a Democrat Texan wants more gun control...........

[lp85253]

are you a responsible gun owner ?

Are the masses trying to take guns away ? to that I think(hope) not, but unless you live under a rock don't think for one minute there are those that given the chance would do it in a NY minute !

Yes.. And the 2nd amend covers the rest.. You may not realize it , but that's pretty well set in stone.. It would take 2/3 of the states to ratify a constitutional amendment .. Iow , it ain't going to happen...

 

[lp85253]

so what you have to ask yourself then why was this Dem from Texas wasting her /our time proposing such ?

The thing is , i don't care.. That person is in Texas, not in my state... The bill has zero chance of passing in Texas if it limits gun rights for responsible folks...

 

[lovinthehd]

The thing is , i don't care.. That person is in Texas, not in my state... The bill has zero chance of passing in Texas if it limits gun rights for responsible folks...

The person is filing it in Washington DC and is a congressional bill.....

 

[highfigh]

The thing is , i don't care.. That person is in Texas, not in my state... The bill has zero chance of passing in Texas if it limits gun rights for responsible folks...

Unless, enough people from more Liberal areas move there, like they have been moving to AZ. I know both states have large Conservative population, but in the highest populated areas, that's not the case and they're the ones who can swing a vote or election away from the way it had been.

One state is a foot in the door, especially if that state was formerly not in favor of gun control which is only part of what HR-5717 is.

A lot of the guns don't interest me, but if they limit magazine size to something useless, count me out. I don't see a need for bump stocks for most people- it can be licensed like full auto, if they allow it.

I really want to see some thought put in my Congress to the behavioral problems I mentioned, but that would make people sad and would likely cost votes. Statistically, the number of legal gun owners who use guns illegally is ridiculously low, but badly handled, improperly stored and spraying lead when they freak out needs to be addressed and fixed.

I have heard about a large number of incidents where people have flashed guns in the last few weeks, too. As I have written many times lately, people are losing their damn minds.

 

[lp85253]

Unless, enough people from more Liberal areas move there, like they have been moving to AZ. I know both states have large Conservative population, but in the highest populated areas, that's not the case and they're the ones who can swing a vote or election away from the way it had been.

One state is a foot in the door, especially if that state was formerly not in favor of a Bill.

I really don't see it being an issue here either, i guess i could be wrong, but there's still enough gun owners here that it's just not going to happen.. There are plenty of us liberals that honor the 2nd....i grew up here, Az has a long pro 2nd tilt... I assume texas does as well...

 

[highfigh]

The person is filing it in Washington DC and is a congressional bill.....

I think it was filed in April. I could be wrong about it actually having been filed, though.

 

[highfigh]

I really don't see it being an issue here either, i guess i could be wrong, but there's still enough gun owners here that it's just not going to happen.. There are plenty of us liberals that honor the 2nd....i grew up here, Az has a long pro 2nd tilt... I assume texas does as well...

I'm amazed by the number of people who think that ALL Democrats are for gun control and that few of them would want to own guns. Look at any factory, jobsite or other employer and the fact is, a lot of Democrats want to be able to protect themselves/their families and they hunt. A lot.

 

[lp85253]

The person is filing it in Washington DC and is a congressional bill.....

Then it's got zero chance with regard to actual gun control.. Even Bernie is pro 2nd...

 

[lp85253]

I'm amazed by the number of people who think that ALL Democrats are for gun control and that few of them would want to own guns. Look at any factory, jobsite or other employer and the fact is, a lot of Democrats want to be able to protect themselves/their families and they hunt. A lot.

Bingo.. I'm not against limiting capacity or banning fully auto weapons ( which would help reduce deaths in mass shootings).. beyond that i can't see needing to change anything ...i agree there are a lot of pro 2nd liberals... I think we outnumber the anti gun crowd

 

[highfigh]

Bingo.. I'm not against limiting capacity or banning fully auto weapons ( which would help reduce deaths in mass shootings).. beyond that i can't see needing to change anything ...i agree there are a lot of pro 2nd liberals... I think we outnumber the anti gun crowd

While fully auto are used for mass shootings, pistols are used at least as often, if not more. The problem is that when some pinhead like the guy in Vegas goes off, it's a battlezone.

I have heard full auto is a lot of fun to shoot, but the problem that is too common is people not locking them securely or using a cheap gun safe. At that point, they may as well leave it outside.

 

[Mikado463]

agreed on the auto thing, in all my years of gun ownership I have never desired to own a 'black gun'. Much prefer my bolt action rifles.

 

[sterling shoote]

Some here appear not to remember, Democrats did ban a firearm back in 1994, the AR-15. Mitch McConnell was able to amend the legislation for the law to sunset in ten years to be voted on again after statistics of the law's effectiveness at reducing gun crime could be discerned. In 2004 the law did sunset, first because the AR-15 ban had no effect on gun crime and second because Republicans were the majority party again. At any rate, don't think that Democrats won't try to take away your guns. Sheila Jackson Lee has introduced legislation to do just that.

