Obama's Gun Ban List Is Out, page 1
Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times
Topic started on 12-3-2009 @ 08:11 PM by TheAgentNineteen

Obama's Gun Ban List Is Out


www.rense.com
Here it is, folks, and it is bad news....


Remember, it is registration, then confiscation....

...."There shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event."

(visit the link for the full news article)


reply posted on 12-3-2009 @ 08:23 PM by Flying V
reply to post by TheAgentNineteen


How do we know this list to be true? Hasn't Rense been wrong on a few occasions?



reply posted on 13-3-2009 @ 10:16 AM by SailorinAZ
reply to post by TheAgentNineteen


Dude, that is like every gun possible. Essentially banning everything. Damn I really hate freakin liberals!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


reply posted on 13-3-2009 @ 11:22 AM by whatukno
reply to post by thisguyrighthere


I have to admit, I had no idea what a Barrel Shroud is and why it needed to be regulated. Good point.

for those that, like me, had no idea what a barrel shroud is...

A barrel shroud is a ventilated covering attached to the barrel of a firearm, that partially or completely encircles the barrel, preventing burns from contact with a barrel hot from firing.[1] Slides, extensions of the stock that do not fully encircle the barrel, and the receiver (or frame) of a firearm itself are generally not considered barrel shrouds. Barrel shrouds are commonly featured on machine guns, where sustained rapid or automatic fire leave the barrel extremely hot and dangerous to the operator. Barrel shrouds have little or no effect on the ballistic performance of the firearm on to which they are installed.

Source: 1

Why does that need to be regulated?

Some gun laws are just stupid. Some save lives. This law in and of itself needs to be taken apart piece by piece. Certainly there is a need to protect the rights of Americans to bear arms. But what of those weapons are really necessary to be able to obtain to protect ones self?

I mean do you really need a full auto assault rifle for hunting? Exactly how dangerous is the average deer? I mean why isn't the gun lobby upset that American citizens are forbidden to own a fully operational and armed thermonuclear missile? After all it is an arm. I can certainly protect myself from an armed assailant with a nuke better than say a machine gun.

What about rocket propelled grenades? Obviously an RPG would be an effective tool in use for hunting. Why isn't the gun lobby upset about those? They are after all arms, and as such should be included under the 2nd amendment right of Americans to keep and bear arms.


reply posted on 13-3-2009 @ 11:40 AM by thisguyrighthere
Originally posted by whatukno
I mean do you really need a full auto assault rifle for hunting? Exactly how dangerous is the average deer? I mean why isn't the gun lobby upset that American citizens are forbidden to own a fully operational and armed thermonuclear missile? After all it is an arm. I can certainly protect myself from an armed assailant with a nuke better than say a machine gun.

What about rocket propelled grenades? Obviously an RPG would be an effective tool in use for hunting. Why isn't the gun lobby upset about those? They are after all arms, and as such should be included under the 2nd amendment right of Americans to keep and bear arms.



I'm glad you learned what a barrel shroud is but you have much more to learn.

Full auto arms have been heavily regulated since the 30's and their importation and sale to civilians was banned for all arms manufactured past 1980 something making the automatic weapons that are available extremely rare and costing about as much as a used Honda.

Even if they were readilly available hunting regulations wouldnt permit their use and 99.99% of hunters agree that wasting ammunition and destroying the prize are not the best ways to enjoy a hunt.

Things like nukes, RPGs and other suck nonsense are regulated under explosive ordinance provisions though some would argue if you can afford them they why the hell not have them? Having a thing doesnt make a person any more of less a threat. If my neighbor owned an RPG my only concern would be that die to cost he wouldnt take me out to a field to fire it because hot damn would I love to fire it.


reply posted on 13-3-2009 @ 11:50 AM by whatukno
reply to post by thisguyrighthere


I think you missed the point of sarcasm in my above comment. What I was getting at is that the gun lobby gets upset every time that a new gun control measure comes out yet they don't encompass the larger issue which is arms regulation.

Wouldn't you agree that a thermonuclear hand grenade would be considered arms?

I just don't understand why the gun lobby freaks out over every piece of legislation that comes down the pike. But alternatively other weapons they virtually ignore the obvious infringement on our right to keep and bear arms.

Remember the constitution does not state it is our right to keep and bear guns. it states arms. A broader term encompassing all manner of weaponry. Not just slug throwers.


reply posted on 13-3-2009 @ 11:58 AM by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by whatukno


Oh okay I get you.

Some of the gun groups do focus on a solid "shall not be infringed" approach like the GOA and the guys over at Frontsight but the majority concede to fight the everyday battles that trickle down the pipe like these "assault weapons" bills and like garbage. These smaller battles are likely perceived as easier to win and more immediate threats to the everyday gun owner as well as being easier for the gun-ignorant public to understand.

Granted, one gigantic win for "all arms" would settle the matter once and for all (well, maybe a year or two) but the risk of focusing on winning the war in such a way is that all of these little bills that erode the right gradually would have an easier time passing. By the time a decision came up for the big win society would already have years of living disarmed under these smaller bills and anyone wishing for the 2nd to return would be seen as a fringe nut sort of like the situation in the UK and for them its only been a few years of disarmament yet so many already believe they've lived this way for eons.
Pages:     ^^TOP^^