Post by: GrainfedMuley on October 07, 2017, 03:03:52 AM
Post by: Mossy on October 07, 2017, 06:30:03 AM
So we probably only need a couple bullets to guard our homes???
Post by: RockChuck on October 07, 2017, 08:15:53 AM
Post by: Stein on October 07, 2017, 08:58:47 AM
You are grandfathered, but cannot sell or transfer (had it to anyone under any conditions) to anyone other than a dealer or give it to be destroyed. The gun and mags have to be locked at your house (clearly unconstitutional), and you can only use them at a licensed range (no target shooting in the woods) or while hunting and they need to be locked in transit (and presumably while in camp).
Presumably you also have to be able to prove when you bought every mag, firearm and assaulty accessory.
Forget to lock it up while back in camp and you are a Class C felon.
Post by: Tinmaniac on October 07, 2017, 09:25:33 AM
"Nobody needs a hundred bullets a minute to shoot a deer, and nobody needs a hundred bullet capacity to guard their house."You can have all the bullets you want.The fact is if you shoot someone ten times your going to be charged with murder.Same thing goes for shooting in the back.
So we probably only need a couple bullets to guard our homes???
Post by: Pegasus on October 07, 2017, 09:58:37 AM
"Nobody needs a hundred bullets a minute to shoot a deer, and nobody needs a hundred bullet capacity to guard their house."You can have all the bullets you want.The fact is if you shoot someone ten times your going to be charged with murder.Same thing goes for shooting in the back.
So we probably only need a couple bullets to guard our homes???
Not if you are using a bump stock. You can blame the bump stock made you shoot the perp a couple of hundred times before you could stop it and so what if 50 rounds struck him in the back during the altercation. Yes the media will claim you were using those "automatic rounds" and had modified your weapon to become a "fully automatic" "machine gun" but you can offset this false agenda driven story by expert witnesses testifying about bump stocks during your trial. Make sure at the beginning of your trial that you stand up and shout: "I Will Give Up My Bump Stock When You Peel My Cold Dead Fingers From Around It".
Post by: Tinmaniac on October 07, 2017, 11:05:40 AM
Post by: firepin on October 07, 2017, 04:25:22 PM
Sounds good in fantasy land.In the real world you ARE allowed to defend yourself and property in a life threatening situation.You ARE NOT allowed to play executioner.In a situation like this and you happen to kill someone your only defense is going to be a self defense argument.By adding a bump stock,a prosecutor would have an easy argument that you intended to kill rather than stop the threat.I hope no one here ever faces this type of situation.If you do find yourself in a situation like this in your home,grab the 12 gauge loaded with buckshot and shoot once not the rapid fire AR.If I am in my home I will grab the closest gun, not run past my AR to get my 12g. :stup:
Post by: hunter399 on October 07, 2017, 05:14:28 PM
Here's a link
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,205241.0.html
When Hunters decide to change the 24 cal min for deer,then I might care at about assult weapons ban intel then ,i just don't worry about it.
From the artical:
Fascitelli: "These are military-style assault weapons that are marketed as such. They're not hunting tools. Nobody needs a hundred bullets a minute to shoot a deer, and nobody needs a hundred bullet capacity to guard their house."
Post by: Stein on October 07, 2017, 06:58:57 PM
Post by: Seahawk12 on October 07, 2017, 07:15:56 PM
Period.
Brownshirts are always for disarming citizens.
Post by: hunter399 on October 07, 2017, 08:13:30 PM
The 2nd is not about hunting.Your right the 2nd amendment is not about hunting , But look how it saved California's gun rights,also when the 2nd was written there was not assault rifles or mass shooting,times are a changing ,laws will follow.Washington state will never let ar15 be a sporting rifle,due to hunting restrictions,I don't see assault weapon bans in Idaho where they can hunt with one. 223 cal. :twocents:
Period.
Brownshirts are always for disarming citizens.
Post by: GrainfedMuley on October 08, 2017, 01:39:16 AM
The 2nd is not about hunting.look how it saved California's gun rights,also when the 2nd was written there was not assault rifles
Period.
