XCR Forum banner
1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
59 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Subject: Gun Law Update by Alan Korwin, Democrats have already leaked a gun-ban list. Forward or send to every gun owner you know...Gun Law Update by Alan Korwin, Author Gun Laws of America. Jan. 5, 2008. Gun-ban list proposed. Slipping 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 Brady's plan to introduce shortly. I have an outline of the Brady's current plans and targets of opportunity, 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. 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-Point20Carbine,
* 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 rim fire 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.

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.

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

Forward or send to every gun owner you know...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
449 Posts
And this references which active bill, vote, committee......?

HR1022 or it's ilk is raised anew by Carolyn McCarthy each session and dies each session, this is not new, or news.

Panic mongering by GLOA, I'm just surprised they didn't throw HR45 in as well.........
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,115 Posts
The new AG has stated that He and Obama wanted to reinstate the '94 Crime Bill, but make it permanent. Nancy Pelosi of all people put the kaibash on it stating that "We need to enforce the laws we already have before we make more legislation". In other words she knows the '94 Crime Bill killed many Democrats' careers, and taking away a Dem majority in both Congress and the Senate that they had held for 30 years, and would do the same thing this time around. They want to keep their jobs and will not take action on gun bans. Obama CANNOT get a gun ban pushed through without his party backing him and they will not do it this time.

We also have Heller to protect us. Under Heller "Any firearms in common usage is protected under the Second Amendment." The AR-15 is the fastest selling, most popular rifle in the United States as well as guns like it. Tactical/military styled rifles are outselling all other guns 4 to 1. Sounds like common usage to me.

We also have many more watch dog groups like the GOA and the members of the Second Amendment Task Force, most of who are members of Government, this time around and are being VERY vigilant towards any slight against 2A.

Keep alert and ready to act, but DO NOT PANIC and don't give up. We are much stronger this time around.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
919 Posts
Kill's right. I'm not nearly as worried about a gun ban as I was a couple months ago. Oh I still think there are plenty of people out there looking to melt down our right to defend ourselves, but like kill said, I don't think they have the backing they'd need to do it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,835 Posts
It is coming, don't doubt that there will be an attempt. I DON'T think that it is going to happen anytime soon. The Fed has way to many other things on their plate to fix.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
449 Posts
We need to focus on the real attempts to erode RKBA, and spend less energy on vanity bills with no support like HR45.

Will there be an attempt (probably post 2010), almost certainly, will it pass....well so long as we don't spend all our energy on the not realistic stuff, much less likely than before

Be aware, be vigilant but don't Chicken Little
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,296 Posts
Aziator's on the mark on both counts: It's a clear priority for Obama, and naming Holder AG is a clear indication of his intent. But this kind of initiative needs a certain amount of public support, and they don't have it right now.

They need a few victories under their belts, and have some assurance the can survive the political fallout.

They'll need to field a few more proposals on the economy, maybe wait until after elections. It's conceivable they could wait until a second Obama term -- unless it's clear that he won't get one. And I'm not certain they can get it through Congress. The scarier maneuver, to me, would be an executive order that allows Holder to decide which guns are acceptable and which are not.

But because of Heller, there is a viable option for challenging it: We'll get an injunction against enforcement, and it will take at least two years to get to the Supremes. So it's even possible that Obama could be gone by that time.

tk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,835 Posts
I think you will see an expansion on the prohibited import items, especially ammo. The overwhelming majority opinion in the US is that the 2nd amendment protects the individuals right to have a firearm. It says nothing about ammo. If I were in charge I would go after ammo.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
449 Posts
The SC has a long history going back through Jim Crow laws and earlier of not taking kindly to politicians working "imaginative" ways around their rulings.

If any act to restrict domestic sales came down the pipe they would come down on it like a ton of bricks, "We're not bypassing Heller et-al simply won't cut it"

As for an EO, all it can do is act as guidance to existing law and the only conceivable restriction would be on imported ammunition and see above for the sort of consequences.

To be brutally honest it's simply not important enough an issue to spend a huge amount of political capital over. Loads of pain, little gain.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,038 Posts
Interesting that no .50BMG rifles are on the list...

Yes, I realize that they can be added at any time as stated - but to not have them on the list, seeing how EVIL they are and how all the gangs are using them ( ::) ) - makes me wonder why they ain't?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
325 Posts
This isn't current, but i'm not sweating it. The real plan as of now is an attempt to find a legal way to make the ban of 1994 permanent. As you know, the NRA and other groups are up in arms (and us as well) But I have no fear, the 1994 gun ban wasn't so bad, and I could live with it. As far as .50 BMG's go, they are trying to make it a DD, but that will be difficult due to legal paperwork. If you browse youtube, there's tons of stupid junk floating around, but the worst one is the new Attorney General actually stating the attempt of making the ban permanent.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,115 Posts
This isn't current, but i'm not sweating it. The real plan as of now is an attempt to find a legal way to make the ban of 1994 permanent. As you know, the NRA and other groups are up in arms (and us as well) But I have no fear, the 1994 gun ban wasn't so bad, and I could live with it. As far as .50 BMG's go, they are trying to make it a DD, but that will be difficult due to legal paperwork. If you browse youtube, there's tons of stupid junk floating around, but the worst one is the new Attorney General actually stating the attempt of making the ban permanent.

