The New Gun Ban

[right winger]

This is going to be trouble big time.

This is a post on my blog http://musingsofavastright-winger.bl...w-gun-ban.html


This is from Gun Laws of America. I get regular updates from them.
It sounds like the fight for our right to keep and bear arms is going to be a long hard one.
God Help Us.
-------------------------------------------------------------
1. Officials stocking up on AR-15-style long guns
2. Preliminary gun ban list revealed

S&W sales With bans on AR-15 and AR-15-styled rifles to the public expected under the Obama administration (see gun-ban lists below), Smith and Wesson has just announced expansion of that market, with the sale of 275 of its M&P15 rifles to the Chicago police department. http://tinyurl.com/742qre

Chicago, president-elect Obama’s home town, has virtual bans on handguns and strict repressive limits on long guns, but police are excluded and criminals blithely ignore the provisions.

The M&P15 strongly resembles the AR-15, a high quality, semi automatic long gun used by the U.S. military and the public for decades. What the Chicago police expect to do with 275 of the guns, vilified as assault weapons by the lamestream media, was undisclosed. Assault, it has been noted, is a type of behavior, not a type of hardware.

In other news, the Minnesota State Patrol has purchased 90 of the high-quality M&P15 firearms, which retail for more than $1,000 each.In still other news, actor David Spade donated $100,000 to the Phoenix police department, to buy 50 new AR-15 rifles made by Colt, an S&W competitor. Spade was apparently moved by a “news” broadcast that said Phoenix officers had to buy their own rifles due to lack of funding, and he wanted to help them out.

2. Gun-ban list proposedSlipping below the radar (or under the short-term memory cap), the Democrats have already leaked a gun-ban list, even under the Bush administration when they knew full well it had no chance of passage (HR 1022, 110th Congress). It serves as a framework for the new list the Bradys plan to introduce shortly.

I have an outline of the Brady’s current plans and targets of opportunity, I’m working on getting that news out asap after these ban lists, probably be ready in the next few days. It’s horrific. They’re going after the courts, regulatory agencies, firearms dealers and statutes in an all out effort to restrict we the people. They’ve made little mention of criminals

Now more than ever, attention to the entire Bill of Rights is critical. Gun bans will impact our freedoms under search and seizure, due process, confiscated property, states rights, free speech, right to assemble and more, in addition to the Second Amendment. See what 250 of your peers thought during our recent Bill of Rights Day event at the Wrigley Mansion in Phoenix: http://www.gunlaws.com/BOR-Day-2008-Report.htm

The Democrats current gun-ban-list proposal (final list will be worse):Rifles (or copies or duplicates):M1 Carbine, Sturm Ruger Mini-14, AR-15, Bushmaster XM15, Armalite M15, AR-10, Thompson 1927, Thompson M1;AK, AKM, AKS, AK-47, AK-74, ARM, MAK90, NHM 90, NHM 91, SA 85, SA 93, VEPR;

Olympic Arms PCR; AR70, Calico Liberty, Dragunov SVD Sniper Rifle or Dragunov SVU, Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, or FNC, Hi-Point Carbine, HK-91, HK-93, HK-94, HK-PSG-1, Thompson 1927 Commando, Kel-Tec Sub Rifle;

Saiga, SAR-8, SAR-4800, SKS with detachable magazine, SLG 95, SLR 95 or 96, Steyr AU, Tavor, Uzi, Galil and Uzi Sporter, Galil Sporter, or Galil Sniper Rifle (Galatz).

Pistols (or copies or duplicates):Calico M-110, MAC-10, MAC-11, or MPA3, Olympic Arms OA, TEC-9, TEC-DC9, TEC-22 Scorpion, or AB-10, Uzi.

Shotguns (or copies or duplicates):Armscor 30 BG, SPAS 12 or LAW 12, Striker 12, Streetsweeper.

Catch-all category (for anything missed or new designs):A semiautomatic rifle that accepts a detachable magazine and has (i) a folding or telescoping stock, (ii) a threaded barrel, (iii) a pistol grip (which includes ANYTHING that can serve as a grip, see below), (iv) a forward grip; or a barrel shroud.

Any semiautomatic rifle with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds (except tubular magazine .22 rimfire rifles).A semiautomatic pistol that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine, and has (i) a second pistol grip, (ii) a threaded barrel, (iii) a barrel shroud or (iv) can accept a detachable magazine outside of the pistol grip, and (v) a semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds.

A semiautomatic shotgun with (i) a folding or telescoping stock, (ii) a pistol grip (see definition below), (iii) the ability to accept a detachable magazine or a fixed magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds, and (iv) a shotgun with a revolving cylinder.

