dwa12479
.338 Win Mag
Good, I hope this passes. The only was we're ever going to get any help in NY from the rest of free America is when they get the same laws as us.. Let's get this show on the road to SCOTUS once and for all.
It's a leap of faith, but yeah.Good, I hope this passes. The only was we're ever going to get any help in NY from the rest of free America is when they get the same laws as us.. Let's get this show on the road to SCOTUS once and for all.
(1) A firearm receiver casting or firearm receiver blank or unfinished handgun frame that—
(A) at the point of sale does not meet the definition of a firearm in section 921(a) of title 18, United States Code; and
(B) after purchase by a consumer, can be completed by the consumer to the point at which such casting or blank functions as a firearm frame or receiver for a semiautomatic assault weapon or machinegun or the frame of a handgun.
View attachment 36058
Unless, I'm reading this wrong, it looks to me like they have redefined 'Assault weapon' to be ANY semiautomatic rifle or shotgun with a detachable magazine.
(4) the term “semiautomatic assault weapon” means—
(A) a semiautomatic rifle or semiautomatic shotgun that has the capacity to accept a detachable ammunition feeding device; or
(B) a semiautomatic pistol that has—
(i) the capacity to accept a detachable ammunition feeding device; and
(ii) any one of the features described in subsection (b);
My bad, I missed this.I've said they will be going after 80% lowers and here it is in their text...
edit to ad...
Of course. Dems would be pretty much content if we adopted European or Australian gun laws. De Facto ban on hand guns, you can have a bolt gun for hunting, and you can have a break action shotgun for trap. And even then mandatory training, etc.Unless, I'm reading this wrong, it looks to me like they have redefined 'Assault weapon' to be ANY semiautomatic rifle or shotgun with a detachable magazine.
(4) the term “semiautomatic assault weapon” means—
(A) a semiautomatic rifle or semiautomatic shotgun that has the capacity to accept a detachable ammunition feeding device; or
(B) a semiautomatic pistol that has—
(i) the capacity to accept a detachable ammunition feeding device; and
(ii) any one of the features described in subsection (b);
Of course. Dems would be pretty much content if we adopted European or Australian gun laws. De Facto ban on hand guns, you can have a bolt gun for hunting, and you can have a break action shotgun for trap. And even then mandatory training, etc.
Hell, that's coming to NYS in January. Coumo is running for president, and wants Gun-Confiscation for his 2020 campaign ads. Buy what you want now, because soon you won't!In the next 2-4 years you will see a hard attempt (possibly accomplished) Canadian or Australian gun laws
It will be a slow erosion until dems have another president plus at least one half of congress. If they get both halves you can just forget it. Sell your shit, it's over. SCOTUS will only be a stop gap if it ever does another gun case, because I absolutely do not put it past the democrats to eventually aim for 60 votes and repeal the 2nd amendment. You are 100% going to see more people talking about how it should be repealed in coming years.In the next 2-4 years you will see a hard attempt (possibly accomplished) Canadian or Australian gun laws
It will be a slow erosion until dems have another president plus at least one half of congress. If they get both halves you can just forget it. Sell your shit, it's over. SCOTUS will only be a stop gap if it ever does another gun case, because I absolutely do not put it past the democrats to eventually aim for 60 votes and repeal the 2nd amendment. You are 100% going to see more people talking about how it should be repealed in coming years.
I made another order today at palmetto.
It would take an amendment proposal (approved by 2/3 of congress or an article V convention of states) that is ratified by 3/4 of state legislatures. So, any 13 states could block such a repeal.It takes more than 60 votes to repeal a constitutional amendment
It would take an amendment proposal (approved by 2/3 of congress or an article V convention of states) that is ratified by 3/4 of state legislatures. So, any 13 states could block such a repeal.
How many votes does it take to just ignore one ?It takes more than 60 votes to repeal a constitutional amendment
How many votes does it take to just ignore one ?
A constitutional amendment.Ignore what?
A constitutional amendment.
They will never repeal the 2A, just redefine it to mean the the national guard exists. I.e. they will just ignore it.
And my point was that they will never go through the effort of actually repealing it, they will just ignore it instead.They were saying they would repeal the amendment. It takes more than just 60 votes
And my point was that they will never go through the effort of actually repealing it, they will just ignore it instead.
And my point was that they will never go through the effort of actually repealing it, they will just ignore it instead.
From the text...My bad, I missed this.
Yes that verbiage calls for retroactive ban of currently-legal and possessed un-serialized guns. I still do not see that this bans 80% unfinished lowers, but a finished lower without a serial would be illegal under this. Could be mighty tricky for them to prove you had one, of course.
A firearm receiver casting or firearm receiver blank or unfinished handgun frame that—
(A) at the point of sale does not meet the definition of a firearm in section 921(a) of title 18, United States Code; and
(B) after purchase by a consumer, can be completed by the consumer to the point at which such casting or blank functions as a firearm frame or receiver for a semiautomatic assault weapon or machinegun or the frame of a handgun.
Like the gun laws of Malta? That allow collectors to acquire new production machine guns? I’m inOf course. Dems would be pretty much content if we adopted European or Australian gun laws. De Facto ban on hand guns, you can have a bolt gun for hunting, and you can have a break action shotgun for trap. And even then mandatory training, etc.
I'm pretty sure that not only does it take 2/3 of congress, but it must also be ratified by 2/3 of the states. The other way is the states convention which bypasses the federal government entirely.They were saying they would repeal the amendment. It takes more than just 60 votes
What about a 70% lower though? Or a 60%? Or a block of aluminum the right size?From the text...
Yes, this will include 80% receivers. It's what the bill is all about.