|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
March 28, 2018, 06:41 PM | #1 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
The Situation in Vermont
https://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/...and/389013002/
This is a touch old but reading elsewhere http://www.wcax.com/content/news/Ver...478080883.html Quote:
The laws have a great deal of surface validity to a general public unfamiliar with the issues as well as those already opposed to gun rights. An effective strategy to turn this around (as we have discussed, sometimes acromoniously) is not looming on the horizon.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
|
March 28, 2018, 08:15 PM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 22, 2016
Posts: 2,192
|
A poison pill amendment? If the new laws are not effective at preventing ______ or reducing specific crime to ________ by a particular date they shall be nullified as too onerous to stand while being ineffective.
Any precedent? |
March 28, 2018, 10:50 PM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 21, 2016
Posts: 629
|
Vermont is a little shady - without going too deep into that, ie Bernie ..
Speaking of the northeast though when a state has "Live Free or Die" on the license plate - that's one I think you count on .. The whole age thing, I wrote at least a couple pieces on it through high school & college, maybe a few. Drives me nuts, is something we really ought to straighten out once and for all.. Drive at 16, adult at 18 and can join the military and take part in most adult things, buy booze at 21 (or probably weed now too I guess?).. But if you negligently run over somebody and kill them at 16, well suddenly you have gained the full adult mental capacity to be charged as an adult for your crime. If we want to make it 21 really ought to be 21 across the board - if you aren't adult enough to buy booze (or own a gun) then I guess you shouldn't be able to join the military or go to prison either. |
March 31, 2018, 12:17 AM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 16, 2013
Posts: 280
|
The magazine capacity ban has me Although I've read that lever-actions and bolt-actions are exempt from it, which raises an interesting conundrum, because there are lever-actions that take AR magazines and even bolt-actions ARs, so such magazines I am assuming them are not illegal to possess, just illegal to use in a semiautomatic rifle.
|
April 1, 2018, 03:32 AM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 26, 2018
Posts: 380
|
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/03/31...ont-rally.html
Read the last few sentences where the Gov promises "you'll get used to it" while blaming mass shootings on guns and magazine size. If VT does away with CCW reciprocity (Constitutional Carry in their case) I will not be skiing there again. |
April 1, 2018, 06:36 AM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 31, 2011
Location: Vermont
Posts: 2,076
|
Scott has repeatedly left himself an 'out' by stating that he needs to have his chief council (lawyers) sign off on the bill before he signs it...
"Scott says he will sign all three bills into law after his attorneys review the legislation for possible technical errors." https://vtdigger.org/2018/03/30/upda...assage-senate/ Though I am not holding my breath, let's hope he finds a way to take that out... |
April 1, 2018, 08:38 AM | #7 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,468
|
Quote:
|
|
April 1, 2018, 08:43 AM | #8 | |||
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,468
|
Quote:
Quote:
Also from the link at Congressionalsportsmen.org: Quote:
|
|||
April 1, 2018, 10:40 AM | #9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
1. The ineffectiveness of previous laws is noted by antigunners. The argument is that existing stocks are sufficient to supply folks who want the item for a very long time. That is why some of them argue for confiscation. Thus, the studies are a double edged sword. The gun world says bans are useless. The antigun world says they need to be draconian.
2. About lever actions, pumps, blah, blah. Making the argument that they are equally dangerous. Cowboy Ed BangBang can shoot a lever action gun so fast that .... Ok - ban them too. You think you made the case for your AR because of Cowboy Ed. NO, you just made the case for banning Cowboy Ed's guns. See Australia. As Joe Scarborough (a self-proclaimed Conservative - now under the power of Mika) said (a touch of a paraphrase) - I don't need a clip of 30 cop killer bullets to go hunting with my son! BTW, someone want to say that 5 is enough and mock as nuts those who want to carry a higher cap gun? Remember those threads?
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
April 3, 2018, 02:07 AM | #10 |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,833
|
I don't mind the people claiming 5 rounds is enough, so long as its a civil discussion and not a rant. Nor do I mind the guy who calculated he needed to carry at least 26 rnds, in order to get the 3-4 COM hits needed....