OK, right there is where you need to change your outlook. You need to not be able to "live with it" because once you can "live with" those features then it will become all semi autos, then handguns because they can be concealed, then all bolt actions because they can be used as sniper rifles, then all guns. YOU, my friend, need to adopt a ZERO TOLERANCE policy when it comes to your gun rights.

If our Founding Fathers could "live with" the restrictions of their respective governments then the USofA would NEVER have been founded. Learn your history.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,339 Posts
...the 1994 gun ban wasn't so bad, and I could live with it.
OK, right there is where you need to change your outlook. You need to not be able to "live with it" because once you can "live with" those features then it will become all semi autos, then handguns because they can be concealed, then all bolt actions because they can be used as sniper rifles, then all guns. YOU, my friend, need to adopt a ZERO TOLERANCE policy when it comes to your gun rights.
Resisting gun laws has not prevented them from being enacted. It has only resulted in a nibbling away at gun rights, with gun owners becoming gradually acclimated to the continually increasing number and scope of restrictions.

I wonder if it might not be better in the long run to adopt the approach taken in some of the martial arts. When an opponent who is stronger than you pushes, don't push back, instead "help" him by pulling him off balance.

Instead of taking a "zero tolerance" stance that is likely to end with more compromises that continue the nibbling away process, help the anti-gun people institute a complete and total ban on gun ownership.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
...the 1994 gun ban wasn't so bad, and I could live with it.
OK, right there is where you need to change your outlook. You need to not be able to "live with it" because once you can "live with" those features then it will become all semi autos, then handguns because they can be concealed, then all bolt actions because they can be used as sniper rifles, then all guns. YOU, my friend, need to adopt a ZERO TOLERANCE policy when it comes to your gun rights.
Resisting gun laws has not prevented them from being enacted. It has only resulted in a nibbling away at gun rights, with gun owners becoming gradually acclimated to the continually increasing number and scope of restrictions.

I wonder if it might not be better in the long run to adopt the approach taken in some of the martial arts. When an opponent who is stronger than you pushes, don't push back, instead "help" him by pulling him off balance.

Instead of taking a "zero tolerance" stance that is likely to end with more compromises that continue the nibbling away process, help the anti-gun people institute a complete and total ban on gun ownership.
I agree that no one should break any laws as it only gives the Lib's more ammo against us.... but our outlook should be of "Zero tolerance". If laws to suppress our civil rights come, let us march on Washington. Let us protest like the 60's, let us harass and picket them. Let us all attend the Million gunowners March in 2010. Let's not be quiet like the 90's. Let us vote these traitors out of office and get ourselves heard.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,339 Posts
...the 1994 gun ban wasn't so bad, and I could live with it.
OK, right there is where you need to change your outlook. You need to not be able to "live with it" because once you can "live with" those features then it will become all semi autos, then handguns because they can be concealed, then all bolt actions because they can be used as sniper rifles, then all guns. YOU, my friend, need to adopt a ZERO TOLERANCE policy when it comes to your gun rights.
Resisting gun laws has not prevented them from being enacted. It has only resulted in a nibbling away at gun rights, with gun owners becoming gradually acclimated to the continually increasing number and scope of restrictions. Instead of taking a "zero tolerance" stance that is likely to end with more compromises that continue the nibbling away process, help the anti-gun people institute a complete and total ban on gun ownership.
I agree that no one should break any laws as it only gives the Lib's more ammo against us.... but our outlook should be of "Zero tolerance". If laws to suppress our civil rights come, let us march on Washington. Let us protest like the 60's, let us harass and picket them. Let us all attend the Million gunowners March in 2010. Let's not be quiet like the 90's. Let us vote these traitors out of office and get ourselves heard.
Can "we" vote them out of office? As I see it, the non-gun public comprises mainly two types of people: those who hate guns, and those who have no interest in guns. Both types, as well as perhaps the majority of gun owners, are in favor of "reasonable" restrictions. Doesn't that virtually guarantee there will be further infringements on the 2nd Amendment?

If, as many in this and other forums have stated, the anti-gun people are "traitors" and "domestic enemies of the Constitution," why tolerate their continued presence in this country?
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top