Brownshirts are always for disarming citizens.
First of all, hunting did not save California from anything. All of California gun laws are efin stupid. Second, it does not make any difference when the 2nd amendment was written it applies to all of your gun rights. The citizens half the same right to the same firepower as our government. So the government does not infringe on the rights of there citizens. That is why it was written to begin with. Back then it was about muskets and cannons. Today it is about the AR-15 and AK-47. That is not hard to understand.
Post by: hunter399 on October 08, 2017, 03:43:03 AM
I said look at what the 2nd amendment did for California,I don't see mass shootings with muskets and cannons ,so there might be a difference,If your gonna quote somebody ,Then at least put the whole sentence.This is what I said.The 2nd is not about hunting.look how it saved California's gun rights,also when the 2nd was written there was not assault rifles
Period.
Brownshirts are always for disarming citizens.
First of all, hunting did not save California from anything. All of California gun laws are efin stupid. Second, it does not make any difference when the 2nd amendment was written it applies to all of your gun rights. The citizens half the same right to the same firepower as our government. So the government does not infringe on the rights of there citizens. That is why it was written to begin with. Back then it was about muskets and cannons. Today it is about the AR-15 and AK-47. That is not hard to understand.
Your right the 2nd amendment is not about hunting , But look how it saved California's gun rights,
Post by: JimmyHoffa on October 08, 2017, 09:56:31 AM
When the first was written, there weren't typewriters, phones, computers, fakebook, etc. Should only pen, ink and parchment or local townhalls and taverns be good for protection?The 2nd is not about hunting.Your right the 2nd amendment is not about hunting , But look how it saved California's gun rights,also when the 2nd was written there was not assault rifles or mass shooting,times are a changing ,laws will follow.Washington state will never let ar15 be a sporting rifle,due to hunting restrictions,I don't see assault weapon bans in Idaho where they can hunt with one. 223 cal. :twocents:
Period.
Brownshirts are always for disarming citizens.
How about association--no internet forums back then?
No cyberspace, so guess no warrants needed for anything electronic.
Post by: Stein on October 08, 2017, 10:31:15 AM
Now, the argument for bump stocks is being made which is basically the opposite of the above - the rate of fire with a bump stock is much higher and that near full auto is more lethal.
What I see is more states banning magazines and what they deem as assault rifles. SCOTUS has refused to hear any cases along these lines, so presumably they will stick if the case is made they are not most useful as military weapons.
The interesting side note is that the NRA estimates 5-10 million ARs privately owned in the US. Does this open a window on the grounds they are not "dangerous and unusual" as required by Heller? If you add AKs, and all the other semi auto rifles, shotguns and pistols that fall under "assault weapon", you probably can get well over 10 million which would suggest the are not unusual at all.
Post by: HuntnFishnRyan on October 08, 2017, 11:33:54 AM
The 2nd is not about hunting.Your right the 2nd amendment is not about hunting , But look how it saved California's gun rights,also when the 2nd was written there was not assault rifles or mass shooting,times are a changing ,laws will follow.Washington state will never let ar15 be a sporting rifle,due to hunting restrictions,I don't see assault weapon bans in Idaho where they can hunt with one. 223 cal. :twocents:
Period.
Brownshirts are always for disarming citizens.
AR15 AK47, assault rifles can be used can be used to hunt unclassified game in WA state. AR15 can be used to hunt cougar provided it is .22cal or >.24cal or 6mm.
With that said I'm for increased gun regulation but some lawmakers don't have enough experience to decide how to go about it properly. Some of them see a gun that looks big and scary (such as AR15 or AK47) and want to ban it. I have no need for an AK47 but who am I to decide that for you or anyone else? By banning a certain weapon type, lawmakers are attacking certain gun manufacturers as well. A company specializing in AR15's can be put of of business if they are banned. Its career suicide for a lawmaker to put companies out of business (so is a lawmaker trying to cut funding to healthcare or social security but that's a different story). By putting a cap on magazine capacity nobody is going to go out of business and MAY decrease the amount of loss of life in the case of an attack (i.e. las vegas, school shootings). Devices used to increase rate of fire in semi auto weapons isn't going to put anyone out of business either. Now as a hunter, target shooter, responsible citizen I don't think anyone needs a bump stock, gat crank for hunting or home defense. 15 rounds seems like a reasonable mag capacity to me since many pistols come with that capacity. Ignorant lawmaker will say: "why do you need 15 round mag for hunting?" I would say to them if you were cornered by a pack of 15 wolves you would understand.
