Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 | >
Show 30 post(s) from this thread on one page

Gold & Silver Forum (http://goldismoney.info/forums/index.php)
- Firearms (http://goldismoney.info/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=159)
- - That didn't take long.... (http://goldismoney.info/forums/showthread.php?t=320014)

oz in sc | 11-06-2008 11:06 PM
That didn't take long.... Quote:
Address Gun Violence in Cities: As president, Barack Obama would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law enforcement to access important gun trace information, and give police officers across the nation the tools they need to solve gun crimes and fight the illegal arms trade. Obama and Biden also favor commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals who shouldn't have them. They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, as such weapons belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets.
http://change.gov/agenda/urbanpolicy/

MOD1 | 11-06-2008 11:23 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... A sign of the new social, economic and cultural model based on England and Zimbabwe. Coming soon to your town! I'm so depressed. CHANGE AND HOPE or was it HOPE AND CHANGE. Take care, Mod1

oz in sc | 11-06-2008 11:24 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... It is amazing how FAST his followers have flipped and now are saying banning guns is okay.... Of course the election is over now.

platinumdude | 11-06-2008 11:37 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Todd_Tiahrt Tiahrt is the author of the Tiahrt Amendment, which prohibits the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) from releasing information from its firearms trace database to anyone other than a law enforcement agency or prosecutor in connection with a criminal investigation. Additionally, any data so released is inadmissible in a civil lawsuit.[5] Some groups, including the Mayors Against Illegal Guns Coalition, believe that having further access to the BATFE database would help municipal police departments track down sellers of illegal guns and curb crime. These groups are trying to undo the Tiahrt Amendment.[6]

CoinHunter53562 | 11-06-2008 11:41 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... What is the gunshow loophole? Does that mean that you can buy a gun from a non-licensed dealer at a show without the background check and waiting period and all that jazz?

platinumdude | 11-06-2008 11:44 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... Quote:
Originally Posted by CoinHunter53562 (Post 1402714) What is the gunshow loophole? Does that mean that you can buy a gun from a non-licensed dealer at a show without the background check and waiting period and all that jazz?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_sho...ow_loophole.22 is a term coined to describe the legal sale of firearms between private individuals at gun shows in states where this is legal. When these sales take place at a gun show, some perceive a "loophole" in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), although these laws have never applied to individual-to-individual sales of personal firearms. United States federal law requires persons engaged in interstate firearm commerce, or who are in the business of selling firearms, to hold a Federal Firearms License and to perform checks prior to transferring a firearm, but there is an exemption for private sales by individuals who are "not engaged in the business" of selling firearms, or who only make "occasional" sales. Unlicensed private sellers are permitted by law to sell privately-owned guns at gun shows, or at private locations, in 24 states (as of 1998).[10] Although gun shows remain a point of concern, a 1997 Department of Justice survey of 3,959 inmates found that only 2% stated that they had bought a gun used in a crime from a gun show.[11] The remaining 98% were obtained from other sources, in which the criminal had no direct connection with a gun show. The most common sources (35%) were family or friends.[12]

oz in sc | 11-06-2008 11:44 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... No-one knows what the gunshow loophole really is.... It would most likely be to ban private sales anywhere,otherwise people would simply agree to buy firearms outside the gunshow.

Lars Ragnarsson | 11-07-2008 12:38 AM
Re: That didn't take long.... Quote:
Originally Posted by oz in sc (Post 1402692) It is amazing how FAST his followers have flipped and now are saying banning guns is okay.... Of course the election is over now.
No surprise. Awhile back some joker posted a horseshit thread about "Obama doesn't want your guns" with brilliant comments like "Why do you need them anyway?" At the risk of sounding Mogambo-ish, I guess I was the only one who remembered BJ Clinton's moderate stance during the campaign, and then the hard left turn on gun control after the 1992 election. My friends, I truly believe that in terms of engaging in evil, conniving treachery against others in pursuit of power and self-servitude, Obama and his cronies are going to make Bill and Hillary look like the Pope and Mother Teresa.

oz in sc | 11-07-2008 12:43 AM
Re: That didn't take long.... Sometimes the thought of armed conflict breaking out here doesn't sound too bad....

buff01 | 11-07-2008 02:10 AM
Re: That didn't take long.... oh boy.... Quote:
They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, as such weapons belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets.
I don't think the rush to buy so-called AWs will be ending anytime soon :(

charrick | 11-07-2008 02:21 AM
Re: That didn't take long.... Quote:
...give police officers across the nation the tools they need to solve gun crimes and fight the illegal arms trade.
Oh no! Quote:
Obama and Biden also favor commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals who shouldn't have them.
No! Not that!! There goes my plan of buying that AK-47 for my son for Christmas! He was already looking forward to showing it to his classmates! Wait...I still might have a few more months!

