House Passes Ban on AR Type Weapons.

The Best online firearms community in Louisiana.

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • TickleChain

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 16, 2022
    338
    43
    Castle Doctrine
    According to NIH, in 2020, almost 92,000 OD deaths, 56,000 of them fentanyl.
    According to gunviolencearchve.org, in 2020, 19,500 willful, malicious and accidental gun deaths, and no 2020 number for suicides, but it looks pretty consistent at about 24,000 per most previous years, so approximately 45,000 total gun deaths in 2020.
    Pale in comparison to the vaccine problems.
     

    DBMJR1

    Madame Mayor's Fiefdom
    Rating - 100%
    23   0   0
    Jul 27, 2008
    2,313
    113
    New Orleans, La.
    I think for you not to actually consider the losses is a mistake. I like you believe in the second amendment, my question is at what cost? If you think it is acceptable that innocent child lives are worth your freedoms then I feel sorry for you. I am willing to make concessions so no more families loose a child needlessly. If that is the measure of your constitutional privilege I feel sorry for you. As law abiding citizens we should stand as an example, not a threat of conflict that reflects stupidity. I would go to great lengths if an AR owned by a member of this community was picked up by a child in the home and used wrongfully. Your opinion and lack there of assures me of the lack of intelligence in this community. Based in response alone the weapons should be removed
    This happened in 1927.


    Would an AR ban have prevented this from happening.
     

    GunRelated

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    41   0   0
    Feb 22, 2012
    3,554
    113
    Walker, La
    Nope, no one from Big Pharma went to jail, no one from the banks have gone to jail for money laundering, borders did not get secured when they have majority house and senate.
    Bingo. Because the war on drugs is not about the source, it is about money and control of the population. It is meant to fill the jails. It is not meant to be won, it never was.
     

    Capt Don

    Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 28, 2021
    7
    3
    Covington
    “I'm thinking you're either a troll looking to try to "red flag" people on Gun forums, or you're a troll looking to "red flag" people on Gun forums.”
    Psmith-July 4,2022. What does that tell you.
    That may be the single greatest tattoo I have ever seen in my life!!!
     

    Welldoya

    Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 29, 2013
    10
    3
    Before the 1964 law you could buy a gun and have it sent to your home or work. No FFL or 4473
    I believe it was the Gun Control Act of 1968 or was there also one in 1964?
    In 1974 I worked summers and after school at a large building supply store.
    They had a contest and I won a Winchester 290 selling lawn mowers.
    There must have been some kind of exception to the law because I distinctly remember the postman asking me if there was a gun in the box when he delivered it to my house.
    I did have to get the local sheriff to sign a form and send it in before they delivered it.
     

    mylongscreenname

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    8   0   0
    Aug 17, 2020
    127
    28
    Baton Rouge, LA
    i encourage everyone to take 30 minutes and call our senators. DO NOT assume that just because they have an (R) behind their name that they will vote in a manner that represents you. I called both. NEITHER office would make an official statement....blah blah blah. When they promised to share my comments if i was willing to provide one, I told them my that my comment was that I would like to see my Senator make a public statement on this bill ahead of any vote. Told them instead of giving them a message that I would like to hear from them. This bill is in committee. I doubt the (D) party will let it sit there until after mid-terms. There will be a push bring it to a vote. The left and the right are both wings of the same shitty bird at this point. Use you voice while you can freely express your opinion to the policy makers.
     

    Core

    Salt
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 5, 2011
    247
    28
    Maine
    Optics. It's wholly unconstitutional: I wouldn't put this past an executive action by a Democrat: but it wouldn't hold Article VI in good standing. Citizens would demand SCOTUS shoot it down at the federal and state levels. I could see many Democrats becoming ineligible for office and facing severe consequences if it passed into law.
     

