Page 129 of 255 FirstFirst ... 2979119122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136139179229 ... LastLast
Results 1,665 to 1,677 of 3305
  1. #1665
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Eastern PA
    Posts
    68,943
    Quote Originally Posted by barbar View Post
    Well it was in the movie with Brad Pitt. who version of fiction do you want to use.

    So my accuracy stands. thank you!
    I did not expect this blatant of leftist justification from you. I really thought you were not as irrational as the other leftists on this site. Just goes to show; even I can be wrong.
    Government is a disease...
    ...masquerading as its own cure…
    Ecclesiastes 10:2 NIV


  2. #1666
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Atlanta GA area
    Posts
    21,057
    Quote Originally Posted by air1 View Post
    The world economy. Because the US economy is the world economy. The republicans are playing with fire and they're going to get burned.
    You obviously do not know much of what you say... Care to post some verifiable numbers of GDP for each of the G-20 countries? Might learn something...
    GA-HVAC-Tech

    Quality work at a fair price with excellent customer service!

    Romans Ch's 5-6-7-8

    2 Chronicles 7:14

  3. #1667
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Rochester, NY, USA
    Posts
    14,288
    Quote Originally Posted by RoBoTeq View Post
    I did not expect this blatant of leftist justification from you. I really thought you were not as irrational as the other leftists on this site. Just goes to show; even I can be wrong.
    wait, what?
    The Last four letters


    American = I Can, Republican = I Can, Democrats = Rats


    any questions

  4. #1668
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Atlanta GA area
    Posts
    21,057
    Quote Originally Posted by air1 View Post
    Started with the republicans playing chicken Obama and holding the global economy hostage.
    You really need to speak from a position of knowing what you are speaking about... so far you are removing any doubt as to whether you are credible or a fool.

    Very quickly... folks who do not have the data to back up their statements re relegated to the classification of 'dumb liberal'. I think you are smarter than that... please do not disappoint us.

    Now I have a question for you: Do you own your business... I have a $1 bill that says you have no idea how to run a business.
    GA-HVAC-Tech

    Quality work at a fair price with excellent customer service!

    Romans Ch's 5-6-7-8

    2 Chronicles 7:14

  5. #1669
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Atlanta GA area
    Posts
    21,057
    Quote Originally Posted by RoBoTeq View Post
    I did not expect this blatant of leftist justification from you. I really thought you were not as irrational as the other leftists on this site. Just goes to show; even I can be wrong.
    Quote Originally Posted by jmac00 View Post
    wait, what?
    Yeah... Armageddon may be around the corner... given that self revelation... Might want to get right with God... things could change radically... <grin>
    GA-HVAC-Tech

    Quality work at a fair price with excellent customer service!

    Romans Ch's 5-6-7-8

    2 Chronicles 7:14

  6. #1670
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    7,759
    It would be funny if the kenyan in chief came out with a federal law banning all magazines that allow over 5 cartridges to be loaded..... even funnier if he knocked it down to 3.......lol

    Im chomping at the bit to hear those 19 things he is going to do..... though from what Ive read they are all fairly lame and dont do anything to piss gun nuts off
    YOU SHALL REAP WHAT YOU HAVE _______ SOWN

  7. #1671
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Western PA
    Posts
    25,567
    Quote Originally Posted by barbar View Post
    Firstly I would say that you are a responsible gun owner, but are you responsible out of choice or legal requirement. I am talking about you general security of your weapons. Does a gun owner have to by law have to have is guns secured, when the gun is not in his control?
    If law, then i see no issue, and the big girl can go and whistle, but what if it is by choice and you are not responsible, weapon laying around, then surely big girl would have a reason to worry.
    I see 4 ways to go
    1 Arm everybody to the back teeth
    2 Disarm all
    3 do nothing
    4 Formulate responsibility.

    I would choose 4. by what legal method is another question, as it should not directly effect the second.
    In my state, there isn't a safe storage law that I'm aware of.

    Since our government was formed by responsible people, they created it FOR responsible people.

    Mandating responsibility isn't likely to work. Since legislating an end to drugs, murder and such has worked so well....


    It's a societal issue, not a gun issue.