Twisted Avatar | 11-07-2008 09:16 AM
Re: That didn't take long.... 1 Attachment(s) MOLON LABE.............@$$HOLES!

sterling | 11-07-2008 09:25 AM
Re: That didn't take long.... You can already see the sheep bowing down to Lord Obama. Including many here on this site. They will back the gun confiscations for the 'better good". After all Obama isn't Bush, he is a new kind of leader, the world somehow changed when Obama was elected. If Lord Obama tell us the evil guns must be confiscated it must be true.

Big_Rob | 11-07-2008 10:33 AM
Re: That didn't take long.... Quote:
Originally Posted by charrick (Post 1402835) Oh no! No! Not that!! There goes my plan of buying that AK-47 for my son for Christmas! He was already looking forward to showing it to his classmates! Wait...I still might have a few more months!
You really dont have a clue do you?

oz in sc | 11-07-2008 10:36 AM
Re: That didn't take long.... Quote:
Originally Posted by sterling (Post 1403088) You can already see the sheep bowing down to Lord Obama. Including many here on this site. They will back the gun confiscations for the 'better good". After all Obama isn't Bush, he is a new kind of leader, the world somehow changed when Obama was elected. If Lord Obama tell us the evil guns must be confiscated it must be true.
Yep...it was funny. All the way up to the election it was "No,there will be NO gun bans" even when shown Obamas record and beliefs. Now he is elected,it is what do you need those types of guns(none can define what an 'assault weapon' is of course) for anyway. And the gov. database,well if oyu have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.:36_1_28:

Silver Wolf | 11-07-2008 10:40 AM
Re: That didn't take long.... I knew anti gun legislation would be high on their agenda list.

oz in sc | 11-07-2008 11:04 AM
Re: That didn't take long.... Under HR 1022,the following would be banned: AK, AKM, AKS, AK-47, AK-74, ARM, MAK90, Misr, NHM 90, NHM 91, SA 85, SA 93, VEPR; `(ii) AR-10; `(iii) AR-15, Bushmaster XM15, Armalite M15, or Olympic Arms PCR; `(iv) AR70; `(v) Calico Liberty; `(vi) Dragunov SVD Sniper Rifle or Dragunov SVU; `(vii) Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, or FNC; `(viii) Hi-Point Carbine; `(ix) HK-91, HK-93, HK-94, or HK-PSG-1; `(x) Kel-Tec Sub Rifle; `(xi) M1 Carbine; `(xii) Saiga; `(xiii) SAR-8, SAR-4800; `(xiv) SKS with detachable magazine; `(xv) SLG 95; `(xvi) SLR 95 or 96; `(xvii) Steyr AUG; `(xviii) Sturm, Ruger Mini-14; `(xix) Tavor; `(xx) Thompson 1927, Thompson M1, or Thompson 1927 Commando; or `(xxi) Uzi, Galil and Uzi Sporter, Galil Sporter, or Galil Sniper Rifle (Galatz). `(B) The following pistols or copies or duplicates thereof: `(i) Calico M-110; `(ii) MAC-10, MAC-11, or MPA3; `(iii) Olympic Arms OA; `(iv) TEC-9, TEC-DC9, TEC-22 Scorpion, or AB-10; or `(v) Uzi. `(C) The following shotguns or copies or duplicates thereof: `(i) Armscor 30 BG; `(ii) SPAS 12 or LAW 12; `(iii) Striker 12; or `(iv) Streetsweeper. `(D) A semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine, and that has-- `(i) a folding or telescoping stock; `(ii) a threaded barrel; `(iii) a pistol grip; `(iv) a forward grip; or `(v) a barrel shroud. `(E)(i) Except as provided in clause (ii), a semiautomatic rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds. `(ii) Clause (i) shall not apply to an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition. `(F) A semiautomatic pistol that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine, and has-- `(i) a second pistol grip; `(ii) a threaded barrel; `(iii) a barrel shroud; or `(iv) the capacity to accept a detachable magazine at a location outside of the pistol grip. `(G) A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds. `(H) A semiautomatic shotgun that has-- `(i) a folding or telescoping stock; `(ii) a pistol grip; `(iii) the ability to accept a detachable magazine; or `(iv) a fixed magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds. `(I) A shotgun with a revolving cylinder. `(J) A frame or receiver that is identical to, or based substantially on the frame or receiver of, a firearm described in any of subparagraphs (A) through (I) or (L). `(K) A conversion kit. `(L) A semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General. In making the determination, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any Federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.'.