    Magdump

    Don’t troll me bro!
    Rating - 100%
    163   0   0
    Dec 31, 2013
    9,396
    113
    Hammond, Louisiana
    Before we infringe on the 2A rights, lets change the penal code to prevent the loss of orders of magnitude more lives than school and church shootings. I propose anyone committing a crime with a weapon should be sentenced to life, and anyone committing murder should be executed.

    Recidivism is getting worse, but in the eyes of the judicial system (excluding the cops, mainly the prosecutors, judges and parole boards) black lives (and other colors) don't really matter - only the rights of convicted criminals.

    By the way, I figured a ban on ARs and regular capacity mags would only affect 5-6% of my guns, but I'm still against any attack on the 2nd. Once you start down that road, momentum builds and it's hard to stop until the entire Bill of Rights and Constitution are threatened by "reasonable compromises."
    Have you figured how many of your guns would be affected by a ban on semiautomatic weapons?
     

    Toodamgoofy

    Don’t sweat the petty stuff, pet the sweaty stuff
    Premium Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Apr 4, 2022
    93
    18
    CENLA
    Absolutely
    Don’t kid yourself. Any criminal can pick up an AR type weapon from any of their black market contacts. What then? Any and all law abiding citizens that are in possession of an AR now is supposed to give up their weapons without an appeal process or anything? So if it doesn’t pass into law or if it is overturned in the near future but the government has already destroyed your weapon, they’re supposed to pay you back? I think you need to read the second amendment again. And yes as a veteran and police officer I believe that anyone that has these weapons should keep them in the event that the second amendment needs to be enforced. You ma’am and everyone in this forum or the law abiding citizens in America are the well armed militia that our forefathers were talking about to subdue a tyrannical government. Not arguing that the government we have presently is.
     

    Mr Smooth

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Feb 19, 2022
    209
    28
    Destrehan
    It doesn't apply to weapons you currently legally own only weapons available after the ban goes into affect. Same for your mags. It does seem to say you cannot sell your weapons after the ban goes into affect. It lists exempt weapons but the lists by type are drastically poorly developed leaving a lot of exempt by definition off the list. Guess they ain't that quick

    I read it again and you may be able to sell intrastate but that might be considered buying a banned weapon after the ban, confusing
     
    Last edited:

    Martman300

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    44   0   0
    Nov 12, 2018
    702
    43
    Gretna, la
    Absolutely
    Not even close. Someone looking to do this type of tragedy would not stop because it’s against the law to own an a firearm of any type.

    The murder is the crime. If that isn’t deterrent enough to stop a mass shooter, how is a lesser law, ie owning a certain firearm, or having a specific magazine capacity going to deter them.

    Facts show, the mass shooters don’t stop until they are forcibly stopped.
     

    Martman300

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    44   0   0
    Nov 12, 2018
    702
    43
    Gretna, la
    It doesn't apply to weapons you currently legally own only weapons available after the ban goes into affect. Same for your mags. It does seem to say you cannot sell your weapons after the ban goes into affect. It lists exempt weapons but the lists by type are drastically poorly developed leaving a lot of exempt by definition off the list. Guess they ain't that quick

    I read it again and you may be able to sell intrastate but that might be considered buying a banned weapon after the ban, confusing
    I saw a video, Mr. Guns & Gear, showing and reading the document. It looks like if you own the weapon it has to be “right by you” 24/7.
     

    Core

    Salt
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 5, 2011
    247
    28
    Maine
    So many of us are "certain" it won't pass the Senate, but how do we know. I think the sheer number of "mass" shootings we've been having is too great of a number that many of the politicians constituents will demand action. Which may sway them to vote for a AWB
    You should do your research: school shooting death rates are .00000671% over 50+ years in the US. Kids get run over going to and from school more often. It's about disarming and the media is gas lighting for their funders.
     

    Core

    Salt
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 5, 2011
    247
    28
    Maine
    Absolutely
    You created an account to resort to ad hominem attacks?

    And you deal in absolutes..

