"Ar-15" Ban Bill

jshen

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2003
Messages
3,858
Location
GA
Hmm I guess none of the democraps read about "ex post facto" laws...In the Bill of Rights...
 

BlckBox04

I am the liquor
Established Member
Premium Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
8,496
Location
NJ
Let’s play devils advocate, what about the gun companies and ammo companies? I think it’s very possible they could try and sue the government for essentially putting them out of business. It would lay the groundwork for just enacting stricter laws rather than completely eliminate an entire industry.
 

Silverstrike

It's to big to move FAST!
Established Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2002
Messages
8,596
Location
Here/there/some other silly place
Let’s play devils advocate, what about the gun companies and ammo companies? I think it’s very possible they could try and sue the government for essentially putting them out of business. It would lay the groundwork for just enacting stricter laws rather than completely eliminate an entire industry.


I always said they all needed to ban together and refuse to sell anything to the US fed Government. Only then these stupid anti constitutional Dems would be kicked into a corner for good and told do not ever open your mouth again.
 

BlckBox04

I am the liquor
Established Member
Premium Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
8,496
Location
NJ
I always said they all needed to ban together and refuse to sell anything to the US fed Government. Only then these stupid anti constitutional Dems would be kicked into a corner for good and told do not ever open your mouth again.
Yep. Tell the government to go **** themselves and when bIdEn’S troops are given weapons made by shitty Chinese morons that fail on first shot they’ll be forced to show their hands
 

jshen

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2003
Messages
3,858
Location
GA
The real argument will be that the government cannot pass ex post facto laws constitutionally and make illegal what was formerly legal. They can however eliminate the importation as well as the production of new firearms and ammunition. That will leave a constitutional argument that they have in fact violated the second amendment. They can also try the tax maneuver like they did in 1934.

Everyone should know that any firearm you bought legally through a gun shop you filled out a FFL form and the government has access to that and that only. To whom you sell it and under what conditions is strictly up to you. When I ran background checks on firearms I could only get the original buyer. I really don't think there are enough voters in this country to outlaw firearms by passing any constitutional amendment. In fact most Democrats that I know support and have firearms. It's only the radical left in the freaking news media and a half-minded president that think otherwise.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using the svtperformance.com mobile app
 

jshen

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2003
Messages
3,858
Location
GA
And trying to shut down the firearms industries and ammunition industries would cause a devastating effect not only to those companies but all those suppliers who make the powder the brass and so forth and all the material makers

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using the svtperformance.com mobile app
 

Makobra

Mostly Peaceful
Established Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2018
Messages
1,353
Location
Texas
i'm willing to compromise. if the government supplies me with my weapons they can regulate which ones i get from them.
 

Shifty Powers

The Shifty Mobile
Established Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2006
Messages
4,380
Location
Pennsylvania
Was talking with a LEO yesterday at my brewery(work at/dont own). He said if they want to buy back his guns, how are they figuring out what to pay for them; and if so hell take 20k for each gun.

But really he agreed with what others said. If they tell the police to go and seize weapons "That is a flat out **** no". Besides they do not agree with it, they damn sure do not want to be the ones coming to your door to take your weapons.

I would go buy another right now but wife may kill me. Need more ammo
 

jshen

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2003
Messages
3,858
Location
GA
They will use Nat Guard units from completely different area of the country.....
 

Junior00

Hurter Of Delicate Vaginas
Established Member
Premium Member
Joined
May 20, 2005
Messages
2,575
Location
Ga
Agents are going to find out how good their vests are.


Sent from my iPhone using svtperformance.com

Hardly any are issued level iv I would bet (SWAT yes, patrol no) and even then a single shot, while it might not penetrate, is enough to put a man down and out for a significant amount of time in a gunfight.

It’s not a road I think many would be willing to go down.
 

CompOrange04GT

Anyone have a strap on my girl can use on me?
Established Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2011
Messages
8,565
Location
Texas
Hardly any are issued level iv I would bet (SWAT yes, patrol no) and even then a single shot, while it might not penetrate, is enough to put a man down and out for a significant amount of time in a gunfight.

It’s not a road I think many would be willing to go down.

cop I know in LA told me .. their local gov wants to get rid of vest.. because they are “ scary and military grade”
 

thomas91169

# of bans = 5203
Established Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2006
Messages
25,662
Location
San Diego, CA
They will use Nat Guard units from completely different area of the country.....

Still more registered gun owners than all the branches combined.

It'll only take a few incidents of gun grabs turning lethal for any enlisted to go "nah, **** that" and bounce. The ones that don't deserve to get lead, sorry not sorry. You know what you signed up for and this surely wasn't it.
 

Stanley

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Premium Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2005
Messages
5,069
Location
Deer Park, Texas, United States
cop I know in LA told me .. their local gov wants to get rid of vest.. because they are “ scary and military grade”
2021-02-19.png
 

SecondhandSnake

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2011
Messages
1,743
Location
Columbus, IN
I don't think the feds are dumb enough to come knocking for your guns. They know they don't need to do a mandatory buyback. They know they don't have boots on the ground willing to do it, nor would it be that successful legally. That's why they will whittle it away by taxing/regulating ammunition making it useless, as well as banning the transfer of ownership/sale. Then they just wait it out for enough of the old guard to die and a younger generation that has never known firearms, (and likely vehemently anti-gun) to take their place.

I ran into that with the whole SAFE act in NY. Had a friend pass away that had some "restricted" firearms. Didn't take long for the troopers to show up and confiscate them. Sure it was legal for him to own- but they couldn't be transferred without jumping through the corresponding hoops. Took 12 months, a lawyer and a whole lot of legal/permitting nonsense for his immediate family to regain possession of the majority of them. And that's all they have to do. Make it onerous enough no one puts up a fight to get them back, and they slowly disappear, one by one. Time is on their side.
 

nxhappy

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2006
Messages
10,031
Location
AZ
I ran into that with the whole SAFE act in NY. Had a friend pass away that had some "restricted" firearms. Didn't take long for the troopers to show up and confiscate them. .

that's some ****ing Nazi shit right there. this is EXACTLY why I moved to AZ. And now, Biden trying to stomp on everyone's dick. This is ****ing ridiculous. I just can't believe my boat sank, with all of my firearms on board.
 

quad

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2004
Messages
8,073
Location
Detroit
The real argument will be that the government cannot pass ex post facto laws constitutionally and make illegal what was formerly legal. They can however eliminate the importation as well as the production of new firearms and ammunition. That will leave a constitutional argument that they have in fact violated the second amendment. They can also try the tax maneuver like they did in 1934.

Everyone should know that any firearm you bought legally through a gun shop you filled out a FFL form and the government has access to that and that only. To whom you sell it and under what conditions is strictly up to you. When I ran background checks on firearms I could only get the original buyer. I really don't think there are enough voters in this country to outlaw firearms by passing any constitutional amendment. In fact most Democrats that I know support and have firearms. It's only the radical left in the freaking news media and a half-minded president that think otherwise.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using the svtperformance.com mobile app
Great post. I don't care how many legal degrees / PHDs someone has. The 2A language is pretty simple and clear. Right to own arms shall not be infringed on. That means any arms as far as I am concerned. People should start pushing the cockroach politicians and lawmakers to get rid of all weapon bans. Put the heat on them and go in offensive mode. We don't need no weapon bans! Lift existing bans. Forget about new bans.
 

Users who are viewing this thread



Top