  8. #1672
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    2,185
    Quote Originally Posted by RoBoTeq View Post
    I did not expect this blatant of leftist justification from you. I really thought you were not as irrational as the other leftists on this site. Just goes to show; even I can be wrong.
    As it was just a bit of fun, and was not really related, I could not resist. But i am correct in the film Seven, at the end Jealousy was next to the last deadly sin. Ben was jealous, of Brad's family and killed his wife (sorry can not remember the fictional names)

  9. #1673
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Western PA
    Posts
    25,567
    Quote Originally Posted by netsalt View Post
    From what I am reading here and elsewhere keeping the guns out of the "crazies" hands is something most people agree with. What method shall we use? Currently there are many avenues for purchasing firearms that do not require a background check but some of the same people who want to keep the guns away from the crazies are totally against changing the laws.

    Just a side note, in speaking to people who know nothing about gun regulation most that I have run across are not aware that a background check is not required for purchases made at gun shows. When given this information everyone I have talked to said they would consider changing the law as OK.

    Care to educate me?


    A NICS check is required on EVERY SALE MADE by a federally licensed dealer. Doesn't matter if it's at their place of business, a gun show or a truck stop parking lot.

    The "gun show loophole" is a lot of bluster

  10. #1674
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    11,863
    Quote Originally Posted by corny View Post
    It would be funny if the kenyan in chief came out with a federal law banning all magazines that allow over 5 cartridges to be loaded..... even funnier if he knocked it down to 3.......lol

    Im chomping at the bit to hear those 19 things he is going to do..... though from what Ive read they are all fairly lame and dont do anything to piss gun nuts off
    Probably not much more than Clinton did. But, each state can pretty much do what they want.

    I'm assuming you antis won't take the time to read this though.



    The Federal Assault Weapons Ban (AWB), or Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act, was a subtitle of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, a federal law in the United States that included a prohibition on the manufacture for civilian use of certain semi-automatic firearms, so called "assault weapons". The 10-year ban was passed by Congress on September 13, 1994, and was signed into law by President Bill Clinton the same day. The ban only applied to weapons manufactured after the date of the ban's enactment.

    The Federal Assault Weapons Ban expired on September 13, 2004, as part of the law's sunset provision. There have been multiple attempts to renew the ban,[1] but no bill has reached the House floor for a vote.
    U.S. Firearms Legal Topics

    Assault weapon
    Assault weapons ban
    ATF Bureau
    Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act
    Concealed carry in the U.S.
    Domestic Violence Offender Gun Ban
    Federal Firearms License
    Firearm case law
    Firearm Owners Protection Act
    Gun Control Act of 1968
    Gun laws in the U.S. — by state
    Gun laws in the U.S. — federal
    Gun politics in the U.S.
    National Firearms Act (NFA)
    Second Amendment to the Constitution
    Straw purchase
    Sullivan Act (New York)
    Violent Crime Control Act

    v
    t
    e

    Contents

    1 Criteria of an assault weapon
    2 Provisions of the ban
    3 Compliance
    4 Expiration and effect on crime
    5 Efforts to renew the ban
    6 Assault weapons ban in New York politics
    7 Assault weapons bans in other states
    8 See also
    9 References

    Criteria of an assault weapon

    The term, assault weapon, when used in the context of assault weapon laws refers primarily (but not exclusively) to semi-automatic firearms that possess the cosmetic features of an assault rifle that is fully automatic. Actually possessing the operational features, such as 'full-auto', changes the classification from assault weapons to Title II weapons. Merely the possession of cosmetic features is enough to warrant classification as an assault weapon. Semi-automatic firearms, when fired, automatically extract the spent cartridge casing and load the next cartridge into the chamber, ready to fire again. They do not fire automatically like a machine gun. Rather, only one round is fired with each trigger pull.[2]

    In the former U.S. law, the legal term assault weapon included certain specific semi-automatic firearm models by name (e.g., Colt AR-15, TEC-9, non-select-fire AK-47s produced by three manufacturers, and Uzis) and other semi-automatic firearms because they possess a minimum set of cosmetic features from the following list of features:
    A semi-automatic Yugoslavian M70AB2 rifle.
    An Intratec TEC-DC9 with 32-round magazine; a semi-automatic pistol formerly classified as an Assault Weapon under Federal Law.

    Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:

    Folding or telescoping stock
    Pistol grip
    Bayonet mount
    Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
    Grenade launcher (more precisely, a muzzle device that enables launching or firing rifle grenades, though this applies only to muzzle mounted grenade launchers and not those mounted externally).

    Semi-automatic pistols with detachable magazines and two or more of the following:

    Magazine that attaches outside the pistol grip
    Threaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppressor, handgrip, or suppressor
    Barrel shroud that can be used as a hand-hold
    Unloaded weight of 50 oz (1.4 kg) or more
    A semi-automatic version of a fully automatic firearm.

    Semi-automatic shotguns with two or more of the following:

    Folding or telescoping stock
    Pistol grip
    Fixed capacity of more than 5 rounds
    Detachable magazine.

    Provisions of the ban

    The Federal Assault Weapons Ban was only a small part (title XI, subtitle A) of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act.

    The Act created a flowchart for classifying 'assault weapons' and subjected firearms that met that classification to regulation. Nineteen models of firearms were defined by name as being 'assault weapons' regardless of how many features they had. Various semi-automatic rifles, pistols, and shotguns were classified as 'assault weapons' due to having various combinations of features.

    The Act addressed only semi-automatic firearms, that is, firearms that fire one shot each time the trigger is pulled. Neither the AWB nor its expiration changed the legal status of fully automatic firearms, which fire more than one round with a single trigger-pull; these have been regulated by the National Firearms Act of 1934 and Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986.

    The Act also defined and banned 'large capacity ammunition feeding devices', which generally applied to magazines or other ammunition feeding devices with capacities of greater than a certain number of rounds, and that up to the time of the Act were considered normal or factory magazines. Media and popular culture referred to these as 'high capacity magazines or feeding devices'. Depending on the locality and type of firearm, the cutoff between a 'normal' capacity and 'high' capacity magazine was 3, 7, 10, 12, 15, or 20 rounds. The now defunct federal ban set the limit at 10 rounds.

    During the period when the AWB was in effect, it was illegal to manufacture any firearm that met the law's flowchart of an assault weapon or large capacity ammunition feeding device, except for export or for sale to a government or law enforcement agency. The law also banned possession of illegally imported or manufactured firearms, but did not ban possession or sale of pre-existing 'assault weapons' or previously factory standard magazines that were legally redefined as large capacity ammunition feeding devices. This provision for pre-ban firearms created higher prices in the market for such items, which still exist due to several states adopting their own assault weapons ban.
    Compliance

    The National Rifle Association has referred to the features affected by the ban as cosmetic,[3] as has the Violence Policy Center.[4]

    In addition, in March 2004, Kristen Rand, the legislative director of the Violence Policy Center, criticized the soon-to-expire ban by stating, "The 1994 law in theory banned AK-47s, MAC-10s, Uzis, AR-15s and other 'assault weapons'. Yet the gun industry easily found ways around the law and most of these weapons are now sold in post-ban models virtually identical to the guns Congress sought to ban in 1994."[5]
    Expiration and effect on crime

    Opponents of the ban claimed that its expiration has seen little if any increase in crime, while Senator Diane Feinstein claimed the ban was effective because "It was drying up supply and driving up prices."[6]

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention studied the "assault weapon" ban and other gun control attempts, and found "insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws reviewed for preventing violence," noting "that insufficient evidence to determine effectiveness should not be interpreted as evidence of ineffectiveness."[7] A 2004 critical review of research on firearms by a National Research Council panel also noted that academic studies of the assault weapon ban "did not reveal any clear impacts on gun violence" and noted "due to the fact that the relative rarity with which the banned guns were used in crime before the ban ... the maximum potential effect of the ban on gun violence outcomes would be very small...."[8]

    In 2004, a research report submitted to the United States Department of Justice and the National Institute of Justice found that should the ban be renewed, its effects on gun violence would likely be small, and perhaps too small for reliable measurement, because rifles in general, including rifles referred to as "assault rifles" or "assault weapons", are rarely used in gun crimes.[9] That study by Christopher S. Koper, Daniel J. Woods, and Jeffrey A. Roth of the Jerry Lee Center of Criminology, University of Pennsylvania found no statistically significant evidence that either the assault weapons ban or the ban on magazines holding more than 10 rounds had reduced gun murders. However, they concluded that it was "premature to make definitive assessments of the ban's impact on gun crime," and argue that if the ban had been in effect for more than nine years, benefits might have begun to appear.[10]

