Hunting Forum

This Isn’t About ‘Assault Weapons’, Folks…
Last Post 14 Jan 2013 10:22 AM by rthomas4. 33 Replies.
AddThis - Bookmarking and Sharing Button Printer Friendly
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
Sort:
PrevPrev NextNext
You are not authorized to post a reply.
Page 1 of 212 > >>
Author Messages
SGINGRASUser is Online

SGINGRAS Send Private Message Posts:995
--
26 Dec 2012 05:08 PM

This Isn’t About ‘Assault Weapons’, Folks…

Grass Roots North Carolina for Firearms Education

http://www.ammoland.com/2012/12/26/this-isnt-about-assault-weapons-folks/#axzz2GCov8xNJ

North Carolina -
-(Ammoland.com)-Gun Owners: If you labor under the misconception that Barack Obama’s proposed gun ban will encompass only “assault weapons,” you are about to get a wakeup call:

Initial reports indicate the ban will be far more expansive than the one which expired in 2004, and will probably encompass hundreds of types of rifles, pistols and shotguns.

Do not think for a moment that just because you only own a handgun for self-protection, or a shotgun for hunting ducks, that Barack Obama doesn’t have you in his crosshairs. In coming months, you will see that Obama wants nothing less than a virtual end to gun ownership … and the freedom which accompanies it.

Obama assigns Joe Biden to lead ‘assault weapon’ task force
Last Wednesday, Obama called for new bans on what he mischaracterizes as “weapons of war,” and on “high capacity”magazines. He is also calling for closing the “gun show loophole,”which means registering all private gun sales with the FBI via the computerized National Instant Check System.

On Friday, Obama alleged he has 400,000 signatures for the petition he is running at the White House website, and then announced that Joe Biden would lead the “Gun Violence Task Force” which will make recommendations in a few short weeks.

In case you have any doubts about what that task force will recommend, understand that just two days ago, Politico quoted Biden as saying: “There’s ‘no reason’ why Congress shouldn’t be able to pass a ban on ‘assault weapons…’”

That would be the same Joe Biden who recently bragged: “Remember, I’m the guy that back in 1994, passed and wrote the ‘assault weapons’ ban.”

What will the new ban include?
Maybe you think: “I’ve got a concealed handgun permit to protect myself, but why does anybody need an ‘assault weapon?’”

Or maybe you are saying: “So what? It wasn’t so bad the last time we had a ban. I still went hunting with my [fill-in-the-blank] rifle or shotgun.”

But will the Obama/Biden/Feinstein ban be like the last one? As the saying goes, “not exactly.”

The Washington Post is already celebrating the expansiveness of the bill Senator Dianne Feinstein promises to offer on “the first day”of the new Congress:

“Feinstein’s bill, I’m told, will be more sweeping in its targeting of specific weapons. ‘This bill would name many more weapons than the original ban did,’ the person familiar with drafting tells me …”

Oh, but that’s not all: Beyond specifically named guns and magazines holding more than 10 rounds, reports indicate includes pistols and rifles capable of accepting more than ten rounds and shotguns capable of accepting more than five rounds.

Can you say “hunting rifles and shotguns?” Sure you can.

What will the NRA do?

To its credit, the NRA didn’t come right out and capitulate at its breathlessly-awaited news conference on Friday. Indeed, Wayne LaPierre laid the blame for mass murder squarely on violent cultural influences, media exploitation and ostensibly “gun free” killing zones in which victims are disarmed, even proposing a plan to protect schools.

But that won’t slow down Obama/Biden/Feinstein in the slightest. Why? Because their agenda isn’t about protecting kids; it’s about disarming you!

The real question is: What will the NRA do when gun ban legislation starts moving? Will the NRA, as it so often has in the past, accept a “compromise” under which you lose just slightly less than you would have under Feinstein’s original, draconian proposal?

And what will you do?

That’s the more important question, isn’t it? Many of you are actively defending your rights: Signing petitions, writing letters, contributing to gun rights organizations. For others, it’s time for a little “tough love.”

