PDA

View Full Version : another PR blitz


bwiese
03-08-2006, 12:27 PM
Another media blast, very similar to last week's - slight rephrasing, number up to "approximately 11,000".

We'll see what happens. I may need to change PR newswire services if this keeps going.

ppreston
03-08-2006, 12:53 PM
California AG Bill Lockyer Inaction Allows 11,000
New Assault Weapon Frames into California


Official List of Banned AR15 & AK47 Series Rifles Not Updated In Over 5 Years

California AG Bill Lockyer has failed to update the “Kasler list” of banned assault weapons for over five years. This has allowed approximately 11,000 new unlisted AR15 and AK47 “series” firearm frames to be legally purchased in California since mid-December. These frames are being built into legal, operational firearms differing from banned assault weapons only by make and model names, and the lack of a 99-cent plastic pistol grip.


San Jose, CA • March 9, 2006 — California gun owners have discovered that state Attorney General Bill Lockyer – running for state Treasurer in 2006 – has not updated the “Kasler list” of banned AR15 and AK47 series assault weapons since late 2000. The June 2001 California Supreme Court Harrott decision states “series” assault weapons must be specifically identified in California regulatory code by the AG’s Department of Justice before they can be banned from further sale (and which are then subject to further regulatory and registration processes).

In just the last 11 weeks approximately 11,000 frames – called receivers – of unlisted AR and AK series weapons have been legally sold by licensed gun dealers throughout the state. (State law requires such sales to be treated as any other firearm sales: sales must be performed at licensed dealers, with 10-day waiting periods and ID/background checks.) Letters from Lockyer’s Deputy AG, Alison Merrilees, confirm the legality of the sale and possession of these “off-list receivers”.

California gun owners are now building these “off-list” AR15 frames into legal, operational rifles which differ only from the Penal Code generic assault weapon definition by the absence of a 99-cent plastic pistol grip. Other owners affix 10-round nondetachable magazines to these frames, again not violating the generic assault weapons definition. Off-list AK47 receivers can also be legally constructed into manually-cycled non-semiautomatic rifles by merely not installing a gas piston.

The recent intense interest in these off-list AR15 and AK47 receivers developed due to the national popularity of these sport-utility rifle platforms, in combination with inaction by the California AG’s office and the 2004 sunset of the Federal assault weapons ban. Many Californians wish to exploit this ability to use these modified rifle platforms in state, while being able to fully configure these rifles with their standard features whenever they travel outside California.

Technical gun law issues have proven to be a particularly weak point in Lockyer’s administration. Just last year, over four thousand Walther/Smith & Wesson target pistols already sold to Californians had to be recalled and retrofitted: Lockyer’s DOJ had certified them to be “safe handguns” and approved for retail sale, even though they had a banned assault weapons feature at the time of certification.

ArmedBear
03-08-2006, 1:00 PM
What exactly is this supposed to accomplish?

Dont Tread on Me
03-08-2006, 1:02 PM
Bill - thanks and again, I hope I get to buy you a beer someday.

I agree that we've hit a sticking point with the DOJ. We need to get them to list.

bwiese
03-08-2006, 1:10 PM
What exactly is this supposed to accomplish?

Staving off embarassment by listing new items.

ArmedBear
03-08-2006, 1:16 PM
Why?

What do we REALLY care if he lists them?

If the things get listed, I might have to get a $%^# FAB10 to shoot on BLM and NF land, and then it can't be converted to .22LR or other neato calibers.

Oh, but I can have an "assault rifle" (with one different part changed out) that I can haul to the range in a locked case, pay money and shoot slow-fire?

I'm not trying to be a jerk. I'm just wondering, why push it? So that moonbat Bill gets the Democrat-controlled anti-gun legislature to ban everything from Mini-14's to black powder pistols, in order to save political face?

Maybe I don't understand the game.

Is this some way to nullify the whole ban through legal means?

Or are we just preventing the next group of people from buying their lowers next year so we can feel good about paying $200 for something that's worth $95?

Sorry if this ground has been covered. But I'm getting really confused.

ohsmily
03-08-2006, 1:22 PM
Why?

What do we REALLY care if he lists them?