    Research by John Lott in the 2000 second edition of More Guns, Less Crime provided the first research on state and the Federal Assault Weapon Bans.[11] The 2010 third edition provided the first empirical research on the 2004 sunset of the Federal Assault Weapon Ban.[12] Generally, the research found no impact of these bans on violent crime rates, though the third edition provided some evidence that Assault Weapon Bans slightly increased murder rates. Lott's book The Bias Against Guns provided evidence that the bans reduced the number of gun shows by over 20 percent.[13] Koper, Woods, and Roth studies focus on gun murders, while Lott's looks at murder, rape, robbery, and aggravated assaults. Unlike their work, Lott's research accounted for state Assault Weapon Bans and 12 other different types of gun control laws.

    The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence examined the impact of the Assault Weapons Ban in its 2004 report, On Target: The Impact of the 1994 Federal Assault Weapon Act. Examining 1.4 million guns involved in crime, "in the five-year period before enactment of the Federal Assault Weapons Act (1990-1994), assault weapons named in the Act constituted 4.82% of the crime gun traces ATF conducted nationwide. Since the law’s enactment, however, these assault weapons have made up only 1.61% of the guns ATF has traced to crime."[14] A spokesman for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) stated that he "can in no way vouch for the validity" of the report.[15]
    Efforts to renew the ban

    Since the assault weapons ban expired on March 2, 2004, legislation to renew the ban has been proposed a number of times unsuccessfully.

    On March 2, 2004, the Senate voted down the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (a bill to bar firearms manufacturers and dealers from being held liable for crimes committed with their products) after a ten-year extension of the assault weapons ban was attached to it, sponsored by Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California. The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act was subsequently passed in 2005 without a renewal of the assault weapons ban.

    In the 108th Congress, Representative Carolyn McCarthy, Democrat of New York, introduced H.R. 2038, the Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2003, on May 8, 2003, before the assault weapons ban expired. It had 111 co-sponsors. The Bill would have renewed the assault weapons ban for an additional ten years and revise the definition of 'semiautomatic assault weapon'. The Bill never got out of committee to come up for a floor vote and died at the end of the 108th Congress.[16]

    In the 109th Congress, McCarthy reintroduced the same bill, on March 15, 2005. The Bill, H.R. 1312, the Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2005, which had 94 co-sponsors, never got out of committee and died at the end of the 109th Congress.[17]

    In the 110th Congress, McCarthy reintroduced the same bill, on February 17, 2007. The Bill, H.R. 1022, the Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2007, which had 67 co-sponsors, never got out of committee and died at the end of the 110th Congress.[18]

    Shortly after the November 4, 2008 election, Change.gov

    , the website of the office of then President-Elect Barack Obama, listed a detailed agenda for the forthcoming administration. The stated positions included "making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent."[19] This statement was originally published on Barack Obama's campaign website, BarackObama.com

    .[20] The agenda statement later appeared on the administration's website, WhiteHouse.gov

    , with its wording intact.[21]

    Also in the 110th Congress, Representative Mark Kirk, Republican of Illinois, introduced a bill on June 12, 2008, to reinstate the assault weapons ban for ten years and expand the list of banned weapons. The Bill, H.R. 6257, the Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization Act of 2008, had four co-sponsors, all Republicans: Michael N. Castle of Delaware, Mike Ferguson of New Jersey, and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida, and Christopher Shays of Connecticut. The Bill never got out of committee and died at the end of the 110th Congress.[22]

    On February 25, 2009 newly sworn-in Attorney General Eric Holder repeated the Obama administration's desire to reinstate the Federal Assault Weapons Ban.[23] The mention came in response to a question, about 20 minutes into a joint press conference with DEA Acting Administrator Michele Leonhart, discussing efforts to crack down on Mexican drug cartels. Attorney General Holder said: "[...] there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons."[24]