I’ve heard all manner of excuses for inaction. See if you or anybody you know has said any of these:

  • “I’m not political.” Really? Then your opponents will thank you (just before they steal your rights) because they certainly are.
  • They’re not after my guns, just those ugly ‘assault weapons.’”Alas, the incremental gun bans of Australia and Britain say otherwise. As in 1994, Obama and his cronies are going after semi-automatic firearms first because they can “divide and conquer” gun owners by making them think defensive pistols and hunting firearms are “safe.” In truth, other guns will be the next targets, just as they were in 1994 when Handgun Control, Inc. rolled out its draconian “Brady II.”
  • “I’ve got all the semi-autos I need.” For now, perhaps, but remember: The “assault weapon” ban which then-Senator Biden engineered in 1994 initially required registering such guns, and registration is the invariable prelude to confiscation. And if you don’t register them, you will never again be able to use them in public.
  • “They’ll get my guns when they pry them from my cold, dead hands.”Newsflash, Rambo: The government is capable of arranging just that. Remember Ruby Ridge? And failing to comply will make you, an otherwise law-abiding citizen, a criminal for life. As George Orwell pointed out in his book “1984,” a government can’t control the law-abiding. If it wants control, first it has to make citizens into criminals.

Stop the Obama gun ban now!

So if you or any of your friends, acquaintances or family members have ever said any of the above, I suggest you get off your butt right now and do four things:

  • Sign the petition to STOP THE OBAMA GUN BAN by going immediately to: http://grnc.org/stop-the-obama-gun-ban-petition-gpo1203
  • Tell Congress you won’t tolerate attacks on your rights: Do so by using GRNC’s contact page at: http://grnc.org/stop-the-obama-gun-ban
  • Support GRNC: We are already meeting with members of Congress to give them a “spine injection” and get them to oppose the Obama gun ban when it is introduced. That means going to Washington, and that requires money. If you haven’t yet joined or contributed, go to: http://grnc.org/index.php/join-grnc/contribute

Forward this article: Maybe you some know some lazy shooters at the wildlife club; maybe you know somebody with a concealed handgun permit who feels this issue doesn’t affect them. Get them informed and active!

The goals of gun control

I have led gun rights organizations for 18 years. The last time I saw a threat this dangerous was in 1994 and, by some measures this is worse: After 12 years of victories, gun owners have become complacent, figuring the gains we’ve made are set in stone. They aren’t.

Moreover, new gun owners, often brought in via concealed handgun permits, don’t know the history of gun control. They don’t know that in 1994, the relatively “benign” Brady Act for background checks was followed by the seemingly necessary “assault weapon” ban which was then followed by Brady II, which would have:

  1. Banned any handgun capable of accepting more than 6 rounds;
  2. Banned all concealable handguns;
  3. Slapped a 50% tax on ammunition;
  4. Required you to get an “arsenal license” even if you had only two “bricks” of common .22 ammunition;
  5. Legalized warrantless searches of the homes of anyone brash enough to own 20 guns.

By her own admission, Dianne Feinstein has waited years for this “opportunity.” Gun control advocates have long since learned to soft-pedal their agenda, but the objectives remain the same: To end the private ownership of firearms.

Whatever Barack Obama tells you, folks, this isn’t about “assault weapons,” it’s about your freedom.

Armatissimi e liberissimi,

F. Paul Valone
President, Grass Roots North Carolina

*First spoken by Niccolo Machiavelli with reference to the Swiss, “Armatissimi e liberissimi” means “most armed, most free.”



