Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
bulletproofzone.com
Vanchoff v. James would have been the case to watch, but FPC dropped it without explanation.Ninth circuit? lol
Also, there has been more decisions since then that could change things.
Also, if taken to the SC, it would probably be shot down.
It would be a waste of time.You should have just said I don't want my narrative to be disrupted by the facts because I think facts are stupid and may disrupt my narrative, so don't insert facts into my narrative.
That would have been the intellectually honest thing to say.
Did the court overrule the last AWB?
Nope!
Bullshit. Let’s. The very thing you try to eliminate from the discussion is the crucial part of the discussion.Let's not get dragged down into a stupid argument of what an "assault weapon" is.
We can stop right here. For, if that idiotic mindless self-serving contention were true (which of course it simply isn’t), then Congress could call a cap gun an “assault weapon” and seek to regulate it or ban it.An assault weapon is whatever Congress decides it is,
Vanchoff v. James would have been the case to watch, but FPC dropped it without explanation.
In his Heller opinion, Scalia said the Second Amendment, "like most rights", is not unlimited.
Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.
What the Supremes would have to determine with an AWB is if an AR-15, for example, is a dangerous and unusual weapon.
Like a hand grenade.
Or a machine gun.
Or a tank.
Or a nuke.
Let's not get dragged down into a stupid argument of what an "assault weapon" is. An assault weapon is whatever Congress decides it is, and to argue about how stupid it is they include one kind of gun and not another is a waste of time.
In 1994, Congress passed an AWB: Text of H.R. 4296 (103rd): Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act (Placed on Calendar in the Senate version) - GovTrack.us
The AWB also banned large capacity magazines, though existing large capacity magazines were grandfathered. You could still buy and sell grandfathered magazines.
It is my opinion that the AWB had a negligible impact on the gun homicide rate in America.
The 1994 AWB expired in 2004.
I imagine any future AWB will have a longer list of "assault weapons", and will police large capacity magazines more thoroughly.
Now let's get down to the meat and potatoes of why this is an exercise in futility.
First and foremost, 99 percent of all gun homicides do not involve an assault weapon.
Assault weapon shootings make splashy headlines. Lots of blood and sadness.
The press tries to connect every mass shooting to assault weapons. Every time there is a mass shooting involving an assault weapon, the following days are filled with headlines screaming about how many mass shootings per week we are suffering, with the unspoken but deliberate implication these mass shootings all involve assault weapons.
The fact is, the vast majority of mass shootings do NOT involve an assault weapons ban.
Guns used in mass shootings U.S. 2023 | Statista
Handguns are the most common weapons used in mass shootings in the United States. Other types of guns used in mass shootings include rifles and shotguns.www.statista.com
Handguns are the most common weapon type used in mass shootings in the United States, with a total of 151 different handguns being used in 103 incidents between 1982 and November 2022. These figures are calculated from a total of 137 reported cases over this period, meaning handguns are involved in about 75 percent of mass shootings.
Here is the definition of a mass shooting: Mass shooting | Definition, Statistics, Weapons, & Locations
mass shooting, also called active shooter incident, as defined by the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), an event in which one or more individuals are “actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a populated area. Implicit in this definition is the shooter’s use of a firearm.” The FBI has not set a minimum number of casualties to qualify an event as a mass shooting, but U.S. statute (the Investigative Assistance for Violent Crimes Act of 2012) defines a “mass killing” as “3 or more killings in a single incident.”
It is my opinion an Assault Weapons Ban is theater for the rubes which has little to no effect on the gun violence problem in the United States.
Fire away!
An assault weapon is whatever Congress decides it is,
Hand grenades are regulated under the National Firearms Act ("NFA"), a federal law first passed in 1934 and amended by the Crime Control Act of 1968. The 1968 amendments made it illegal to possess "destructive devices," which includes grenades. (26 U.S.C. § 5801.) There's no doubt that a live hand grenade designed for military combat fits within the law's provisions—non-military people may not possess them.It is not illegal to own a grenade, machine gun, tank, or even a nuke.
