What are the feared "Future Restrictions" driving up gun sales?

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

bushmaster1313

Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2008
Messages
3,653
Location
Peoples Republik of New Jersey
Lot's of articles how fear of future restrictions are driving up gun sales.

What restrictions are people worried about.

Supreme Court has said that 2nd A applies to individuals and is enforceable against the States and people cannot be prevented from having handguns in their homes.

What feared restrictions are potentially just over the horizon if the November elections go one way or the other. (Let's avoid political rants)
 
Last edited:
I think the main thing is the thought that there will be another assault weapons ban, only this time without a sunset provision. While the supreme court has said that the 2nd applies to individuals and that they cannot be prevented from having handguns, it has not weighed in on assault weapons yet.

Personally I don't think there will be a new AWB, but that doesn't stop other people from driving up the price of ammo and guns. My current situation doesn't let me maintain much of a stock of ammo, so I will end up either paying inflated prices for my ammo or shooting less :(
 
Heller was an overall positive, but it left the door open to "restrictions."

Further, if Obama wins, he will reveal himself for the rabid anti-gunner that he is. He has already ignored the Constitution (which he has thus far gotten away with) so there's no telling what Executive Orders may be handed down as soon as the election results are in.

I would anticipate full capacity magazines (anything holding over 10 rds) and "assault weapon" restrictions/banning almost immediately.
 
For all practical purposes, except for the 10 round limit on magazines, the old AWB was toothless and cosmetic.

A real AWB would be like California.

But a Federal Ban would have to get through both Houses of Congress
 
The key feature of so-called "assault weapons" is magazine capacity. All other characteristics (folding stocks, pistol grips, bayonet lugs, etc.) are just cosmetic. Figuring that the gun-banners have learned their lessons, I expect any future restrictions to focus on magazines (over 10 rounds?) and I expect there won't be a grandfather provision or sunset provision this time. (The grandfather provision was what made the '94 AWB such a joke.)

This is the gun-banners' pipe dream, but there's little chance they can actually get it enacted.
 
Just how would a retroactive ban be enforced?
Click to expand...

Let me say at the outset that such a retroactive magazine ban is very unlikely to be enacted. We're talking about it only because it's high on the anti-gunners' wish list.

That said, they wouldn't be sending their minions door to door picking up magazines. That's impractical. ATF agents would randomly be at public ranges, gun shows, etc., and they would pick up any banned magazines that showed up there. The effect would be to drive such items underground, similar to unregistered machine guns.

Speaking of machine guns, a magazine ban (which would presumably include belts and other feeding devices) would be absolutely devastating to the MG community.
 
Illegal to possess

Declare it contraband
Click to expand...

That would immediately turn practically everyone who owns a service sized pistol into a criminal. Quite possibly several times over as I know a lot of people have extra magazines for each gun.

And then you would have millions of pieces of contraband that are small and easy to hide, and which are quite similar to what would be their "legal" versions (that being the ones that hold 10 rounds). Hell, almost every service and compact sized pistol comes with multiple mags that would be considered contraband under that kind of law. Not to mention the AR/AKs and other assault rifles.

How would the gov provide a way for people to rid themselves of these oh so dangerous items? A national turn in would be a logistical nightmare...
 
That would immediately turn practically everyone who owns a service sized pistol into a criminal. Quite possibly several times over as I know a lot of people have extra magazines for each gun.

And then you would have millions of pieces of contraband that are small and easy to hide, and which are quite similar to what would be their "legal" versions (that being the ones that hold 10 rounds). Hell, almost every service and compact sized pistol comes with multiple mags that would be considered contraband under that kind of law. Not to mention the AR/AKs and other assault rifles.

How would the gov provide a way for people to rid themselves of these oh so dangerous items? A national turn in would be a logistical nightmare...
Click to expand...

New York City bans magazines over 5.
Can't even have a Model 12 in NYC
 
The AR has been a favorite target, and it catches up a lot of regular guns in attempts to regulate the "Evil Black Rifle".

I can see a new push to regulate the following...

Ammunition designed/manufactured for military/law enforcement (SURPLUS! and hollow points)
Longer barrel requirements. 18" for rifle vs 16 (targets AR's/AK's)
Removable mag cap limits (targets ar/ak/sks/rimfire/full auto)
Folding/collapsible stock bans (AKs/ARs and HD shotguns)
Regulating/limiting modifications from stock (They've done it with cars for decades!... think 922r expanded to all weapons)
 
I think gun companies secretly dump huge amounts of money into Democratic campaigns. Then they sit back and laugh when money comes pouring in from the panic.