Read more at Ammoland.com: http://www.ammoland.com/2012/12/26/this-isnt-about-assault-weapons-folks/#ixzz2GCpFH0bu
SGINGRASUser is Online

SGINGRAS Send Private Message Posts:995
--
26 Dec 2012 05:20 PM
Feinstein & Cuomo Admit Planning Australian Style Government Gun Buy Back




Read more at Ammoland.com:


http://www.ammoland.com/2012/12/26/feinstein-cuomo-admit-planning-australian-style-government-gun-buy-back/#ixzz2GCsSDz3O


SGINGRASUser is Online

SGINGRAS Send Private Message Posts:995
--
27 Dec 2012 06:00 PM

Her proposed legislation will 1. BAN THE SALE, TRANSFER, IMPORTATION AND MANUFACTURING OF ALL SEMI-AUTOMATIC RIFLES, SHOTGUNS AND HANDGUNS THAT CAN ACCEPT A DETACHABLE MAGAZINE GREATER THAN 10 ROUNDS, 2. CERTAIN OTHER NAMED  SEMI-AUTOMATIC RIFLES, SHOTGUNS AND HANDGUNS HAVING ONE MILITARY CHARACTERISTIC, AND 3. ALL HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINES ACCEPTING MORE THAN 10 RDS

 

She also requires that ALL GRANDFATHERED WEAPONS BE REGISTERED WITH THE ATF UNDER THE NATIONAL FIREARMS ACT. LOCAL LEO MUST PERFORM A NEW BACKGROUND CHECK, PROVIDE POSITIVE PHOTO ID, FINGERPRINTS AND A CERTIFICATION OF OUR IDENTITY AND THAT OUR POSSESSION OF SUCH REGISTERED FIREARMS WOULD NOT VIOLATE STATE OR LOCAL LAW TO THE ATF.

 

 

 

 

http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/assault-weapons

 

 

 

 

 

DuckbusterUser is Offline

Duckbuster Send Private Message Posts:257
--
27 Dec 2012 06:22 PM
Well, I'm not registering any of my firearms, I'm not going to let them run a background check on me, I'm not providing a photo ID or certificate of my identity, and I won't give them my fingerprint records. Guess I'll be a felon. Oh well.

SGINGRAS--That's some scary stuff. I don't doubt at all that could happen. The first link you posted stated that the government would make an offer on buying back guns we can't refuse...up to $500. Yeah, that's a complete rip-off. But, I wouldn't do it for $10,000.

As Ted Nugent so aptly put it; "They can go and suck on my machine gun." I think I'll post that video. LOL.
Every sunrise I take in over a marsh or in a forest, I thank God for all he has given us.
rthomas4User is Offline

rthomas4 Send Private Message Posts:2343
--
27 Dec 2012 07:52 PM
Let me think. Damn, I simply can't remember who I sold all of my guns to!!!!!!!!!!! I would have automatically been on the confiscation list, since I did own 34............or was it 36 guns.  Damn, I can't even remember how many I had, before I sold all of 'em!
NRA LM, NAHC LM, Buckmasters LM, Second Amendment Foundation, GOA, NAGR, Palmetto Gun Rights, DU, NWTF, QDMA, Everyday Hunter,OYOA, ASAdspalliance,D& DH, and PROUD SC redneck REBEL for life. If the South had won the war, Obama wouldn't be in the White House.
Big DawgUser is Offline

Big Dawg Send Private Message Posts:557
--
28 Dec 2012 06:35 AM
When you filled out the form 4473 you gave them all the info they need should they want to come for your firearms. Firerams bought from pirvate individuals of course require no form 4473 so they cannot be found unless the seller gives them your name and such. When they have gun shows here i usually spend some time out side watching and looking at what folks are bringing to sell, trade, or for whatever reason and if I see something that interest me then I wll start a conversation with that person. I also like yard sales along with estate sales as firearms can be bought with nothing more than cash.
LM NAHC, LM NSSF, LRRP Competitor Shooter/Spotter. Never Quit ! All the Way ! No Man Shall Be Left Behind !
swnoelUser is Offline

swnoel Send Private Message Posts:619
--
28 Dec 2012 07:31 AM
Posted By Big Dawg on 28 Dec 2012 07:35 AM
When you filled out the form 4473 you gave them all the info they need should they want to come for your firearms. Firerams bought from pirvate individuals of course require no form 4473 so they cannot be found unless the seller gives them your name and such. When they have gun shows here i usually spend some time out side watching and looking at what folks are bringing to sell, trade, or for whatever reason and if I see something that interest me then I wll start a conversation with that person. I also like yard sales along with estate sales as firearms can be bought with nothing more than cash.

