Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Postulating Future Ban...

Discussion in 'Legal' started by shattered00, Jun 17, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. shattered00

    shattered00 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    200
    Assuming that an "assault weapons" ban is to come into play in 2008 or so, what would happen to all the guns that one currently owns which are forbidden by the law? For instance, if a Romanian AK-47 is completely banned, what would come of mine? Would it be grandfathered? What about guns that have certain features that are banned, such as folding stocks or high-cap mags? Could you just change out the features and still be able to retain the weapon? I ask this hypothetically, so that I may take every precaution available aside from voting for non-antis. I know that no one knows what would happen for sure, but what do yall think is most likely to happen? Might it be left up to each state? Sorry for the paranoia and the posting of a thread that will be strictly conjecture and speculation.
     
  2. shattered00

    shattered00 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    200
    Not 10 seconds after this post did I realize that it needs to be in political/legal. Apologies for the moderators who have to deal with people like me.
     
  3. MisterPX

    MisterPX Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2006
    Messages:
    759
    Location:
    Amerika's Doyleland
    Unless someone has a DeLorean and a flux capacitor, no one will know unless it happens.
     
  4. Vitamin G

    Vitamin G Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2003
    Messages:
    934
    Location:
    Monroeville, PA (Home of the Zombies)
    Send me a rod of plutonium or a 1.21 jigawatt bolt of lightning, and i'll let you know ;)
     
  5. shattered00

    shattered00 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    200
    Obviously I stated that no one knows or can know. I merely wanted to see what others' opinions were on the possibilities. I was looking more for replies that might reference past scenarios (for instance, what happened to the weapons people owned which were put on the '94 ban list).
     
  6. Baba Louie

    Baba Louie Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    3,831
    We all learn from our mistakes.

    So too will those who would ban some guns.

    Mere speculation on my part.

    Depending on the outcome of this November and the 2008 elections, perhaps declaring an open WAR on Assault Weapons (or WAW in Baba Wawa speak) with a new, broader definition including ALL semi-auto rifles/carbines w/ pistol grip, detachable magazine, evil flash hiders or muzzle breaks, chambered for military favored rounds. No grandfather clause, a 12 month turn-in amnesty, then (federal) felony possession.

    Only terrorists would need or want such weapons of mass destruction, neh?

    Perhaps including "high powered sniper rifles" and "steet sweeper" semi-auto shotguns knowing the outrage that will cause, knowing full well that they'll be "willing" to compromise on that issue (for now) if only we can get those awful "Assault Weapons" off the streets immediately.

    It may be through Presidential Executive Order, it might be via bill(s) passed by a newly elected Democratic Congress and signed to law by a newly elected Democratic President, with full UN and world-wide approval.

    Mere speculation on my part.

    Bring America's Citizens to their knees or become criminals. We know how to deal with criminals, don't we?
     
  7. jazurell

    jazurell Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2004
    Messages:
    129
    Location:
    NE Ohio
    The possibilities are endless and there's no need to get your shorts in a wad and form an opinion of something that may happen. It's a waste of good shooting time.
     
  8. 1911JMB

    1911JMB Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Messages:
    875
    I think Charlton Heston summed this one up very nicely with his well know 14 word statement. My theory is, I have no intentions of buying anything illegal, but if they ban something I legaly bought originaly, thats tough ****. Cold dead fingers indeed. Or, more than likely, anything that turns illegal of mine other than the pistols I registered will sit in hiding for generations. Much like the millions and millions of unregistered full autos that are out there.
     
  9. shattered00

    shattered00 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    200
    For those of you who practice in litigation, would people be reimbursed for the weapons, if said weapons were to be made illegal? In other words, is it possible for the government to take something from someone if they purchased it during a period of time when it was legal but has now become illegal all WITHOUT reimbursing the consumer?
     
  10. Tommygunn

    Tommygunn Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,505
    Location:
    Morgan County, Alabama
    Yes, the goobermint can do anything. I think they'd likely offer some compensation though, but to add insult to the injury it would be taxpayer money, so the government would be stealing from them to pay you less than the value.
    Plus it isn't really a valid "sale." "selling" involves a mutually agreed upon transaction at a mutually agreed upon price.
    Confiscating guns is just plain theft.
    In other words, it's sorta like one of us peons robs a bank of $10,000 and agrees to give $5,500 back and say, "hey, no problemo, sorry 'bout that," and just trot off scott free.
    Only a politician would believe he ought to be able to get away with that!!!:evil:
     
  11. geekWithA.45

    geekWithA.45 Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2003
    Messages:
    9,051
    Location:
    SouthEast PA

    What, you didn't get the Mr. Fusion upgrade? :neener:

    Seriously, anything we'd say @ this point is pure conjecture. If the forces of organized gun bigotry get access to the levers through their usual champions, the Dems, all bets are off.

    Personally, I'd like to see the forces of organized gun bigotry politically homeless, without credibility, and treated as the fringe whackjobs they are.
     
  12. progunner1957

    progunner1957 member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2004
    Messages:
    831
    Location:
    A wolf living in Sheeple land
    Please explain...

    Exactly what does that mean, Shattered00? Do you intend to vote for those who would ban and confiscate our semiautos, over 95% of whom happen to be Democrats? Is that what you are saying?
     
  13. minuteman1970

    minuteman1970 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    93
    Location:
    Long Island, NY
    Call me a pessimist, but I must concur with Baba Louie's speculation.
     
  14. coltrane679

    coltrane679 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2004
    Messages:
    377
    I know the Democrats are stupid, but I actually don't think they'd walk off this cliff. They'd LIKE to, no doubt, but they've been hearing from people like Howard Dean, James Carville, etc., that the gun issue is just a stone loser for them politically--it get's them no new votes, and loses a LOT of potential ones (the old "Reagan Democrats").

