Assault Weapons Ban 2015

[Artdeco]

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/4269/text

Well, specifically bans AR15's, we'll see how it does.

 

[Brian Stirling]

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/4269/text

Well, specifically bans AR15's, we'll see how it does.

Have read through part of it but will take time to finish...

So, are they're planning to take away the millions of guns already in peoples hands or to prevent the future sale of said weapons? If the later then do the people that currently own said weapons have the ability to sell the ones they own or must they hold onto them forever?


Brian

 

[Artdeco]

Prevent sale of new ones, offer a buy back.

It would essentially make them like the full automatics banned in 86', IIRC, permission to buy etc...

 

[HTFOff]

Let me think...no.

If lawmakers truly want to save lives and bring about a sea change, let's start at the top. All salt weapons, grenades, stingers, mortars et al our government, on behalf of the taxpayer, give to religious fundies/tribalists according to which side our geopolitical interests favor - cut it off.

That is literally blood on every american's hand. When that happens we can begin to ponder limiting constitution rights.

Uncle Sam wants to make it more difficult for the plebs to defend themselves, at the same time dabbling in foreign lands thus increasing the likelihood those foreigners would do us harm in the homeland. It's a wise and beautiful woman's juggling act and I won't stand for it.

 

[ivwshane]

Let me think...no.

If lawmakers truly want to save lives and bring about a sea change, let's start at the top. All salt weapons, grenades, stingers, mortars et al our government, on behalf of the taxpayer, give to religious fundies/tribalists according to which side our geopolitical interests favor - cut it off.

That is literally blood on every american's hand. When that happens we can begin to ponder limiting constitution rights.

Uncle Sam wants to make it more difficult for the plebs to defend themselves, at the same time dabbling in foreign lands thus increasing the likelihood those foreigners would do us harm in the homeland. It's a wise and beautiful woman's juggling act and I won't stand for it.

What a weird argument to make. If the terrorist are coming here to attack us you want to make it so that weapons are available so you can fight them? Wouldn't those same weapons be available to them? Lets ignore the fact that most terrorism in this country is domestic.

 

[Svnla]

Well, time to stock up? I do have some cash laying around in savings accounts with low interest. Maybe time to buy a few AR15s and sell for profit later... hummmm.

 

[MongGrel]

I have trouble seeing it passing, but does seem they are going for anything lighter weight, large capacity. Not even sure how it would impact anything really, people have been buying up parts to make another million of them just in the last few days.

Lots of exemptions in there for actual semi-auto hunting rifles.

Banning any semi-auto shotgun with a grenade/rocket launcher was kind of interesting to see in there

Now I want a semi-auto shotgun with a rocket launcher.

:sneaky:

 

[Artdeco]

Looks like it's dead, as well as any other firearms legislation.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/senate-vote-gun-restrictions-224426

 

[bozack]

Prevent sale of new ones, offer a buy back.

It would essentially make them like the full automatics banned in 86', IIRC, permission to buy etc...

buy back or confiscation....cause if its the former I don't know anyone who would turn theirs in.

 

[OutHouse]

Ummm the killer did not use a AR15. So not sure what the ban would prevent.

 

[HTFOff]

What a weird argument to make. If the terrorist are coming here to attack us you want to make it so that weapons are available so you can fight them? Wouldn't those same weapons be available to them? Lets ignore the fact that most terrorism in this country is domestic.

Let me put it in the simplest of terms.

Potentially, the gov. will weaken a constitution right and limit the ability of it's citizens to defend themselves. To protect innocent people.

At the same time, tax revenue from those citizens is used to buy and hand out tools of war like candy to insane people, in foreign lands - which are then used to slaughter innocent people.

This meddling, besides being extremely hypocritical, feeds the hate for americans.

Citizens put in greater danger from being the worlds policeman, with no end in sight, and now with limited means to defend themselves, is just the icing on the cake.

It's fucked.

 

[Fenixgoon]

will never happen - you could easily challenge it on constitutional grounds that the AR-15 is by far "in common use" per heller. it is *the* most popular rifle sold.

why are they banning barrel shrouds? the bill even acknowledges that the whole purpose is to prevent your hands from getting burned.

also, they're about to make millions of americans criminals by criminalizing possession of "assault weapons"

this bill will do little to really affect crime (or suicides for that matter...only takes 1 bullet).


also, the whole exemption for former military/police confuses me. why do they get special treatment? they're just civilians like anyone else. and i realize many states have this clause in their firearms code as well.