Frames or receivers for the above are included, along with conversion kits.

Attorney General gets carte blanche to ban guns at will:Under the proposal, the U.S. Attorney General can add any “semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General.” Note that Obama’s pick for this office (Eric Holder, confirmation hearing set for Jan. 15) wrote a brief in the Heller case supporting the position that you have no right to have a working firearm in your own home.

In making this determination, the bill says, “there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.”

In plain English this means that ANY firearm ever obtained by federal officers or the military is not suitable for the public.

That presumption can be challenged only by suing the federal government over each firearm it decides to ban, in a court it runs with a judge it pays. This virtually dismisses the principles of the Second Amendment.

The last part is particularly clever, stating that a firearm doesn’t have a sporting purpose just because it can be used for sporting purpose -- is that devious or what? And of course, “sporting purpose” is a rights infringement with no constitutional or historical support whatsoever, invented by domestic enemies of the right to keep and bear arms to further their cause of disarming the innocent.

If these near-total bans aren’t enough, the most dangerous part may be the phrase “pistol grip” because: “The term ‘pistol grip’ means a grip, a thumbhole stock, or any other characteristic that can function as a grip.” In other words, any semi-auto long gun with a grip (that’s ALL semi-auto long guns) would be banned under the existing proposal. It’s not clear what they hope to achieve by deceptively banning guns with grips instead of just calling to ban the guns -- even an idjit can tell it’s the same thing.

I didn’t cover here all the magazine bans, transfer bans, dealer record-keeping and centralized reporting, and a host of nuisance details -- there will be time enough for that when the new lists are released soon: “As soon as President-elect Obama is inaugurated and the 111th Congress is sworn in,” according to Ms. Brady. Congress is set to be sworn in on Jan. 6, Inauguration Day is Jan. 20.

No one expects the new proposal to be less abusive than the current one supported by the party of the Democrats. Remember -- these bans were proposed when the congressional anti-rights crowd had no chance of success. Now they are ready to run wild, or according to Sarah herself, “I have never been so confident.” The “news” media has failed to report on any of this, preferring instead to blare that the incoming president supports the Second Amendment and commonsense (sic) laws.

To see the whole bill, go to http://thomas.loc.gov/ and search for HR 1022, (switch to the 110th Congress if the 111th has begun).

The excellent Firearms Coalition started by the late Neal Knox and now run by his family members makes these important points about the upcoming Judiciary hearings for AG nominee Holder:

“The Democrat members of the Judiciary Committee are all sworn enemies to the Second Amendment and are unlikely to be swayed at all by any firearms related arguments, but might hesitate to confirm based on Holder’s participation in the pardons of 16 Puerto Rican terrorists and billionaire financier and arms merchant Marc Rich [and perhaps the Elian Gonzalez abduction by federal agents Holder authorized]. Any letters to Democrats should focus on those issues.

“On the Republican side, Arlen Specter, the ranking Republican on the committee has never been a friend to gun rights, but he owes his reelection to NRA support and has expressed concern over the pardon issues. Among the other Republicans, most are relatively reliable votes, but only Coburn has routinely taken a leadership role on Second Amendment matters. All of them need to be pressed hard to do everything they can to block the appointment.

“For more information about Eric Holder and why his appointment must be fought tooth and nail, go to our web site at http://www.firearmscoalition.org/.”

Respectfully submitted,Alan Korwin, Author Gun Laws of Americahttp://www.gunlaws.com/gloa.htm

Permission to circulate or post this Gun Law Update granted.Sign up for future alerts on my home page:http://www.gunlaws.com/

[RunningOnMT]

Question: Should congress pass such a gun ban, what happens to those listed arms already in the hands of the public. Is there a likely to be a grandfather clause for those already in possession? If for example you own an AR, the BATF already knows you own it at least if purchased by a reporting retailer. Would they contact you to confiscate it? What action did they take under the former gun ban in those circumstances?

[45nut]

Thanks Right Winger,

Why are you bashing the Democrats on HR 6257 when it's our lovely RINO's that have introduced and sponsored H.R. 6257 Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization Act of 2008? No doubt the DNC is giddy over this, but it is our own guys selling us out.

Rep. Mark Kirk [R-IL]
Cosponsors [as of 2008-11-07]
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen [R-FL]
Rep. Michael Ferguson [R-NJ]
Rep. Christopher Shays [R-CT]
Rep. Michael Castle [R-DE]

Link to bill below;
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-6257

[RunningOnMT]

Originally Posted by 45nut

Thanks Right Winger,

Why are you bashing the Democrats on HR 6257 when it's our lovely RINO's that have introduced and sponsored H.R. 6257 Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization Act of 2008? No doubt the DNC is giddy over this, but it is our own guys selling us out.