Hand grenades are regulated under the National Firearms Act ("NFA"), a federal law first passed in 1934 and amended by the Crime Control Act of 1968. The 1968 amendments made it illegal to possess "destructive devices," which includes grenades. (26 U.S.C. § 5801.) There's no doubt that a live hand grenade designed for military combat fits within the law's provisions—non-military people may not possess them.
www.drivetanks.com
I was just talking about this with a contractor from the UK. The subject of the mandatory confiscation in Australia came up. I told him that could not happen here because of our Second Amendment.Nobody on the left talks about it but the argument centers on confiscation. Forced confiscation of firearms from law abiding citizens (ironically) at the point of a gun is the ultimate goal. If democrats can figure out how to do it and not violate a couple of Amendments in the Bill of Rights you might be on a train headed for a concentration camp sometime in the near future.
After watching this regime give billions of dollars in weapons, and equipment to third world extremists, sans background checks; and trading a notorious gun runner for a drug smuggler... The government can shove every single gun law it has ever written, or ever will directly up its fucking ass.Let's not get dragged down into a stupid argument of what an "assault weapon" is. An assault weapon is whatever Congress decides it is, and to argue about how stupid it is they include one kind of gun and not another is a waste of time.
In 1994, Congress passed an AWB: Text of H.R. 4296 (103rd): Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act (Placed on Calendar in the Senate version) - GovTrack.us
The AWB also banned large capacity magazines, though existing large capacity magazines were grandfathered. You could still buy and sell grandfathered magazines.
It is my opinion that the AWB had a negligible impact on the gun homicide rate in America.
The 1994 AWB expired in 2004.
I imagine any future AWB will have a longer list of "assault weapons", and will police large capacity magazines more thoroughly.
Now let's get down to the meat and potatoes of why this is an exercise in futility.
First and foremost, 99 percent of all gun homicides do not involve an assault weapon.
Assault weapon shootings make splashy headlines. Lots of blood and sadness.
The press tries to connect every mass shooting to assault weapons. Every time there is a mass shooting involving an assault weapon, the following days are filled with headlines screaming about how many mass shootings per week we are suffering, with the unspoken but deliberate implication these mass shootings all involve assault weapons.
The fact is, the vast majority of mass shootings do NOT involve an assault weapons ban.
Guns used in mass shootings U.S. 2023 | Statista
Handguns are the most common weapons used in mass shootings in the United States. Other types of guns used in mass shootings include rifles and shotguns.
Handguns are the most common weapon type used in mass shootings in the United States, with a total of 151 different handguns being used in 103 incidents between 1982 and November 2022. These figures are calculated from a total of 137 reported cases over this period, meaning handguns are involved in about 75 percent of mass shootings.
Here is the definition of a mass shooting: Mass shooting | Definition, Statistics, Weapons, & Locations
mass shooting, also called active shooter incident, as defined by the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), an event in which one or more individuals are “actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a populated area. Implicit in this definition is the shooter’s use of a firearm.” The FBI has not set a minimum number of casualties to qualify an event as a mass shooting, but U.S. statute (the Investigative Assistance for Violent Crimes Act of 2012) defines a “mass killing” as “3 or more killings in a single incident.”
It is my opinion an Assault Weapons Ban is theater for the rubes which has little to no effect on the gun violence problem in the United States.
Fire away!
After watching this regime give billions of dollars in weapons, and equipment to third world extremists, sans background checks; and trading a notorious gun runner for a drug smuggler... The government can shove every single gun law it has ever written, or ever will directly up its fucking ass.
Hand grenades are regulated under the National Firearms Act ("NFA"), a federal law first passed in 1934 and amended by the Crime Control Act of 1968. The 1968 amendments made it illegal to possess "destructive devices," which includes grenades. (26 U.S.C. § 5801.) There's no doubt that a live hand grenade designed for military combat fits within the law's provisions—non-military people may not possess them.
I was just talking about this with a contractor from the UK. The subject of the mandatory confiscation in Australia came up. I told him that could not happen here because of our Second Amendment.
I also asked him if he had heard of all the Molon Labe people we have running around.
Amen. After releasing one of the world's most notorious arms dealers to the Russians, I don't ever need to hear another DemoKKKrat mention "gun control" ever again. They just forfeited that battle forever.
Look at the numbers.
Australia did not give up its assault weapons at all.
They all just pretended they disappeared.
www.vox.com
