Cajunlawyer: perhaps you can answer this question, with all the politicians talking about "outlawing" "assault weapons", and confiscating them and magizines , how would the government seize private property without compensation?
Is it the 4th or 5th amendment that deals with this, and how have the courts dealt with similar issues? Just asking? Where the heck would they come up with the $$$, they (we) are bankrupt now.
When the "assault weapons ban" was passed in 1994, all existing "assault weapons" were exempt.
There's a clause in the Constitution, Article I, Section 9, (Clause 3) which states, "No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed." And this clause applies more specifically to criminal law.
Just a WAG, but whatever "assault weapons" are out there today, would have to remain legal. The Firearms Act of 1934, which created "Class III" weapons, could probably be amended, requiring registration, etc. And good luck with that. The Feds would never be able to confiscate the weapons, because no one knows where they all are, not even a fraction of them.
The down-side to any of this type legislation, is getting it through the House of Representatives. They're not in the mood, regardless the outcry from the left, to entertain any legislation. They also have two full years for things to cool down.
There's also the cost to implement. In 1934, there were relatively few fully automatic weapons. Today, there are millions of "assault weapons" out there, both in "A4", or similar configuration, and less "menacing-looking". There are also a lot out there being used in high power rifle competition, etc.
The folks who'll make a ton of money from this will be those who make traditional-looking stocks for AR's.
To paraphrase Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto - There will be an AR behind every blade of grass.
