|
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 23, 2016, 07:25 AM | #51 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 24, 2010
Posts: 498
|
Maybe I'm thinking with too broad a view, but this talk about "substantially similar operating system" is the truly big worry IMO.
In reality all cartridge firearms have a 'similar' operating system: a metal firing pin strikes a cartridge within the chamber of a barrel or tube resulting in the ignition of a charge of smokeless powder. As others have said, this isn't a slippery slope: it's a greased cliff. All it will take is for someone to be bold enough to redefine the similarity of all modern cartridge arms. |
July 23, 2016, 08:36 AM | #52 | |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
Quote:
I thought that was a succinct summation of the issue. I have no interest in fighting the government. I, and just about everyone else, can relate to wanting to at least have the choice of being able to fight back. Phrasing it that way, you can defuse the attempt to associate you with wackjobs? "Fight the government? Sure, I guess if reptiloid Nazis became the government I'd fight back <laugh>. That's probably not likely but there are more common threats I'd like to be able to defend myself from..." Although if you want to attempt the scholarly fight the government argument, this link is a must read: http://www.constitution.org/2ll/2ndschol/76holo.htm *And on a tangential matter, I think the deep source of a lot of support for gun control is rooted in the phenomenon described in Jeffrey Snyder's "A Nation of Cowards." Having to seriously contemplate fighting the government or taking responsibility for your own self-defense is an immensely frightening prospect to anyone with a brain. Some people will choose to face their fears and some will deny they have anything to fear to deal with it. If you want to reach out to antis, you have to understand that fear and help them find the courage to overcome it without triggering that propensity for denial. Last edited by Bartholomew Roberts; July 23, 2016 at 08:42 AM. |
|
July 23, 2016, 02:19 PM | #53 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 17, 2012
Posts: 1,085
|
Quote:
This law explicitly targets semi-autos, manuals (though often mechanically identical) are at least specifically exempt. But ancient, obsolete, and ineffective firearms aren't what the RKBA is about, nor are they even adequate to partially fufill its purpose (case in point: Mexican Federales/Narcos vs. civilian Autodefensas with bolt rifles & single shot scatterguns). From that perspective, this power play is the death blow, coup de grace, whatever you want to call it, for gun owners' political power in MA. If it stands, gun owners interested in their freedoms will either leave, or grow disillusioned & fade away. A deal of that has happened already in MA. There will be no more retreating, unless it's to leave MA entirely, it would seem. TCB
__________________
"I don't believe that the men of the distant past were any wiser than we are today. But it does seem that their science and technology were able to accomplish much grander things." -- Alex Rosewater |
|
July 23, 2016, 04:59 PM | #54 |
Member
Join Date: March 12, 2012
Location: Maryland
Posts: 53
|
My brother lives in Connecticut, and he let his handgun license lapse by mistake. This meant he couldn't even purchase handgun ammo until he took classes and became re-certified. In the class was a former service member that just moved to Ct. from another state. He mentioned that he had an AR-15 and a bunch of 30 round mag's he wanted to bring into his new home. The instructor told him he would be a FELON if caught with ANY of those items!.
Massachusetts is simply duplicating the law already instituted in CT. If it weren't for the newly elected Republican governor we voted for here in Maryland, I have no doubt I would find myself in the same boat. Contact your congressperson and let them know how you feel. |
July 23, 2016, 09:37 PM | #55 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 17, 2012
Posts: 1,085
|
Quote:
__________________
"I don't believe that the men of the distant past were any wiser than we are today. But it does seem that their science and technology were able to accomplish much grander things." -- Alex Rosewater |
|
July 24, 2016, 09:29 AM | #56 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,462
|
Quote:
After the Sandy Hook school shooting, Connecticut re-wrote it's assault weapons ban law, essentially reducing the allowable number of "evil" features from two down to one. That made all formerly legal post-ban configuration AR-15s (and similar firearms) into instant "assault weapons." Owners who already had them were given a window of opportunity to register them with the state police. IIRC, the law was passed in April and the deadline was in December. After that, no AR-type firearms falling within the outlawed configuration could be registered in Connecticut or imported into Connecticut. The new law also applied to magazines holding more than 10 rounds. Same window of opportunity to register them; after the deadline, they became contraband. This former service member was not allowed to bring in his AR for the sinmple reason that the law didn't allow him to bring it in, not because anyone reinterpreted an old law to suddenly encompass much more than the law was intended to encompass. |
|
July 24, 2016, 03:39 PM | #57 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Posts: 3,513
|
MA resident here. The biggest issue here isn't even the banning of most semi-autos, and believe me that is a huge issue for me, it's the AG's clear overreach of power. It sets an extremely dangerous precedent. She basically got away with reinterpreting a law that has been on the books for almost 20 years to how she sees fit. I foresee this being overturned, but that takes time, so for the time being it's here to stay. I'll tell you this though, I am damn glad I bought a second lower a couple months back and ordered my upper from BCM before they stopped shipping to MA, which they did as of 2 days ago.
