Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

If its semi-auto and you can GRIP it, it's banned!!!

page: 4
35
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 04:21 PM
link   

All semiautomatic rifles that can accept a detachable magazine and have at least one military feature: pistol grip; forward grip; folding, telescoping, or detachable stock; grenade launcher or rocket launcher; barrel shroud; or threaded barrel.


Wow. Just wow. Grip, stock, GRENADE & ROCKET LAUNCHER, barrel shroud, and threaded barrel. They're guilty by association I guess? None of those 4 things are going to make a weapon assault people more efficiently. I really think the placement of the grenades/rockets in the sentence was carefully calculated by someone.

This isn't Call of Duty, where you attach an adjustable stock and your Accuracy Meter goes up 3 bars
edit on 1-2-2013 by jessejamesxx because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by jessejamesxx
 


Last time I checked pistols have pistol grips, before that a grenade launcher and rocket launcher does not speed up its rate of fire either.

Then of course civilians can't buy grenades or rockets.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 

since you called me out by name ... just remember, you asked for it.

It sure would be nice if some of you who know about guns (Semper?? Honor93??) would come in and validate that what I've said here is true
BH, you are absolutely mistaken.
yes, i've read the bill and again from your link, specifically.

you said this ...

Only semi-automatic pistols that have the capacity to accept a detachable magazine outside the pistol grip are banned
now perhaps you mis-spoke ?
but if not and you believe what you typed, you need to read it again, sloooowwwer.

i could be wrong but i think you are skipping over "pistols that have the capacity to accept a detachable magazine" ... which are most semi-auto pistols.

nowhere does it say that the pistol must have a magazine entry at the grip AND some other location. that is your error, not hers.

again, in a later post, you say ...

So, to be considered a semi-autiomatic weapon, a pistol has to be a semi-automatic that has a detachable magazine AND another detachable magazine outside the pistol grip.
and that, my friend, is completely false.

questions ??

ETA -- just to clarify in case you aren't understanding ... a SAP (semi-auto pistol) that has a detachable mag (loadable anywhere) is the first qualifier.
IF that *sole* magazine loads forward of the trigger, that is sufficient for banning.

i have yet to see any SAP that has 2 loadable mag locations.
have you ??

now, according to the bill ... further down ... that same grip loading mag SAP, cannot contain more than 10 rounds of ammo ... ????
well now, that's just ridiculous, most of them, are manufactured with 13 or more.

edit on 1-2-2013 by Honor93 because: ETA



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by whatsup86
What a surprise. This will be the second major victory for nwo and all we do is bitch about it on a forun.


It's not a victory yet, and no one has tried to confiscate anything yet.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 04:55 PM
link   
So here is a thought from "someone who knows nothing about guns".

Magazine capacities are caliber specific, bigger the rounds the less carried, but more lethal.

Getting hit with 9mm and 40 better chance of survival than with a .357..44, .45 or ,50.now wasn't the aim to reduce violence?

edit on 1-2-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by jessejamesxx
 


Last time I checked pistols have pistol grips, before that a grenade launcher and rocket launcher does not speed up its rate of fire either.

Then of course civilians can't buy grenades or rockets.


I don't know if you understood my post. I was talking about the parts that supposedly make a rifle an assault rifle, the parts that are harmless by themselves (grip stock shroud threaded barrel), and they conveniently threw in grenade launcher to make the grouping seem more "terrifying" or necessary for a ban.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 06:08 PM
link   


Youngblood said the banning of any guns could start the country down a path to the elimination of the second amendment and that any ban would give people a false sense of security.



Well my Sheriff in Kern County said, he AIN'T enforcing no new federal gun ban.

So if Feinstein don't like it, she can go get a face lift!

m.turnto23.com...
edit on 1-2-2013 by sylent6 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 06:16 PM
link   
I'm a grandfather so I have all grandfather guns.


I don't like this bill, it isn't clear and it can be altered to fit their intentions in the future. If all the senators vote for it we will impeach every one of them and take away any retirement benefits they are entitled to. We should create a law addressing that second part about benefit and pension loss.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 06:24 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Lol no my guy, getting hit with a .22 or a 9 milly is better than a .40 or above.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 06:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Honor93
 


Another vague part of the bill is how it states the limitation on how many rounds a magazine can hold. A Winshester Model 1892 lever action rifle has a tube magazine that holds 15 rounds. The key word is "magazine" which would make this great hunting fit the AWB that is being proposed as well.

As BH says, the lawyers are probably salivating over this one.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by jimmiec
I hope they keep it up. It is political suicide and will result in them losing seats in the Senate next election cycle. I doubt many Democrats will actually vote for it. Maybe the really stupid ones will. Maybe if they are retiring anyway they will.


Yes it is political suicide, except the vote counts are rigged.
To me it is simple. By using the slippery grandfather technique they are making it 'comfortable' for us to accept rogue zionist full-auto attacks on the Constitution.

