Top Ad

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Question 2, if or rather when the assault weapon ban goes back in place do you ever see it being lifted or it expiring.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Question 2, if or rather when the assault weapon ban goes back in place do you ever see it being lifted or it expiring.

    Question 2, if or rather when the assault weapon ban goes back in place do you ever see it being lifted or it expiring.

  • #2
    I think it will be "temporary" depending on your definition of "temporary". See my answer to the previous question if you wish to have an explanation of my thinking on this.

    Comment


    • #3

      First off, nothing is going to get passed until the economy is turned around.

      Not even liberals would tolerate stalling congress with such an issue right now.

      Reid and Pelosi are both afraid of another piece of legislation as stupid as the awb. They know what it means for reelection.

      That being said, now that they have 60 seats in the senate, the really scary thing is that the ONLY thing stopping them is reelection fears.

      What we need is a calm, well spoken conservative (NOT limbaugh, orielly, or hannity) who understands guns and can go on tv and explain to the non-gun owning public that these regulation has zero correlation to how dangerous a gun really is.

      Comment


      • #4
        Do I ever see it being lifted or it expiring?
        Yes!
        The real problem is, “What is an assault weopon?!”
        Just because it looks like it, doesn’t make it so!

        Mexico is complaining about guns from the US and the Whitehouse says guns from the US are being smuggled into Mexico.

        Question?

        Where in the hell is the serial number of these weapons and why hasn’t there been any arrests made!
        And second, the pictures I have seen are firearms that are old 22’s and bolt action centerfire rifles!
        It’s all a lie just to push the Antigun agenda.

        The reasons you don’t hear about any arrests for these weapons is very simple. The guns that have been given to Mexico by the United States Government have been channeled to the drug cortile by criminal Mexican Federal Employees and Politicians. Also they are receiving Kalashnikov's automatic rifle AK47 7.62 mm assault rifle developed in the Soviet Union by Mikhail Kalashnikov including China, South America and other sources along with explosives and grenades.

        I know for a fact, our Government has been sending 30-06 Ball ammo south of the border along with M1 Garand’s etc to find their way into criminal organizations

        Comment


        • #5


          Clay,

          I wholeheartedly agree that the mexican gun fiasco was drummed up by anti- gun people.

          Do you know where this 90% number comes from?
          - mexican govt raided a cartel warehouse, found over 100000 guns
          - 3800 had traceable serial numbers
          - 90% of those were of US origin
          - the investigation ended there

          Source : NPR ...shockingly

          The thing that pisses me off the most is that blatant BS manipulation of the numbers is being reported as fact by every major news source in the country!

          All that being said, I think it is quite unlikely that the white house is behind all this(excluding hillary and holder from my usage of the word "white house)

          When obama issued his response to the situation he had the perfect opportunity to call for strict anti gun laws.

          But what did he do?

          He spoke specifically about ILLEGAL guns and then sent money to reinforce the border!

          I don't agree with many of the guys policies, but I'm just not convinced he's this super bogey man that everyone thinks he is. He's just another democrat, no better or worse

          Comment


          • #6
            The anti-gunners will use any news headlines to foward their agenda. They saw the Mexican issue as a back door way to restrict firearms in our country. They were not prepared however for the fallout from the majority of Americans who were outraged at the idea of giving up our constitutional rights for the sake of another country. Thankfully plenty of Americans have learned to see right through the BS spewed from these groups, the more unfounded truths they put forth, the better, as they have lost most if not all of their credibility. I wish more news agencies would learn to fact check this crap before they report on it, as it makes their reporters and anchors look like fools to many Americans.

            Comment


            • #7
              There are many Dems that would like to get rid of all guns in private hands. If they get a ban passed it would take 60 good guys in the senate, a pro-gun president, and a pro-gun house to reverse it. All the while the liberal main stream press will be coniving to help the anti's. How you might ask? Well they can and do slant public opinion just by what they choose to report or not report. They don't even have to lie. For example the Post Office is a very safe place to work numerically speaking. You wouldn't believe that to watch the shootings headlined in the press. Another thing, remember all the bad press for Bush 'cause 3000 men died fighting terror. That is a drop in the bucket compared to other wars. About 392,000 died in WWII, around 56,000 Viet Nam, 50,000 Korea. How does that compare? The press has an agenda. If we had lost say 500 in Irag they still would have been all over Bush on that. A soldier is safer in Irag than he would be on the inner city streets of any major US city. Think about how many hundreds of thousands of servicepeople have served there and we have only lost about 4000 to date. Obama could loose many and the number would prabably go unnoticed by the press. In fact since he took over you don't hear anything about it. Don't get me wrong even one of my brothers in arms lost is 1 too many. It's just not what the press would have you believe.

              Comment


              • #8
                I agree with what everyone is saying but wanted to further Clay's comment about what is an Assault Rifle.

                I have an AR-15 that shoots .223 centerfire rifles.

                I have a Beretta Xtrema 2 12 guage that can shoot 3.5 inch shells.

                Both are semi-automatic and I would guess when it came down to it that both can cycle faster than I could aim and squeeze the trigger. I could probably do a hell of alot more *assault* with the shotgun than I could the rifle; yet because of the looks of the AR it would be more likely banned.

                If politicians are making gun laws I think they need to pass a gun competency test first.

                Comment

                Welcome!

                Collapse

                Welcome to Field and Streams's Answers section. Here you will find hunting, fishing, and survival tips from the editors of Field and Stream, as well as recommendations from readers like yourself.

                If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ for information on posting and navigating the forums.

                And don't forget to check out the latest reviews on guns and outdoor gear on fieldandstream.com.

                Right Rail 1

                Collapse

                Top Active Users

                Collapse

                There are no top active users.

                Right Rail 2

                Collapse

                Latest Topics

                Collapse

                Right Rail 3

                Collapse

                Footer Ad

                Collapse
                Working...
                X