to police, national guard units, and the military to begin the process of rounding up and confiscating privately owned firearms. But think about this. First off, it would be an illegal order and therefore not enforceable or required to be carried out. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land and every military individual takes an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign AND domestic. Plus it would be in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act. And then there is this.

    Let's say this has begun and has been met with armed resistance and quite a bit of it. A unit of the Army is moving through Georgia, taking arms as they go and they are running into fire from civilians. And let's say that this unit is comprised with soldiers from Indiana. Don't you think that they are going to put two and two together and think that if this is happening in Georgia, it is probably also happening in their own home towns with their own families being fired upon by the military. In other words, I would bet a lot of soldiers, LEO's, and guardsmen would refuse to carry out these illegal orders.

    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
    Posts
    3,806

    Post imported post

    How many times have a brought that up?

    There is CONSIDERABLE anti-government sentiment in the military.

    At least, I know there was where I was stationed, and every duty station of just about every 200X veteran I've ever spoken to....

    The underlying theme?

    government != country
    and
    government != Constitution

    (!= mean "does not equal")
    Why open carry? Because 1911 > 911.

  20. #20
    Regular Member MetalChris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    SW Ohio
    Posts
    1,215

    Post imported post

    SouthernBoy wrote:
    The Constitution is the supreme law of the land and every military individual takes an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign AND domestic. Plus it would be in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act.
    Did that stop them in NOLA?

  21. #21
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849

    Post imported post

    MetalChris wrote:
    SouthernBoy wrote:
    The Constitution is the supreme law of the land and every military individual takes an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign AND domestic. Plus it would be in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act.
    Did that stop them in NOLA?
    No sir, it did not. Which is why a sizable show of arms and armed resistance could be the factor that garnishes a change of heart and action on their part. What took place in New Orleans was disgusting, illegal, and unconscionable. I would bet this will not take place on a national level.


    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  22. #22
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    DFW, Texas, USA
    Posts
    429

    Post imported post

    SouthernBoy wrote:
    Which is why a sizable show of arms and armed resistance could be the factor that garnishes a change of heart and action on their part. What took place in New Orleans was disgusting, illegal, and unconscionable. I would bet this will not take place on a national level.

    Not long after Katrina the Texas legislature enacted law that specifically prohibits the confiscation of weapons in times of emergency. This leads me to believe other states will also disapprove of federal gun grabbing.

    By this I mean that some states will ultimatelyprotect armed citizen resistance against illegal confiscation.But by God it would get ugly.

  23. #23
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849

    Post imported post

    cccook wrote:
    SouthernBoy wrote:
    Which is why a sizable show of arms and armed resistance could be the factor that garnishes a change of heart and action on their part. What took place in New Orleans was disgusting, illegal, and unconscionable. I would bet this will not take place on a national level.

    Not long after Katrina the Texas legislature enacted law that specifically prohibits the confiscation of weapons in times of emergency. This leads me to believe other states will also disapprove of federal gun grabbing.

    By this I mean that some states will ultimatelyprotect armed citizen resistance against illegal confiscation.But by God it would get ugly.
    Virginia also has the same sort of law. Still we know that despots, by definition, are inclined to ignore laws that interfere with their designs on the people they have been hired to serve. That is the primary reason for the Second Amendment. To control government through the thread of, or actual use of, force of arms.


    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  24. #24
    Lone Star Veteran Gator5713's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Aggieland, Texas, USA
    Posts
    593

    Post imported post

    I believe that 'door to door' is unfortunately an eventual reality, however I also believe that it is some time in coming... I do believe it to be a possibility within my lifetime. (I am 28 so I plan to be here for a good while longer...)
    I believe that the first step in the major gun grab will be to require that we keep our arms at an approved depot and unfortunately many casual hunters and sporters will likely comply greatly reducing our capacity to put up a resistance. But I also believe that there will be a great resistance in which much of our 'armed forces' join with the side of the people. I hope and pray that it does not come to that, but I believe that eventually we will have many unarmed current 'guns are bad' people running to us praying to God and asking us to 'pass the bullets'!

  25. #25
    Regular Member compmanio365's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pierce County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,013

    Post imported post

    Gator5713 wrote:
    I believe that 'door to door' is unfortunately an eventual reality, however I also believe that it is some time in coming... I do believe it to be a possibility within my lifetime. (I am 28 so I plan to be here for a good while longer...)
    I believe that the first step in the major gun grab will be to require that we keep our arms at an approved depot and unfortunately many casual hunters and sporters will likely comply greatly reducing our capacity to put up a resistance. But I also believe that there will be a great resistance in which much of our 'armed forces' join with the side of the people. I hope and pray that it does not come to that, but I believe that eventually we will have many unarmed current 'guns are bad' people running to us praying to God and asking us to 'pass the bullets'!
    I think it's those people that will be running to the current administration and asking to save them from the "terrorists" running amuck......it has become clear that the majority of America does not care about their freedoms or the ideals of which this country was founded, and to them, those that do are "right-wing radicals" and even could be called "terrorists". They are perfectly happy to see America die and turn to socialism, because they know they'll get "free" handouts instead of having to work for a living.....

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •