Pirate 4x4 banner

21 - 40 of 43 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
if you read Sec 2 Paragraph 3&4 it explains that appendix A is the list of what is not considered a "semiautomatic assault rifle"

it reads (clear as day and night):
"Paragraph (1) shall not apply to--

`(A) any of the firearms, or replicas or duplicates of the firearms, specified in appendix A to this section"
(B) any firearm that--

`(i) is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action"


appendix A is the list of bolt action rifles/leverguns/ pump shotguns that will not be considered illegal if this is passed
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,048 Posts
My bad...that makes me feel a bit better. So who has the lowest price on AR15 receivers? Might be time to stock up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,073 Posts
Im gonna go get me a few more CMMG or Mega stripped lowers and uppers
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,993 Posts
This is what I sent to my congressman, I suggest you all write as well.

I am writing you as a concerned citizen about H.R. bill 6257, the Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization Act of 2008. I feel that the restriction of the 2nd Amendment is not going the solve the issue that this bill is trying to fix. An intelligent person would have to justify and understand that if a bill like this passes, illegal gun owners would NOT hand over their weapons. All this would do is just take the legal citizens and disarm them. When gun control like this happens, the only people with weapons will be criminals.

Look how well the firearms ban works for Washington D.C. Why does Washington, D.C., a district whose laws make it illegal to buy, possess, transport or acquire a handgun, experience the highest per capita murder rates in the nation? Its because law makers believe that gun control will quell violence. It doesn't! Why does the state of Virgina have no issues like this? Virginia is right next to Washington D.C., yet criminals know that they might be victimizing an armed citizen. Firearms bans make normal citizens helpless to violent criminals. Would you take a stick to a gun fight? Of course you wouldn't, but that's what the average American will be doing if gun laws like this continue.

CBS news labeled Great Britain "one of the most violent urban societies in the western world." As you may know, Great Britain banned handguns in 1997, since that time the number of crimes committed with handguns has more than doubled. The violent crime rate in Great Britain is higher than the United States. 26% of English citizens have been victimized by violent crime, 2nd highest overall to the 30% of Australia. In this study, the US didn't make the top ten in violent crime rate. Every country listed above the US had stringent gun control policies. Great Britain has a "hot" burglary rate of 59%, that is burglaries committed while someone is occupying the building. The "hot" burglary rate in the US is 13%. Criminals in the US are plain afraid of being shot by a citizen protecting his life, family and property. You might refute this by saying it was handguns banned in Britain. 6257 is an assault weapons ban. This is true, but banning "assault weapons" sets a dangerous precedent. Further more, it is estimated that "assault weapons" are used in less than .2% of violent crime, that is one fifth of one percent.

Criminologist Gary Kleck estimates that 2.5 million Americans use guns for defensive purposes each year, and approximately 400,000 of them believe someone would have been dead had they not resorted to their defensive use of firearms. A government study put the figure at 1.5 million. Why would you want to disarm Americans, and take their right away at defending their life, family and property?

I ask you to PLEASE vote against this bill, and in the future, any bill that takes the gun owners who are legal and law abiding citizens rights away. Guns do not kill people by themselves. They are only metal, wood and plastic. They are a tool. Look at the recent rash of mall stabbing sprees in Japan, another country a gun ban. Criminals will commit crimes with whatever tools they have. Who does an "assault weapons" ban benefit? Certainly not the law abiding citizen. It also doesn't hinder the criminals ability to commit violent crimes, in fact it helps criminals by disarming their victims.

Please consider that more Americans are increasingly becoming aware that our gun rights are slowly being eroded. Some politicians seem to lead a sheltered life. They think that the creation of bills and laws like this can fix gun crimes and violent acts with paper.



Thank you for your time.




Thanks to Halogrinder, I used his letter as a template to get started.
 

·
I build stuff
Joined
·
24,247 Posts
Discussion Starter #27
You and everyone else.
I did not post this link as an effort to boost bussiness. But as off this morning looks like I have sold two dozen lowers :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
806 Posts
Yep here you go:mad3::mad3:



SEC. 6. APPENDIX A TO SECTION 922 OF TITLE 18.

Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following appendix:

`APPENDIX A

`Centerfire Rifles--Autoloaders
....

`Remington 700 ADL Bolt-Action Rifle

`Remington 700 BDL Bolt-Action Rifle

`Remington 700 BDL Varmint Special
...

`Remington Peerless Over/Under Shotgun

`Ruger Red Label O/U Shotgun

`Ruger Sporting Clays O/U Shotgun

...
Alright I'm totally confused I haven't ever seen a over/under fire more than 2, and I think a 700 might hold up to 5 rounds. Both the over/under and 700 I haven't ever heard referred to as an assault rifle even by the stupidest news reporter. :shaking:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,993 Posts
Alright I'm totally confused I haven't ever seen a over/under fire more than 2, and I think a 700 might hold up to 5 rounds. Both the over/under and 700 I haven't ever heard referred to as an assault rifle even by the stupidest news reporter. :shaking:
I'm pretty sure this list is guns not affected by the ban
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
499 Posts
Alright I'm totally confused I haven't ever seen a over/under fire more than 2, and I think a 700 might hold up to 5 rounds. Both the over/under and 700 I haven't ever heard referred to as an assault rifle even by the stupidest news reporter. :shaking:
The original poster of the list misposted. Those are not on the list.
 

·
Registered
'73 Scout
Joined
·
10,458 Posts
I'm pretty sure this list is guns not affected by the ban
Im thinkin' the same way given Shiloh and C.Sharps are on the list.
Funny part was while meandering through the Appendix A list not a single one of mine were listed, including the model sharps (model #3) I got... :D

D.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,947 Posts
if you read Sec 2 Paragraph 3&4 it explains that appendix A is the list of what is not considered a "semiautomatic assault rifle"

it reads (clear as day and night):
"Paragraph (1) shall not apply to--

`(A) any of the firearms, or replicas or duplicates of the firearms, specified in appendix A to this section"
(B) any firearm that--

`(i) is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action"


appendix A is the list of bolt action rifles/leverguns/ pump shotguns that will not be considered illegal if this is passed
I still do not understand why they would list LEGAL firearms:confused: Isn't an autoloader "self loading"? A bolt/ pump/ lever by definition are not auto loaders.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,224 Posts
I got a cool reply from my Rep.

Trent Franks said:
Thank you for contacting me regarding recent legislation addressing the right to bear arms. I appreciate knowing your thoughts on this important topic.

Our country is blessed with freedoms unlike any other nation in the history of humankind and we must defend these freedoms at every turn. I am deeply committed to the rights of America's law-abiding citizens to own and bear arms. Our Second Amendment is a fundamental tenet of the document enshrining basic human liberty; and it is a freedom I have and will continue fighting to preserve.

As you probably know, H.R.6257, the Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization Act, was introduced on June 12, 2008 by Rep. Mark Kirk, in what I believe to be a calculated attempt to begin eroding that basic freedom to keep and bear arms. H.R.6257 would reinstate repealed criminal provisions regarding assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices (the assault weapons ban) for a period of ten years. In addition, it would revise the definition of "semiautomatic assault weapon" to include conversion kits and any semiautomatic rifle or pistol that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine, or that contains other specified characteristics, including a telescoping stock. I will vote against any attempt or formal legislation to reestablish the ban.

As an alternative to this proposed legislation, Rep. Ron Paul introduced H.R. 1096, the Second Amendment Protection Act, on February 15, 2007. This legislation would repeal the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act and the Federal Firearms License Reform Act of 1993, restoring and reviving any provisions previously amended or repealed. It would also repeal provisions of both the Internal Revenue Code and Federal Criminal Code distinguishing firearms used for sporting, recreational, or cultural purposes, from the general category of firearms provisions which have been used to justify firearm regulation. Should it reach the House floor, I will vote in favor of H.R. 1096.

It is interesting to note that before most great tyrannies and genocides occurred in the world, the citizens of those lands were first disarmed. We must keep a watchful and wary eye toward anything that would take the United States down that same path. I join those who are unable to understand how removing the right to bear arms somehow ensures the safety of honest citizens; and I remain committed to protecting this essential cornerstone in the foundation of human liberty.

Again, thank you for taking the time to contact me. I hope you will continue to inform me of the issues that concern you. In the meantime, please feel free to visit my website at http://www.house.gov/franks.

Most sincerely,

Trent Franks
United States Congress
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
687 Posts
That letter alone is why I love my country. Looks like the people in your district elected the right man!
 

·
I build stuff
Joined
·
24,247 Posts
Discussion Starter #38
Rep. Ron Paul introduced H.R. 1096, the Second Amendment Protection Act, on February 15, 2007. This legislation would repeal the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act and the Federal Firearms License Reform Act of 1993, restoring and reviving any provisions previously amended or repealed. It would also repeal provisions of both the Internal Revenue Code and Federal Criminal Code distinguishing firearms used for sporting, recreational, or cultural purposes, from the general category of firearms provisions which have been used to justify firearm regulation. Should it reach the House floor, I will vote in favor of H.R. 1096
its too bad that will never see the House floor

This is the 11th such bill Rep. Paul has introduced. Damn good idea also.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-1096
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,224 Posts
Damn, I need to move to AZ. :D
This part is really cool...especially coming from a US Congressman

Trent Franks said:
It is interesting to note that before most great tyrannies and genocides occurred in the world, the citizens of those lands were first disarmed. We must keep a watchful and wary eye toward anything that would take the United States down that same path. I join those who are unable to understand how removing the right to bear arms somehow ensures the safety of honest citizens; and I remain committed to protecting this essential cornerstone in the foundation of human liberty.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
781 Posts
`(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession or transfer of any semiautomatic assault weapon otherwise lawfully possessed under Federal law on the date of the enactment of this subsection.

So does this mean that all the "Post Ban" guns (ie:AR15's) converted to "Preban" configuration after the first law sunset will be legal? I have a post ban Bushy that had a solid stock, non threaded HBAR barrel and no Bayonet lug. The lower now has a collapsible stock, and a CMMG 14.5" (16" with perm. supp.) lugged upper. So technically my gun meets the current law, and according to the paragraph above should still be legal. I just can't buy another lower if this law goes through. :confused:
 
21 - 40 of 43 Posts
Top