Govt is going after the low hanging fruit-this time ghost guns

[kbm6893]

Handguns are easier to conceal than rifles. So, should we ban handguns? A Glock 17 in the waistband and a few mags in the back pocket is as much mayhem on tap as a 7" AR and a 30 round mag.

Why do people want them? The forbidden fruit. I don't care for ARs and certainly wouldn't have one today, were it not for gun control advocates screaming about taking them away.



No, it IS legal to make your own firearm. Are you suggesting that only things beyond the skill set of the average person should be legal?

Which stepping stone on the path to a total ban is a step too far?

No, I don't want to ban handguns. Just the untraceable ones you can buy in a kit.

No, I'm not suggesting all things not made by a skilled person be made illegal. Just lethal weapons. . When a skilled person was making them, they invested in machinery, tools, and many hours of practice. Now Joe Hood-Rat is making them and shooting up street corners. Yeah, bag guys are gonna get their weapons anyway. We don't have to make it easy for them. Decent, law abiding people aren't interested in these things. I wouldn't take one if you gave it to me.

AR pistol do the same damage as an AR pistol? Not even close. Some nut in a subway car in Brooklyn opened up with a Glock and several extended magazines. He shot 10 people. None died. .223 rounds do far more damage, short barrel or not.

 

[326MOD10]

One more post and I am done.

I never called it a "Law" I said rule.

I am pretty sure President is an elected spot.

Executive Orders have been around for a long time and, while I agree abused a lot more over the past few years, still exist.

But when it is something I agree with it is okay but when I don't it is tyranny. And that goes both ways.

Like I said before there is no middle ground for rational decisions. It is all "my way" or nothing these days and that sure is working out great.

 

[AlHunt]

Like I said before there is no middle ground for rational decisions. It is all "my way" or nothing these days and that sure is working out great.

I used to think there could be a middle ground on just about any issue. Recent events have proven that incorrect.

Our biggest problem is that the national trust has been broken.

 

[kbm6893]

One more post and I am done.

I never called it a "Law" I said rule.

I am pretty sure President is an elected spot.

Executive Orders have been around for a long time and, while I agree abused a lot more over the past few years, still exist.

But when it is something I agree with it is okay but when I don't it is tyranny. And that goes both ways.

Like I said before there is no middle ground for rational decisions. It is all "my way" or nothing these days and that sure is working out great.

Indeed. If the president issued an EO in favor of gun owners, nobody here would have a problem with it.

 

[Alk8944]

All the items listed should have been illegal under the NFA or GCA at the time they were introduced but the ATF let them slide for years instead of doing their job!!!! Obviously this includes whatever guns which are actually manufactured by persons without a manufacturers license.

The only part I would question would be so-called "ghost guns" on the basis that they cannot be traced. There are millions of pre GCA 68 .22 rifles and shotguns with no serial numbers, wolud they be "ghost guns"? Not to mention the millions of war surplus guns over the past 150 or more years, guns that were never inventoried when released to the market!

Other than the last paragraph, what is the big deal?????

I really don't know why I posted this, at the end of page 3 of a thread where no one will ever read it! Prove me wrong and give me a "like" just so I will know if anyone did read it!!

 

[fordson]

All the items listed should have been illegal under the NFA or GCA at the time they were introduced but the ATF let them slide for years instead of doing their job!!!! Obviously this includes whatever guns which are actually manufactured by persons without a manufacturers license.

The only part I would question would be so-called "ghost guns" on the basis that they cannot be traced. There are millions of pre GCA 68 .22 rifles and shotguns with no serial numbers, wolud they be "ghost guns"? Not to mention the millions of war surplus guns over the past 150 or more years, guns that were never inventoried when released to the market!

Other than the last paragraph, what is the big deal?????

I really don't know why I posted this, at the end of page 3 of a thread where no one will ever read it! Prove me wrong and give me a "like" just so I will know if anyone did read it!!

Clever way to get "likes"

 

[AlHunt]

All the items listed should have been illegal under the NFA or GCA at the time they were introduced but the ATF let them slide for years instead of doing their job!!!! Obviously this includes whatever guns which are actually manufactured by persons without a manufacturers license.

I can't give a "like" to something I vehemently disagree with.

But I did read it.

 

[smithman 10]

Need some links to verify this statement

Tell that to the NYPD -- better than one in 10 guns they've picked up on the street this year at crime scenes are finished Polymer80s or other kit guns -- and not just at "they had a gun" scenes, but murder scenes.

They're very popular with the "I can't pass a background check" meth and crack crowds who use their burner phones and Visa gift cards from traded food stamps to order them.

If true, we have something to talk about.

 

[StakeOut]

The anti gunners stick together no matter what.

The pro gunners are a mixed bag as evidenced here in this thread.

United We Stand,Divided We Fall

Today the Pits,Tomorrow the Wrinkles....then no prunes at all

 

[johngalt]

Indeed. If the president issued an EO in favor of gun owners, nobody here would have a problem with it.

That is likely a hypothesis that will never be tested.

 

[johngalt]

No, I don't want to ban handguns. Just the untraceable ones you can buy in a kit.

No, I'm not suggesting all things not made by a skilled person be made illegal. Just lethal weapons. . When a skilled person was making them, they invested in machinery, tools, and many hours of practice. Now Joe Hood-Rat is making them and shooting up street corners. Yeah, bag guys are gonna get their weapons anyway. We don't have to make it easy for them. Decent, law abiding people aren't interested in these things. I wouldn't take one if you gave it to me.

AR pistol do the same damage as an AR pistol? Not even close. Some nut in a subway car in Brooklyn opened up with a Glock and several extended magazines. He shot 10 people. None died. .223 rounds do far more damage, short barrel or not.

