CozInCowtown
Moderator
Ever wanted to own a "real" Thompson???
****NFA 1934****
Yes they have, yes they will if they think they can get away with it.
DC
Why Would You Own An Assault Rifle?
- Thread starter Gondor
- Start date
****NFA 1934****
Yes they have, yes they will if they think they can get away with it.
DC
Pathfinder1
Well-Known Member
Hi...
They didn't BAN automatic weapons as such...what 'they' did was have more thourough background checks on prospective owners...plus a $200.00 federal tax stamp to own one.
As an aside, the first time I toured the FBI HQ in DC, they delighted in showing off the potency of the Thompson Sub-Machine Gun. Of course, they only rarely carried them then, which was...at times...a deadly flaw of the Bureau, in MuHO.
The last time I was given a tour of their HQ, they delighted in showing off the potency of the M-16. Of course, they rarely carried them, which was...at times...a deadly flaw of the Bureau...!! Again, in MuHO.
The did...eventually...give their agents pistols to replace their revolvers. Even then, many Agents had .38 cal. revolvers as their back-up (ankle holster) gun.
sent from my iBrow
They didn't BAN automatic weapons as such...what 'they' did was have more thourough background checks on prospective owners...plus a $200.00 federal tax stamp to own one.
As an aside, the first time I toured the FBI HQ in DC, they delighted in showing off the potency of the Thompson Sub-Machine Gun. Of course, they only rarely carried them then, which was...at times...a deadly flaw of the Bureau, in MuHO.
The last time I was given a tour of their HQ, they delighted in showing off the potency of the M-16. Of course, they rarely carried them, which was...at times...a deadly flaw of the Bureau...!! Again, in MuHO.
The did...eventually...give their agents pistols to replace their revolvers. Even then, many Agents had .38 cal. revolvers as their back-up (ankle holster) gun.
sent from my iBrow
Hurricane Katrina Door to Door Firearms Confiscation - YouTube
There are three different news features on this page link.
The moment the POTUS declares martial law is the moment you will no longer recognize the United States of America. And in the words of our local Sheriff, it will turn in to a bloodbath. If you want to stay in denial, that is fine, but if you want to get your eyes opened check out REX84 or UN Agenda 21.
Last edited:
Same here, mainly 'coz I got kids at home. No matter how careful I am when it comes to keeping any guns from their reach, you can never say because they can be very curious. For those that want to own an assault rifle or any kind of gun, I got no qualms about it for as long as you're responsible.
ChadTower
Active Member
Did you read that article?
Right in the second sentence:
Not only is that not a ban but it included no attempts at collecting the weapons that were already out there. That is the line I am drawing. They can "ban sales of" all they want but that's not going to remove the several million guns already out there in peoples' hands. The people who claim the gov't is actually going to try that are simply not being honest. The gov't has never tried that nor does it have the ability to do that without causing a civil war.
Of course the government can ban things. We are all too young to remember the Volstead Act, but not too young to remember The Untouchables and how ineffective they really were. If you ban guns, the Al Capone's of the world will have a field day in the U.S. because the people want guns and they will have them.
ChadTower
Active Member
I agree that this is a bad thing.
Now let's discuss how the declaration of martial law could be integrated into a law passed by the House, the Senate, and signed by the President, without the entire country going nuts while it is happening. I don't believe that could ever happen. Officials wouldn't last the month in their jobs.
Martial law during a disaster is an entirely different discussion than ongoing legislation regulating the sales, ownership, and taxation of guns.
Tell that to the honest La. people who lost their guns. And if the POTUS declared martial law, the ensuing backlash would ensure his being able to keep it in place.
Diver97
Member
One of the proposals that is currently on the table would ban the transfer of semiautomatic weapons. So If I own one and I can't sell it and I can't give it to my children what happens to it when I die? What happens in 75-100 years when all of the current owners start to die. This will effectively ban them, it will just take a little bit longer.
They are also wanting to ban the possession of parts. So what happens to the firearms currently in possession that need to be repaired? If you can't get parts and your gun doesn't work then it becomes nothing but an overpriced club.
If you truly believe that some of the people currently in the spotlight would not ban the possession of all firearms if the could get away with it then it is you who is not being honest with yourself. Some of these very people are on record stating that they would do just that.