    Senator Diane Feinstein announced she would introduce a Federal assault weapons ban bill in the U.S. Senate[25] following the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting.[26]
    Assault weapons ban in New York politics
    See also: Gun laws in the United States by state

    The state of New York's version of the law is very similar to the Federal version, but New York's version does not have a sunset provision. According to the laws of the State of New York, a magazine with a capacity of more than 10 rounds manufactured after September 14, 1994 cannot be legally possessed by anyone other than a law enforcement officer. A provision of the Federal law required that gun makers stamp the date of manufacture on every newly manufactured 'large capacity' magazine. Because that requirement is no longer in effect, the New York magazine ban becomes potentially unenforceable, except with respect to those magazines manufactured during the ban and marked according to federal regulations then in effect.

    NYS Penal Law § 265.02(6) makes it a class D felony to possess "a large capacity ammunition feeding device," which is defined in Penal Law § 265.00(23) as "a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device, manufactured after [September 13, 1994], that has a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than ten rounds of ammunition." Possession of unmarked "large capacity" magazines made after the sunset of the federal ban thus subject New Yorkers to felony charges. Police and prosecutors may be able to determine actual manufacture dates of seized magazines from information not generally available to consumers, such as the dates of magazine design changes and parts assembly numbers. The New York ban thus leaves possessors of unmarked post-ban magazines at risk of felony charges since they may not know the magazines were manufactured post-sunset and not pre-ban. However, the prosecution must be able to prove that the subject in possession of the magazine had knowledge that it was in fact a post-ban magazine.

    During the period of the federal ban, ATF would issue rulings as to whether attachment of a given muzzle device on a post-ban rifle was permissible because it acted only as a brake, or impermissible because it acted as a flash suppressor. As with magazines, the New York regulatory scheme implicitly relied upon such federal regulatory determinations for enforcement of the state's ban. With the sunset of the federal ban, ATF is no longer concerned with classifying muzzle devices. New York residents now may acquire or modify rifles, attaching what they believe to be muzzle brakes, but which, at some point, New York police or prosecutors may deem to be flash suppressors, resulting in arrest or prosecution for unwitting possession of a banned rifle. [See NYS Penal Law § 265.00(22) defining "Assault Weapon" to include "a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least two of the following characteristics... (iv) a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor." There is no definition of 'flash suppressor' in § 265.00, which contains all definitions for the ban, thus leaving grounds for arrest and prosecution uncertain until what is or is not a 'flash suppressor' is resolved by state courts or clarified by statute.]
    Assault weapons bans in other states

    In addition to New York (see above), Massachusetts and New Jersey have enacted similar bans. Cook County of Illinois has enacted a similar, but more restrictive ban. California enacted one of the first bans on semi-automatic rifles in 1989, adding stricter measures to the law several times since. Connecticut has enacted a partial ban that focuses on assault weapons with certain characteristics. Hawaii and Maryland have assault pistol bans pertaining to assault weapon characteristics only and pistols.

  11. #1675
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    11,863
    Quote Originally Posted by jpsmith1cm View Post
    Care to educate me?


    A NICS check is required on EVERY SALE MADE by a federally licensed dealer. Doesn't matter if it's at their place of business, a gun show or a truck stop parking lot.

    The "gun show loophole" is a lot of bluster
    Fact is,(not Federally licensed) individuals don't have access to the NICS information system.

  12. #1676
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Rochester, NY, USA
    Posts
    14,288
    If Germany pulls all the gold home, they may decide to leave the EU and go back the German mark, that would collapse the EU in less than a month.
    The Last four letters


    American = I Can, Republican = I Can, Democrats = Rats


    any questions

  13. #1677
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Western PA
    Posts
    25,567
    Quote Originally Posted by the dangling wrangler View Post
    Fact is,(not Federally licensed) individuals don't have access to the NICS information system.
    I'm well aware of the personal sale exemption for long guns.


    Many of these goobers make gun shows sound like a free-for-all where everyone and anyone can buy a gun and that is not the truth of the matter.

Page 129 of 255 FirstFirst ... 2979119122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136139179229 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Comfortech Show Promo Image

Related Forums

Plumbing Talks | Contractor Magazine
Forums | Electrical Construction & Maintenance (EC&M) Magazine
Comfortech365 Virtual Event