As a side note I find it disgusting that lawmakers wait until a mass shooting to occur THEN try to push forward increased gun control. As a few weeks go by its no longer in the headlines, the bill quietly gets defeated, more time goes by then another mass shooting occurs then its rinse and repeat.
Post by: fishngamereaper on October 08, 2017, 12:07:26 PM
Also think about it. You can do the same damage given the appropriate venue with a shotgun and double 00 buck.
Post by: Tinmaniac on October 08, 2017, 12:18:01 PM
Mag capacity has nothing to do with these acts of violence. I don't need a law telling me what style of mags I can or should own. Don't give them an inch they will want a mile.Not with a standard capacity shotgun and not from 300 yards away.With 22,000 people present and shooting at buckshot range,as soon as it was time to reload the shooter would be swarmed by an angry mob.
Also think about it. You can do the same damage given the appropriate venue with a shotgun and double 00 buck.
Post by: Fl0und3rz on October 08, 2017, 12:48:17 PM
The 2nd is not about hunting.Your right the 2nd amendment is not about hunting , But . . . also when the 2nd was written there was not assault rifles or mass shooting,times are a changing ,laws will follow.
Period.
Brownshirts are always for disarming citizens.
. . .
:twocents:
Governments also didn't have drones, rockets, jets, gps, mass surveillance capabilities, and a standing army. That argument better serves ensuring equality of arms than it does further diminishing the Second Amendment.
:twocents:
Post by: Fl0und3rz on October 08, 2017, 12:51:11 PM
Mag capacity has nothing to do with these acts of violence. I don't need a law telling me what style of mags I can or should own. Don't give them an inch they will want a mile.Not with a standard capacity shotgun and not from 300 yards away.With 22,000 people present and shooting at buckshot range,as soon as it was time to reload the shooter would be swarmed by an angry mob.
Also think about it. You can do the same damage given the appropriate venue with a shotgun and double 00 buck.
Better outlaw private planes, heavy trucks, and flammable liquids while you're at it.
What firearms should we give up when these tools are used to commit mass murder?
Post by: Airnip on October 08, 2017, 01:51:02 PM
Our armed population is defense against foreign land invasion. There is already law against murder.
A clothes pin spring can substitute. Suppose bump stocks were illegal before this mass murder. No bump stocks. Forget it then?
He owned bomb making material found in his car. He also owned a private airplane. Aimed fire would have been much more efficient than spraying to enhance the body count.
Our government cannot protect us against this murderous sort of behavior. We need to be able to defend ourselves.
Post by: Fl0und3rz on October 08, 2017, 05:29:09 PM
Post by: Fl0und3rz on October 08, 2017, 05:39:17 PM
Post by: Oh Mah on October 10, 2017, 06:28:49 PM
none. dont forget the cattle.Manure has been used to kill a lot of people.Matches,fuel of all kinds,hammers,knives of any kind.what i have learned from watching lockup we better add tooth brushes and combs to the list as well.Mag capacity has nothing to do with these acts of violence. I don't need a law telling me what style of mags I can or should own. Don't give them an inch they will want a mile.Not with a standard capacity shotgun and not from 300 yards away.With 22,000 people present and shooting at buckshot range,as soon as it was time to reload the shooter would be swarmed by an angry mob.
Also think about it. You can do the same damage given the appropriate venue with a shotgun and double 00 buck.
Better outlaw private planes, heavy trucks, and flammable liquids while you're at it.
What firearms should we give up when these tools are used to commit mass murder?