Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
National assault weapon ban coming Thursday (Today)
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="tulsamal" data-source="post: 2077233" data-attributes="member: 571"><p>Those of you that actually get interviewed by the media about stuff like this... I've seen people talk on the news about a "new AWB." And they usually say something like, "It will close some of the loopholes of the previous one." (Got to love how everything you don't like is actually a "loophole.") And they will include some type of paragraph about how "Existing weapons will be grandfathered in." But somehow the media never, never, never says one word about how Feinstein's bill actually says you can't sell them, you can't transfer them. About how these newly "grandfathered" weapons legally only belong to one person. (And there's that registered weapon issue again.) When that one person dies... nobody else is allowed to own it.</p><p></p><p>You would _think_ the media would be capable of realizing what a vast increase of gov't intrusion this represents. How this would be a confiscation of private property without compensation. A guy has $10,000 worth of "military style semi-autos." Until the bill passes. Now the gov't says they aren't actually "worth anything." He can't sell them. He can't transfer them to his son. When he dies, the bill says they have to be turned into the gov't to be destroyed. In what universe could anybody call that "fair?"</p><p></p><p>So if somebody sticks a microphone in your face or turns on a camera... please point that out to them!</p><p></p><p>Gregg</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="tulsamal, post: 2077233, member: 571"] Those of you that actually get interviewed by the media about stuff like this... I've seen people talk on the news about a "new AWB." And they usually say something like, "It will close some of the loopholes of the previous one." (Got to love how everything you don't like is actually a "loophole.") And they will include some type of paragraph about how "Existing weapons will be grandfathered in." But somehow the media never, never, never says one word about how Feinstein's bill actually says you can't sell them, you can't transfer them. About how these newly "grandfathered" weapons legally only belong to one person. (And there's that registered weapon issue again.) When that one person dies... nobody else is allowed to own it. You would _think_ the media would be capable of realizing what a vast increase of gov't intrusion this represents. How this would be a confiscation of private property without compensation. A guy has $10,000 worth of "military style semi-autos." Until the bill passes. Now the gov't says they aren't actually "worth anything." He can't sell them. He can't transfer them to his son. When he dies, the bill says they have to be turned into the gov't to be destroyed. In what universe could anybody call that "fair?" So if somebody sticks a microphone in your face or turns on a camera... please point that out to them! Gregg [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
National assault weapon ban coming Thursday (Today)
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom