angelofdeath Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-1022 'oh no, the democrats who took control of congress would NEVER think about trying to pass any gun control legislation! they are just trying to impeach bush!' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qawee Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 yo this has only one sponsor, i dont think it will go through, if it picks up steam i might have to load up the credit card though, ya heard? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qawee Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 yo angelofdeath, you have any type of resource on who is leaning to vote which way? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russell jones Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 I can't stand when laws are made that accomplish nothing to solve a supposed problem. Did this law stop one person from shooting anyone else? I doubt it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted February 20, 2007 Author Share Posted February 20, 2007 not sure quawee, im just guessing it would be the usual suspects. most democrats, alot of republicans and bush has said he would sign it if it came to his desk. which is probably the only reason the law expired in the first place. if it would of passed congress, it would of been law. this bill always made me laugh. banning guns with 3 or more 'assault' features. though im against any sort of gun control, even if i were for it, i dont see how banning a gun with a bayonet lug is gonna save someone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russell jones Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 true, even if one doesn't except the premise that the Second Amendment protects individual gun owners, I seriously doubt that any form of gun control would prevent any crimes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qawee Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 not sure quawee, im just guessing it would be the usual suspects. most democrats, alot of republicans and bush has said he would sign it if it came to his desk. which is probably the only reason the law expired in the first place. if it would of passed congress, it would of been law. this bill always made me laugh. banning guns with 3 or more 'assault' features. though im against any sort of gun control, even if i were for it, i dont see how banning a gun with a bayonet lug is gonna save someone. this new one bans any gun with a detachable magazine and 1 of the previous "assault" features. :mad: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted February 20, 2007 Author Share Posted February 20, 2007 word. guess i should of read all of the new bill . they are trying to pass a similar in my state. it would outlaw .22 caliber semi autos with detach mags. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qawee Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 your ruger 10/22 done deal. check the thread out in channel zero big brother is teh h4x0rz about the roving wire taps scary shit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAR Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 just out of curiousity, why would you even want an assault weapon? I mean, personally, I dont care if people own them as long as they are responcable but still, im just curious... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qawee Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 protection. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAR Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 wouldnt a 9mm or a shotgun sufice? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qawee Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 not when your enemy has assault rifles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunt double Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 i really dont see any reason for a civillian to own an assault weapon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CACashRefund Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 just out of curiousity, why would you even want an assault weapon? I mean, personally, I dont care if people own them as long as they are responcable but still, im just curious... You WOULD say that. You dont want anything hampering your plans for world domination. JEW. Hahaha. Had to get that out there. Heres an excerpt of good article on the assault weapons ban written while it was still in effect. In a September 1988 report on "assault weapons" that he prepared for the Education Fund to End Handgun Violence, gun control advocate Josh Sugarmann candidly observed: "The weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weaponsanything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine guncan only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons. In addition, few people can envision a practical use for these guns." So back in 1988, one of the nation's leading gun prohibitionists was banking on public support for restrictions on "semi-automatic assault weapons," not because Americans were informed about the guns in question, but because they were uninformed and likely to remain so. Sugarmann, now executive director of the Violence Policy Center, could rely on the public's continuing confusion because he knew he would have the help of the nation's leading news organizations. During the next few years the major TV networks, newspapers, and magazines persistently misled the public about the capabilities of "assault weapons," falsely implied that the guns have no legitimate use, and ignored the Second Amendment issues at stake. Given the intensity of this misinformation, it is hardly surprising that polls find some 70 percent of Americans support the "assault weapon" ban approved by Congress last year. Many members of the current Congress, including Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole, favor repealing the ban, although that effort was put on hold in the wake of the Oklahoma City bombing. In reporting on the continuing controversy, the national press routinely cites strong public support for the ban. The lead of an April 6 story in TheNew York Times is typical: "A group of House Republicans plans to introduce legislation on Thursday to repeal last year's ban on assault weapons, even as national polls continue to show that a majority of Americans favor it." Having whipped up hysteria about "assault weapons," journalists now point to the results of their alarmist reporting as evi dence that they were right all along. Although big journalism's misleading coverage of this issue can be partly explained by a combination of ignorance and arrogance, it seems clear that hostility toward the right to keep and bear arms has played an important role. From the beginning, stories about "assault weapons" blurred the distinction between semi-automatics and machine guns. Machine guns are automatics: They fire as long as the trigger is held back. The possession of such firearms has been strictly regulated by the federal government since 1934. They have long been banned in some states, and no new automatics have legally entered civilian circulation in the United States since 1986. But semi-automatics, regardless of how much some of them may look like machine guns, fire one shot per trigger pull. Civilians have commonly used them for recreation and self-defense since the turn of the century http://www.reason.com/news/show/29766.