|
July 24, 2016, 06:55 PM | #58 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 8,236
|
Seems like this is the new gun control format:
Step 1. Pass a common sense gun law that can get through the legislature. Step 2. Enforce the law in excess of how the law is written. Step 3. Take a gamble with legal challenges, worst case scenario is that after years in court the decision is not in the state's favor; not to worry, the damage has long since taken hold |
July 25, 2016, 05:11 PM | #59 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 9, 2010
Location: live in a in a house when i'm not in a tent
Posts: 2,483
|
Do you think that this will spur the development of caseless ammo?
Wouldn't a mechanism that is cycling caseless ammo and igniting it w/out hammer or striker be outside of this law? I dunno. Just trying to be hopeful.
__________________
I'm right about the metric system 3/4 of the time. |
July 25, 2016, 07:11 PM | #60 |
Member
Join Date: March 12, 2012
Location: Maryland
Posts: 53
|
Quote:
"The new law also applied to magazines holding more than 10 rounds. Same window of opportunity to register them; after the deadline, they became contraband." Did the state mark those magazines somehow that hold over 10 rounds when owners registered them? How do you prevent someone from buying more at an out-of-state gun show? |
July 25, 2016, 08:21 PM | #61 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 23, 2009
Posts: 3,963
|
Doofus, I guarantee you that caseless ammo would be blasted by the anti-funners as a clear attempt to evade the use of ballistic evidence in linking a shell casing to a gun used in a crime. They would demagogue it for about two weeks and then get it banned, as well. Kind of like the 'plastic gun' issue that was a fraud, as well.
|
July 26, 2016, 11:09 AM | #62 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
Work arounds aren't going to work anymore. Unless you can establish that we have the right to own a good old standard AR, AK, Tavor, etc. rifle - playing with MSR, bullet buttons, compliant NY stocks, blah, blah - are just spitting in the wind.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
July 26, 2016, 04:06 PM | #63 |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,821
|
We feel the right is long established. THEY DON'T. Or rather they feel our right to arms is limited to only those arms that THEY approve of.
And that's the bottom line, until/unless some GOVT agency that THEY respect announces we do have the right, they won't listen. (and even then, I doubt they will stop trying to ban guns) They see GUNS as the problem. We see people shooting each other for fun and profit as the problem. The only time these gun ban advocates have shut up, slowed, or toned down their rhetoric was for a short time after 9/11. A small number of them even admitted that they had been wrong to focus on privately owned firearms as the greatest danger we face. With a couple thousand people dead, many thousands injured, and two of the world's tallest buildings (or was the Twin Towers one building??) destroyed, without a single gun being used, the evidence was pretty obvious. Only took them about a decade to forget that, and a few more years to resume their full court press....
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
July 28, 2016, 06:16 PM | #64 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 2, 2007
Posts: 1,100
|
I agree with Dragline, the assumption of such power by a single person has no part in representative government. That is the definition of tyranny; simply said, despite what the "law" says. Tried such an end run here in Va with concealed carry reciprocity. That went down in flames when the legislature threatened to take away the gov.'s budget for security personnel. Ended up biting McAwful in the butt. Seems the only recourse left to those in Mass. is to elect those who will stand up for the right to have weapons. I think we all can agree that opposing tyranny is one of the primary reasons the right to keep and bear arms was included in the Constitution. Funny thing is, you don't need it until it is taken away.
|
July 28, 2016, 06:33 PM | #65 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 16, 2013
Posts: 280
|
What is needed is an open-carry rally of thousands of people carrying ARs in say Boston. Peaceful carry, but I mean the police couldn't possibly arrest thousands of people. Or if not open-carry, just thousands of protesters period.
|
July 29, 2016, 07:34 PM | #66 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 30, 2010
Posts: 3,513
|
Quote:
|
|
August 1, 2016, 09:09 AM | #67 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 2, 2013
Posts: 975
|
Quote:
|
|
August 3, 2016, 10:32 AM | #68 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2008
Posts: 11,132
|
Quote:
|
|
August 3, 2016, 07:09 PM | #69 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 6, 2002
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 271
|
To make matters worse the MA Speaker of the House will not bring forward legislation filed to reverse what the AG has done. He's about as left as you can get, so this isn't really a surprise.
Another turn of events is that the AG is sending letters to MA firearms and parts manufacturers demanding records. Not really sure what that's all about, but it can't be good for us. |
|
|