Rep. Mark Kirk [R-IL]
Cosponsors [as of 2008-11-07]
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen [R-FL]
Rep. Michael Ferguson [R-NJ]
Rep. Christopher Shays [R-CT]
Rep. Michael Castle [R-DE]

Link to bill below;
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-6257

Notice that 3/5 of the sponsors are New Englanders? Suppose we could sell New England and San Francisco to the Canadians?

[carver]

Originally Posted by RunningOnMT

Question: Should congress pass such a gun ban, what happens to those listed arms already in the hands of the public. Is there a likely to be a grandfather clause for those already in possession? If for example you own an AR, the BATF already knows you own it at least if purchased by a reporting retailer. Would they contact you to confiscate it? What action did they take under the former gun ban in those circumstances?

In the '92 Clinton/Biden ban if you already had the gun, you kept the gun. That law simply stopped the sale of those guns under that ban. Don't know for sure on this one yet!

[cycloneman]

Running on Mt

retailers do not report. At least that was the way it was years ago. The dealer keeps a log of all guns that come in and go out. BATF can inspect this log anytime they want. I would not be suprised if their is a data base with all this info on it already.
When a dealer goes out of business this log and all 4473's are turned in to BATF

[bcj1755]

Originally Posted by RunningOnMT

Question: Should congress pass such a gun ban, what happens to those listed arms already in the hands of the public. Is there a likely to be a grandfather clause for those already in possession? If for example you own an AR, the BATF already knows you own it at least if purchased by a reporting retailer. Would they contact you to confiscate it? What action did they take under the former gun ban in those circumstances?

I saw a verison of this bill a few weeks ago posted on a website (can't remember where), and although it added ALOT of new weapons to the "banned" list, it did allow you to keep weapons already owned. Now if the final version has a grandfather clause is anyone's guess. I"m hoping Obambabababababa tries to "fix" the economy before trying to "fix" the "firearms and crime" problem.

[RunningOnMT]

Originally Posted by cycloneman

Running on Mt

retailers do not report. At least that was the way it was years ago. The dealer keeps a log of all guns that come in and go out. BATF can inspect this log anytime they want. I would not be suprised if their is a data base with all this info on it already.
When a dealer goes out of business this log and all 4473's are turned in to BATF

Correct me if I'm wrong but don't they know the firearm and serial number when the dealer phones in for approval at the time of sale?

[Nighthawk]

Originally Posted by RunningOnMT

Correct me if I'm wrong but don't they know the firearm and serial number when the dealer phones in for approval at the time of sale?

no, they're checking if you're okay to sell to.
In TX if you have CCL they don't call .

[cycloneman]

nighthawk

its been many years now but i seem to recall something special if a person was purchasing more than one gun at a time. I may be wrong but I think you had to call in multipal gun sales on one sheet with gun types

[ponycar17]

Originally Posted by RunningOnMT

Notice that 3/5 of the sponsors are New Englanders? Suppose we could sell New England and San Francisco to the Canadians?

One of them is from FL. Count that as a New Englander as well... He probably was a New Englander at one time.

My wife's family lives in FL. Her Grandparents were the New England seeds from PA that located her family there... It's like stepping into the North while going South. Everyone there has ties to NE so it seems. Simply amazing...

Personally, buy what you can afford and offer to introduce a new person into the shooting hobby at every opportunity. We can't win against stupidity if we are letting our numbers fall as urbanization rises.

[cycloneman]

pony makes a good point. introduce anyone you can into the shooting sports. also there is no reason why you can't hunt with so called "black guns" I think more people should use them to hunt with. the more reasons for having them will only help. I mean what about auto shotguns? What about all the people employed by black gun factories? Uncle Ted Nugent uses a DPMS 308 LR for some of his hunts. whats the difference between a remington 7400 and a ar 15.

[j3hill]

I have two points on this. 1st under the 10th amendment states can tell the feds to stick it. I doubt any will. One of the sad things about the souths loss of the civil war, was the huge errosion of states rights. Maybe Alaska will? And once one state does others will follow? I doubt it, because then they will lose whatever fed funding they may want. 2nd many people are affraid that they will get knocks on their doors by people wanting their guns. I doubt this would ever happen, law enforcement wants to go home at the end of their shifts, but a ban just has to be on paper, thats it. Once weapons are banned on paper, that takes away your use of the gun, and regards it to just sitting there in your home, unused. Without the ability to go outside and play.
I highly doubt anything would be "grandfathered in" That would be defeating the whole point of a ban. Now let's talk bug out bags!!!!


