Assault weapons and high cap mags dropped from senate gun bill!

[Tandor]

That's what I call FM (f*cking magic) Tada Mcfly.......

 

[Racechase1]

If the government does a new UBC, call me an outlaw.Yes , they will come for your guns. Doubt it, look through the threads on the board here, they're already trying all over the country.

Good news, the gun and magazine prices will now drop like a stock market crash. For those of you out there who thought they'd make a killing on this, one word,SUCKER!

 

[STEEL CORE]

Ain't over till its over, and how far can you trust them Eh?

 

[jb1911]

You are WRONG! The reason the current background check (which is almost totally useless) is seemingly benign is that only the guns purchased from or through dealers are ran through the system. Those you give your Son's, Daughters, or other relatives or friends are never seen in the system and those in private sales are not in the system.

The cost to "transfer" firearms would quite likely (almost certainly) greatly increase - and soon a "TAX" could / will be added. Not likely huh? Look at all automatic firearms now!

IF THE UNIVERSAL BACKGROUND CHECK IS IMPLEMENTED IT WOULD BASICALLY REGISTER EVERY GUN TRANSFERRED. WHICH MEANS EVERY GUN OWNED BY THE HONEST CITIZENS - NO CRIMINALS WILL EVER TRANSFER ONE LEGALLY!

You would probably not see any repercussions for a few years except the heavy price increase to transfer. But in maybe 30 or 40, when most of the (LEGALLY OWNED GUNS) ONLY HAVE BEEN "REGISTERED". then all it would take is a commie/liberal senate & house to confiscate certain guns. Then we would either lose all our firearms or a revolution would occur.

Won't happen you say? READ HISTORY - if you believe this you probably believed OBAMA and voted for him...

I never said that I was in favor of UBCs, in fact, I'm not in favor of ANY compromise. Where do you get the right to insult me? You don't even know me. Seek counseling for your anger issues.

 

[jb1911]

Ain't over till its over, and how far can you trust them Eh?

You can't trust libtards at all. Feinswine will put her stupid bill back in her top desk drawer and wait for the next gun tragedy or mass killing, then start to drool as she takes the bill back out for the next round of insanity. It's funny that until Sandy Hook there was hardly any talk of new gun laws, it was pretty quiet, like the left had given up. We all know that they never give up on anything. They're like a cancer on society that just keeps trying to destroy the host. Evil never sleeps.

 

[jaybird_123]

Well, with all this "what if" ing going on, let me ask a question. I know a lot of guns the bad guys have, are stolen. But at the same time, a large portion of them are purchased from non-dealers at gun shows. So how are we, I say "we" because a large number of us buy and sell and trade our guns among us, going to keep from selling guns to the bad guys. Not our responsability? What if, the gun you sell to someone, is used to kill a child, a mother, someones dad? We can "what if" all day long. What if Joe Blow down the street from YOU, was a nut-case, and he suddenly get himself a AR-15, and a big old 30 round mag., and you know for sure he got it illigal. Would you report him?

 

[6mm Shoot]

This is good news and bad news. I like to think about the good. I hope that they don't get the bad passed. I am going to keep sending Email to the powers that be to let them know that this is still a no go. I suggest every one do the same thing.

Maybe now prices will come down. One can only hope.

 

[NomadS]

That is good but keep on our Senators and your Representative to fight the Universal Background Check. The amendments can also be tricky. If they try to tag a ban back on as an amendment it might slip through or it might kill the bill.

agreed. This is backdoor registration. It must be stopped. The feds should have no say on transactions that take place fully within a state.

call senators and reps and ask them to explain their position on background checks based on state sovereignty, interstate vs intrastate commerce. Specifically Article I, Section 8, Clause 3: and the tenth amendment.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

You are WRONG! The reason the current background check (which is almost totally useless) is seemingly benign is that only the guns purchased from or through dealers are ran through the system.

Actually, the GUN is never ran through the system at all. The PURCHASER is ran through the system. The specific weapon you are purchasing isn't part of the background check.

Other than NFA weapons, there is no registration. Cars are registered. I can search your name in a database and find all the cars registered to you. There is no similar system for guns.

The closest thing is working backwards. If I have a gun, I can contact the ATF and see which distributor the manufacturer sent it to, then contact them and see which store they sold it to, and then contact the store to check their bound book to see who they sold it to.

 

[hornadylnl]

You can't trust libtards at all. Feinswine will put her stupid bill back in her top desk drawer and wait for the next gun tragedy or mass killing, then start to drool as she takes the bill back out for the next round of insanity. It's funny that until Sandy Hook there was hardly any talk of new gun laws, it was pretty quiet, like the left had given up. We all know that they never give up on anything. They're like a cancer on society that just keeps trying to destroy the host. Evil never sleeps.

This is the part that ticks me off about the Romney voters here. They spent the entire year running up to the last last election saying that if Obama got reelected, a gun ban was guaranteed. Now that he was reelected and the sandy hook incident happened, many of those same people want to say that there's no chance of a ban. It makes a great campaign tool but everybody wants to brush it under the rug now that its costing them more money.

 

[OccasionalSh00ter]

Well, with all this "what if" ing going on, let me ask a question. I know a lot of guns the bad guys have, are stolen. But at the same time, a large portion of them are purchased from non-dealers at gun shows. So how are we, I say "we" because a large number of us buy and sell and trade our guns among us, going to keep from selling guns to the bad guys. Not our responsability? What if, the gun you sell to someone, is used to kill a child, a mother, someones dad? We can "what if" all day long. What if Joe Blow down the street from YOU, was a nut-case, and he suddenly get himself a AR-15, and a big old 30 round mag., and you know for sure he got it illigal. Would you report him?

I will report ANY criminal activity that I come across. Why should I treat the illegal possession of a firearm any differently? In fact, given the importance of the issues at stake, we, the law abiding gun community, should be the most willing to stop illegal activity involving a firearm.
Furthermore, I would like to ask you a question based on something you implied. How would you feel if you sold a car and that person you sold it to used to intentionally run down children waiting to board their school bus?
I contend that an individual bears no moral responsibility in either case if the sale was made in good faith and reasonable due diligence was performed. We must be careful not to fall into the trap that those who would rob our freedom have laid. They encourage all manner of people to indulge in feelings of false guilt. The same tactic is used to pass all sorts of "entitlement" spending.

 

[sparkyfender]

Just a lull in the action. If they keep throwing this crap long enough and frequently enough, some of it is bound to stick.