Lawsuit against the atf.

[Chuckie]

Oh, let's see now... How about the National Rifle Association agreeing to provisions of the Gun Control Act of 1968... Need I say more?

People tend to forget that 'The National Rifle Association' is not part of the government but just a private lobby group that petitions lawmakers - no different than any other lobbyist group (like the National Diary Council or the Sierra Club environmentalist).

 

[BillM]

People tend to forget that 'The National Rifle Association' is not part of the government but just a private lobby group that petitions lawmakers - no different than any other lobbyist group (like the National Diary Council or the Sierra Club environmentalist).

What does that have to do with it? They had a great deal of influence the could have used to kill or at least neuter GCA-68. Instead they encouraged additional and unconstitutional restrictions on our 2A rights. Very much contrary to their purpose. Serial numbers were not required on firearms until passage of that bill. They also forbade sale of firearms via mail order. Just two specific items in a whole package of infringements and obstructions.

 

[Chuckie]

Why does it have to be permanent? Isn't a right delayed a right denied? You know very well that there have been numerous federal bans over the past 30 years, Some overturned, some not. Can you go buy an HK G3 semi auto rifle off the rack today? No you can't. Can you buy a brand new Valmet M76? No you can't. Can you buy a freshly imported case of 7N6 ammo today? no you can't.

Now let's talk about why there haven't been even more bans. It's not for lack of trying. If no one spoke up when the government tried to ban any number of 2A related items, we'd all be drooling over the newest single shot rifles by now.

Oklahoma hasn't passed anything but pro-gun legislation since 1995. States have overwhelmingly RELAXED gun laws over the past quarter of a century. Even in many states we here in Oklahoma would consider draconian, have fewer restrictions specifically because we've fought battles in federal courts that have benefitted citizens behind enemy lines.

And don't think ATF and DoJ aren't coordinating with anti-gun groups to support gun bans in communist states. Every time the ATF reinterprets legislative language and definitions of words to our detriment, the communist state AG's and legislatures model their efforts after them. So yes the federal government is a serious, persistent threat to our 2A rights, along with numerous other Amendments.

Saying otherwise is just disingenuous.

Of course the average citizen cannot buy the HK G3 or the Valmet M76 because both are 'select fire' firearms. ALL 'select fire' weapons have been banned from being owned by the average citizen (without extensive vetting by the government) since when, '68? Earlier?

And I wasn't talking about what the government could have, might have, almost did, tried to, talked about or any other thing that actually did not happen. So I'll stick to what I said. The Federal government has not passed, except for bump-stocks, any actual permanent (as in made law) firearm/firearm accessory/ammo ban in at least 30-years. Again, it's not the Federal government, but the State governments you need to be concerned about when it comes to your firearm and 2A 'Rights'.

Tell those living in Mass, NY, NJ, CA, WA, OR, and a half-a-dozen more States how "Relaxed" their gun laws have become over the past Quarter-Century, as you claim. I do agree though, and have said that .gov uses the individual States to achieve it's goal - they just don't do it "head-on" as I said in my comment.

 

[Chuckie]

What does that have to do with it? They had a great deal of influence the could have used to kill or at least neuter GCA-68. Instead they encouraged additional and unconstitutional restrictions on our 2A rights. Very much contrary to their purpose. Serial numbers were not required on firearms until passage of that bill. They also forbade sale of firearms via mail order. Just two specific items in a whole package of infringements and obstructions.

The reason I said what I did was because of your comment;

"Oh, let's see now... How about the National Rifle Association agreeing to provisions of the Gun Control Act of 1968... Need I say more?"

As if you believed that because the NRA agreed to the provisions . . . , that it means anything. Well it doesn't mean jack-squat whether they agreed with the Gun Control Act of 1968 or not because they have NO authority to submit Bills or pass any Laws. At best they can suck-up to politicians, maybe pass on a few 'gifts' in their bid to influence the politicians they own, but in the end it's still the politicians in the House, Senate, and ultimately Congress that submit the Bills and pass the Laws that affect our gun 'Rights'.

Again, the "restrictions" you are talking about were things passed into law more than 30-years ago (Gun Control Act of 1968). I know time seems to fly by really fast when you get old but, again, all the Federal bans or restrictions (except, again, for bump-stocks) happened a long time ago.

 

[dennishoddy]

I know he's a staunch supporter, but he suggested a "compromise" that completely ignores the simple fact that any such rule is unconstitutional. Frankly, I'm done compromising. Even in jest.

Obviously you skimmed over the portion in my original comments that I’d fight to the death for the right to own one.
But I’m not letting anyone pull the wool over my eyes to say they are for disabled people. I’m no stranger to a gun range, watching perfectly capable people pull the “pistol” right up their shoulder and fire. I’ve never seen the Velcro straps utilized as they were designed.
40 million sold? I would wager the farm we don’t have that many disabled gun owners even if they owned a dozen each to reach that mark.
Y’all go ahead and shoot your SBR’s. I once again support it.

 

[Glocktogo]

Of course the average citizen cannot buy the HK G3 or the Valmet M76 because both are 'select fire' firearms. ALL 'select fire' weapons have been banned from being owned by the average citizen (without extensive vetting by the government) since when, '68? Earlier?

And I wasn't talking about what the government could have, might have, almost did, tried to, talked about or any other thing that actually did not happen. So I'll stick to what I said. The Federal government has not passed, except for bump-stocks, any actual permanent (as in made law) firearm/firearm accessory/ammo ban in at least 30-years. Again, it's not the Federal government, but the State governments you need to be concerned about when it comes to your firearm and 2A 'Rights'.