 

[MongGrel]

Ummm the killer did not use a AR15. So not sure what the ban would prevent.

It was in the same class, same caliber even I believe, that is not even worth repeatedly throwing up there. The proposal covered the one he used, also.

It's pretty much irrelevant anyway, there will be no ban.

 

[MrPickins]

Well, time to stock up? I do have some cash laying around in savings accounts with low interest. Maybe time to buy a few AR15s and sell for profit later... hummmm.

I would advise against it. Look what happened to prices after Sandy Hook.

I'm guessing the same price spike is gonna happen.

 

[MongGrel]

also, the whole exemption for former military/police confuses me. why do they get special treatment? they're just civilians like anyone else. and i realize many states have this clause in their firearms code as well.

For starters, they are highly unlikely to be terrorists and have been trained to use them to begin with, but I still prefer other things for hunting and have never owned an AR-15 type of rifle after I left the military.

Most civilians have no where near the training people that are former military/police have with that type of rifle.

Plunk an average civilian on say a USMC range without at least a solid week of snapping in/learning how to shoot non stop before you fired a round, they wouldn't have a clue wtf was going on. But seems they might have even changed things at ranges a bit these days.

It used to be if you didn't even qualify for a toilet seat in those days they would run you through another two weeks of that, I felt sorry for those guys. Used to hear stories of guys doing the manual at arms with footlockers, not sure if true or not. I even graduated with only a toilet seat myself, a couple of my PMI's were trying to flunk me at the time I believe, they thought I was a little cocky for a recruit att and did not offer any advice at all after the first day shooting. The PMI's took the place of the DI when you were at the range, was one of my most uplifting moments when I nailed the piss out of a lot of bull eyes when there later and the Senior DI patted me on the back and said "Good Job" at the time like a fuck you to them.

If you didn't make it after that, they would maybe wash you out completely, if you didn't get sent back to start over from scratch, which I think happened rarely.

I was a Sharpshooter later on, but even then believe it or not I had a hard time getting to the range.

Even went one time and had a fucking Colonel at MAG send a jeep to bring me back over an issue, when you were not supposed to be able to be pulled off the range, they did not even have a land line to it at the time. He was having an argument over another Colonel att over an issue I was involved in that was his fault, the base General even eventually got involved and stomped on his dick over that one.

 

[MongGrel]

I would advise against it. Look what happened to prices after Sandy Hook.

I'm guessing the same price spike is gonna happen.

I'd imagine it is just a rush to buy the stuff out at the moment for no real reason myself.

 

[SparkyJJO]

Ummm the killer did not use a AR15. So not sure what the ban would prevent.

And an AR-15 is not an "assault rifle" either, for that matter. It doesn't have burst or auto fire, just plain old semi-auto. One pull, one bullet.

It really is a small bullet too. You're not even allowed to hunt with it in most cases because it won't typically kill the larger critters like deer, just makes them miserable. Yeah, a hunter's rifle has a lot more power to it than an AR-15.

And before someone says it, The AR in the name does not stand for "assault rifle." AR stands for ArmaLite Rifle, the company who came up with the thing.

The only thing the AR-15 does like an assault rifle is look cool. Or scary, if you're a pansy

Part of me wants one just for the fun of it, but I never have gotten one because I don't know how often I'd actually use it. I rarely go target shooting as it is. Probably best I don't spend the money for it to just sit around doing nothing.

 

[MongGrel]

NM, this thread giving me a headache.

Time to move.

 

[Brian Stirling]

Ummm the killer did not use a AR15. So not sure what the ban would prevent.

Do you have a pointer to the story that refutes the claim it was an AR-15? Now I know the media routinely messes this up and one has to believe they sometimes do so on purpose, but most everything I've heard or read says AR-15.

EDIT: OK, it looks like it was a Sig Sauer MCX and likely used the .223 cartridge though it can be chambered in other calibers. This doesn't much change the argument and proponents of bans will argue the Sig Sauer MCX is an assault weapon and uses the same ammo as an AR-15. Not sure if the Sig Sauer MCX uses the same magazine as an AR-15 though it looks like it might...


