Possible ATF Regulation Could Essentially Ban All Semiautomatic Firearms

L

livingston

20×102mm Vulcan
Messages
51,331
Reaction score
139,588
Location
livingston county
The big goal is to get rid of all guns . We all know this . ALL auto loading guns is the goal for now ... There is a well thought reason we are hearing the term "weapons of war ". That is the new mantra .... The 1911 was conceived to serve the military .... Now we have all its bastard offspring ... Glocks ... Sigs ... all down the line . These will be next ... If one looks at court cases involving the AR-15 it is talked about keeping a community safe ... There are reasons why that language is there . We are not dealing with dummies folks . Public safety will be a driving point in the move to ban autoloaders. More people being killed with auto handguns than anything else . That is a fact that is true. .. They will argue and refer to the AR-15 court case as precedent.. And be successful in doing so.
I have said this more than one on this forum . Everyone needs to own at least one revolver that one is comfortable with as a carry gun . First there could be a run on them if the drive to ban automatics is successful and if one could find one that say .. S&W 686 with a 3 inch ... could be running five times the price (or more ) due to scarcity .
 
L

livingston

20×102mm Vulcan
Messages
51,331
Reaction score
139,588
Location
livingston county
Mr. terzmo said:
You pull the trigger on a revolver and get a round ,pull the trigger on a semi and you get a round, The only difference is the hammer goes to the rear after a semi trigger is pulled. Who fires a revolver by cocking it after every shot in a "situation" More BS from propaganda city. What they would accomplish in this "proposal" is limit handgun capacity by only allowing revolvers.
Click to expand...
5 0r 6 rounds before a manual reload.
 
SmallGameAddict

SmallGameAddict

.308 Win
Messages
3,396
Reaction score
4,442
Location
Oswego County, NY
livingston said:
The big goal is to get rid of all guns . We all know this . ALL auto loading guns is the goal for now ... There is a well thought reason we are hearing the term "weapons of war ". That is the new mantra .... The 1911 was conceived to serve the military .... Now we have all its bastard offspring ... Glocks ... Sigs ... all down the line . These will be next ... If one looks at court cases involving the AR-15 it is talked about keeping a community safe ... There are reasons why that language is there . We are not dealing with dummies folks . Public safety will be a driving point in the move to ban autoloaders. More people being killed with auto handguns than anything else . That is a fact that is true. .. They will argue and refer to the AR-15 court case as precedent.. And be successful in doing so.
I have said this more than one on this forum . Everyone needs to own at least one revolver that one is comfortable with as a carry gun . First there could be a run on them if the drive to ban automatics is successful and if one could find one that say .. S&W 686 with a 3 inch ... could be running five times the price (or more ) due to scarcity .
Click to expand...
I have thought about those two words used together many times. 'Public Safety'. Specifically worded...Threat to Public Safety
 
dsdmmat

dsdmmat

Donut Master
Moderator
Messages
11,477
Reaction score
26,055
Location
Alpha Quadrant, Sector 001
Onegunnotenough said:
The Heller decision didn't do squat against the safe act. Look what was banned here in Ny.
Click to expand...
2 completely different circumstances. 1) the state banned features not type of actions. 2) the federal government could have sued the state ( but the libs owned the Justice Department). Had the Justice department sued NY over the SAFE act NY would have lost when they could not present a compelling argument for the law.

Banning the type of action is not a reasonable restriction. Not that banning features is either but, two totally different things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top