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

Republicans Introduce Anti-Gun Law

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Kyle S., Oct 11, 2017 at 12:44 PM.

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

    Dill Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    84
    The NRA supports this bill, so don't expect them to go after traitor Paulsen.
     
  2. 340PD

    340PD Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2007
    Messages:
    1,376
    Call every one of them not just the one in your district or State. My e-mail and calls were done yesterday.
     
  3. bnolsen

    bnolsen Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2004
    Messages:
    247
    Location:
    Colorado
    Get involved in primaries. If too many take this stand then we'll be no better than red china or soviet russia in short order.

    I'm totally disgusted by the GOP. They're almost all a bunch of leftists who also lie to get votes.
     
    CoalTrain49 likes this.
  4. Hunter 08

    Hunter 08 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2017
    Messages:
    50
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Last I heard it was just to look at the stocks and that was it nothing this outrageous.
    Politics 101 I guess. They all equally lie.
     
  5. Dill

    Dill Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    84
    no, it's much worse. This bill will call into question any trigger modification, drop ins, springs etc. The NRA is shooting themselves in the foot.
     
  6. 340PD

    340PD Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2007
    Messages:
    1,376
    The NRA is very wrong in this issue. It is a slippery slope when one considers simple things like trigger jobs or magazine capacity. I think their motivation is the fact they expect this bill to be attached to a national reciprocity and suppressor bills.
    I say screw them kill this bill and THEN go for the other two on their own. I live in MN and contacted Paulsen yesterday.
     
    Dill likes this.
  7. grter

    grter Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2013
    Messages:
    557
    Off the top of my head I can think of 2 states that will love this "tea party" bill. Mister veto the whole house, senate, and populace majority Mario Cuomo is preparing his magic stew pot to mix this lovely" tea party tea" into his concoction which is sure to make every decent tax paying law abiding New Yorker who had the audacity to get their firearm trigger improved very very sick.

    Connecticut is another state well known for making a million dollars out of 0.15 cents and will have a lot of use for this "tea party" spice in their future court cases.

    What is that falling from the sky is it rain is it snow no it's Wayne LaPierre and the NRA standing over you showering you with their good will to go with your "tea party" tea.

    What is that you feel squeezing you from behind it's Trump with a twisted leery smile about to show you how hard he can squeeze.

    And to top if off as usual which for some reason these "pro gun" political powerhouse advocates and various lawyers refuse to address are the severe jail terms and felony convictions targeting people because they are gun owners for small infractions that do not fit the crime.

    There are a different set of rules when it comes to firearm owners. Rules which make every law abiding firearms owner live with dictatorship like laws hanging over their head ready to drop down on them at the slightest mistake or infraction.
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2017 at 10:39 AM
  8. Hunter 08

    Hunter 08 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2017
    Messages:
    50
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Yes I know, I mentioned that in another post. But what I was saying was the other day LaPierre said that bumpstocks should be reviewed and more regulated.

    I do agree this is a bad call by the NRA to back such a thing and many members have called them up to tell them of their displeasure. This bill is a modern Hughes Amendment and needs to be stopped before it gets to be voted on. It's too open ended and it's not reasonable. I'm going to have a hard time renewing my membership next year if they do not reverse their stance on this. The NRA is compromising with the enemy, they shouldn't give them the time or day.
     
    Dill likes this.
  9. kell490

    kell490 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2012
    Messages:
    53
    Like most of these laws that deal with the a type of firearm or device has never done much to stop criminal use of a firearms we saw the 94 AW ban only had a handful of criminals were ever convicted of that crime. What they are proposing is just a feel good law they can use next election cycle. They should be talking about the problems with the current laws we have like the instant background check that only checks 40% of the states are sharing information with the system, and felons attempting to buy firearms were never prosecuted this was pointed out back when Sandy Hook happened. Now they are trying figure out a way to regulate a device like a bump stock as pointed out in this video it's going to be very difficult to do that. We will have another gun law that doesn't really do anything to stop criminal use of a firearm, but possibly sends law abiding people to prison.
     
  10. AlexanderA
    • Contributing Member

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    3,256
    Location:
    Virginia
    The latest news is that Speaker Ryan won't bring the bump fire bill up for a vote in the House. He says he wants the ATF to handle the issue, by revisiting its prior ruling.

    This is where it gets interesting. The ATF can either cave to political pressure, and reverse itself, or it can stand fast on technical grounds. Either of these results will lead to further complications.

    If the ATF rules that bump-fire stocks are parts for converting guns to fully automatic (and thus treated as machine guns in and of themselves), what happens to the thousands that are already out there in the public's hands? Do they have to be immediately turned in and destroyed, or will they be grandfathered in some way? How do you mark them with serial numbers so that they can be traced? If they are grandfathered, does that imply a de facto reopening of the registry?

    If the ATF does not reverse itself, does the matter drop (unlikely), or does it get bucked back to Congress and we are right back where we started?
     