Big_Rob | 11-07-2008 11:05 AM
Re: That didn't take long.... Quote:
Originally Posted by platinumdude (Post 1402711) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Todd_Tiahrt Tiahrt is the author of the Tiahrt Amendment, which prohibits the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) from releasing information from its firearms trace database to anyone other than a law enforcement agency or prosecutor in connection with a criminal investigation. Additionally, any data so released is inadmissible in a civil lawsuit.[5] Some groups, including the Mayors Against Illegal Guns Coalition, believe that having further access to the BATFE database would help municipal police departments track down sellers of illegal guns and curb crime. These groups are trying to undo the Tiahrt Amendment.[6]
Thats about the best example of double speak right there. If the police already have access to the BATFEs database...One would have to pose the question why does the MAIGC really want to repeal the amendment other than for malicious purposes such as civil personal lawsuits and weapon confiscation?

Twisted Avatar | 11-07-2008 11:09 AM
Re: That didn't take long.... Quote:
Originally Posted by oz in sc (Post 1403248) Under HR 1022,the following would be banned: AK, AKM, AKS, AK-47, AK-74, ARM, MAK90, Misr, NHM 90, NHM 91, SA 85, SA 93, VEPR; `(ii) AR-10; `(iii) AR-15, Bushmaster XM15, Armalite M15, or Olympic Arms PCR; `(iv) AR70; `(v) Calico Liberty; `(vi) Dragunov SVD Sniper Rifle or Dragunov SVU; `(vii) Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, or FNC; `(viii) Hi-Point Carbine; `(ix) HK-91, HK-93, HK-94, or HK-PSG-1; `(x) Kel-Tec Sub Rifle; `(xi) M1 Carbine; `(xii) Saiga; `(xiii) SAR-8, SAR-4800; `(xiv) SKS with detachable magazine; `(xv) SLG 95; `(xvi) SLR 95 or 96; `(xvii) Steyr AUG; `(xviii) Sturm, Ruger Mini-14; `(xix) Tavor; '.
I got mines and two more are on the way. Suckers! T

JJ_ | 11-07-2008 11:19 AM
Re: That didn't take long.... Quote:
Originally Posted by charrick (Post 1402835) Oh no! No! Not that!! There goes my plan of buying that AK-47 for my son for Christmas! He was already looking forward to showing it to his classmates! Wait...I still might have a few more months!
HEY! http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_i1ZjNkR4id...tless72119.jpg Look around http://communitiesonline.homestead.c...es/troll_2.jpg That shit really doesn't fly here.

oz in sc | 11-07-2008 11:20 AM
Re: That didn't take long.... Look at the bottom paragraph.... Quote:
A semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General. In making the determination, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any Federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.'.

JJ_ | 11-07-2008 11:22 AM
Re: That didn't take long.... Quote:
Originally Posted by oz in sc (Post 1403278) Look at the bottom paragraph....
you beat me to it... I was just gonna point that out Pretty much covers anything we'd ever want huh.

Big_Rob | 11-07-2008 11:28 AM
Re: That didn't take long.... Anyone care to bet that the new AG will be totally 110% anti?

Twisted Avatar | 11-07-2008 11:30 AM
Re: That didn't take long.... 5 Attachment(s) Dragunov SVD Sniper Rifle or Dragunov SVU........... those are some sweet rifels If I had the time they would have been on my hit list as well.

Big_Rob | 11-07-2008 11:34 AM
Re: That didn't take long.... O-MG! That folding stock Dragunov is sweet!