 

[Mikado463]

Sterling I remember it well, along with King Cuomo up in NY stating there was no use and or need for an AR-15, while at the same time not knowing(or in his case comprehending) that it was in fact a legal hunting firearm in his own state !

 

[Old Onkyo]

The United States will never remove guns from its citizens.

We can debate registration, types of guns, and amount of ammunition one can stockpile.

The rest is political theater.

 

[sterling shoote]

agreed on the auto thing, in all my years of gun ownership I have never desired to own a 'black gun'. Much prefer my bolt action rifles.

Here are the facts: Full automatic firearms are all subject to the National Firearms Act, meaning the purchaser must apply to the BATF for the transfer of the full automatic firearm from the owner, as well as pay a $200 tax. In other words, you do not just walk into a gun store and walk out with a full auto firearm upon passing the instant background check. And once the full auto firearm is transferred into your possession keeping it locked up is a given since there are relatively few of these firearms in circulation, the result of the NFA rules being changed in 1986 to prohibit the sale of full auto manufactured after 1986. Those that do go through all the hoops to acquire a legal full automatic firearm, like an M16, will pay in today's market about $20,000 for the firearm, while a semi-auto AR-15 can be purchased for about $1700 or less.

 

[Mikado463]

The United States will never remove guns from its citizens.

We can debate registration, types of guns, and amount of ammunition one can stockpile.

The rest is political theater.

while I tend to agree I can only hope that some day we can effectively remove them from the criminals.

 

[Mikado463]

Here are the facts: Full automatic firearms are all subject to the National Firearms Act, meaning the purchaser must apply to the BATF for the transfer of the full automatic firearm from the owner, as well as pay a $200 tax. In other words, you do not just walk into a gun store and walk out with a full auto firearm upon passing the instant background check. And once the full auto firearm is transferred into your possession keeping it locked up is a given since there are relatively few of these firearms in circulation, the result of the NFA rules being changed in 1986 to prohibit the sale of full auto manufactured after 1986. Those that do go through all the hoops to acquire a legal full automatic firearm, like an M16, will pay in today's market about $20,000 for the firearm, while a semi-auto AR-15 can be purchased for about $1700 or less.

I'm fully aware of that, but legislating these rules and there associated costs will have an effect on the responsible gun owner it will have little effect on the criminal intent ...........

Legality aside, how hard is it to convert an AR15 to fully automatic?

Answer (1 of 13): Legality aside, not hard at all. You need to drill an additional hole for the full auto sear and mill out the fire control pocket a little more to accept a full-auto fire control group. The full auto fire M4 or M16 control groups, M16 bolt carrier and compatible full auto buffe...

www.quora.com

my comment on 'black guns' , a term used to describe any and all assault style weapons, was meant to all types.

 

[Old Onkyo]

while I tend to agree I can only hope that some day we can effectively remove them from the criminals.

That will never happen. A person is not a criminal until they commit a criminal act, are arrested, and convicted Of a crime.

everyone that entered the Capital on January 6th is a criminal, wanna guess the percentage of gun owners in the group?

wanna guess how many will be convicted of a crime?

 

[sterling shoote]

The United States will never remove guns from its citizens.

We can debate registration, types of guns, and amount of ammunition one can stockpile.

The rest is political theater.

Any debate starts with the presentation of facts; however, the Democrats are not interested in facts; thus, debate is thwarted for emotional appeals devoid of any facts. At any rate, here are some interesting facts about civilian usage of the US Service Rifle. In 1903 President Roosevelt signed into law the National Defense Act, which required to Army to teach interested civilians how to shoot the US Service Rifle. The idea was to have a nation of Marksmen should our Country be mobilized for war. In 1922 law was passed to permit citizens who had been trained by the Army to join in military shooting competitions. This law as well as the one requiring the Army to teach interested civilians how to shoot are still honored today. In 2004 or thereabouts there was a twist to the Army training civilians, the Army recruited top civilian Marksman volunteers to assist the United States Army Marksmanship Unit deliver the Squad Designated Marksman Course. I was one of those civilians accepted into the program. The bottom line is this: there is a very long tradition of civilian military rifle marksmanship here in the US which has served our Country well, since Marksmanship cannot be taught overnight and thus it precludes having to send Soldiers into harms way without enough proper training, which is not moral.

 

[sterling shoote]

I'm fully aware of that, but legislating these rules and there associated costs will have an effect on the responsible gun owner it will have little effect on the criminal intent ...........

Legality aside, how hard is it to convert an AR15 to fully automatic?

Answer (1 of 13): Legality aside, not hard at all. You need to drill an additional hole for the full auto sear and mill out the fire control pocket a little more to accept a full-auto fire control group. The full auto fire M4 or M16 control groups, M16 bolt carrier and compatible full auto buffe...

www.quora.com

my comment on 'black guns' , a term used to describe any and all assault style weapons, was meant to all types.

The congress of 1994 defined "assault weapon" to make the AR-15 Sporter, a semi-auto sporting rifle, illegal by it's purely cosmetic feature set. Then, as now, this firearm is statistically insignificant in gun crime.