    Kyle S. likes this.
  11. grter

    grter Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2013
    Messages:
    557
    Bump fire stocks are not very complicated devices and are easy to manufacture.

    I don't see how this law is going to stop a wealthy suicidal maniac who spends days and nights in a room meticulously planning ways to commit crimes against humanity.
     
  12. Hunter 08

    Hunter 08 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2017
    Messages:
    50
    Location:
    Minnesota
    I do not trust the ATF in anyway. They seem to flip flop every few years or every few months and it's getting really annoying. The ATF needs to be disbanded. If you watch the latest news Dianne Feinstein even said herself the no new regulations or current regulations would have prevented this from happening. Former vice president Joe Biden even said the same thing after Sandy Hook. So they're just trying to pass stuff just to help clamp down on the Second Amendment to bring in the real goal of total disarmament and confiscation of every American. You can find Dianne Feinstein's press conference or whatever from 1994 and she says and I quote if I had the 51 votes in the Senate it would have been mr. And mrs. American hand them all in. So they've already shown their hand years ago and that's still there end goal.

    So never trust a politician no matter what they say in the campaign Trail take it with a grain of salt. Maybe you can trust him the first few months or a year but eventually they will stab you in the back.
     
  13. AlexanderA
    • Contributing Member

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    3,256
    Location:
    Virginia
    Outright prohibitions never work. A workable prohibition has to have a "safety valve" that allows people to get around it in limited circumstances. Otherwise people will just defy the law, and respect for law in general will decline. We saw this during alcohol Prohibition.

    Machine guns are a good example. Between 1934 and 1986, it was increasingly feasible for people who were really interested in machine guns to have them legally. (It's still possible after 1986, although at astronomical prices.) So what happened when the legal avenue became too difficult? People found workarounds such as drop-in auto sears and lightning links (both of which were eventually held to be machine guns themselves), and then trigger cranks and bump-fire stocks. These are the current "safety valves."

    If you close all conceivable "safety valves," that won't be the end of the problem. In fact, it will make the problem worse, because increasing numbers of people will say "heck with it" and risk prison by making illegal conversions, but they won't be denied their machine guns. Countries with the most draconian and "airtight" gun laws often have the highest rates of noncompliance. Better to have guns in the open than underground.
     
  14. grter

    grter Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2013
    Messages:
    557
    Despite my comments I am still an active NRA member and supporter but this is getting hard to bear I sure hope there is light at the other end of this tunnel.


    About "safety valves" although off topic but related prohibition gave birth to large scale organized crime that reaches into the some of the highest places in government. This effect is still felt despite the fact that prohibition has been long overturned.

    The immense corruption would have never been possible without a total ban on alcohol a substance with deep roots in almost every country and culture of which the populace were willing to pay large amounts of money for enjoying it's consumption despite the risks.

    Prohibition made some (to be honest I am not sure if it's some or a lot of) very bad people very rich and and powerful.

    Radical extreme actions are almost always sure to fall way short of their goals and obviously give rise to other problems that may be far worse.
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2017 at 11:31 AM
  15. Hunter 08

    Hunter 08 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2017
    Messages:
    50
    Location:
    Minnesota
    At least the way Tim from Military Arms channel described it it's at a probably would end up leading to a confiscation and or complete destruction of bump fire stocks and anything else deemed to be a way to increase rate of fire. Which is so stupid because it all depends on your trigger finger really and you're giving that at Birth. So if you really think about it this is just a backdoor way to ban all semi-autos unfortunately this might end up working. Too many deaths too many injuries and too much emotion all around no one is thinking straight.

    I'm not a huge fan of bump fire stocks or really anything fully automatic or even burst because I can't afford that kind of ammunition to feed it if I could I'd have an auto or at least a bumpfire. I mean I'll support people that own them because that's the right and it's not my rights or anybody else is right to take that away from them.

    If the bill passes I highly doubt Trump will veto it he's too unpredictable and that scares me a lot. He has a history of supporting anti-gun laws.
     
  16. Sam1911

    Sam1911 Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Messages:
    34,356
    Location:
    Central PA
    The NRA was NOT in support of the Hughes Amendment. That's a complete misunderstanding of the issue.

    The NRA was very much in support of FOPA, and with good reason. It really fixed a lot of things that were wrong with federal firearms law. The NRA was very much opposed to Sen. Hughes' amendment which got tacked on at the last minute. It was a "poison pill." An amendment intended by the antis to kill the bill. The NRA felt that it wouldn't stand up to a court challenge, so instead of abandoning a bill with tons of positive changes, they asked Pres. Reagan to go ahead and sign it.

    Unfortunately, the closing of the registry has never been able to be pushed back up to be heard by the SCOTUS and so it remains closed.

    Blaming the NRA for that decision without understanding what happened is really destructive and unreasonable.
     
  17. Sam1911

    Sam1911 Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Messages:
    34,356
    Location:
    Central PA
    Do you have actual information that the NRA is backing this bill? I know they suggested the ATF should review the matter, but that's different from backing a bill in Congress.