If the things get listed, I might have to get a $%^# FAB10 to shoot on BLM and NF land, and then it can't be converted to .22LR or other neato calibers.

Oh, but I can have an "assault rifle" (with one different part changed out) that I can haul to the range in a locked case, pay money and shoot slow-fire?

I'm not trying to be a jerk. I'm just wondering, why push it? So that moonbat Bill gets the Democrat-controlled anti-gun legislature to ban everything from Mini-14's to black powder pistols, in order to save political face?

Maybe I don't understand the game.

Is this some way to nullify the whole ban through legal means?

Or are we just preventing the next group of people from buying their lowers next year so we can feel good about paying $200 for something that's worth $95?

Sorry if this ground has been covered. But I'm getting really confused.

These are going to be permanently stopped from coming into the state sometime in the next year or 2 at the most by new legislation PERIOD

So, if they are going to be stopped anyway, it would be NICE (very nice), if the DOJ did what it was supposed to do and update the list so we can build these into SB23 AW's.

So, don't labor under the illusion that if this stays quiet, nothing will happen...something IS going to happen....this will be in the form of new legislation that will somehow stop these lowers from being DROSed, listed or not.

bwiese
03-08-2006, 1:26 PM
ohsmily..

Thanks, good summary.

We just want the listing to run ahead of more-than-likely-anyway legislation.

Steve G
03-08-2006, 1:28 PM
So, if they are going to be stopped anyway, it would be NICE (very nice), if the DOJ did what it was supposed to do and update the list so we can build these into SB23 AW's.

Not gonna happen ever in California, I don't know why some of you are giving false hope to people that don't understand the laws.

ArmedBear
03-08-2006, 1:29 PM
These are going to be permanently stopped from coming into the state sometime in the next year or 2 at the most by new legislation PERIOD

So, if they are going to be stopped anyway, it would be NICE (very nice), if the DOJ did what it was supposed to do and update the list so we can build these into SB23 AW's.

So, don't labor under the illusion that if this stays quiet, nothing will happen...something IS going to happen....this will be in the form of new legislation that will somehow stop these lowers from being DROSed, listed or not.

Sure. But what's the rush? Why not buy and build a few more over the next year or 2? Not everyone has a few grand to spend right away.

When you change out the magazine release, what will you do with the gun? It'll look nice in the closet.

You can't hunt with it, shoot it on public land, or even carry it without a locked case.

As it stands now, you can do those things and you can plink in AZ or NV with a detachable magazine.

ArmedBear
03-08-2006, 1:30 PM
We just want the listing to run ahead of more-than-likely-anyway legislation.

To prevent a Class 4 problem? That would make sense. Maybe I'm starting to get it.

ALTSEC972
03-08-2006, 1:31 PM
PLEASE DO SOME RESEARCH ON THESE BAORDS. THIS HAS BEEN COVERED TIME AND AGAIN. IN FACT, YOU CAN FIND SOME OF THIS AT THE RED LINK AT THE TOP RIGHT OF EVERY PAGE ON THIS SITE "CALIFORNIA AR/AK "SERIES" ASSAULT WEAPON FAQ" http://www.calguns.net/a_california_arak.htm

If these unlisted lowers become listed, it is more than likely that we will get AW permits from the DOJ, (provided we register them) which will give us the ability to legally own new AW's in the state. No one knows for sure how this is all going to work out, and it may take a bunch of legal wrangling and suing to get this accomplished, but if Bill and others didn't take the time (and $$$) to make the media and public aware of this, then the list would never get updated, and/or there would never be any public pressure to bear on the AG, and CA DOJ.

thats it in a nutshell, I guess.

bwiese
03-08-2006, 1:32 PM
Not gonna happen ever in California, I don't know why some of you are giving false hope to people that don't understand the laws.

Sounds like you're a newbie here. This has been discussed quite a bit before.

There is a reasonable chance that, if timing goes right and these are listed, we can have a full AW - recent DOJ memo notwithstanding.

bwiese
03-08-2006, 1:33 PM
To prevent a Class 4 problem? That would make sense. Maybe I'm starting to get it.

Ding! Give that man a bag of ammo! ;)

bwiese
03-08-2006, 1:37 PM
Sure. But what's the rush? Why not buy and build a few more over the next year or 2? Not everyone has a few grand to spend right away.