Rumplestiltskin | 11-07-2008 11:36 AM
Re: That didn't take long.... Quote:
Originally Posted by oz in sc (Post 1402674) http://change.gov/agenda/urbanpolicy/ They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, as such weapons belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets.
Interesting. I wonder what the 3rd Infantry�s 1st BCT carries on the streets outside Atlanta. http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/0...eland_090708w/

TLM | 11-07-2008 12:04 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... L) A semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General. In making the determination, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any Federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.'. ---------------------------------------------------------------- So the 2nd ammendment guarantees our right to keep and bear arms for sporting purposes? So the founders wanted to protect quail hunting and target practice???? That was mighty nice of them to be so concerned about us... but what about fishing poles, the founding fathers didn't care enough to secure our rights to fish for sporting purposes????

oz in sc | 11-07-2008 12:08 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... If anyone is interested,there is a VERY illuminating debate going on here: http://www.city-data.com/forum/2008-...-gun-bans.html It started out pretty normally but has now gotten to the stage where the Obamatrons are basically saying too bad,we don't care what you want or what the 2nd Amendment states....

Big_Rob | 11-07-2008 12:28 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... Quote:
Originally Posted by oz in sc (Post 1403382) If anyone is interested,there is a VERY illuminating debate going on here: http://www.city-data.com/forum/2008-...-gun-bans.html It started out pretty normally but has now gotten to the stage where the Obamatrons are basically saying too bad,we don't care what you want or what the 2nd Amendment states....
That forum just proves that those that want the gun bans have absolutely no clue about firearms and will roll over like a puppy when it comes to giving that right up.

oz in sc | 11-07-2008 12:29 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... Quote:
Originally Posted by Big_Rob (Post 1403414) That forum just proves that those that want the gun bans have absolutely no clue about firearms and will roll over like a puppy when it comes to giving that right up.
And they are the people.... I am not sure we will not see a dictatorship of sorts in the next few years.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:19 AM. |
Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 | >
Show 30 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright = None use it and Link to GIM

Gold & Silver Forum - That didn't take long....

Page 2 of 2 | < | 1 | 2
Show 30 post(s) from this thread on one page

Gold & Silver Forum (http://goldismoney.info/forums/index.php)
- Firearms (http://goldismoney.info/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=159)
- - That didn't take long.... (http://goldismoney.info/forums/showthread.php?t=320014)

Brent | 11-07-2008 12:35 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... Quote:
Originally Posted by Big_Rob (Post 1403414) That forum just proves that those that want the gun bans have absolutely no clue about firearms and will roll over like a puppy when it comes to giving that right up.
The real question is how many are willing to die to take them?

oz in sc | 11-07-2008 12:45 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... Well...as they will have the full force of the fedgov. behind them and they believe they are in the right,they will most likely have no problem eliminating those who are trying to destroy society. Remember anyone who opposes Obama is,right off the bat, 'racist'. Future headline.... " Racist separatists murder civilian security officers trying to protect community"

Twisted Avatar | 11-07-2008 01:16 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent (Post 1403430) The real question is how many are willing to die to take them?
NONE. T

oz in sc | 11-07-2008 01:19 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... No...the real questions are: How many gunowners will do nothing? How many anti-gunners are willing to kill to impose their will? If you asked people in dictatorships,they would NEVER have thought their neighbors and friends would turn them in...

eyeofliberty | 11-07-2008 01:21 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... Quote:
Originally Posted by oz in sc (Post 1403382) If anyone is interested,there is a VERY illuminating debate going on here: http://www.city-data.com/forum/2008-...-gun-bans.html It started out pretty normally but has now gotten to the stage where the Obamatrons are basically saying too bad,we don't care what you want or what the 2nd Amendment states....
Damn, I read a few pages and had to stop, I was getting too pissed off! Good job there, oz!

oz in sc | 11-07-2008 01:25 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... They are now out and out lying to get sympathy but were caught out....and are now backtracking... I cannot see how this nation can stay together with so many demanding others submit to their beliefs. One thing about gunowners,we never FORCE people to own guns,the same can't be same with gun control supporters.