Now more than ever we must identify and expose the rascals. One is in Chicago, posing as mayor. Find the picture of him wearing his fro and look at his smirk, remember it. It is a picture he doesn't want you to see. It would have been better if they had used their power to have manufactured him into a rock star. Instead he sank his teeth into technofascism so he could become a world bully. They all have the same unbridled power trip urges, and disarming you in requisite to their needs. We may need to leave the country in order to work to get it back. Our names are programmed into sky net and satellite weapons systems, because they know that data collection is as good as guns when it comes to power, and they want OURS. These systems are real.

If they legislate a slider piece of turd legislation that demolishes the Constitution into 'the future', then they absolutely destroyed it, and this means every yesterday right back to the signing of the Constitution. As we know, tomorrow arrives fast, no matter how distant it may be in the future. Blink of an eye and life is old. I become sick inside when I hear shills explaining don't worry: 'you have until 2014 to comply with (enter zionist ID) legislation'. I know what it means.

It will be suicide to drive through areas where criminals are at play. Suicide.The street thug will shoot you. The cops will shoot you (5 times) if you don't drop your carving knife, in broad Seattle daylight. This is assimilation for world power, because the coke has addled their power tripping minds.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by WaterBottle
 


Apparently you have a problem understanding written words. Any gun other than a revolver will be banned. Plain and simple.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 07:02 PM
link   
reply to post by TDawgRex
 

i can say this ... i don't know enough about the variety of weapons available to know for sure what all will be impacted ... but i do know, at least 1/2 dozen of the models i've been shopping for would be included and that just ain't right.

as for the lawyers, i wish they were salivating from the bottom of the sinkhole in LA

edit on 1-2-2013 by Honor93 because: typo



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 07:03 PM
link   
I read somewhere that the bill says that the attorney general will have the final say as to what weapons are banned. I have not found that in the bill yet, but I may have missed it. I would appreciate any input anyone has regarding this.

I find the definition of folding, collapsible, detachable stocks sufficiently vague to worry me.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 07:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Honor93
 



Originally posted by Honor93

you said this ...

Only semi-automatic pistols that have the capacity to accept a detachable magazine outside the pistol grip are banned


i could be wrong but i think you are skipping over "pistols that have the capacity to accept a detachable magazine" ... which are most semi-auto pistols.


First, thanks for answering.



The term ‘semiautomatic assault weapon’ means any of the following, regardless of country of manufacture or caliber of ammunition accepted:
...
(D) A semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine AND any 1 of the following:
--------(i) A threaded barrel.
--------(ii) A second pistol grip.
--------(iii) A barrel shroud.
--------(iv) The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip..


The first line in the above excerpt is to define the term "semiautomatic assault weapon" (since that's what's being banned). Under the (...) starting with (D) it's defining semiautomatic pistols being banned. To be banned by this bill, a pistol has to have the capacity to accept a detachable magazine AND any one of those other things.

So, for a pistol to be banned, it has to have a detachable magazine AND that detachable magazine has to be outside of the pistol grip. If it has a magazine INSIDE the pistol grip (like most pistols), it's not banned. OR it has to have a detachable magazine AND a threaded barrel. And so on.



ETA -- just to clarify in case you aren't understanding ... a SAP (semi-auto pistol) that has a detachable mag (loadable anywhere) is the first qualifier.


But if it doesn't have one of the other items (i-iv) it's fine.



IF that *sole* magazine loads forward of the trigger, that is sufficient for banning.


Yes, that would be outside the grip. That's what I said in the statement you quoted.



i have yet to see any SAP that has 2 loadable mag locations.
have you ??


No, nothing suggests two. But that loadable mag HAS to be outside the pistol grip for it to be banned. And that's what I'm saying in the quote.



now, according to the bill ... further down ... that same grip loading mag SAP, cannot contain more than 10 rounds of ammo ... ????


It's NOT the same. It's talking about is a fixed magazine.



‘‘(E) A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.

edit on 2/1/2013 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 07:35 PM
link   
reply to post by butcherguy
 

usually stuff like that is buried near the end ... hoping those reading it will be soooooo distracted that they miss it and perhaps this is the phrasing they meant ??
{i'll have to look closer laters but i think this is what you were told about}


pg 121

‘‘(4)(A) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Attorney General may implement this sub section with regulations.

edit on 1-2-2013 by Honor93 because: typo



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 08:02 PM
link   
reply to post by butcherguy
 


The AG will have the final say?

Wait a second...isn't that Holder? A verified anti-gun guy?

That doesn't bode well.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 08:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by TDawgRex
 


as for the lawyers, i wish they were salivating from the bottom of the sinkhole in LA

edit on 1-2-2013 by Honor93 because: typo


This may be tied in the courts for years, but the Gov't will continue to act as they were laws, thusly tying up the courts further.

As far as most lawyers are concerned, I wish that the were in the belly of sharks salivating for more. Sharks eating Sharks as it were.


I know that there are some good lawyers out there. They need to step forward and not wait for a case just to make money.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by TDawgRex
reply to post by butcherguy
 


The AG will have the final say?

Wait a second...isn't that Holder? A verified anti-gun guy?

That doesn't bode well.
Yeah, Holder is antigun....
Except if you are in a Mexican drug cartel!



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 08:33 PM
link   
What I want to know is?

When all the "bad guns" are banned why do I still have to pass a background check after all the bad guns are gone ?

No one can answer that.






top topics



 
35
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join