Besides the immediacy of legal timing issues involved (against prospective legislation), folks that wanted these got these already.

We can't wait for the laggards/impoverished. If those folks really valued this, they'd've had thier off-list lowers by now.


When you change out the magazine release, what will you do with the gun? It'll look nice in the closet.

Um, if reg'd as an AW there's no need to keep it in the closet!

You can't hunt with it, shoot it on public land, or even carry it without a locked case.

Those are general AW restrictions - locked case & specific authorized destination - that have been in place in the last 15 years.

Actually, you can hunt with AWs and/or use it on certain public lands (BLM land, etc.)



As it stands now, you can do those things and you can plink in AZ or NV with a detachable magazine.

Yes, and if our ducks line up nicely and with a bit of luck, perhaps in California too!

ALTSEC972
03-08-2006, 1:40 PM
Class 4 problem? How about Class 4 joke!

I want them listed ASAP.... I want to help test the courts/ state/ CA DOJ. (but I sure as hell will follow the laws to a tee leading up to it). I personally cannot see how we (& our off-list lowers) could fall into a calssification of firearm that doesn't even exist when we purchase them...... But hey, if they can support an "after the fact" floor excise tax on tobacco products, and the courts can uphold it, then I'm not too sure how this will really work out.... even though we may have legal pillars to stand on, who really knows for sure.

ArmedBear
03-08-2006, 1:41 PM
So right now, with an unlisted lower, we can build an AR and use it wherever we want with a .22LR upper or a Sporting Conversions Maglok, or fully-assembled out of state.

In theory, pending inevitable court battles, we can get new AW licenses with our new lowers, and then we can't use the guns for much outside a private range, if they get listed. We gain something and we lose something, especially those of us who like to build things.

If the AG thinks there's something to gain by it, he might list them AND go to the legislature and get the import of UPPERS banned, as well as magazines and any other part. This is not inconceivable or even unlikely. It becomes orders of magnitude more likely if this gains a lot of public attention. Note that dummy grenades, many kids' cap guns, etc. can't be brought into California. CA could easily make it illegal to import or make an AR trigger, even.

So we are certainly risking the ability to build rifles at all, if this happens.

But I'm not as up on the game as you are, so maybe I'm missing something really important here.

TonyM
03-08-2006, 1:46 PM
You can't ...... shoot it on public land


Yes you can.

ohsmily
03-08-2006, 1:47 PM
Not gonna happen ever in California, I don't know why some of you are giving false hope to people that don't understand the laws.

Do YOU understand the laws? What we are pursuing is PART of current law. What we are TRYING to avoid is a CHANGE to the current law (new legislation).

It is evident by your brief and uninformed statement that YOU don't understand the laws.

There are very well-read individuals AND lawyers who have analyzed this situation. They understand it and under current law there is more than a good chance that IF (big IF) the list is updated, we can build SB23 AW's. Bill's press is intended to compel adding to the list rather than delaying till legislation which will ensure that these can't be built into SB23 AW's.

So, new guy, read MORE, and hurl misinformation around LESS.

ALTSEC972
03-08-2006, 1:50 PM
not so true Armedbear....

We will lose very little if they get listed... and we will gain tons!

Let the AG go to the legislature... let him admit that this court ruling got handed down YEARS AGO, because some lazy person wrote the law in the manner they did, and did not list every single AK and AR variant. he has decided to drag his feet for all this time, and do nothing about it!

I really want him to speak publicly about this.... Especially when he is trying to get elected to a slightly higher office...... You know, the elections are not too far down the road.

Aside from all of that, all we have to buy now, is the lowers... a couple hundered bucks per lower, (give or take) is not THOUSANDS PER GUN NOW! And if people miss out on this, than they ca always buy whatever lowers have yet to be listed next time around.

Remember there are tons of MFG's, and thousands of makes and models. Several are bound to fall through the cracks each time they update the list.

bwiese
03-08-2006, 1:51 PM
So right now, with an unlisted lower, we can build an AR and use it wherever we want with a .22LR upper or a Sporting Conversions Maglok, or fully-assembled out of state.

Yup.