Brian

 

[OutHouse]

It was in the same class, same caliber even I believe, that is not even worth repeatedly throwing up there. The proposal covered the one he used, also.

It's pretty much irrelevant anyway, there will be no ban.

my point still stands, that the hysteria on the hill about banning the AR based upon this event when the AR was not the weapon used. to me that is just crazy typical Washington politics run a muck.

its like banning firestone tires due to an accident caused by bridgestone tires. do you not see how fucked up that is?

 

[Strk]

my point still stands, that the hysteria on the hill about banning the AR based upon this event when the AR was not the weapon used. to me that is just crazy typical Washington politics run a muck.

its like banning firestone tires due to an accident caused by bridgestone tires. do you not see how fucked up that is?

Except that's really just being pedantic. The bill also targeted more than just the AR15

 

[MongGrel]

my point still stands, that the hysteria on the hill about banning the AR based upon this event when the AR was not the weapon used. to me that is just crazy typical Washington politics run a muck.

its like banning firestone tires due to an accident caused by bridgestone tires. do you not see how fucked up that is?

Not really, it would be more like banning a certain tire make/size made by both companies that had been deemed unsafe, not everything they sold in general.

Probably why you do not see a lot of people driving certain racing tires on the street, as many would be deemed unsafe for driving on the road on a daily basis.

 

[Mai72]

Let me think...no.

If lawmakers truly want to save lives and bring about a sea change, let's start at the top. All salt weapons, grenades, stingers, mortars et al our government, on behalf of the taxpayer, give to religious fundies/tribalists according to which side our geopolitical interests favor - cut it off.

That is literally blood on every american's hand. When that happens we can begin to ponder limiting constitution rights.

Uncle Sam wants to make it more difficult for the plebs to defend themselves, at the same time dabbling in foreign lands thus increasing the likelihood those foreigners would do us harm in the homeland. It's a wise and beautiful woman's juggling act and I won't stand for it.

Wow. You want terrorist to be able to purchase high powered weapons, so they can then kill my fellow Americans.

Obama wants to keep us safe by not allowing terrorist to purchase these deadly weapons. You and the Republican party want easy access to guns.

Whose the real terrorist?

 

[MongGrel]

Wow. You want terrorist to be able to purchase high powered weapons, so they can then kill my fellow Americans.

Obama wants to keep us safe by not allowing terrorist to purchase these deadly weapons. You and the Republican party want easy access to guns.

Whose the real terrorist?

You should go hang out with shimpster and give him some tips Mai, he has not become as refined as you over time, cough, even though you have always been easy to see through.

 

[compuwiz1]

It's really unfortunate that so much disingenuous bullshit is being spread about the AR-15. Fine, take them out of the market and it won't solve one damn thing! From the White House, down through the media, the AR-15 is being made out to be the powerful monster that it really isn't. More damage could be done with your standard 30-06 semi-automatic hunting rifle. Weight and compactness are the only reasons they are chosen over the hunting rifle, for the most part. Same shooter could have done more damage with a 30-06, with increased capacity magazines, but studies have shown that magazine capacity doesn't necessarily translate to more casualties. Even with limited capacities, a shooter will just bring more magazines, which can be changed out pretty quickly in an active situation.

The biggest lie circulating out there is that they operate not unlike a machine gun, where one simply continues to squeeze the trigger and the weapon keeps firing rounds until all bullets in the magazine have been depleted. Not true! The AR-15 and the 30-06 both require one trigger pull for each round fired. Each round fired requires a separate squeeze of the trigger. Can they be modified to fire fully automatic? Yes. So can many other semi-automatic weapons, but that would be illegal. Then again, laws don't stop deranged criminals, intent on taking lives.

The political aspect of it, especially on the left, purveys some notion that if these "weapons of war", which they are not, are eliminated, everything will be just fine and we won't have these problems. That's just plain partisan bullshit. I challenge everyone buying the bullshit to turn off your news channel and actually do some firearm research, from unbiased information bases. Ask people who really know firearms, including military people you may know, as well as some hunters you know. Stop blindly following the narrative, who's end game is an unarmed society.
They're not really much more than a .22, which used to be my rabbit rifle.