    .50--yep. A reinstatment of the 1994 law--possible. But what is being speculated here, I doubt.
     
  15. shattered00

    shattered00 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    200
    Progunner1957: I apologize for my outdated use of the English language. I was using "aside" as a preposition for "beyond." It has been a while since I have taken an English course, and my grammar becomes wayyyy too rusty. This is an archaic and obsolete use of hte word and for that I apologize. I am libertarian btw. Any party who swings anti-gun, be it Republican or Democrat, will not get my vote.
     
  16. progunner1957

    progunner1957 member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2004
    Messages:
    831
    Location:
    A wolf living in Sheeple land
    Glad to hear it, Shattered! That's my approach - I refuse to vote for an antigun bigot, period.

    My biggest pet peeve in all of politics is so-called gun owners who vote for antigun bigots, using the "there are other issues to consider" excuse to justify it.
     
  17. Art Eatman

    Art Eatman Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    Messages:
    43,265
    Location:
    Terlingua, TX; Thomasville,GA
    The feds have, historically, grandfathered existing "bad things". That way, they avoid having to buy guns at "fair market value" as a taking under the 5th Amendment. It's not just the cost of some individual EBR; it's the court costs on a case by case basis.

    Art
     
  18. beerslurpy

    beerslurpy member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    4,438
    Location:
    Spring Hill, Florida
    I predict no ban because it is fashionable for gun owners to vote these days.

    I think the worst the dems can do is kill the tax cuts if they take power. Oh sure, they could do some sort of gun ban, but I dont think they want to go back to a 1994 situation at least not right away. The Dems have woken somewhat out of the old dream of controlling the media and being able to act with impunity. I think we are still a good way away from them actually becoming politically saavy again.

    If an actual democrat-aligned movement takes root in this country AND incorporates gun control into that platform, then I would worry. Right now a lot of the traditional Democrat core groups like unions are extremely pro-gun. The anti-gunners, as fashionable as they can be for NE Dems, are just not a large enough group to counter gun owners as long as we remain politically active.

    Issues that help the Dems in solidly pro-Democrat states are not issues they want to campaign on. They need to start adopting issues that play well to southern and midwestern groups- I predict they choose economics rather than social issues like guns. Unfortunately as long as the "poor" have jobs and are doing well, socialism isnt going to really grab a lot of votes. But it does tell you why the mainstream media is contantly trying to piss on the economy and get people thinking things are bad.
     
  19. Jimmy Newman

    Jimmy Newman Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2006
    Messages:
    280
    What would happen to my banned guns? They'd get packed in grease, put in an airtight container with dessicant, and buried somewhere noone would ever find them :).

    Actually, the only thing I have that could conceivably be banned (at least in the very near future) is a Mini-14 with a pistol grip/folding stock.
     
  20. benEzra

    benEzra Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    8,575
    Location:
    Down East in NC
    Not to mention the political, tactical, and logistics challenges of sending the police/military door-to-door to round up the EBR's of those who don't want to give them up. That would be a political DISASTER for anyone who tried such a stunt. Look at the backlash over a handful of confiscations in New Orleans, and multiply that by, oh, 25 million or more. I am reasonably confident that that's NOT going to happen.

    There might be politicians foolish enough to try (Dianne Feinstein strikes me as someone who would LOVE to send big guys with machine guns and black body armor door-to-door), but most politicians are smart enough to see that "an APC in every neighborhood" isn't a very good campaign slogan.

    I think that's why prohibitionist legislators went with a grandfather clause and a 2-features criterion for "assault weapons" definition in 1994, to AVOID actually banning AR-15's, civvie AK lookalikes, and such. They hoped that would satisfy the gun-ban extremists without upsetting gun owners too much. (They were wrong on both counts, of course...)
     
  21. K-Romulus

    K-Romulus Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2003
    Messages:
    1,146
    Location:
    Somewhere in Monkey County, MD
    What backlash?

    Aside from the SAF lawsuit, there was no backlash from the NOLA confiscations, aside from one law passed in Louisiana. Even the SAF lawsuit was a bust in the long-term because the same city government was voted back in, and pledged to do everything the same next time.

    The NRA's attempt at bringing up the issue with its "no confiscate" pledge drive seems to have fallen flat, to the delight of both "the intelligentsia" and law enforcement. I agreed with the SAF NOLA lawsuit, and am not happy to see the NRA campaign go south.

    Exhibit A:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/15/AR2006061501792.html
     
  22. Derby FALs

    Derby FALs Member In Memoriam

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2004
    Messages:
    978
    Location:
    Louisville, KY
    What good are weapons if they are buried because you are too afraid to use them? What is the magic straw that would finally break the camel's back?
     
  23. the pistolero

    the pistolero Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Messages:
    783
    Location:
    Beaumont-Port Arthur, Texas
    Whoaaaa. The bed-wetting GFWs have reached new heights of hysteria here. Now it's not only blood in the streets, it's New York/Los Angeles/Chicago/Houston-as-Baghdad! Judas Priest, what a maroon. :barf: :barf: :barf: :barf: :barf:
     
  24. shattered00

    shattered00 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    200
    What is a GFW?

    "Actually, the only thing I have that could conceivably be banned (at least in the very near future) is a Mini-14 with a pistol grip/folding stock." Why would they choose this weapon over all the others?
     
  25. the pistolero

    the pistolero Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Messages:
    783
    Location:
    Beaumont-Port Arthur, Texas
    Gun-Fearing Wuss. Does anyone know who came up with this term?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page