Does anyone find the similarities between the '94 Clinton Gun Ban(aka Assault Weapons Ban) and the '86 legislation that banned new manufacture for the public, importation for the public('68?) and registration by the public odd? By the same logic that shot down(pun intended)
the '94 ban, the '86 ban needs to go as well. Neither truly banned anything it only served to regulate the gun industry in a way congresses powers were never intended to be used. An attempt to legislate intent/mind state of the user. Both laws caused a making frenzy and then freeze of an entire industry in it's tracks with the stroke of a pen. When they(gov) began to regulate certain weapons in the '30s you only had to register them to be legal(Mg,short barreled rifles and shotguns,suppressors,etc),then in '86, no new registration of machine guns(sbrs and everything else were still able to be registered). The features that made assault weapons sooooooooooooo dangerous (bayonet lugs, flash reducers, retractable stocks, full capacity magazines) were so evil/offensive that you could not even register with the gov. to make one( like you could a sbr)after the hoops and red tape !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Basically the gov. believed that bayonet lugs, retracable stocks and full capacity magazines are as "suitable for crime" as machine guns and need to be off the civie market..........
Really makes you wonder what they say behind our back if this is what they say to our face........Criminals shouldn't have these = so take it from the American public .......American public must be = to the criminals
