His true color showing

MOTOR51 · Mar 26, 2019

Gator 45/70 said:
She makes some very real valid points.....

That a civil war is coming? That LEO are going to be going door to door to confiscate guns? Do you think she’s going to fight it out with those LEO who show up in an MRAP sporting an M2? The only sensible points she makes is that AOC and the others like her are morons AOC’s own party shunned her in a vote today. This country has a problem but it’s not a new problem and def not ready for civil war. That’s just crazy talk

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Gator 45/70 · Mar 26, 2019

MOTOR51 said:
That a civil war is coming? That LEO are going to be going door to door to confiscate guns? Do you think she’s going to fight it out with those LEO who show up in an MRAP sporting an M2? The only sensible points she makes is that AOC and the others like her are morons AOC’s own party shunned her in a vote today. This country has a problem but it’s not a new problem and def not ready for civil war. That’s just crazy talk

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Well by-golly we shall see? BTW she's single if anyone is interested?

MOTOR51 · Mar 26, 2019

Gator 45/70 said:
Well by-golly we shall see? BTW she's single if anyone is interested?

She looks like she is a hippie. I’d bring some Vick’s to rub under my nose

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Saw · Mar 26, 2019

thperez1972 said:
I would agree that's where it could be headed. But for now an item that does not violate the law has been banned. That's why it should be overturned. At the very minimum, a court should rule on its constitutionality before legally purchased property is seized.

Here here! I don’t like bumpstocks, but I don’t want some agency banning anything without a law (that can be challenged in court) to back it up.

Bangswitch · Mar 26, 2019

MOTOR51 said:
Are bump stocks constitutionally protected? What reason would he have for overturning it? I’m not a bump stock hater, I have family and friends that have them.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Ok I had everything typed up earlier and lost it so here is my second attempt...

This isn’t just a change in regulation. It’s the criminalization of owning personal property, unilaterally decided by the executive branch. This is a representative republic, but no representatives voted. This isn’t a constitutional amendment no states ratified anything. This isn’t a reinterpretation or a legislative change it’s a kings decree that separates lawful property owners from their property under penalty of law, with no reimbursement or recourse. At the federal level I don’t think this has ever happened (I may be wrong).

What makes it worse is it’s a piece of property that deals with a constitutionally protected right. Now let’s talk about the presumed reason for the ban. It’s on the chopping block because it speeds up the rate of fire for a semi-automatic rifle.

There are so many reasons this has slippery slope all over it. If private property is fair game then we are merely subjects to a tyrant.

Gator 45/70 · Mar 26, 2019

MOTOR51 said:
She looks like she is a hippie. I’d bring some Vick’s to rub under my nose

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I can tell right now your a bit of an animal!!

Lol..

machinedrummer · Mar 26, 2019

MOTOR51 said:
I don’t disagree with gun laws coming if dems take over the White House. I think that’s quite likely. That’s why I buy all the 30rnd mags I can afford now so I can sell them for ridiculously high prices later.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

What if their executive order says you have to turn them in or destroy them with no grandfather clause? Mr trump set the stage for the poison pen to be used and they will run a few out of ink.

MOTOR51 · Mar 26, 2019

machinedrummer said:
What if their executive order says you have to turn them in or destroy them with no grandfather clause? Mr trump set the stage for the poison pen to be used and they will run a few out of ink.

Then I guess I will have to make a personal choice

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

MOTOR51 · Mar 26, 2019

Bangswitch said:
Ok I had everything typed up earlier and lost it so here is my second attempt...

This isn’t just a change in regulation. It’s the criminalization of owning personal property, unilaterally decided by the executive branch. This is a representative republic, but no representatives voted. This isn’t a constitutional amendment no states ratified anything. This isn’t a reinterpretation or a legislative change it’s a kings decree that separates lawful property owners from their property under penalty of law, with no reimbursement or recourse. At the federal level I don’t think this has ever happened (I may be wrong).

What makes it worse is it’s a piece of property that deals with a constitutionally protected right. Now let’s talk about the presumed reason for the ban. It’s on the chopping block because it speeds up the rate of fire for a semi-automatic rifle.

There are so many reasons this has slippery slope all over it. If private property is fair game then we are merely subjects to a tyrant.

