Armor piercing rifles?

[Amici]

Such legislation is suposedly targeted at rifles firing the .50 MG round but I'm sure they'd take whatever they else they could include.

That might be the INITIAL definition, as "no-one needs a .50 BMG sniper rifle." This will give the Fudds a false sense of security and distract other gunners, while making it appear to Jane Soccermom that the legislature is Keeping Her Family Safe.

That done, the scope (if you will) of the ban will expand to the point where anything with optics capable of discharging a projectile will be labeled a "deadly sniper rifle" and declared illegal to own.

The gun-grabbers have lots of time and NOTHING to lose, and will come back again and again and again.

 

[walkinghorse]

That might be the INITIAL definition, as "no-one needs a .50 BMG sniper rifle." This will give the Fudds a false sense of security and distract other gunners, while making it appear to Jane Soccermom that the legislature is Keeping Her Family Safe.

That done, the scope (if you will) of the ban will expand to the point where anything with optics capable of discharging a projectile will be labeled a "deadly sniper rifle" and declared illegal to own.

The gun-grabbers have lots of time and NOTHING to lose, and will come back again and again and again.

Wasn't the press calling that scum Malvo a 'sniper' cause he used a rifle?
Can't remember if he had optics of some sort on the rifle or not.

 

[Amici]

Wasn't the press calling that scum Malvo a 'sniper' cause he used a rifle?
Can't remember if he had optics of some sort on the rifle or not.

Yes. Technically, he was. To a REAL sniper, he was just a homicidal poser.

Note that most of the shots were at fairly close range and taken while hiding in the trunk of a car, shooting through a peephole.

No ghillie suit required.

 

[N_itis]

Most rifles. Depends on the armor.

Exactly.

The proposed legislation that immediately came to my mind was the attempt to ban "cop killer" bullets...anything that could penetrate "unreinforced" kevlar body armor. In which case, we would all have to say goodbye to our "hunting" rifles. But, wait, the gun grabbers love "hunters." At least they love the ones who are too dumb to see the real Agenda.

 

[PDL]

Be careful what you envision. One of those butt heads is going to suggest that only the firearms of the 1700's are covered by the constitution.

(As a side issue, even if you bought the bs about a militia, nothing in the 2nd says you have to be a member of one.)

 

[Amici]

Be careful what you envision. One of those butt heads is going to suggest that only the firearms of the 1700's are covered by the [C]onstitution.

In which case no communication by phone, radio, tv or the internet is protected by the First or Fourth Amendments.

As cars, trains and planes didn't exist, any vehicle more advanced than a buggy can be stopped and searched for any (read: no) reason.

No religion not existing at or derived from one existing in 1787 is protected by the First Amendment.

We can have fun playing the "no modern weapons" game.

 

[Marshall 357]

If they worried about our economy as much as they worry about our guns,we would not be in a recession .

 

[Spotteddog]

I heard a comparison of both sides of several issues described as,
"Conservatives want to control what's done in the bedroom".
But
"Liberals want to control what's done in the,
Kitchen,
Garage,
Work place,
Highways,
Banks,
Atmosphere,
Planet,
And if allowed to, your Solar System!
What you
Smoke,
Eat and
Drive.
But! They'll defend to the death someone's right to do absolutely ANYTHING in their bedroom.

 

[TXbug]

Any rifle other than a .22 or a BB gun, will penetrate commonly used body armor.

 

[Amici]

Any rifle other than a .22 or a BB gun, will penetrate commonly used body armor.

I think .30 Carbine would fail miserably. And .45-70 would probably not penetrate, but the impact would cause cardiac bruising.

 

[wbraswell]

I heard a comparison of both sides of several issues described as,
"Conservatives want to control what's done in the bedroom".
But
"Liberals want to control what's done in the,
Kitchen,
Garage,
Work place,
Highways,
Banks,
Atmosphere,
Planet,
And if allowed to, your Solar System!
What you
Smoke,
Eat and
Drive.
But! They'll defend to the death someone's right to do absolutely ANYTHING in their bedroom.

You forgot the bathroom.

 

[PDL]

In which case no communication by phone, radio, tv or the internet is protected by the First or Fourth Amendments.

As cars, trains and planes didn't exist, any vehicle more advanced than a buggy can be stopped and searched for any (read: no) reason.

No religion not existing at or derived from one existing in 1787 is protected by the First Amendment.

We can have fun playing the "no modern weapons" game.

I'm sure you realize that facts never bothered the banners and they're already trying to say the 2nd doesn't apply to the states. And the illegal DWI checks aren't against the 4th amendment 'cause they're safety check points. And miranda warnings aren't required when questioning a DWI suspect, cause they're not committing a crime, it's a traffic violation.
Sorry for the rant, just too literal for my own good.

To the orriginal question though, the reason they're now terming them armor piercing refles is that they wanted to ban all .50 cal weapons. That is untill someone woke them up to the fact that a 12 ga. shotgun would also be banned.

 

[MajorGeneralMontyM]

I dont think the SC is going that way. I think the 2nd will apply to the Sates just like all the rest. The rub is the " reasonable" restrictions the States will impose. But a little home rule isnt bad since voters actually have a right to vote for somebody else if they dont like what their legislators are doing. What a novel concept!
As for check points, they are subject to the 4th amendment and the locations have to meet standards that are not considered arbitrary. Its a small intrusion considering your in your car. Many states have applied the miranda warnings to DWI suspects once the officer has probable cause to believe the person is intoxicated.