In theory, pending inevitable court battles, we can get new AW licenses with our new lowers, and then we can't use the guns for much outside a private range, if they get listed. We gain something and we lose something, especially those of us who like to build things.

Not permits or licenses, but ability/requirement to be registered AWs. (There is a difference.)


If the AG thinks there's something to gain by it, he might list them AND go to the legislature and get the import of UPPERS banned, as well as magazines and any other part. This is not inconceivable or even unlikely. It becomes orders of magnitude more likely if this gains a lot of public attention.

Do you think if we promise to play nice that they won't try this stuff anyway?
There's apparently already semiauto stuff afoot in legislative hallways even before all this stuff started. Timidity will not buy us anything: for once we have a chance to be seized, and that likely won't make things worse.

Best to do this now, anyway, with a nominally Republican gov. Parts ban won't go - esp as it requires money to enforce.

This whole furor will only likely ast this year anyway. There WILL be legislation written to address off-list lowers. It might even be signed by the gov.

So we are certainly risking the ability to build rifles at all, if this happens.

I don't think homebuilt rifles will be at general risk. There will always be continuing attacks on semiautos, regardless of activity here.

Frankly the most dangerous thing coming is ammo marking like SB357. It still could come alive again as it's a 2-year bill.


But I'm not as up on the game as you are, so maybe I'm missing something really important here.

We're just exploiting an opportunity, there's a good upside, and relatively little downside.

ArmedBear
03-08-2006, 1:53 PM
Thanks! I feel better about it, then.

pilotmadrat
03-08-2006, 1:55 PM
Why does everybody think further legislation is assured? From my observations the political tide may be shifting a bit. I think they will have a very hard time getting new and more restrictive legislation through. This whole "off-list" issue has helped to show what a joke these laws are.

Get them to update the list, then new manufactures and models will pop up. Let them chase there tails more. The main reason they have not published is they realized it's a hopeless situation.

2nd amendment rights groups have only been getting stronger the last 5 years, and data showing the ineffectiveness of gun control is piling up. Look at Canada there anti-gun PM just got voted out of office, partly because his gun control schemas did not and will never work.

If they try to pass new legislation then we must all fight it tooth and nail. The AG enforces law, he does NOT make it. I think it is a conflict of interest for the AG or any law enforcement group to take any stance on legislation. They should do there job and keep there personal opinions out of public view.

The more publicity this gets the better.

My $0.02

ArmedBear
03-08-2006, 2:00 PM
pilot-

I think California is getting "bluer" as the libertarian and conservative types are leaving for neighboring states, and young "progressives" are the only ones moving in. This is not a US issue; it's a CA issue. CA is becoming more and more a state full of GFW moonbats.

I HATE pessimism, but statistics and the last election show this.

But I think Bill et al. are right that this has to go to court, not the legislature, ASAP.

bwiese
03-08-2006, 2:08 PM
Why does everybody think further legislation is assured? From my observations the political tide may be shifting a bit. I think they will have a very hard time getting new and more restrictive legislation through. This whole "off-list" issue has helped to show what a joke these laws are.

Um it's not as good as it seems.... we have demographics running against us for specific things, though that may not play for RKBA and may run in our favor. (People broadly support RKBA conceptually except in specific details.)

Smart informed people (gun lawyers etc) have told me:

off-list lower purchases in Dec triggered legislative interest;
there was already attention being paid to semiautos in general before all this;



Get them to update the list, then new manufactures and models will pop up. Let them chase there tails more. The main reason they have not published is they realized it's a hopeless situation.

No, actually that's achievable. They don't need 100% control, just 97%.
They can scan Gun List etc and have all the new commercial brands listed faster than the rollmarks can change. Sure a few might sneak thru.


The AG enforces law, he does NOT make it. I think it is a conflict of interest for the AG or any law enforcement group to take any stance on legislation. They should do there job and keep there personal opinions out of public view.

Absolutely. So if/when the Feb 1 memo becomes 'active' due to open reg window we challenge the hell out of it.

And if we find line-level DOJ agents/staff attempting to write legislation and do legislative staffers' jobs, that's a HUGE no-no.

