|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
July 11, 2011, 09:01 AM | #51 | |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
Quote:
|
|
July 11, 2011, 02:54 PM | #52 |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
San Francisco Gate has a story today on one of the apparent first steps the Administration is taking with gun control. They have declared that semi-automatic rifles sold by FFLs in Texas, California, Arizona and New Mexico will be subject to the same multiple sales requirements as handguns.
It will be interesting to see where they have the Congressional authority to make that requirement since the law specifically says "handguns." |
July 11, 2011, 04:00 PM | #53 | ||
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,059
|
Quote:
Quote:
And this will achieve what? After all, Lone Wolf and J&G Sales were reporting these sales, in real time, to the ATF, and the weapons still made it across the border. Or am I missing something?
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
||
July 11, 2011, 04:43 PM | #54 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 6, 2011
Posts: 231
|
Quote:
|
|
July 11, 2011, 04:55 PM | #55 |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
Well Tom, if the federal agency charged with enforcing gun laws can break those laws so easily, clearly we need stricter gun control laws.
Seriously though, you would think that making an extra reporting requirement that seems to have no statutory basis in law and can't help but highlight the idiocy of Fast and Furious wouldn't be the first choice; but I've given up guessing what they'll do next. |
July 11, 2011, 05:17 PM | #56 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,059
|
Quote:
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
July 11, 2011, 05:36 PM | #57 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,720
|
This is a political distraction for his buddy Holder to use as a smoke screen for cover -- because if Holder goes down, he could take O with him, and maybe other senior cabinet members. (imagine if everybody went down in flames except Biden because he was kept out of the loop)
Quote:
__________________
"Everything they do is so dramatic and flamboyant. It just makes me want to set myself on fire!" —Lucille Bluth Last edited by zxcvbob; July 11, 2011 at 05:41 PM. |
|
July 11, 2011, 07:31 PM | #58 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: July 26, 2005
Location: The Bluegrass
Posts: 9,142
|
thallub said:
Quote:
The constitutional "right" has only been recently recognized by the Supreme Court. Litigation abounds about what is and what will be permissible. The Supreme Court has already said some regulation will be allowed. While a treaty may not directly result in handguns being banned, it may certainly impact gun owners a great deal. Like shooting that Eastern European AK-47? Kiss it goodbye as imports of the gun could easily be banned (where are all those nice Chinese Norincos?). All the European guns could be banned. Springfield Armory would probably be forced out of business. All the ammo from both Europe and Mexico could likewise be banned. That's just some of the low hanging fruit. It could get much worse. |
||
July 11, 2011, 09:04 PM | #59 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 3,112
|
Quote:
BTW: The AWB expired in 2004 like it was supposed to and we re-gained the right to carry in national parks. Maybe it's creeping the other way. Last edited by thallub; July 11, 2011 at 09:12 PM. |
|
July 12, 2011, 03:53 AM | #60 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
KyJim, if all it took was a treaty, then why hasn't CIFTA been ratified? It's already signed.
Thallub is correct, IMO. |
July 12, 2011, 08:35 AM | #61 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 13, 2009
Location: NJ
Posts: 1,254
|
Until someone tells us WHAT they plan to do, this is pointless circle talk. You guys can chase your own tails if you want to, I'm pretty sure that's protected in the constitution . Personally I'm not going to fire until I have a target (see gun talk ) .
|
July 12, 2011, 09:05 AM | #62 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 23, 2010
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 1,293
|
Last time I checked fully automatic FN-FAL's, H&K G-3's, AK-47's were not for sale in your typical gunshop. If they are I have been going to the wrong gun shop all these years. I would easily believe that MANY of the weapons Mexican criminals use are stolen or otherwise obtained from Mexican LEO or Military personel and may have been sold or given to Mexico by our government.
|
July 12, 2011, 09:40 AM | #63 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 3,112
|
The US guns to Mexico thing is a myth perpetuated in an effort to force congress to pass another "assault weapons" ban.
Why would a drug lord would have high priced semi-auto AK and AR rifles smuggled into Mexico at a very high prices when he can buy a shipping container full of rock and roll AK 47s on the international arms market for $250 apiece? When the BATFE and/or the media shows a cache weapons confiscated in Mexico; there are AKMs, RPG launchers, grenades and M16 rifles with grenade launchers. This stuff was not smuggled across the US/Mexican border. |
July 12, 2011, 09:46 AM | #64 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 7, 2011
Posts: 173
|
I think people are being a bit paranoid. I'm pretty indifferent when it comes to politics, except when it directly concerns me.
Concerning this, I'll be gone from this hole in a few years so I imagine there will not be any BS passed that will directly affect me in that timespan. |
July 12, 2011, 12:34 PM | #65 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,059
|
Quote:
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
July 12, 2011, 01:25 PM | #66 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 14, 2005
Location: Concord, NH
Posts: 2,723
|
Quote:
|
|
July 12, 2011, 01:40 PM | #67 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Orange, TX
Posts: 3,078
|
ATW525, you may very well find you get an unexpected knock at the door from your good friends at BATF. Wouldn't surprise me to see them punitively investigating legitimate buyers.
|
July 12, 2011, 01:42 PM | #68 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,457
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
||
July 12, 2011, 01:49 PM | #69 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 14, 2005
Location: Concord, NH
Posts: 2,723
|
Quote:
|
|
July 12, 2011, 02:34 PM | #70 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2007
Location: S.E. Minnesota
Posts: 4,720
|
When does this start? I'll be flying down to Texas in a couple of weeks and driving back; I wonder if Carter's Country sells SKS's... (aren't they one of the dealers who ended up briefly in the hot-seat for cooperating with the ATF?)
__________________
"Everything they do is so dramatic and flamboyant. It just makes me want to set myself on fire!" —Lucille Bluth |
July 12, 2011, 02:58 PM | #71 | |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
Quote:
Don't know if they sell SKS rifles; but apparently they are OK with semi-auto detachable mag rifles, so they might. |
|
July 12, 2011, 04:23 PM | #72 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,059
|
Quote:
For the most part, they review the reports and look at patterns. One guy buying a couple of SKS rifles (or decent handguns) won't set off a warning bell. One guy buying ten sub-$200 pistols will.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
July 12, 2011, 04:25 PM | #73 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 17, 2007
Posts: 680
|
Quote:
The UN? Puuuuuleeze.
__________________
Blessed is the man who has nothing to say, and cannot be compelled to say it. |
|
July 12, 2011, 04:37 PM | #74 | |||
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
Quote:
I notice this lets them keep sales information on legitimate purchases about 1 year and 364 days beyond the period they can keep information on other legitimate sales and that the restriction on other purchases through NICS was enacted by Congress. Seems like thin ice to me.. Here is the statute the ATF is citing for authority of the Multiple Sales reporting requirement for rifles: Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
July 12, 2011, 07:34 PM | #75 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Orange, TX
Posts: 3,078
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|