robertmcw wrote:All I can say that all of you who voted for ‘The One’ should have their heads checked and the rest of us we need to give a check to the NRA.
Robert
Not everyone voted for "the one" and that "vulture capitalist," Romney (TX Gov. Perry's term) was a traitor to US workers, but loyal to Communist China. Wake up, they both suck. Remember our loss of rights: 1968 (Johnson), 1976 (Ford), 1986 (Reagan), 1989 (Bush), 1994 (Clinton), 2004 (Bush campaigning that he would re-new the AWB), and 2005 (Bush did nothing to stop the barrel ban). Now explain how Republican presidents protected gun rights? Again they both suck, blind partisanship on either side of the aisle gets nothing but more of the same
“… corporations have been enthroned, and an era of corruption in high places will follow, … until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed.”
I was going through articles and news footage from Feinstein's little conference and in 1 of the stories a reporter had gotten a hold of a copy of the proposed bill. They took a picture of the page listing the banned weapons and at the bottom of the page it says All Belt Fed Semiautomatics. So yes, the SA-42s, MG-42s, etc.. are banned under the proposed bill. Feinstein said their would be a grandfather clause for assault weapons that are already owned, but it wasn't even 2 weeks ago I saw a news clip of her saying there would be NO grandfather clause. There is also no sunset included in this bill.
The bill is BS and would not stop a single mass shooting (which are rare anyways but the media loves to play up the blood, gore, and dead kids for ratings). I do fear that regardless of what we tell our congress critters they will vote for this monstrosity. Remember the sign for how to tell when a politician is lying to you, their lips are moving.
The bill is BS and would not stop a single mass shooting (which are rare anyways but the media loves to play up the blood, gore, and dead kids for ratings). I do fear that regardless of what we tell our congress critters they will vote for this monstrosity. Remember the sign for how to tell when a politician is lying to you, their lips are moving.
Deplorably there are some sick people in both parties (mainly bleeding-heart gun grabbing Dems, but some GOP for sure) that will go for restrictions. It doesn't matter if another AWB never stops another mass-shooting, they want your guns, regardless of logic and facts to the contrary on the AWB efficacy, they want your guns.
Don't worry Fiend'ishstein will let you have a brown bess--but no poweder
“… corporations have been enthroned, and an era of corruption in high places will follow, … until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed.”
For everyone's viewing "enjoyment" here is the current proposed bill. Funny it seems much lighter than the one they were talking about submitting. Maybe this is just a synopsis.
Though this bill does seam far reaching, I'd like to see what it ends up looking like by the time it passes, if it does. They've already taken some of the teeth out of it from when it was first put fourth (like no grandfathering, etc).
Even if a "light" version passes (which will not likely get out of the House--for now), it will be wack-a-mole. First this class of guns are banned, then another class/characteristic will be banned, etc.,,,they will not stop. There are those that hate guns as much as we revere and appreciate them, sadly the haters have the media doing their bidding.
“… corporations have been enthroned, and an era of corruption in high places will follow, … until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed.”
My belief is that the version shown at the press conference was the toned down voter friendly model to sway moderates. By showing that there were "concessions" made and it will not infringe on 2nd Amendment rights. I still would like someone to show me where in the 2nd Amendment it says that it only protects our right to duck hunt. Bush did the same type of thing when he was pushing to pass the unPatriot Act. The congress critters were shown 1 version but when they voted they were not told that a different version had taken it's place for the vote. I saw a few videos of the congress critters talking about how mad they were about a bait and switch like that . I suspect that the ultimate version that is voted on will be vague and allow for very broad interpretation by bureaucrats and overzealous LEOs. The list of banned by name was suppose to be between 400 and 900 was the reports before the conference. But I did notice that it did say that it banned all variants of a particular weapon even if it was not named. Most likely a media ploy so they can say that only 150 firearms are being banned and all of them are the evil types of assault weapons, even though with the wording it is far beyond only 150 models.
I was a local gun activist back during the 90s before I enlisted and was prohibited for doing that anymore by regs. Used to write editorials and letters to politicians. And got people talking about the legislation that normally they wouldn't notice because football was on. Some of the people that remember my letters from back then have been after me to do it again. I haven't decided yet if it would truly do any good this time around.
One thing to remember at the end of that long list of to be banned items is a simple statement
"""Belt-fed semiautomatic firearms: All belt-fed semiautomatic firearms including TNW M2HB"""
If something like that is slipped in -- we are done.
That's why I'm building as fast as I can and not selling a thing. I wonder what will happen to this forum? Will the whole "Build it yourself" folder become irrelevant if it passes in it's proposed form? (and i realize it's a big if, btw) Would we have to take it down as not to encourage people to do illegal things? This sucks. No one's ever hurt anyone else with a semi MG42 (or any other belt-fed semi as far as I know). The guys on this forum are highly intelligent and talented and it takes both to build these things. What about all the WWII reenactors? Everyone thinks it's only gun nut, redneck, backwater hicks that have these guns, but i see a lot of engineers and history buffs around here (and yes, a few backwater rednecks, too )
My wife is a hippie and even she thinks this is all a bunch of BS.
P.S. If you look at the wording on the high capacity magazines, you could't buy, sell, or trade them. So, how it looks to me, it won't be a situation where belt go up in price. It'll be a situation where you can't get them, period. You can buy a semi 42 by transfering it through the FBI, but you can't get the belts no matter what. Am I correct?
fritsch wrote: You can buy a semi 42 by transfering it through the FBI, but you can't get the belts no matter what. Am I correct?
yes and no. its written that current semi auto guns can be registered/grandfathered, but never sold. You are correct, that ammunition feeding devices of greater than 10rds will NOT be accessible as it will be illegal to sell them.
That sucks for everyone, but really sucks for the NFA owers/buyers. As its written, I can sell my STG44, but I could not sell the magazines with the gun, and if the buyer didnt already own magazines it would be illegal for him to acquire any...
Who would buy an MG that you couldnt get belts or mags for?
At least up there you get health care, a longer life expectancy, the French-Canadian women can be hot, and the fishing is great, 'oh and $400 Svt-40s, but the weather sucks
“… corporations have been enthroned, and an era of corruption in high places will follow, … until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed.”
)