ArmedBear
03-08-2006, 3:40 PM
This could, of course, backfire very badly if this DOES become a big public deal and the moonbat majority supports even more massive, sweeping legislation than we have now.

Rumpled
03-08-2006, 4:02 PM
The gun banners are and will always be trying to ban everything. They are somewhat happy to get us piecemiel. (ie Ban 50 BMG, safety tests, ammo serialization, "sniper rifle" bans, 1 a month, etc ad nauseam).

This may bring a little more awareness to the fact that semiauto rifles are legal. I'm sure more bans will be attempted. Without banning semi's entirely; there may not be much to accomplish (and so far Granpappy's Garand is safe - look how previous bans took pains to make this so).

All we are really trying to do is force the AG to follow the law, which he has ignored for years.

And just to reiterate, using so-called AW's on public land and/or for hunting is usually legal.

ArmedBear
03-08-2006, 4:12 PM
And just to reiterate, using so-called AW's on public land and/or for hunting is usually legal.

Hmmm...

Maybe I'll buy some more lowers...:)

I was figuring they'd end up as range/safe queens.

NF land around here is no-AW, I believe, but maybe that has changed. BLM apparently doesn't care any more, from a quick perusal of their websites.

Jicko
03-08-2006, 4:22 PM
NF land around here is no-AW, I believe, but maybe that has changed. BLM apparently doesn't care any more, from a quick perusal of their websites.

Which NF are you talking about? I thought NF land is AW-OK.... since the AWB sunset....

ohsmily
03-08-2006, 4:24 PM
Which NF are you talking about? I thought NF land is AW-OK.... since the AWB sunset....

generally, NF is ok to shoot AW's on, BUT, call your local office before you do (though answers via phone are notoriously unreliable).

grammaton76
03-08-2006, 5:18 PM
Let's not forget that a number of guys out there weren't getting into guns because there was this perception that all of the "fun ones" are illegal to own here in CA. I'm sure if God (only one who'd have all-inclusive answers) were to do a census of the number of folks who own more than zero guns in California, that the rate of new gun ownership in CA has gone up considerably from December onwards.

There's a lot of folks out there who don't want to mess with SKSes and hate bolt action, yet who think an AR is worth having. I think we're reaching those folks, and now that more folks have a stake in gun ownership, we'll have (at least slightly) less public apathy.

Now it just remains to be seen how many we can bring over during the time we have...

Charliegone
03-08-2006, 5:56 PM
Let's not forget that a number of guys out there weren't getting into guns because there was this perception that all of the "fun ones" are illegal to own here in CA. I'm sure if God (only one who'd have all-inclusive answers) were to do a census of the number of folks who own more than zero guns in California, that the rate of new gun ownership in CA has gone up considerably from December onwards.

There's a lot of folks out there who don't want to mess with SKSes and hate bolt action, yet who think an AR is worth having. I think we're reaching those folks, and now that more folks have a stake in gun ownership, we'll have (at least slightly) less public apathy.

Now it just remains to be seen how many we can bring over during the time we have...


Tell me about it...my uncle who previously told me that he would never get an ar type rifle because of fear of being prosecuted bought 2 lowers! Now he is thinking of buying an ak receiver type.;)

Pablo
03-09-2006, 3:36 AM
Another media blast, very similar to last week's - slight rephrasing, number up to "approximately 11,000".

We'll see what happens. I may need to change PR newswire services if this keeps going.


Ohhh Bill I just want to get my hands on a LMT and MGI receivers before anything happens. :(

PanzerAce
03-09-2006, 7:22 AM
Let's not forget that a number of guys out there weren't getting into guns because there was this perception that all of the "fun ones" are illegal to own here in CA. I'm sure if God (only one who'd have all-inclusive answers) were to do a census of the number of folks who own more than zero guns in California, that the rate of new gun ownership in CA has gone up considerably from December onwards.

There's a lot of folks out there who don't want to mess with SKSes and hate bolt action, yet who think an AR is worth having. I think we're reaching those folks, and now that more folks have a stake in gun ownership, we'll have (at least slightly) less public apathy.

Now it just remains to be seen how many we can bring over during the time we have...