Big_Rob | 11-07-2008 01:29 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... Quote:
Originally Posted by oz in sc (Post 1403502) They are now out and out lying to get sympathy but were caught out....and are now backtracking... I cannot see how this nation can stay together with so many demanding others submit to their beliefs. One thing about gunowners,we never FORCE people to own guns,the same can't be same with gun control supporters.
Civil war is the only logical progression I can think of.

oz in sc | 11-07-2008 01:39 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... Well...either submission or opposition. That is the ONLY choice being offered by the anti-gunners. I watched a movie about the struggle for freedom in Ireland in the 1920's. What was interesting was the resistance managed to bring the British Empire to the negotiating table with a total of 3500 rifles or so in their possession. Think about that....

eyeofliberty | 11-08-2008 09:02 AM
Re: That didn't take long.... Quote:
Originally Posted by oz in sc (Post 1403502) One thing about gunowners,we never FORCE people to own guns, the same can't be same with gun control supporters.
Guns and Dope Party :biggrin: We advocate: [1] guns for those who want them, no guns forced on those who don't want them (pacifists, Quakers etc.) [2] drugs for those who want them, no drugs forced on those who don't want them (Christian Scientists etc.) [3] an end to Tsarism and a return to constitutional democracy [4] equal rights for ostriches.

Twisted Avatar | 11-08-2008 04:12 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... Quote:
Originally Posted by Big_Rob (Post 1403510) Civil war is the only logical progression I can think of.
How long I been pounding the keyboard saying this eventually end in bullets and gunsmoke?? T

Twisted Avatar | 11-08-2008 04:16 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... Quote:
Originally Posted by oz in sc (Post 1403531) Well...either submission or opposition. That is the ONLY choice being offered by the anti-gunners.
I dont who said this but I love it: "Human beings can only interact with one another through two methods: reason or force. If at any point, either party chooses force, the other must either submit or respond with force, I prefer reason. But I am ready to respond with force. Submission is not an option." T

YellowDog | 11-08-2008 04:31 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... Quote:
Originally Posted by Big_Rob (Post 1403251) Thats about the best example of double speak right there. If the police already have access to the BATFEs database...One would have to pose the question why does the MAIGC really want to repeal the amendment other than for malicious purposes such as civil personal lawsuits and weapon confiscation?
And fishing expeditions (persecution) by cops. The amendment currently limits the local constabulary to "in connection with a criminal investigation".

Worldmariner | 11-09-2008 12:20 AM
Re: That didn't take long.... Quote:
Originally Posted by Silver Wolf (Post 1403205) I knew anti gun legislation would be high on their agenda list.
YUP! VERY HIGH!

merc49 | 11-09-2008 02:20 AM
Re: That didn't take long.... Did anyone get a screen shot of that page? I saw it yesterday and this is what it says now... "The page you requested is not available right now.":MIA: Wonder why they would take the page off the site?????????????????? Just saying..............:36_1_28:

AceNZ | 11-09-2008 03:32 AM
Re: That didn't take long.... Quote:
Originally Posted by merc49 (Post 1406179) Wonder why they would take the page off the site??????????????????
It looks like the entire Agenda section of change.gov has been removed. Unfortunately, it looks like it wasn't there long enough for archive.org to get a snapshot.

AZLiberty | 11-09-2008 03:40 AM
Re: That didn't take long.... Quote:
Originally Posted by Big_Rob (Post 1403294) Anyone care to bet that the new AG will be totally 110% anti?
Odds are it will be Napalatano. She's vetoed every pro-gun bill to hit her desk except one, and the only reason she signed that one is because it had enough votes to easily overturn a veto.

Twisted Avatar | 11-12-2008 12:55 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... And people really wonder why there is feeding frenzy to buy everything thing in site. I am gald......... It means we will all be in good company when the hour approaches. T

platinumdude | 11-17-2008 09:39 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... FYI. The page is back up. http://change.gov/agenda/urbanpolicy_agenda/

Saul Mine | 11-17-2008 10:58 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... There are always people who want to tell everybody else what to do. And there are always lots of people who will support them as long as everybody is oppressed equally. This situation always gets worse and worse until the only way an honest man can make a living is by smuggling. After that the system collapses, perhaps because all the citizens leave and go someplace else, or they all starve, or another country invades and the citizens don't care enough to defend their government.

mk3hunter | 11-19-2008 06:52 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... are you prepared to kill another american over your Rights????

Lars Ragnarsson | 11-19-2008 07:05 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... Quote:
Originally Posted by mk3hunter (Post 1425047) are you prepared to kill another american over your Rights????
Seven score and seven years ago, some Americans were willing to kill their brothers over their rights.... If other "Americans" try to take away my rights, they do so at their own risk....

