Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Unfortunately I doubt many anti-gunners will read it and will CONTINUE to cal the AR-15 an "assault weapon".
"—anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun"
I recall ol'e barbara mukulski standing before congress, when the Clinton "assault weapons ban' was being discussed, with a Thompson Sub- machine gun. spouting how we should keep these guns, assault weapons, aff the streets.
Of course her gun was ALREADY very strongly regulated.
Her point was to "confuse and mis-direct" the public into thinking so-called assault weapons being talked about were like her Thompson.
I saw a cartoon with president Washington looking into the future sweating- saying we were talking about musket balls not GDarn 13.3 bullets per second!!
(they do not let me post pics- so best I can do) but on point! unless you have to deal with lions 10 ft bears or mountain lions-- these weapons do need to be in the average population.
The gun control genie is out of the bottle. There are so many guns in public hands, any attempt to limit them would be about as successful as stacking greased BB's.
Though I like the idea of better background checks, I am not so sure it would help much. Those that couldn't pass the background check would find another way.
This whole deal on 'assault weapons' is mostly smoke and mirrors. Most people don't even know what an assault weapon is. You can take two weapons with near identical characteristics except appearance and one would be called and assault weapon and the other would be called a hunting rifle by most people.
I would be more inclined to make it easier for the honest, mentally stable (what ever that is) population to openly carry and hope it would be a deterrent or at least possible that 'renegades' could be stopped in short order.
It would take a lot of education and clearly defined laws on 'rules of engagement' because knowing who is the good guy and who is the bad guy is not always so clear cut.
It is a scary and difficult situation most anyway you turn.
"It would take a lot of education"
I think this is REQUIRED of MANY politicians who "talk" about guns that know NOTHING about them, such as Grayson.
Things have gotten so ridiculous, I heard that in NY state plastic "guns" that LOOK LIKE an AR-15 are BANNED from being shipped or brought into the state.
Unfortunately I doubt many anti-gunners will read it and will CONTINUE to cal the AR-15 an "assault weapon".
"—anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun"
I recall ol'e barbara mukulski standing before congress, when the Clinton "assault weapons ban' was being discussed, with a Thompson Sub- machine gun. spouting how we should keep these guns, assault weapons, aff the streets.
Of course her gun was ALREADY very strongly regulated.
Her point was to "confuse and mis-direct" the public into thinking so-called assault weapons being talked about were like her Thompson.
And she probably broke the law bringing that to congress.
Normally this would be in another subform, but the AR-15 is undeniably a political hot potato at the moment and the center of focus on the national stage.
I've heard calls from many to ban or confiscate all AR-type weapons. Well, I suppose the Government could pass a law banning the manufacture and sale of the AR-15. I don't know all the legal ins and outs but I suppose that would be doable.
What would the definition of Armalite 15 "type" weapon be specifically, to ban just this "type" of firearm?
So then what? I can see the Government asking for a registration of all such weapons, because truthfully, one one knows where they all are. Yes, when you bought your AR at the gun store you filled out the 4473 and included your name and address. So, theoretically, someone can locate this particular rifle. Lets say you bought your gun in 1989. You then sold it to your Uncle Ralph in 1991. He decided he didn't like it after all and traded it to a golfing buddy in 1992, who then sold it at a gun show in 1994 to someone. See the difficulty?
Ban the AR15, get your way. Mass shootings will still happen but ya'all will be all giddy that you "did something".
We've done this ban nonsense before. I still have registered assault weapons from the first round of lunacy. I still legally used them all the time. ALL the time.
If you don't have the stones to come take my weapon you've done nothing. Confiscation is your only tool with teeth.
I saw a cartoon with president Washington looking into the future sweating- saying we were talking about musket balls not GDarn 13.3 bullets per second!!
(they do not let me post pics- so best I can do) but on point! unless you have to deal with lions 10 ft bears or mountain lions-- these weapons do need to be in the average population.
To that I say: Here's a picture of Jefferson saying "We were talking about moveable-type, single page, manual printing presses, not social media and email!"
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