Well, I think you can count me among the ranks of people who did not own firearms before the lower craze. Hell, I had just gotten back into shooting after a several year break....

troyPhD
03-09-2006, 10:04 AM
Thanks for staying on this Bill. I must admit, however, it's starting to look bleak considering how much time has passed already.

bwiese
03-09-2006, 10:37 AM
Thanks for staying on this Bill. I must admit, however, it's starting to look bleak considering how much time has passed already.

Some of it's my fault... I shoulda been jumping on this near end of January. I fell for the "it's just 2 more weeks" too.

And then I got diverted doing a rebuttal memo to that DOJ Feb 1 memo....

Wumpscut223
03-09-2006, 4:51 PM
Where was that published? I googled it and I couldn't find the source.

bwiese
03-09-2006, 5:12 PM
Where was that published? I googled it and I couldn't find the source.

It's not published. Hope it will be (or extracts reported & commented upon) - it was a PR wire blitz to 200+ CA newspapers, radio/TV stations etc.

Turns out it just was blitzed out today.

Rumpled
03-09-2006, 5:15 PM
NF land around here is no-AW, I believe, but maybe that has changed. BLM apparently doesn't care any more, from a quick perusal of their websites.

Seeing you're in SD, I'm assuming Cleveland NF. A quick check shows the two shooting areas do not mention any AW ban.

http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/cleveland/recreation/shooting/oroscoinfo.shtml
http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/cleveland/recreation/shooting/palomarinfo.shtml

Also, googling assault weapon at www.fs.fed.us gives no relevant bans.

A call to USFS law enforcement would be best if you want to double check.

I'm just providing this info to show that getting a lower or two dozen is good. You will be able to use them.

icormba
03-09-2006, 5:58 PM
oh my!! I sure hope no one is building one like this!!!

"Off-list AK47 receivers can also be legally constructed into manually-cycled non-semiautomatic rifles by merely not installing a gas piston."

Doing such a thing could cause you bodily harm!!! The gas port MUST be plugged!! If not... the gas can/will come right back at your FACE!

bwiese
03-09-2006, 6:05 PM
oh my!! I sure hope no one is building one like this!!!

"Off-list AK47 receivers can also be legally constructed into manually-cycled non-semiautomatic rifles by merely not installing a gas piston."

Doing such a thing could cause you bodily harm!!! The gas port MUST be plugged!! If not... the gas can/will come right back at your FACE!

My original memo said that. I took out the extra 'plugging the gas port'... to reduce 'tech talk'.

I'll rewrite next time to say 'removing & blocking gas system' or some similar phrasing.

TacFan
03-09-2006, 6:52 PM
If we don't stand up now, they may ban semi-autos all together and only allows us to have bolt-action and pump guns. I see this as a possibility. It would be an easy way to plug up the loopholes.

Sgt Raven
03-09-2006, 7:06 PM
If we don't stand up now, they may ban semi-autos all together and only allows us to have bolt-action and pump guns. I see this as a possibility. It would be an easy way to plug up the loopholes.

If we don't stand up this time all we'll have is trap/ skeet shotguns, cowboy guns, and some hunting rifles.

Builder
03-09-2006, 8:50 PM
If we don't stand up now, they may ban semi-autos all together and only allows us to have bolt-action and pump guns. I see this as a possibility. It would be an easy way to plug up the loopholes.

If we don't stand up this time all we'll have is trap/ skeet shotguns, cowboy guns, and some hunting rifles.

If the Socialists ban the semi-autos, shotguns, and pistols, and get the ammo serialization, I actually think it is a good thing. Especially if they try it all at once.
See, our rights can be restricted but not infringed. The difference between the 2 is relative. Socialists just love relativism. I see a civil rights law suit where the CA Socialists have infringed upon our 2nd Amendment rights. Look at the makeup of the new Supreme Court.
If they go after all of these things all at once (because they are pissed off at the whole off-list lower thing), then this will be obviously infringment not just restriction.
The 2nd Amendment gives us this right to bear arms in 2 ways. First as a militia. In the United States Code, Title 10, Section 311, paragraph (a) states, "The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in Section 313 of Title 32, under 45 years of age, who [are] citizens of the US and of female citizens of the US who are members of the National Guard." Section 313 of Title 32 refers to persons with prior military experience who could serve as officers and as such could serve until age 64. Paragraph (b) further states, "The classes of the militia are: (1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard and Naval Militia." The National Guard was created in 1903.
Further, the often quoted Hickman v. Block assertion that the 2nd Amendment is not an individual right is contradicted by the U.S. Supreme court's 1990 ruling in U.S. v. Verdugo-Urquidez, which held that the right to keep and bear arms was an individual right. "The People" -a word used in the Preamble and the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 9th, and 10th Amendments, refers to all "persons who are part of the national community".
We are the militia and we are the people.
So, this gun (AW, semi-auto, shot gun, handgun) and ammo ban are prime evidence of infringement, not just restriction. Thus, the Supreme Court could rule that all of them are illegal or just some of them, or..... Thus, the Socialists have more to lose than we do. :) They could actually lose ALL of their precious bans. I hope that they shoot for the sky, pun intended.
Builder