When I held a FFL, the 4473 was not sent to the ATF but retained in my records. Maybe things are different now.
"The BIG Lie" The phrase was also used in a report prepared during the war by the United States Office of Strategic Services in describing Hitler's psychological profile:[5][6] His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.[7]
Big DawgUser is Offline

Big Dawg Send Private Message Posts:557
--
28 Dec 2012 10:15 AM
The BATFE will be sending out letters to all FFL dealers telling them to send the 4473's or at least copies to them ASAP. These forms that are kept by the dealers are for their records but as I always suspected they are an easy way for the BATFE to have alist of all the buyers. Just like the NCIS background checks are supposed to be deleted but rest assured somebody, somewhere has that list as well !!! This is not something that is just suddenly happening this has been being planned and prepared for and they have only been waiting for the most opportune time much like as the time at hand now.
LM NAHC, LM NSSF, LRRP Competitor Shooter/Spotter. Never Quit ! All the Way ! No Man Shall Be Left Behind !
LunkerdogUser is Offline

Lunkerdog Send Private Message Posts:922
--
28 Dec 2012 11:45 AM
"When I held a FFL, the 4473 was not sent to the ATF but retained in my records. Maybe things are different now."

So what happened to those records when for whatever reason you relinquished your FFL?
 photo avatar9712_1gif_zps4be36d1a.jpg  photo bcd14c0d-152c-48a6-a2f3-404309baf734_zpsa4e46c7b.jpg
swnoelUser is Offline

swnoel Send Private Message Posts:619
--
28 Dec 2012 12:30 PM
I sent them into the ATF even though they didn't want them. That was 25 years ago.
"The BIG Lie" The phrase was also used in a report prepared during the war by the United States Office of Strategic Services in describing Hitler's psychological profile:[5][6] His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.[7]
rthomas4User is Offline

rthomas4 Send Private Message Posts:2343
--
28 Dec 2012 05:19 PM
Today, it's mandatory to send them to BATFE. They can also come into your place of business and confiscate those forms at any time, along with all of your purchase and sales records, then revoke your license because you no longer have the required records! It happened to a second cousin of mine and resulted in him losing his sporting goods store.
NRA LM, NAHC LM, Buckmasters LM, Second Amendment Foundation, GOA, NAGR, Palmetto Gun Rights, DU, NWTF, QDMA, Everyday Hunter,OYOA, ASAdspalliance,D& DH, and PROUD SC redneck REBEL for life. If the South had won the war, Obama wouldn't be in the White House.
SGINGRASUser is Online

SGINGRAS Send Private Message Posts:995
--
30 Dec 2012 12:57 PM
Obama makes passing gun control measures a priority for 2013

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...z2GZCFHRCp
rthomas4User is Offline

rthomas4 Send Private Message Posts:2343
--
30 Dec 2012 02:46 PM
Hell, he made it his #1 priority for his second term, back in 2008!!!!!
NRA LM, NAHC LM, Buckmasters LM, Second Amendment Foundation, GOA, NAGR, Palmetto Gun Rights, DU, NWTF, QDMA, Everyday Hunter,OYOA, ASAdspalliance,D& DH, and PROUD SC redneck REBEL for life. If the South had won the war, Obama wouldn't be in the White House.
SGINGRASUser is Online

SGINGRAS Send Private Message Posts:995
--
01 Jan 2013 01:11 PM
VA Tech Review Panel: High Cap Magazine Ban Would Not Have Stopped 2007 Shooting




Washington DC - -(Ammoland.com)- The Virginian Tech Review Panel’s assessment of the April 16, 2007 shooting in which 32 were killed and 17 and wounded, contains a pertinent piece of information for the gun grabbers who are currently tripping over themselves to blame high capacity magazines for the evil in the world.

The panel’s assessment found that a high capacity magazine ban would not have stopped Seung-Hui Cho from carrying out his criminal act.