    As a scientist I can tell you absolutes do not exist outside of theory.

    As a combat vet. I can tell you your understanding of disarming a population and how it effects the population is not based on reality. Most of the places I worked involved people being predated upon by criminals and corrupt leadership. Significant human suffering.

    To avert suffering you must have a strong armed population. The alternative is a police state. What happens when leadership becomes so corrupt that they place themselves before the needs of the people? They use the police state to enforce their ideology: we see this currently with the US DOJ enforcing unconstitutional laws and seizing private property. We also see blatant political actors being assigned to serve to direct these institutions with massive conflicts of interest. US citizens do not want to live in a police state, we are a society that has policed ourselves for thirteen generations now.

    I have seen DOJ statistics that prove approximately 1300% of guns used in the US are used to stop victimisation versus used in the commission of a violent crime. That means reducing access to guns for law abiding citizens results in victimisation. Gun free zones become soft targets.

    The death rate for school shootings is around .00000671%. Kids are being poisoned and murdered in and around schools at a significantly higher rate in the single positive digit percentages. And accidents take kids in the double positive digits. The media is not discussing this nor attempting to address the issue by gas lighting it.

    You have to understand context.

    There is clearly an angry male school shooter phenomenon that we need to address in the US for certain. Disarming or banning certain guns will do very little to help with the already small numbers of school shootings. We need to focus on preventing dangerous weapons from entering schools. We need to focus on providing fast care to those in emotional crisis. And identifying those in need.

    There's no constitutional way to ban arms. There's no ethical way to create barriers to infringe upon guaranteed and protected rights. Family, school officials, and law enforcement need to be able to report individuals of concern to NICS and they need to flag the individual with a vetting process that involves a psychological evaluation by a psychologist not a counselor. Our mental health system is itself in a crisis mostly because of licensing requirements that disqualifies psychology majors from getting certified and licensed as case managers. And leadership does not want to invest the money into it: because partly it should be privatised and medical licensing boards are to some degree political and classist. I have experience work with government case managers and also with medical doctors that are trying to provide better care and fix the business of medicine.

    I work with data and various phenomenon along Human networks in space and time. These problems are very complex of socioeconomic and cultural in nature where much of our population has very limited access to services and resources that lead them to healthy bodies and minds.

    In my time working for private organisations, I have only seen cherry picking of data and science to chase money and resources. My government work has been limited to huge funding and minimal project scopes: in simple speak bureaucracy.

    Most popular medical, environmental, social, and nutritional science is monetary centric and political. How do we remove this kind of corporate conglomerate funded flex from pseudo science? This is the big question.

    I have completed more meaningful work independently working and consulting with a non profit partner.

    So please tread softly in absolutes: this is not the path to truths.
     

    Core

    Salt
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 5, 2011
    247
    28
    Maine
    The AMA wants to ban guns, but -
    "Estimates of the number of patients who die each year due to medical malpractice vary, with one study reporting about 45,000 to 98,000 deaths annually in the United States, while another study reported a much higher estimate of 200,000 to 400,000 deaths each year." (From an ambulance chaser attorney)
    It's far worse than we know: I have seen 290,000+ in some liberal studies. And many liberal organisations will not publish pharmaceutical related deaths nor will the medical system properly report them or collect data on them as seen by SARS reporting.
     

    Deacon

    Member
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Apr 14, 2012
    18
    3
    Loss of a child is similar no?
    Simple argument. Would probably stump a 15 year old. Guns exist. Even if YOU disarm, the guns will be there for others willing to break the law to obtain them. Pandora's box. I'm sorry for those who lost children to firearms. And car wrecks. And child abuse. And poor medical treatment. And....... Each one of these "talking points" is attempting to disarm LEGAL citizens. Read a history book and find out what happens when the citizens are disarmed and left to the mercy of leaders and their military. Or, maybe you are just playing devil's advocate.....
     
    Top Bottom