blacklisted
03-09-2006, 9:35 PM
It's going to suck when they figure out that a .30-06 hunting rifle is more powerful than a "high powered" AR-15 or AK-47.

shopkeep
03-09-2006, 10:21 PM
It's going to suck when they figure out that a .30-06 hunting rifle is more powerful than a "high powered" AR-15 or AK-47.

5.56mm and 7.62mm will maim you.

.30-06 will _OWN_ you. Not to mention steel cored .30-06 will go through an engine block.

colossians323
03-10-2006, 5:41 AM
5.56mm and 7.62mm will maim you. If you don't know how to place your shot

.30-06 will _OWN_ you. Not to mention steel cored .30-06 will go through an engine block.

There, fixed it for you;)

xenophobe
03-10-2006, 8:22 AM
Not to mention steel cored .30-06 will go through an engine block.

You're FAR more likely to find .308 AP, and unless you're handloading, you're not going to see better performance with .30-06 steel core than you would 7.62 AP.

Steel core ammo is generally only mild steel. AP uses hardened steel.

Anonymous Coward
03-10-2006, 8:22 AM
Would it makes sense to add those to things in the next news thingy:

- What's the motivation of the people that purchase this? Are they militia types to throw over the government or regular people who want are modern, reliable rife for recreational target shooting, competition, hunting,...

- Are these really more dangerous than firearms than non-restricted ones? You mention the pistol grip, but you don't mention that this is the only difference to an M14 type of rifle. And according to the curent law the pistol grip is making it a "more dangerous" AW.

blacklisted
03-10-2006, 8:23 AM
Would it makes sense to add those to things in the next news thingy:

- What's the motivation of the people that purchase this? Are they militia types to throw over the government or regular people who want are modern, reliable rife for recreational target shooting, competition, hunting,...

- Are these really more dangerous than firearms than non-restricted ones? You mention the pistol grip, but you don't mention that this is the only difference to an M14 type of rifle. And according to the curent law the pistol grip is making it a "more dangerous" AW.

I don't think we want to push it too much. :eek:

Anonymous Coward
03-10-2006, 5:36 PM
I don't think we want to push it too much. :eek:

Right now the news wire is a thinly veiled attack on the CA DOJ , right? :D

With some background on why gun owners would get these evil rifles it might be more likely that a newspaper picks it up...

Pablo
03-11-2006, 12:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Democratic Underground
I read an article in the local newspaper about a guy that robbed a liquor store with a fully automatic revolver, do you want to live in a country like that?

:

:eek:
That's an hilarious sig... BTW I really would like to live in a country with fully automatic revolvers. Can you imagine a 500 Smith and Wesson going full auto!:D

artherd
03-11-2006, 12:37 AM
Sometimes being maimed is worse than being owned! ;)

In reality, if necessary, being owned by a .30-06 isn't really all that bad when you really think about it...unless you are going to that other place. :eek:

Beats being 'owned' by a .22 short to the ear!

grammaton76
03-11-2006, 1:10 AM
:eek:
That's an hilarious sig... BTW I really would like to live in a country with fully automatic revolvers. Can you imagine a 500 Smith and Wesson going full auto!:D

No, but I could imagine a Mateba (a semi-automatic revolver - fascinating design!) doing so...

xenophobe
03-11-2006, 2:02 AM
minigun anyone? ;)