In a very detailed manner, the panel reports how many magazines Cho purchased, and when and from where he purchased them. They also report that some of those magazines held 15 rounds — which is 5 rounds beyond the maximum capacity allowed by the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban (AWB). 10 rounds was the maximum number of rounds a new magazine could hold when the ban was in effect.

However, because the AWB expired in October 2004, Cho was able to purchase 15 round magazines with no problem in 2007.

But guess what? The panel says that the ban wouldn’t have stopped Cho anyway. They said forcing him to use 10 round magazines instead of those that hold 15 rounds “would have not made that much difference in the incident.”

Why would it have not made any difference? Because he was shooting at unarmed people, thus he had all the time in the world to reload when necessary.

Ironically, this same report contains testimony from Virginia Tech grads who had concealed carry licenses and had spent their time at Virginia Tech arguing for a change in the school’s gun-free policy. According to the report, these concealed carry permit holders “told the panel that they felt it was safer for responsible people to be armed so they could fight back in exactly the type of situation that occurred on April 16, 2007.”

Is there any chance Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Chuck Schumer (D-NY), and Joe Manchin (D-WV) are listening?

About:
AWR Hawkins writes for all the BIG sites, for Pajamas Media, for RedCounty.com, for Townhall.com and now AmmoLand Shooting Sports News.

His southern drawl is frequently heard discussing his take on current events on radio shows like America’s Morning News, the G. Gordon Liddy Show, the Ken Pittman Show, and the NRA’s Cam & Company, among others. He was a Visiting Fellow at the Russell Kirk Center for Cultural Renewal (summer 2010), and he holds a PhD in military history from Texas Tech University.



Read more at Ammoland.com: http://www.ammoland.com/2012/12/31/high-cap-magazine-ban-would-not-have-stopped-2007-shooting/#ixzz2GkwapaCf
SGINGRASUser is Online

SGINGRAS Send Private Message Posts:995
--
05 Jan 2013 07:53 AM
Gun shows face new scrutiny after Connecticut school shooting

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/01/0...z2H72rmaFU
rthomas4User is Offline

rthomas4 Send Private Message Posts:2343
--
05 Jan 2013 03:30 PM
If the promoters want to cancel or postpone the shows out of a sense of propriety, that's fine and well. But, to go on with the show and deny certain vendors from selling and displaying their products because of the current sentiments, is a sign of weakness and caving in to the antis. If I were a promoter, I'd eliminate parking and entrance fees, and have free hot dogs and sodas for the public. They're going to make their money off of the percentages and table rentals from the vendors, so why not do something to draw the skeptics in and let them actually witness what goes on at a gun show, instead of falling for the lies and propaganda of the antis!!!!!!
NRA LM, NAHC LM, Buckmasters LM, Second Amendment Foundation, GOA, NAGR, Palmetto Gun Rights, DU, NWTF, QDMA, Everyday Hunter,OYOA, ASAdspalliance,D& DH, and PROUD SC redneck REBEL for life. If the South had won the war, Obama wouldn't be in the White House.
hollyUser is Offline

holly Send Private Message Posts:2241
--
05 Jan 2013 08:53 PM
Well I know that I went to a gun show here in CA and they had it all .And yes the paper work still had to be done .They have one or two dealers that do all the paper work for the show ,and you still have to wait your two weeks here .
SGINGRASUser is Online

SGINGRAS Send Private Message Posts:995
--
06 Jan 2013 09:03 AM
White House weighs broad gun-control agenda in wake of Newtown shootings

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...print.html

White House reportedly considering gun control measures beyond assault weapon ban

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...latestnews
g-faberUser is Offline

g-faber Send Private Message Posts:778
--
06 Jan 2013 12:50 PM



• Reduces, from two to one, the number of permitted external features on various firearms. The 1994 ban permitted various firearms to be manufactured only if they were assembled with no more than one feature listed in the law. Feinstein’s new bill would prohibit the manufacture of the same firearms with even one of the features.

• Adopts new lists of prohibited external features. For example, whereas the 1994 ban applied to a rifle or shotgun the “pistol grip” of which “protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon,” the new bill would drastically expand the definition to include any “grip . . . or any other characteristic that can function as a grip.” Also, the new bill adds “forward grip” to the list of prohibiting features for rifles, defining it as “a grip located forward of the trigger that functions as a pistol grip.” Read literally and in conjunction with the reduction from two features to one, the new language would apply to every detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifle. At a minimum, it would, for example, ban all models of the AR-15, even those developed for compliance with California’s highly restrictive ban.

• Carries hyperbole further than the 1994 ban. Feinstein’s 1994 ban listed “grenade launcher” as one of the prohibiting features for rifles. Her 2013 bill carries goes even further into the ridiculous, by also listing “rocket launcher.” Such devices are restricted under the National Firearms Act and, obviously, are not standard components of the firearms Feinstein wants to ban. Perhaps a subsequent Feinstein bill will add “nuclear bomb,” “particle beam weapon,” or something else equally far-fetched to the features list.

• Expands the definition of “assault weapon” by including:

• Three very popular rifles: The M1 Carbine (introduced in 1944 and for many years sold by the federal government to individuals involved in marksmanship competition), a model of the Ruger Mini-14, and most or all models of the SKS.

• Any “semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds,” except for tubular-magazine .22s.

• Any “semiautomatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle that has an overall length of less than 30 inches,” any “semiautomatic handgun with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds,” and any semi-automatic handgun that has a threaded barrel.

• Requires owners of existing “assault weapons” to register them with the federal government under the National Firearms Act (NFA). The NFA imposes a $200 tax per firearm, and requires an owner to submit photographs and fingerprints to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), to inform the BATFE of the address where the firearm will be kept, and to obtain the BATFE’s permission to transport the firearm across state lines.

• Prohibits the transfer of “assault weapons.” Owners of other firearms, including those covered by the NFA, are permitted to sell them or pass them to heirs. However, under Feinstein’s new bill, “assault weapons” would remain with their current owners until their deaths, at which point they would be forfeited to the government.

• Prohibits the domestic manufacture and the importation of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition. The 1994 ban allowed the importation of such magazines that were manufactured before the ban took effect. Whereas the 1994 ban protected gun owners from errant prosecution by making the government prove when a magazine was made, the new ban includes no such protection. The new ban also requires firearm dealers to certify the date of manufacture of any >10-round magazine sold, a virtually impossible task, given that virtually no magazines are stamped with their date of manufacture.

• Targets handguns in defiance of the Supreme Court. The Court ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects the right to have handguns for self-defense, in large part on the basis of the fact handguns are the type of firearm “overwhelmingly chosen by American society for that lawful purpose.” Semi-automatic pistols, which are the most popular handguns today, are designed to use detachable magazines, and the magazines “overwhelmingly chosen” by Americans for self-defense are those that hold more than 10 rounds. Additionally, Feinstein’s list of nearly 1,000 firearms exempted by name (see next paragraph) contains not a single handgun. Sen. Feinstein advocated banning handguns before being elected to the Senate, though she carried a handgun for her own personal protection.

• Contains a larger piece of window dressing than the 1994 ban. Whereas the 1994 ban included a list of approximately 600 rifles and shotguns exempted from the ban by name, the new bill’s list is increased to nearly 1,000 rifles and shotguns. Other than for the 11 detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifles and one other semi-automatic rifle included in the list, however, the list appears to be pointless, because a separate provision of the bill exempts “any firearm that is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action.”

It goes without saying, but that’s pretty jaw-dropping – isn’t it?

Of course, there is the question on whether or not the NRA’s recapitulation of the 2013 AWB is accurate?

That is, did the NRA get the most recent draft of the bill or an earlier draft that may have changed following subsequent revisions?













g-faberUser is Offline

g-faber Send Private Message Posts:778
--
06 Jan 2013 01:52 PM
So we're talking about a 22 rimfire ban, a handgun ban, a turkey shotgun ban....everybody awake?
You are not authorized to post a reply.
Page 1 of 212 > >>