Tell those living in Mass, NY, NJ, CA, WA, OR, and a half-a-dozen more States how "Relaxed" their gun laws have become over the past Quarter-Century, as you claim. I do agree though, and have said that .gov uses the individual States to achieve it's goal - they just don't do it "head-on" as I said in my comment.

Congratulations, you’re completely wrong. Thanks for proving my point!

 

[Glocktogo]

Obviously you skimmed over the portion in my original comments that I’d fight to the death for the right to own one.
But I’m not letting anyone pull the wool over my eyes to say they are for disabled people. I’m no stranger to a gun range, watching perfectly capable people pull the “pistol” right up their shoulder and fire. I’ve never seen the Velcro straps utilized as they were designed.
40 million sold? I would wager the farm we don’t have that many disabled gun owners even if they owned a dozen each to reach that mark.
Y’all go ahead and shoot your SBR’s. I once again support it.

To be fair, I have. I’ve seen the original brace (which Sig implemented into their AR lineup first), being used exactly as intended. I used to RO Honored American Veterans Afield range days in San Antonio. These braces allowed disabled veterans to shoot arms similar to what they used in the military again, with their families in attendance.

After the very first event at the National Shooting Complex, we observed that there were a couple of vets in attendance who couldn’t even shoot with the brace equipped guns due to the severity of their injuries. By the time the event rolled around the next year, some enterprising volunteers rolled up with an adaptive shooting device that allowed veterans with quadriplegia to aim and fire a rifle from their motorized wheelchairs, using their mouths and breath.

Disabled From The Neck Down, Still Slinging Lead -

In a video posted on the Popular Front Instagram page, a man completely disabled from the neck down is seen shooting an AR15-patterned rifle from a mobile rest. Patrick Bronte was disabled when he was 16 years old in a tragic accident but has continued his involvement in the shooting sports by...

www.thefirearmblog.com

Yes braces have been adapted to combat the unconstitutional 2nd Amendment infringement posed by the NFA Act of 1934, but they were invented and yes used to allow disabled shooters to shoot long guns with one hand/arm.

 

[BillM]

The reason I said what I did was because of your comment;

"Oh, let's see now... How about the National Rifle Association agreeing to provisions of the Gun Control Act of 1968... Need I say more?"

As if you believed that because the NRA agreed to the provisions . . . , that it means anything. Well it doesn't mean jack-squat whether they agreed with the Gun Control Act of 1968 or not because they have NO authority to submit Bills or pass any Laws. At best they can suck-up to politicians, maybe pass on a few 'gifts' in their bid to influence the politicians they own, but in the end it's still the politicians in the House, Senate, and ultimately Congress that submit the Bills and pass the Laws that affect our gun 'Rights'.

Again, the "restrictions" you are talking about were things passed into law more than 30-years ago (Gun Control Act of 1968). I know time seems to fly by really fast when you get old but, again, all the Federal bans or restrictions (except, again, for bump-stocks) happened a long time

Congratulations, you’re completely wrong. Thanks for proving my point!

Got to be more difficult and expensive in 1986. In 1982 I was trying to figure out how to come up with $1000 for a Browning .50 cal M2 machine gun. I wouldn't have any idea what it would cost now, but saw a real M-16 a few years ago for only $20,000 when they were only $400-500 back in 1982. Plus the $200 tax stamp. I had an AR-180 about then. Semi-auto, they were only a couple hundred dollars. And a 1903 Springfield was around $100.

 

[Glocktogo]

Got to be more difficult and expensive in 1986. In 1982 I was trying to figure out how to come up with $1000 for a Browning .50 cal M2 machine gun. I wouldn't have any idea what it would cost now, but saw a real M-16 a few years ago for only $20,000 when they were only $400-500 back in 1982. Plus the $200 tax stamp. I had an AR-180 about then. Semi-auto, they were only a couple hundred dollars. And a 1903 Springfield was around $100.

Yes for full auto May 19, 1986 was the cutoff for registering civilian full auto or select-fire arms. Many companies still manufactured and/or imported semi-auto variants of arms such as G3’s, Valmets, AK’s and FAL’s, until they were banned from import. The workaround after the bans were parts kits, many of which were subsequently banned. Then it was sporterized rifles such as Vepr and Saiga, which were banned by Obama, and on and on etc., etc.

There are MANY guns that we simply can’t buy off the shelf new or newly imported that have been federally banned within the past 30 odd years. Pretty much all modern gun bans originate from or are designed with the input and guidance of the federal government. Operation Fast and Furious was a coordinated ATF/DoJ/DoS/White House operation designed to implement a permanent federal ban on “assault weapons”.

They will try again.

 

[BillM]

Yes for full auto May 19, 1986 was the cutoff for registering civilian full auto or select-fire arms. Many companies still manufactured and/or imported semi-auto variants of arms such as G3’s, Valmets, AK’s and FAL’s, until they were banned from import. The workaround after the bans were parts kits, many of which were subsequently banned. Then it was sporterized rifles such as Vepr and Saiga, which were banned by Obama, and on and on etc., etc.

Chuckie doesn't know as much as he thinks he does. 1994 Assault Weapons ban is the only 2A violation I can remember off hand that had a sunset provision. IMHO, ALL federal and state laws should have them.