Twisted Avatar | 11-19-2008 07:11 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... 1 Attachment(s) Quote:
Originally Posted by Lars Ragnarsson (Post 1425072) If other "Americans" try to take away my rights, they do so at their own risk....
Amen.........

The Argent Dragon | 11-19-2008 07:12 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... http://i11.ebayimg.com/02/i/000/a2/33/5408_1_b.JPG

The Argent Dragon | 11-19-2008 07:15 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/b...h4321/ak47.jpg

The Argent Dragon | 11-19-2008 07:20 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... http://i204.photobucket.com/albums/b...ndment_1-1.jpg

thorgrim | 11-19-2008 07:42 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... Quote:
Originally Posted by oz in sc (Post 1403248) Under HR 1022,the following would be banned: AK, AKM, AKS, AK-47, AK-74, ARM, MAK90, Misr, NHM 90, NHM 91, SA 85, SA 93, VEPR; `(ii) AR-10; `(iii) AR-15, Bushmaster XM15, Armalite M15, or Olympic Arms PCR; `(iv) AR70; `(v) Calico Liberty; `(vi) Dragunov SVD Sniper Rifle or Dragunov SVU; `(vii) Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, or FNC; `(viii) Hi-Point Carbine; `(ix) HK-91, HK-93, HK-94, or HK-PSG-1; `(x) Kel-Tec Sub Rifle; `(xi) M1 Carbine; `(xii) Saiga; `(xiii) SAR-8, SAR-4800; `(xiv) SKS with detachable magazine; `(xv) SLG 95; `(xvi) SLR 95 or 96; `(xvii) Steyr AUG; `(xviii) Sturm, Ruger Mini-14; `(xix) Tavor; `(xx) Thompson 1927, Thompson M1, or Thompson 1927 Commando; or `(xxi) Uzi, Galil and Uzi Sporter, Galil Sporter, or Galil Sniper Rifle (Galatz). `(B) The following pistols or copies or duplicates thereof: `(i) Calico M-110; `(ii) MAC-10, MAC-11, or MPA3; `(iii) Olympic Arms OA; `(iv) TEC-9, TEC-DC9, TEC-22 Scorpion, or AB-10; or `(v) Uzi. `(C) The following shotguns or copies or duplicates thereof: `(i) Armscor 30 BG; `(ii) SPAS 12 or LAW 12; `(iii) Striker 12; or `(iv) Streetsweeper. `(D) A semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine, and that has-- `(i) a folding or telescoping stock; `(ii) a threaded barrel; `(iii) a pistol grip; `(iv) a forward grip; or `(v) a barrel shroud. `(E)(i) Except as provided in clause (ii), a semiautomatic rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds. `(ii) Clause (i) shall not apply to an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition. `(F) A semiautomatic pistol that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine, and has-- `(i) a second pistol grip; `(ii) a threaded barrel; `(iii) a barrel shroud; or `(iv) the capacity to accept a detachable magazine at a location outside of the pistol grip. `(G) A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds. `(H) A semiautomatic shotgun that has-- `(i) a folding or telescoping stock; `(ii) a pistol grip; `(iii) the ability to accept a detachable magazine; or `(iv) a fixed magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds. `(I) A shotgun with a revolving cylinder. `(J) A frame or receiver that is identical to, or based substantially on the frame or receiver of, a firearm described in any of subparagraphs (A) through (I) or (L). `(K) A conversion kit. `(L) A semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General. In making the determination, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any Federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.'.
Can someone fill me in on a few things I haven't been following too closely as I am Canadian. Is this the bill that the Dems are waiting to pass once Obama is sworn in? Also would these firearms be illegal to sell or to own?

Twisted Avatar | 11-19-2008 08:00 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... Quote:
Originally Posted by thorgrim (Post 1425165) Can someone fill me in on a few things I haven't been following too closely as I am Canadian. Is this the bill that the Dems are waiting to pass once Obama is sworn in? Also would these firearms be illegal to sell or to own?
With a Absolute Monopoly on all three branches of Gubbermint in a word. YUP. T

mayhem | 11-19-2008 09:00 PM
Re: That didn't take long.... Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent (Post 1403430) The real question is how many are willing to die to take them?
true.....then again how many are willing to die to keep them? Don't get me wrong, I have more than enough, and I also am old enough to .....well say I won't live forever.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:19 AM. |
Page 2 of 2 | < | 1 | 2
Show 30 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright = None use it and Link to GIM