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAR Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 You WOULD say that. You dont want anything hampering your plans for world domination. JEW. :lol:MUWAHAHAHA! But now i understand a bit better, assault weapons are in the same catogory as semi-auto weapons. So even a p99 could be lumped in there. Now I at least understand the concern... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russell jones Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 It's beyond the concern of second amendment rights, it's a symptom of the disease of politics. It's easier to sell pointless non-solutions than trying to find real solutions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted February 21, 2007 Author Share Posted February 21, 2007 russell is right. it goes back to the theory that the government can provide a solution to every conceivable problem. the AWB is just another measure moving to the confiscation of private citizens firearms. the AWB doesnt even target the weapons used in crimes. it targets an imaginary bogey-man. assault weapons should be owned by anyone who wants to own one for a number of reasons, but bottom line is protection against invasion from an armies of tyrants foreign or domestic. the first american revolution started when the army of a despot tried to confiscate civilians cutting edge miitary style 'assault' weapons. im sure the next chapter in the revolution handbook of america will be fought when that very thing happens again. only this time the confiscators will be from DC or the UN. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Pubes Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 It's beyond the concern of second amendment rights, it's a symptom of the disease of politics. It's easier to sell pointless non-solutions than trying to find real solutions. politics is all about cosmetics...which is why the huge problems when i was a kid in the 80's are still with us. a huge crumbling facade of pimply, hairy, farty arse with really badly applied foundation trying to hide the fact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tabloid- Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 legalize drugs, and make it available to everyone on the cheap, or work it like food stamps ... that would cut violent crime a lot, and it would put the kibosh on a lot of gang related activity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russell jones Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 no doubt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qawee Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 russell is right. it goes back to the theory that the government can provide a solution to every conceivable problem. the AWB is just another measure moving to the confiscation of private citizens firearms. the AWB doesnt even target the weapons used in crimes. it targets an imaginary bogey-man. assault weapons should be owned by anyone who wants to own one for a number of reasons, but bottom line is protection against invasion from an armies of tyrants foreign or domestic. the first american revolution started when the army of a despot tried to confiscate civilians cutting edge miitary style 'assault' weapons. im sure the next chapter in the revolution handbook of america will be fought when that very thing happens again. only this time the confiscators will be from DC or the UN. not even that, you can just look to what happened in Katrina, who were the people looting dozens of Cadillacs (throw some D's on that bitch) from the dealership? Cops. The same cops confiscating peoples guns and firing on unarmed civilians while Black Water mercenaries protected property of wealthy businessmen with AR15's and M4s, unchecked. These black water folks hold the same status as us, civilians, yet they were allowed to retain their weapons in order to protect the property of the wealthy, while the working class people were systematically disarmed. Bottom line: I don't trust the government enough to let them be the only ones with the guns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russell jones Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Save us Juan... They're arming themselves! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted February 22, 2007 Author Share Posted February 22, 2007 jpfo.org Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rushawn wuan Posted February 24, 2007 Share Posted February 24, 2007 oh shit. a friend of mine was busted with 2 ak47 extended clips and an undisclosed ammount of rounds along with some coke and cash. with this law not in effect yet what would happen in regards to the gun charges? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russell jones Posted February 24, 2007 Share Posted February 24, 2007 depends on how much coke and cash he had. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CACashRefund Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 oh shit. a friend of mine was busted with 2 ak47 extended clips and an undisclosed ammount of rounds along with some coke and cash. with this law not in effect yet what would happen in regards to the gun charges? Whered he get caught? california? If its california theres already a ban on features in rifles such as ak's and high cap mags Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rushawn wuan Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 it happened in oakland ca. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fermentor666 Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-1022 'oh no, the democrats who took control of congress would NEVER think about trying to pass any gun control legislation! they are just trying to impeach bush!' ONE Democrat introduces the bill and you immediatly blame the whole party. Your link still says "introduced", so you don't have any idea how many support it or who supports it. You claim that you do not identify yourself as a Republican, yet you act otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WORDISM45 Posted February 25, 2007 Share Posted February 25, 2007 what makes you think an assault rifle will help you defend yourself against a government that has cruise missiles and aircraft and heavy armored tanks etc? sounds to me like you need some manpads Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.