|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
January 31, 2013, 11:34 AM | #1 | |
Junior member
Join Date: January 28, 2009
Location: Colorado
Posts: 778
|
Reply from Sen. Michael Bennet
Quote:
|
|
January 31, 2013, 11:47 AM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 15, 2013
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 1,416
|
Uh oh. Another misinformed authority who thinks the 2A is for hunting. Oh, and the gun show loophole too.
But it's for the children so it's OK. |
January 31, 2013, 11:59 AM | #3 |
Member
Join Date: February 22, 2011
Location: Northern CO
Posts: 38
|
I received the same boilerplate reply from him. I was tempted to reply back and let him know that the NFA basically took care of the "restrictions on certain weapons intended for warfare" in 1934. No country's army would go into war using semiautomatic rifles as their main battle rifles.
I haven't decided if I am going to send him a reply seeing as it appears that his mind is made up and I have already voiced my opinion on the matter. |
January 31, 2013, 12:04 PM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 23, 2009
Location: Ft. Collins, CO.
Posts: 398
|
deleted - irrelevent to this forum
|
January 31, 2013, 06:37 PM | #5 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,460
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|