So you understand...why saying the intent with the legislation is to ban items in common use...is against "the law..." and established court precedent?
The issues with recent court filings is not the banning of anything prospectively, rather their banning of items retrospectively. This is where due process steps in, and why the laws have been overruled.
Congress can ban what they want by codifying it into law. These bans can and have stuck as the GCA and 94 AWB proved. This is because they banned from date forward, and not touching what is already there. That is why those three provisions were written into this bill. By providing retrospective protection it seals up the potential due process violation.
So whatever intent to argue about my opinion or wrong think on the matter is meaningless. The proposed laws have been tried for multiple decades in large cities (the criminals, still criminal) and have failed to have any meaningful reduction in crime. Why is gun crime committed in gun free zones? Studies have been done on the previous 1994 AWB and found little to no affect.
The 94 AWB did have an effect on crime, and the FBI stats do show this, but in the sense of the rates after the ban was allowed to sunset. There are more factors playing into the increase in violent crime, but the extent and lethality of said crimes are rooted completely in the tools used.
Is the issue about curbing gun violence or being the authority on what people should or should not own? We would need to make policy on factual information, but facts on issues don't generally make the 11pm news. Legislating on actual FBI crime stats, would require analysis...the average congress critter cares little about.
I would agree, and ad that both sides should educate themselves on the subject. You keep bringing up the “taking away commonly held weapons” but are ignoring the diatribe about taking away the M1 Garand… even though this law would not take them off the table. I think he meant an M1 Carbine but I digress.
On violent crime as a whole...where is the data showing the rifle with a detachable magazine, a pistol grip, adjustable stock, etc... is the problem? If the problem was solely caused by availability of firearms...the swiss would have the same issue, violent crime is not a thing in japan...wonder why?
The features, magazine capacity, et.al is directly attributed to the numbers of casualties incurred from these weapons per event. This is reactionary. No way the Uvalde shooter killed so many had he been wielding anything less than a weapon specifically designed to kill as many humans in as short a time as possible. You can argue all you want about the AR, AK, FAL, etc lack of select fire, but the basic premise and design is present.
The Swiss and the Japanese are a tired old argument. The Swiss have significantly better public healthcare systems, to include access to mental health services. They also have greater self-responsibility ingrained in their culture and civic duty to maintain the greater good than the US.
Japan has violent crime, but if their culture and overall safety is any indication of what a nearly all out ban on firearms can do.. then take them all away. Both of three nations are apples to oranges compared to ours. We could only hope to rise to their level.
They usually continue to make run ins with law enforcement and continue demonstrate behavior and activities with little regard for law (what is the recidivism rate of offenders?).....and by truely knowing people, who other hang out with, and what they do to earn a living....can tell you about their character. Lead people for any length of time...you pick up tells the majority of people have...in a crowd they generally... people that have a certain figettly or completely disconnected behavior( an extreme)...doesn't mean they are a threat just someone to have SA on...
You would be shocked at what skeletons even your closest friends and acquaintances are hiding. You can assume but then…
That's great...hasn't data and studies shown the policy did little to nothing for crime reduction?
Doesn’t matter the state. If an official comes to remove your firearms from your possession, and you lie about them being lost when you are just hiding them, it’s a big nono. As there are firearms involved, it’s a federal crime.Sigh...sarcasm, but those laws can very state to state, but per federal law I believe FFLs are the only one required to report.. You're statement isn't 100 percent and may be fail-able..say it aint so.... I have never professed nor profess to be the arbiter of truth on the forum or thread, nor have I .... in general... posted alluding to constantly being the smartest or most well verse in the room om any discussed topic...
I’m not triggered by you, or your words. You just exhume all the campy stereotypes of someone who would argue the way you are.Easily triggered by language? Excited to stereotype...
Eager to stereotype, well, I’ve been trained and paid to do it for years, so, guilty?
According to FBI states gun crime is committed in Chicago, using handguns, by african american males...killing african american males, factual information racist? Never addressing the problem and continuing to call facts on issues racist attempts to stop diaglog....and it has nothing to do with skin color.... socioeconomics of broken families, and crappy school systems...caused by continued failed government policy...in general...usually policy championed by "the left", when data on years of failure and no progress is available...the continue to double down...on failure.
You citing the gun lobby talking points is not racist. The ease at which you use terms like “homie-cide” is likely stemming from at least latent racist ideals.
What's your actual question, adding a vertical grip to a pistol....makes it an NFA item, though you said you were familiar? Only legal with the government approved tithe...feel free to correct my misconception...telling me I am wrong about something with evidence doesn't make me REEEE,
You states that adding a forward grip to a pistol makes it a SBR if the barrel is under 16”. You then cite this as a fact. This is patently false. By adding a forward grip, at an angle to the longitudinal axis of the barrel, removes it from the definition of a hand-gun. This act changes the classification of the firearm, by definition you “manufactured” something new. As it does not meet any of the established definitions it is classified as a AOW, and subject to the NFA. It’s only a $5 stamp, so who cares, I assume most avoid it through ignorance of the process or fingerprints and deeper background check scare them off.
ATF has reinterpreted multiple pieces of equipment or ammo on a whim under multiple occasions....via letters....or memo...through exec fiat power they don't have or wield.
They do have that power because the laws say they do. These powers, however, are easily and often argued in lower courts, or flipped around by the secretary, a political appointee, at their whim.
Easy to keep making this statement....instead of actually refuting anything...
Only one up in the feels... is the one continually directing the conversion at or about me...feel free to ignore me at any time...or continue... to keep "righting" the forum threads...from subjective wrong think. Are you trying to marginalize me bro....
Righting the threads is an attempt to keep the misinformation from spreading. The OP posted about the bill going to take his guns away. It was corrected by a reading of the plain text of the bill. You started in with inflammatory language, false information, and a seemingly soon fed understanding of this bill, gun control talking points, or gun laws in general. It’s all good man, you do you.
Yes that’s me being dismissive and condescending.
I hope the bill passes so I can listen to all the snowflakes melt down.