I really DO mind the people who#1) say that if you don't do what they recommend you're going to die, die DIE!!! but what really ticks me off, are all those idiots (and that's the kindest word I can think of) that, whether involved in shooting or not, decide that they have the legal and moral authority to decide what you and I need, and make illegal anything they don't think we need. Or, more accurately, make illegal what ever it is that they don't like, or that scares them, and hen claim we don't need it...so its ok to ban it by law... The ONLY place they ever apply that rational seems to be about guns, and never about anything else, especially if its something they have and enjoy in their own personal lives. Apply that exact same logic to anything else, and the best you'll get from them is that "deer in the headlights" blank look. Or a complete rejection of the idea because "guns are different" or "that's not the same"... Try telling one of them they don't need fancy coffee, so we should pass a law closing down all the Starbucks, and see what you get for a response. Every once in a while, you'll get the best one, "well, my coffee never killed anyone!!" To which I reply, "right, and neither has my 30rnd magazine!" Telling me the way I ought to live, and what I should and shouldn't own is ok, its your opinion, and I'm free to ignore it at my peril. Making your opinion a law is a completely different matter. lack of "Need" as a reason for making ownership of a spring loaded metal or plastic box a crime, if it exceeds a certain arbitrary size, is simply a stupid argument. Or its arrogance on a grand scale. After all, what are human needs?? After enough calories to prevent starvation, and enough shelter/clothing to prevent death from exposure, everything else in our lives, since mankind began, is wants, not needs. I want to be well fed and comfortable, but as long as I survive, I don't need to be. And so long as I harm no one, I want to own what I want, not what anyone else tells me I don't need.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
April 3, 2018, 07:09 AM | #11 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 2, 2013
Posts: 975
|
Quote:
|
|
April 3, 2018, 08:35 AM | #12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
The antigun laws were ineffective, again, because they did not really impact access.
That's what I said. So access was a non-issue. Confiscation and mandatory buy-backs would have to be part of their program. Even now, some realize that some suggestions are just cosmetic and push for the confiscation. Would it get every gun - no. But that's where they want to go.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
April 4, 2018, 12:07 PM | #13 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2008
Posts: 11,132
|
How does a magazine ban even work? If I have 3 drum magazines, what do I have to do, turn them in or destroy them without being compensated.
|
April 4, 2018, 12:58 PM | #14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 21, 2016
Posts: 629
|
Did anyone read the ban in detail? I read from press releases the mag ban was on the sale of such mags, to me sounded more of a gesture (albeit a terrible one) that would not actually ban ownership or use.
As far as southern NH goes , having MA next door is scary but the majority who move here tend to be looking to escape the police state. Our gun laws have been relaxed lately, but you are right there is always a looming threat. |
April 7, 2018, 12:03 AM | #15 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 26, 2018
Posts: 380
|
Since magazines are not serial numbered and there is no magazine registry in VT, this "ban" is "virtue signaling."
|
April 7, 2018, 03:14 AM | #16 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 10, 2012
Location: San Diego CA
Posts: 6,876
|
Quote:
My point was if this was really about saving lives they would ban handguns not assault rifles . I then took it a few more steps and asked why I don't see them holding press conferences about the 200,000 deaths that occur every year do to medical malpractice or mistakes made in hospitals . If they were to put even half the effort into stopping those they could save many thousands of lives rather then the 200 they MAY save by banning "assault weapons " . But wait there's more . In 2016 , 10,947 people were killed and an untold amount injured as a direct result of alcohol involved incidents . Hmm seems to me if they really wanted to "SAVE LIVES" They could save 11k a year tomorrow by banning alcohol . There's nothing in the constitution saying you shall not infringe upon my beer and wine so It seems like a no brainer , lets save some thousands of lives people . No no lets just stick to the 200 we might save by banning assault weapons . This has never been about saving lives . If it were they'd be doing much more to save them . I don't see it any different then the anti's simply saying those 200 lives we "MIGHT" save are more important then the several thousand we choose to ignore . Dare I say it , " don't all lives matter" So until I see the "whom ever" trying to save all lives with equal effort . I will not trust them to save any of them .
__________________
If Jesus had a gun , he'd probably still be alive ! I almost always write my posts regardless of content in a jovial manor and intent . If that's not how you took it , please try again . Last edited by Metal god; April 7, 2018 at 03:19 AM. |
|
April 11, 2018, 09:05 AM | #17 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 21, 2000
Location: Minnesota, Twin Cities
Posts: 1,076
|
RiffRaff:
Quote:
__________________
"If you love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." Samuel Adams. |
|
|
|