Will the 15-22 fall under an AWB?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ever notice "most" of these shootings are done by the Mentally Ill that don't get proper treatment ????? WHERE is the Mental Health system hiding ??? BLAME THE SYSTEM for NOT helping these people that need treatment and only get turned away.
 
For those who may not have watched the various news conferences by the Connecticut State Police, in every single one the spokesman kept referring to multiple, high capacity magazines and hundreds of rounds of "deadly" ammunition.

CSP has been trying for years to get mag restrictions passed, as well as making printing or other accidental exposure of a handgun a FELONY, with severe fines and prison time. As an organization, the CSP is very anti-gun, although individual troopers are very pro-gun.
 
Ever notice "most" of these shootings are done by the Mentally Ill that don't get proper treatment ????? WHERE is the Mental Health system hiding ??? BLAME THE SYSTEM for NOT helping these people that need treatment and only get turned away.

The thing that scares me is the possibility of requiring mental exams to purchase/posses a firearm. It's already being tried on veterans.
 
Here's the only thing I can see making a difference. Training, HEAVILY, three or four persons of each school, to carry and use their pistol in their school. Using the school and sim rounds on a weekend each month, make them train atleast every other month in the school while it's empty of course. Making sure they are comfortable with their surroundings, and with clearing rooms, and working together. Texas is already tossing around the idea of arming some of their teachers.

We cannot rely on a law to make a law breaker obey the law. We must rely on each other to protect each other.

I know I didn't deploy twice to protect the right of congress nor anyone else to strip or alter our rights. I fought to protect our rights as they stand, and in hopes that they would get better.
 
Here, Here

Here's the only thing I can see making a difference. Training, HEAVILY, three or four persons of each school, to carry and use their pistol in their school. Using the school and sim rounds on a weekend each month, make them train atleast every other month in the school while it's empty of course. Making sure they are comfortable with their surroundings, and with clearing rooms, and working together. Texas is already tossing around the idea of arming some of their teachers.

We cannot rely on a law to make a law breaker obey the law. We must rely on each other to protect each other.

I know I didn't deploy twice to protect the right of congress nor anyone else to strip or alter our rights. I fought to protect our rights as they stand, and in hopes that they would get better.

Very well stated!
 
The thing that scares me is the possibility of requiring mental exams to purchase/posses a firearm. It's already being tried on veterans.

Must be a small trial area, I've not had, nor have any of my other vet buddies, any inkling of a required mental exam to purchase. Standard background check which actually went faster because of my veteran status.
 
Under the previous "assault weapons ban" there were about 900 exemptions. Sen. Feinstein says she'll introduce her bill in January and will seek to ban "assault weapons" (which could mean everything from a pea shooter to an elephant gun) and limit mags to 10, but it wouldn't be made retroactive; the actual language of her proposed legislation is not yet available as far as I know. If Di Fi and the anti-gun crowd get their way, however, the U.S. is headed the way of Australia, which has clamped down big-time on gun rights. google Australian gun laws to read about the severe restrictions on gun ownership in what was once a rugged frontier-loving nation.
 
Last edited:
Must be a small trial area, I've not had, nor have any of my other vet buddies, any inkling of a required mental exam to purchase. Standard background check which actually went faster because of my veteran status.

Let me restate that - congress is debating that portion of a bill regarding veteran affairs. It is NOT a program in operation.
 
Boys,

I don't like, for the most part, what I am reading here. I have a LOT of guns. Four safes. Now are ya'll telling me that if the dope headed, drug dealin kid that lives down the road from Charlie Sherrill breaks into my house, breaks into one of my fireproof safes with a cuttin torch and goes out and does harm with my Marlin Camp Carbine 9 that I will be responsible? A couple of you writers appear to be falling into the "trap". "Lets panic and give in and maybe they will go away." NOT. WON'T HAPPEN. I suggest you look at another remedy.

I have been around a long time. Don';t know a whole lot, but I know this type of thinking is not gonna cut it.

If you've taken the needed steps and some jack-wagon broke into your safe then you're off the hook.

BUT, if the guy next door had his stolen from his closet and a crime is committed with that gun....well....he should make the best of Club Fed.

After the word gets out that the law is being enforced people will be running to the local safe outlet.......to everyones benefit.
 
Under the previous "assault weapons ban" there were about 900 exemptions. Sen. Feinstein says she'll introduce her bill in January and will seek to ban "assault weapons" (which could mean everything from a pea shooter to an elephant gun) and limit mags to 10, but the actual language of her proposed legislation is not yet available as far as I know. If Di Fi and the anti-gun crowd get their way, however, the U.S. is headed the way of Australia, which has clamped down big-time on gun rights. google Australian gun rights to read about the severe restrictions on gun ownership in what was once a frontier lover's nation.

Did Australia have an RTKBA amendment in there constitution? Or was it more like England? Someone please correct me if I don't have this right, but I'm pretty sure with England, nothing like our 2A existed and so it was easier to impose the laws they have.
 
BUT, if the guy next door had his stolen from his closet and a crime is committed with that gun....well....he should make the best of Club Fed.

That is the law in Connecticut - you are liable for what happens with a non-secured firearm.
 
BUT, if the guy next door had his stolen from his closet and a crime is committed with that gun....well....he should make the best of Club Fed.

YES! The real criminals who steal should be protected and we should jail the victims who have something stolen from their house!


Geesh.......:mad:


Did you really type that someone who has a gun STOLEN FROM THEM should be sent to prison?????:eek:

Yes, it wasn't the thief's fault, it was the victim's fault.

TOS here keep me from saying what I really want to say!


For you guys who think every gun should be kept locked up, I guess you liked DC's old laws which were ruled unconstitutional.


Pogo said it right on: "We have met the enemy and he is us!"
 
+1

I like it, although I would not put a limit on the number of teachers I would arm....the more that are willing the better!!
Most definitely, however, you would be likely to get three or four. But the reason I start with three or four is because of the idea of outnumbering that the army uses. We should have three soldiers to every soldier they have. And you are likely to have one person, not four causing a problem.
 
Did Australia have an RTKBA amendment in there constitution? Or was it more like England? Someone please correct me if I don't have this right, but I'm pretty sure with England, nothing like our 2A existed and so it was easier to impose the laws they have.

You are correct; neither country has any constitutional right to even possess a firearm, much less actually carry one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top