"My first priority will be to reinstate the assault weapons ban as soon as I take office. Within 90 days, we will go back after kitchen table dealers, and work to end the gun show and internet sales loopholes. In the first year, I intend to work with Congress on a national no carry law, 1 gun a month purchase limits, and bans on all semi-automatic guns."

--Barack Obama,

[CampingJosh]

Originally Posted by j3hill

I highly doubt anything would be "grandfathered in" That would be defeating the whole point of a ban.
Now let's talk bug out bags!!!!

The last AWB included a grandfather clause, and I'm fairly certain any new one will as well. The Fifth Amendment says that a person shall not "be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." Since it's legal for us to own them now, there is no due process of law that can take them away.

As I understand it, basically all criminal law works under the principle of Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine praevia lege poenali (which means "No crime, no punishment without a previous penal law"). If it wasn't illegal at the time you did it, you can't be punished for it now. This is more commonly called ex post facto.

So since we already have the "assault" weapons, we're OK to keep them. They must grandfather them in (as much as Congress "must" do anything).

So it sounds to me like we all need to buy what we want right now, because we likely won't have that option 90 days from now.

One of the guys with a legal background (Marlin or User) would be able to explain it much better than I can, but I hope I've covered the basic point there.

[TEXAS 1957]

The fact that we are having to have this conversation in the first place is sickening. It is indicative of the apathy and or ignorance in the voting booth in November. Presently here in Texas all firearms owners I know, including law enforcement officers, are searching the newspapers for individuals selling firearms without having any paper work so that they too can have firearms with a lack of tracing. It is a shame that this is the state of things, however, rather than just sit and complain we need to take notice, voice our concerns, and plan to take back the government of we the people at the voting booth.

[Doug.38PR]

Shouldn't our state legislatures and governors start taking measures (resolutions) to nullify any such new AWB? There is a petition going around on TexasCHL and several other forums to do just that (though it isn't worded as well as it could be).
If Congress can't or won't protect our rights, then the states need to guard us from the Federal government.


I hate to say it, but if the state government's won't do anything...the only thing that will save us short of an act of God is men getting together as independent state militias and hoisting up "come and take it" flags.
We can boast "They're not getting my gun. I'll board myself up in my house and wait for them. Letum' come!" We saw how that ended at Ruby Ridge and Waco. Individuals that try to "shoot" it out alone with no community involvement will die.
That's what the minutemen at Lexington and Concord had to do. I'd like to think that enough army personel and Law Enforcement officers would side with their fellow states or citizens rather than carry out the unConstitutional and immoral edicts of the Obama and his goons

[DontCryMrJefferson]

That quote by Obama is a fake, fortunately.

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactchec...ar_to_ban.html

I am actually scared now. What kind of government gets off on scaring it's citizens into compliance? I will never comply, however, and will resist this and the inevitable further abuses of the rights of the people with every fiber of my being until I die. If Obama signs a bill like this into law I will immediately declare him my #1 enemy and do everything in my power to depose him as soon as possible.

He should be in prison for even speaking of these conspiracies to commit such atrocities to the people of the US and their constitution and we should endeavor to bring him to the scales of revolutionary justice.

[cycloneman]

As usual we dont know what Obama is really thinking. He changes sides. I think he really doesnt care if we own guns or not. He is out there to tell the masses that elected him what they want to hear. The man has hit pay dirt like the rest of them. I think (they) are going to end up doing what pay dirt tells them to. So with that said the anti's have the microphone.

In the small derpessed communities you have drug related murders and the momma's of these stupid kids screaming in the streets for someone to do something. Stop the violence they say. I say WHERE ARE THE KIDS DADDY'S. Stupid young girls having babies and there is no one to raise the kids!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Politicians are taking advantage of this. They are promising things to these people for their votes. PAY DIRT MAN, IT'S ABOUT THE MONEY. That's what we are really fighting "pay dirt" and fatherless homes.

[45nut]

DontCryMrJefferson,

Look into who owns and runs factcheck.org and you will see it's Nobama's old running buddies. See what they have to say about william ayers while you're at it.

Don't be fooled, they are in power now.

[DontCryMrJefferson]

Not that I don't think he would say that but, being the skeptic I am, I'm to need a little more evidence either way now...

Does anyone have a video of him saying this?

[Terry_P]

Originally Posted by RunningOnMT

Notice that 3/5 of the sponsors are New Englanders? Suppose we could sell New England and San Francisco to the Canadians?

I only see one New Englander, and I though Shays got beat.