Take Action - Send An Email to Friends & Family regarding I-1639

[Jake Dogfish]

The Wife and I are undecided on this one.
Could you give specific examples of the firearms mentioned in “reason #1”
Thanks

A Ruger 10/22 would be classified as a "semi-automatic assault rifle".

A quick search said this gun is a semi-automatic.  One place said it can be modified for a 100 round clip?  Is this true?

Anything that can take a detachable is somewhat unlimited. 100 rds is known.

Thanks

[SilkOnTheDrySide]

The Wife and I are undecided on this one.
Could you give specific examples of the firearms mentioned in “reason #1”
Thanks

A Ruger 10/22 would be classified as a "semi-automatic assault rifle".

A quick search said this gun is a semi-automatic.  One place said it can be modified for a 100 round clip?  Is this true?

Anything that can take a detachable is somewhat unlimited. 100 rds is known.

Thanks

Also, it’s not a clip.  It’s a magazine.

The concern over magazine capacity has been proven time and time again to not actually be an issue when it comes to the ability for rounds to be pushed down range.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JimmyHoffa]

Generally the more rounds a mag holds the more likely it jams or malfunctions.

[Stein]

If you have a rifled barrel for a semi-auto hunting shotgun, you will own an assault rifle.  Even with the 2 round plug in your duck gun, it may be an assault weapon.  Yep, a Barrett bolt action 50 cal capable of 1,500 yard shots isn't, but your duck gun with 3 rounds of #8 is.

[bobcat]

The Wife and I are undecided on this one.
Could you give specific examples of the firearms mentioned in “reason #1”
Thanks

Undecided? How is that possible? Regardless of the specific restrictions in this initiative, any new law that restricts our gun ownership rights should be a definite NO vote. There's nothing to even think about here. First of all, adults 18-21 years old would no longer be able to purchase semi-automatic rifles. That right there is unconstitutional. Then there is the requirement to take a firearm training course for anyone who owns a semi-automatic rifle. The cost for that is unknown and unlimited. Probably another restriction being put on us that would be unconstitutional. Third, if a firearm is stolen from your home that wasn't locked in a safe, you can be charged with a crime.

How is there anything in this initiative that makes you even consider for a moment voting yes?   

[Stein]

Here's a few reasons:

1.  The bill develops a statewide gun registry and the local police are required to check periodically to make sure you are still eligible to own the firearm.  If not, they are mandated to come knocking and confiscate it.

2.  The bill requires training which is poorly thought out or defined as well as several new taxes.

3.  The bill prevents people like 20 year old single moms from obtaining effective self defense firearms.

4.  The bill requires you to have those firearms locked and not readily accessible anytime they are in your home, effectively preventing you from using them in the case of a break-in or similar crime.

5.  The bill defines any semi-auto as an assault weapon, as mentioned this includes .22's, waterfowl and deer shotguns and many other firearms that make absolutely no sense.

6.  The bill requires you to report any theft within 5 days or you are a felon, lose your rights to own weapons and can go to jail.  This also opens a wide door for civil litigation that could cost you 6 or 7 figures in the event someone breaks into your house, steals your gun and then commits a crime with it.  I'm not sure what happens if you don't notice the theft for five days or are on vacation, etc.

7.  This is undoubtedly the first pass, future initiatives will certainly build on this.  The state will have a record of every semi-auto you purchase and this could lead to confiscations in the future or additional requirements for ownership, taxes, licenses, etc.

8.  Several law enforcement organizations are opposed.

9.  It is funded by billionaire out of state money like Bloomberg who has publicly supported confiscation and bans, do we think he'll stop at this?

[Jake Dogfish]

How would it become law if it’s unconstitutional? Won’t the courts strike it down?

[Blacktail Sniper]

How would it become law if it’s unconstitutional? Won’t the courts strike it down?

It becomes law if the voters approve it...as far as the courts...well who knows which way the wind will be blowing!

[Jake Dogfish]

How would it become law if it’s unconstitutional? Won’t the courts strike it down?

It becomes law if the voters approve it...as far as the courts...well who knows which way the wind will be blowing!

Thanks,to you and the other replies.  I’ll admit there’s a couple things I thought the concept was ok, but it all seems to go too far. Just way too much.
I have everything on my ballot filled out but this one.  I’ll admit I’m not a expert on firearms. That’s why I asked some questions.
We will be voting no on this.

[Blacktail Sniper]

How would it become law if it’s unconstitutional? Won’t the courts strike it down?

It becomes law if the voters approve it...as far as the courts...well who knows which way the wind will be blowing!

Thanks,to you and the other replies.  I’ll admit there’s a couple things I thought the concept was ok, but it all seems to go too far. Just way too much.
I have everything on my ballot filled out but this one.  I’ll admit I’m not a expert on firearms. That’s why I asked some questions.
We will be voting no on this.

Good for you for taking a minute and asking some questions to aid in making your decision.