Home› Main Category› Second Amendment/Politics
centermass556
Posts: 3,597 Senior Member
Town votes to ban "Assault Rifles"
centermass556
Posts: 3,597 Senior Member
So, beginning June 13, banned assault weapons in Deerfield will include semiautomatic rifles with a fixed magazine and a capacity to hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition, shotguns with revolving cylinders, and conversion kits from which assault weapons can be assembled. And those are just a few of the firearm varieties banned. The list is long and includes all the following models or duplicates thereof: AK, AKM, AKS, AK-47, AK-74, ARM, MAK90, Misr, NHM 90, NHM 91, SA 85, SA 93, VEPR, AR-10, AR-15, Bushmaster XM15, Armalite M15, Olympic Arms PCR, AR70, Calico Liberty, Dragunov SVD Sniper Rifle, Dragunov SVU, Fabrique NationalFN/FAL, FN/LAR, FNC, Hi-Point Carbine, HK-91, Kel-Tec Sub Rifle, SAR-8, Sturm, Ruger Mini-14, and more.
"To have really lived, you must have almost died. To those who have fought for it, freedom has a flavor the protected will never know."
Replies
Perhaps we should put the NG on the border!!
I assume a court case will result from this??
Useful Idiots
At a grand a day I wonder how they want you to prove you no longer have them in that town.
Just another plot to steal money from residents there.
Why is a unregistered gun costing more money ?
Every day we see more & more reasons why !
Running up the prices on rounds & reloading supply s didn't work so now little tin gods in city s can go nuts with new ordinances...........We fought for this type of treatment ?.
When I first moved to Kansas, there were a few towns/cities that had some stupid local firearms ordinances...like Topeka KS for instance that had a local law that made carrying a magazine (not a firearm) in your vehicle or on your person resulted in a carrying a concealed weapons charge....with every round in the magazine resulting in a separate charge.
The state preemption law put a stop to that kind of nonsense....
Does the FOID identify the firearms someone owns, or just that said person owns one or more firearms?
My question is what will the town do about those who already have firearms that meet the banned list criteria? Will they just hope that everyone voluntarily complies and turn in their guns, or go door to door and take guns from law abiding citizens.
I see a court challenge in the making.
Gun control laws make about as much sense as taking ex-lax to cure a cough.
Why is this still in the editor after I posted it?
The whole place sounds like
an HOA dystopian Reich run riot. Only surprise is, they haven't banned red trash cans too.
https://www.denverpost.com/2018/04/01/boulder-assault-weapons-ban/
Where farting in public is a class b misdemeanor.🚨
What I'm talking about here is NOT a foid. I Guess you have to show the foid before you can buy firearms, but what I'm suggesting here is not specific to firearms. It's merely for anything that requires a background check. It would merely be proof that you have had a back ground check that happens to be permissible and necessary for firearm purchases.
That's coming Old Ron, with more background checks. It's like I've been saying and nobody comments. When they make all gun transactions have a mandatory background check, they will attach it to a 4473, which will be the paper trail to all your guns. Now as things are, if they were to see you bought such and such gun and come to confiscate it you can beg off by saying, "Oh that gun, I sold that to so and so a long time back before he died." But when they close all the loops we will have bonafied Gun Registration. All they have to do is check around at gun shops for 4473s and see who bought an AR, then go get a warrant and bust you. That's the reason the NRA is totally against registration.
Well guess what? If they get their way with these back ground checks which will close the gun show loop and make you fill out a 4473, we're screwed. The only way around it is if we lump all the background checks together in one Federal ID card. A card like that will mean that the back ground check has already been done, so no need to link private (Non Retail) gun transactions to a form 4473.
The problem is, the reason the left wants every transaction to require a background check is because as the law is now, they can tie the back ground check to a form 4473, which IS a form of registration, when all firearm transactions require them. Then there's no way out, they gotcha boxed in. They will in time be able to know exactly what you have. And if you try to say somebody stole them, all they're gonna do is ask where's the police report!
Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
Son that's somebody with nothing to do with his time but keep me in trouble with mom.
But! But! FFL dealers are required to destroy all ATF Form 4473s older than 90 days! Or was that just propaganda shoved up our....Sorry. Down our throats prior to them being required?
Coffee spewed through the nose is hard to clean off of the monitor screen! The City Counsel Woman's statement did it.
Councilwoman Jill Adler Grano proposed, and received support for, consideration of a ban.
She called the proposal a “no-brainer.”
I'm sure she has extensive first hand experience with that not rare enough medical condition.
The "no-brainer's" in Multnomah County, Oregon (smallest county in area with by far the largest number of turds in their liberal cesspool) banned semi-auto "assault rifles" in the early 1980s just in time for the huge Expo-Center gun show in Portland. Not a semi-auto AR or AK to be found. Of course no stinking liberal would be caught dead at a (GASP!) gun show but I was hoping at least one would walk in. The Class 3 dealers had their usual Machine Pistols, Sub Machine Guns, actual Assault Rifles, and Machine guns (including Browning M-2s) displayed and for sale! A few days later the state squashed the county's blatant violation of the pre-emption law.
I already wrote a very polite letter to each involved and the governor