Republican presidents result in drops in gun sales or at least a steady stream. Democrats boy the sales skyrocket don't they.
 
New York City bans magazines over 5.
Click to expand...

That's something completely different from a national ban on "high capacity" mags. If one city bans the mags, people still have the option of moving out of the city. While its not necessarily a good option, if someone had a large amount of magazines that would be banned (or just didn't like the insult of having to turn over their "dangerous" property), they could just move outside city limits and be fine. Given the cost of living in a large city like NYC, it might actually be cheaper to live outside the city anyway. When you do that to a whole country, the people are not able to move to a different location to avoid the law and will be criminals. Unless of course you consider moving to a different country a viable option...

Managing a magazine turn-in is relatively simple for an individual city to do, considering they have one police department (there may be some cities with multiple departments, but there would still be very few). Now think about coordinating nearly every police department in the nation to collect these magazines, and transition them to trucks to be taken to their destruction. That is a monumental undertaking. If you start dropping the smaller departments (especially in the rural areas) you start decreasing the amount of voluntary turn-ins and increasing the number of new criminals. (Just think, if you've gotta travel over an hour to turn in something you think should be legal anyway, are you more likely to do it?)

I don't think we're likely to see a "its illegal now, turn them all in" type of ban. I think it would be much more likely to have a registration law, and then eventually a slow turn in type of law made.
Even though I don't think we'll have a ban (at least not immediately after the reelection) I am almost positive that there won't be a retroactive ban.
 
Well there is that 'nasty' arsenal license they planned back in the 1990's. And this includes "Brady II" ...It obviously never happened..but it always remained in the back of the my mind that I wouldn't put it past these buzzards to try to pass this nonsense again...

http://volokh.com/posts/1190402417.shtml


"Any person who owns 20 or more firearms or more than 1,000 rounds of ammunition or primers (e.g. two "bricks" of rimfire ammo) would be required to get an "arsenal" license. To obtain a federal arsenal license, a person would need to be fingerprinted, obtain permission of local zoning authorities, and pay a $300 tax every three years. Her home would be subjected to unannounced, warrantless inspection by the government up to three times a year. "Arsenal" owners would also have to obtain a $100,000 dollar insurance policy."
 
You know what shocks me?

Just how many gun owners claim a semi automatic of any pedigree to be an "assault rifle." As per usual, fellow gun owners are our worst enemy.
 
Orkan .... maybe we surround ourselves with different types of gun owners, but most that I know are embarrassed by terms like "assault rifles". It's a term generally used by those not in the know. We prefer terms like "gat", "heater", and "Glock" (even if it's a vintage Hi Power, it's still a Glock yo).
 
I would add things like required "ballistic fingerprinting", micro-stamping, and cosmetic feature bans on things like collapsible stocks and pistol grips. Also having to go through a background check to purchase ammo, and limits on ammo quantities, having to be licensed to have certain amounts, etc. Those are all things that have been recently tried. It only takes a shift in the political winds for them to come true.

Everyone saying "it won't happen again, we've made too many gains": look how fast those gains were made. Only 15 years ago, concealed carry was rare, ARs were expensive and heavily regulated, magazine capacities were limited, etc. The antis were in control and thought they had everything locked down. And in a few short years, we're where we are now. That's good for us. But it also shows how quickly things can change. We don't know where things will be 15 years from now. I know we all hope the pendulum doesn't swing back the other direction, but if the past decade shows us anything, it's that the pendulum does swing, and it swings quickly. The moment you say "it can't happen", it will.
 
I think that the main thing driving up gun and ammo prices right now is demand due to everyone getting their tax rebates and spending it on stuff they wouldn't normally buy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

R
  • Locked
The Future of Shooting
Replies
19
Views
1K
RDW
R
Speedo66
  • Locked
"What Drives Gun Sales, Fear of Restrictions" (NY Times)
Replies
7
Views
1K
toivo
toivo
D
  • Locked
Fear Breeds Gun Sales
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
Duke of Doubt
D
D
  • Locked
(OH) Arguments against gun restrictions carry no water
Replies
6
Views
505
foghornl
F
Cavalier Knight
  • Locked
Gun Control Group Braces for Court Loss
2 3
Replies
67
Views
4K
ssr
S
Back
Top