Knives are lethal weapons, lots of knife makers out there. They aren't decent people?

I've yet to see any (convincing) explanation of why I should let criminals define what my rights are.

 

[kbm6893]

Knives are lethal weapons, lots of knife makers out there. They aren't decent people?

I've yet to see any (convincing) explanation of why I should let criminals define what my rights are.

Oh please! You're comparing guns to knives? How about baseball bat makers? Hammer makers? Ironing board makers? They're all lethal too.

What's done is done. Just like bumpstocks and pistol braces, they'll be gone. All the internet posturing won't change that. I can't bring myself to care one iota.

Criminals define what your rights are all the time. Many laws were written after an offense has been committed. Nobody cared about bump stocks until after Vegas. Fully auto weapons were banned due to the gangsters using them against the cops. We used to be able to buy guns through the mail. Nearly every one of the thousands of federal gun laws were written in response to a crime, to say nothing of the state and local laws. You get searched before you fly and what you can bring on the plane because of 9/11. Federal AWB was written and passed based on criminal actions, as politicians never stopped telling us.

 

[Paul in Nevada]

Indeed. If the president issued an EO in favor of gun owners, nobody here would have a problem with it.

An EO in favor of your Constitutional rights? Am I supposed to apply moral relativism and support rules that violate my rights just because I support rules that uphold my rights? This is diseased, disordered thinking.


edit: I may have misunderstood your point and if I did I apologize.

 

[Bozz10mm]

Many laws were written after an offense has been committed. Nobody cared about bump stocks until after Vegas. Fully auto weapons were banned due to the gangsters using them against the cops. We used to be able to buy guns through the mail. Nearly every one of the thousands of federal gun laws were written in response to a crime, to say nothing of the state and local laws. You get searched before you fly and what you can bring on the plane because of 9/11. Federal AWB was written and passed based on criminal actions, as politicians never stopped telling us.

Thank you for listing just a few of the many, many, gun laws that have slowly eroded our 2nd amendment rights over the years. Every new gun control law or rule that is passed slowly eats away at our rights. You say you don't care if they ban ghost guns, bump stocks, or pistol braces. But what happens when it gets to the point that they start coming after your revolvers and bolt action rifles?

 

[kbm6893]

Thank you for listing just a few of the many, many, gun laws that have slowly eroded our 2nd amendment rights over the years. Every new gun control law or rule that is passed slowly eats away at our rights. You say you don't care if they ban ghost guns, bump stocks, or pistol braces. But what happens when it gets to the point that they start coming after your revolvers and bolt action rifles?

I don't believe that will happen, with over 400,000,000 guns in this country. That's not to say that it won't. I don't have a crystal ball. But I'm not gonna worry about it. There are far more pressing things for me to worry about than bumpstocks and pistol braces.

I bought my first AR during the AWB. Colt took the flash hider and the bayonet lug off and renamed the Match Target. I was no less armed and protected. 18 years after that ban ended people still think it had an impact. I shot that gun a lot with 30 round pre-ban mags. I wasn't affected by it in the least, other than higher prices on mags.

That's all these new laws and EO's are: posturing from a politician to get support and votes. More states than ever have CCW permits now. Guns aren't going anywhere. I'll cross that bridge when I come to it.

 

[kbm6893]

An EO in favor of your Constitutional rights? Am I supposed to apply moral relativism and support rules that violate my rights just because I support rules that uphold my rights? This is diseased, disordered thinking.


edit: I may have misunderstood your point and if I did I apologize.

My point was posters here call it tyranny and dictatorship when the president uses an EO against guns, but would cheer it if it was for guns.

And your interpretation of your rights is different than the Supreme Court's interpretation, and their interpretation is really all that matters. That's why we can't mount .50 cal weapons to the roof of our cars or put claymore mines on our lawns. The 2A doesn't allow us to buy Stinger missles.

I don't view outlawing pistol braces, bumpstocks, or now Ghost guns as an infringement of my 2A rights. Those were all created to get around restrictions which I find to be perfectly reasonable, and continuing to fight for them only adds more people to the anti-gun side of the argument. I'm sure there are people here who would say I am on that side, but my 4 guns safes say otherwise.

There are limitations placed on all our constitutional rights. If the spirit of the 2A is to allow a citizen to possess weapons in case he needs to confront a tyrannical government, the four gun safes I have prove I am capable of doing that if the need arises, and there is only one bolt gun in the mix, and it's a .22 I bought for my son to teach him shooting. One look in my safe would cause an anti-gunner to have a heart attack.

 

[AlHunt]

Oh please! You're comparing guns to knives? How about baseball bat makers? Hammer makers? Ironing board makers? They're all lethal too.

The english pretty well took guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens.

Did you that now you can't buy pointy knives in England? Because outlawing guns wasn't enough.

 

[Paul in Nevada]

My point was posters here call it tyranny and dictatorship when the president uses an EO against guns, but would cheer it if it was for guns.

Ah, so I didn't misunderstand your post.

 

[kbm6893]

The english pretty well took guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens.

Did you that now you can't buy pointy knives in England? Because outlawing guns wasn't enough.

Yes. I'm aware of that. This isn't England. Different culture and no 2A, so I really don't waste time worrying about that, either. Gun ownership is through the roof in this country. The politicians throw a bone to the anti-gunners so they get their points and get re-elected, and life will continue on.

 

[StakeOut]

If the Feds would just stay out of the Gun Rights argument and give the whole mess to the individual states then things might be a whole lot less complicated.
Again and again the laws or Executive Orders will have little or no affect on reducing crimes committed with firearms or keeping guns out of the hands of criminals.
It's all about playing to a political base for votes.
If "Ghost Guns" laws were up to your state's legislature and not the Feds how would the law be or not be?Are you happy with your state laws governing firearms?