So with the executive order you aren’t allowed to possess it but there is no law against possessing it? I guess I would need to read the executive order. It does sound kinda crazy to ban something but not make it illegal. So what are you suppose to do with the bump stock if you own one? I thought it was like the old assault weapons ban where you couldn’t produce or sell them new anymore.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

thperez1972 · Mar 26, 2019

MOTOR51 said:
So with the executive order you aren’t allowed to possess it but there is no law against possessing it? I guess I would need to read the executive order. It does sound kinda crazy to ban something but not make it illegal. So what are you suppose to do with the bump stock if you own one? I thought it was like the old assault weapons ban where you couldn’t produce or sell them new anymore.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

The ATF reclassified it as a machine gun but there is no grandfather clause. Destroy it or turn it in to the ATF, assuming it wasn't lost in that boating accident.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Bangswitch · Mar 26, 2019

MOTOR51 said:
So with the executive order you aren’t allowed to possess it but there is no law against possessing it? I guess I would need to read the executive order. It does sound kinda crazy to ban something but not make it illegal. So what are you suppose to do with the bump stock if you own one? I thought it was like the old assault weapons ban where you couldn’t produce or sell them new anymore.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

The brady bill was legislation with a sunset date and a grandfather clause. All bans that I’m aware of had grandfather clauses, and most were by legislation or constitutional amendment. Few if any have been by executive fiat. This is a representative republic the constitution empowers the president to act on behalf of the nation with the Executive Order for many things but this was not the intention.

Again if one one man can take away your lawful property, you are no longer a citizen you are a subject. These are the types of things we fought wars over.

President Obama repeatedly claimed global warming was our real threat to national security; if Obama signed an executive order banning a vehicles that burn fossil fuel, would that have been a lawful order or the executive running roughshod over the American people. For me this is more about private property rights than anything. If they no longer exist there no second amendment because you can’t bear what has been taken by executive fiat.

Bangswitch · Mar 26, 2019

Additionally executive orders are not law. They are neither law or regulation. They are orders to be carried out. *Build a wall,* *Secure our coast line,* *bomb the the Iranians into the Stone Age* those are orders. All those things carry weight of law because there are laws or constitutional amendments that back up the order. Telling the DOJ (BATFE) by executive order that bump stocks should be classified as machine guns is as bad as Obama telling the FBI to lay off of Hillary in September of 2016.

Bangswitch · Mar 26, 2019

What’s pathetic is the lefties and the so called republicans who are hammering Trump about his EO for a border wall when his job is literally to carry out national security but there is nothing but crickets because bump stocks are stupid.

MOTOR51 · Mar 26, 2019

thperez1972 said:
The ATF reclassified it as a machine gun but there is no grandfather clause. Destroy it or turn it in to the ATF, assuming it wasn't lost in that boating accident.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

So no tax stamp?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Bangswitch · Mar 26, 2019

In the 1930’s the Federal government wanted to ban Marijuana, but they realized that private property rights still existed so instead of an immediate ban they cleverly wrote legislation requiring that all marijuana required a tax stamp the catch was you had to have the grass present to purchase the stamp and you could not possess it without the stamp. It was a clever end run around private property rights. Check it out sometime it’s known as the 1937 Marihauna tax act. I’m by no means saying this is the way it should have been handled just pointing out the fact that once there were elected officials who understood the weight of unconstitutional legislation, regulation and EO’s.

Bangswitch · Mar 26, 2019

MOTOR51 said:
So no tax stamp?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Can a regular citizen manufacture a machine gun? I thought there were laws against that already stamp or not.

GunAddict · Mar 26, 2019

It is now officially in effect. It started today 3/26/19. Either destroy them or abandon at an atf office. Read it carefully.
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/12/26/2018-27763/bump-stock-type-devices

MOTOR51 · Mar 27, 2019

Bangswitch said:
Can a regular citizen manufacture a machine gun? I thought there were laws against that already stamp or not.

I was referring to ones already manufactured.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Sig220 · Mar 27, 2019

MOTOR51 said:
I was referring to ones already manufactured.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

The "machine gun" would have had been made and registered BEFORE the Gun Control Act (1968) to be "taxed" or possessed. (stamp)

Quoting from the ATF order,

"With limited exceptions, the Gun Control Act, as amended, makes it unlawful for any person to transfer or possess a machinegun unless it was lawfully possessed prior to the effective date of the statute. The bump-stock-type devices covered by this final rule were not in existence prior to the effective date of the statute, and therefore will be prohibited when this rule becomes effective."

So, with a stroke of a pen they classified a plastic stock as a MG subject to the 1968 GCA which effectively banned possession. No legislation, no law and no compensation for those who owned them.

Again, how far will they take this course of action before the pen runs dry? It would be just as easy to ban AR's, semi autos, high capacity mags the same way.

Sig220 · Mar 27, 2019

Bangswitch said:
Can a regular citizen manufacture a machine gun? I thought there were laws against that already stamp or not.

While a regular citizen CAN manufacture a firearm with certain restrictions legally, they can NOT manufacture a machine gun....legally.....can't get a stamp for it either.

The list of transferable MG's is just that a list....they are no more to be added as the law reads

His true color showing

The Best online firearms community in Louisiana.

Member Benefits:

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

ESSAYONS

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

constitutionalist

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Log in

Forum statistics