    If you have seen an NRA release that says they support this bill, please post a link to it.

    If not, please be careful what you say because the details matter.
     
  18. Hunter 08

    Hunter 08 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2017
    Messages:
    50
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Then that changes everything. I hear a lot of firearm supporters that's say the NRA supported that Amendment. Maybe it's just that they couldn't remember very well or there's conflicting information online.
     
  19. Sam1911

    Sam1911 Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Messages:
    34,356
    Location:
    Central PA
    Most of the folks who say that really don't know anything about the FOPA bill, or even that Hughes was an amendment to it. They've heard and repeated the rumor that the NRA told Reagan to sign Hughes, not realizing why or what the conditions were.

    Unfortunately, history is often (re)written just like that, with important details completely lost in the juicy story retold. So the thoughtful and strategically-minded people who made a very tough decisions under a lot of pressure and gave us something very good get maligned as the bad guys.

    It might be happening again, here, but it is really hard to tell in the moment when everyone's passions are up and we can't see what ends will come of all the wrangling and maneuvering that's currently going on.




    I can envision a strategy, based on the things I've seen in the last couple of weeks, whereby this whole issue gets pushed back through administrative reviews/ATF analysis as a stall tactic so it doesn't get movement on the floor of Congress where it's more likely to do real harm. And then where the ATF comes back several months later and says, "no, we really don't see a legal reinterpretation that makes these stocks regulatable under NFA," and by then the nation's passions have subsided and there's no political will to fight this out in Congress anymore. That would be a classic and elegant piece of legislative deflection and we could all laud the NRA for having the smarts to play the cards that way.

    Who knows? We won't know how it all works out until much time has passed.
     
    danez71 likes this.
  20. AlexanderA
    • Contributing Member

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    3,256
    Location:
    Virginia
    It all depends on your perspective. From where I sat (I was a Class III SOT dealer at the time), closing the registry was worse than not getting the (IMO) marginal improvements in the rest of FOPA. Yes, Hughes was a poison pill. The NRA should have asked Reagan to veto FOPA as it stood after Hughes, but they had invested too much political capital in it to accept even a temporary setback. I have no doubt that a clean FOPA bill would eventually have passed, if only the NRA had a little patience. They were too willing to throw the MG community under the bus, in order to score points with their general membership that they had "done something" about the ATF abuses etc.
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2017 at 1:29 PM
    kell490 likes this.
  21. Sam1911

    Sam1911 Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Messages:
    34,356
    Location:
    Central PA
    Yes, it depends on your perspective. But that's an informed perspective, rather than a simplistic one based on nothing but gun-counter scuttlebutt.
     
  22. grter

    grter Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2013
    Messages:
    557
    Yes however the NRA has not offered much in the way of standing up for people who buy, sell, or own bumpfire stocks. This is a witch hunt and I get the impression the NRA is choosing to not get involved or ride it out with minimum involvement rather than encourage logic and common sense when dealing with issues like this.

    I say give the general public more credit. They are not all idiots. Taking the current stance gives the impression that the NRA is just another political organization that just sways and bends at every political wind that blows it's way while happily accepting donations from people they have no intention of standing up for.
     
  23. AlexanderA
    • Contributing Member

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    3,256
    Location:
    Virginia
    The NRA's strategy, as always when faced with horrific events such as this, is to stall for time. It's a historical fact that emotions tend to cool, sometimes quickly and dramatically. That's what the NRA's suggestion to send bump-fire stocks to the ATF Technical Branch is all about. Probably nothing will come of that, and the whole matter will be forgotten. Already we're seeing Las Vegas being pushed off the news headlines. The general public has a short attention span. And there's a differentiation in the degree of interest between pro-gun people and anti-gun people. Pro-gunners tend to be avid, and for many of them guns are their single most important voting issue. Anti-gunners generally are lukewarm, and have their interest spread over a variety of issues. Also, gun owners have a vested interest in their property, whereas for anti-gunners (who presumably don't own guns), the interest is more theoretical. All these facts have been established by numerous surveys over the years, and are well known to politicians. That's what really scares them, and not some putative "clout" by the NRA.
     
  24. kell490

    kell490 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2012
    Messages:
    53
    I remember the FOPA at that time many NRA members didn't care about machine guns hardly anyone I knew even owned Semi-autos like the AR-15s. The ATF has already said they will not be able to regulate bumb stocks as machine guns because the law is very specific description of a machine gun any firearm which can fire more than 1 cartridge per trigger pull. If the ATF tries to regulate devices like the bump stock they will be challenged in court.
     
    Hunter 08 likes this.
  25. hdwhit
    • Contributing Member

    hdwhit Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2015
    Messages:
    3,118
    Location:
    Frisco, TX
    Bad idea.

    Given the current mood of the country, any document that could get enough of the states to assent would be far less workable and far less likely to protect all the rights that the current Constitution does.
     
    AlexanderA likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page