• Mossberg Owners is in the process of upgrading the software. Please bear with us while we transition to the new look and new upgraded software.

Democrat-sponsored bill will ban these guns… Is YOURS on the list?

MikeD

I'm Your Huckleberry
Staff member
Administrator
Global Moderator
"Philanthropist"
Just saw this anyone else hear about it?

Source: http://www.allenbwest.com/2015/12/outrageous-democrat-sponsored-bill-will-ban-these-guns-is-yours-on-the-list/

I'm embarrassed that there are two Republicans and one Democrat from MI supporting this.

It was only a matter of time, and I guess that time is now.

While we were all preparing for the holidays, a group of 123 Democrats in the House of Representatives was planning to basically rewrite the Second Amendment, redefine “assault weapons” as just about anything semiautomatic with a high capacity magazine and therefore preparing to ban YOUR guns.

As SHTFplan.com puts it, “If passed H.R. 4269 would literally redefine the Second Amendment as evidenced by the bill’s description, which in no uncertain terms clarifies its ultimate goal:

“To regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes.”

Perhaps you need to read that again: to ensure the right to keep and bear arms is NOT unlimited.
The bill directly targets every semi-automatic firearm in the United States including handguns, shotguns and rifles. It specifically mentions certain firearms and manufacturers, including the popular AR-15 and AK-47 rifles.

Here’s the full text of the bill. Check and see if what you own is on the banned list.


Because the law is Federal it would blanket the country with new restrictions, including making it illegal to own any magazine that exceeds a capacity of ten rounds.

And here’s the kicker, even if your weapon has a legally-defined low capacity detachable magazine but is modified with any of the following accessories, it is considered an “assault rifle” and would be outright banned in the United States.

Semiautomatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and any 1 of the following:
“(i) A pistol grip.
“(ii) A forward grip.
“(iii) A folding, telescoping, or detachable stock.
“(v) A barrel shroud.
“(vi) A threaded barrel.
“(B) A semiautomatic rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds, except for an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.
“(C) Any part, combination of parts, component, device, attachment, or accessory that is designed or functions to accelerate the rate of fire of a semiautomatic rifle but not convert the semiautomatic rifle into a machinegun.

The bill is currently before the House Judiciary committee where it will be considered and marked up or amended. The committee may stop action, or “table” a bill it deems unwise or unnecessary.

Here is a list of the committee members. You might want to let them know how you feel about this one. Let’s see if our Republican majority is good for anything…

[Note: This article was written by Michele Hickford]
 
So pretty much if it holds bullets or shells it will banned....well...not yet.
 
It won't even hit the floor for a vote... but a damn shame that folks are entertaining the thought. My guess... the Dems sponsoring the bill are trying to look big and tough in order to bolster their voter base. "Hey look... I stood for common sense gun control...vote for me"
 
It might not hit the floor...now. But as soon as we have another mass shooting. BOOM!!!! Instant legislation. They know they can just hang on to it until a perfect crisis.
 
Here is the entire bill. It will take about 15 minutes to read it all, and after you do, I assure you that you will feel like you need a shower. It even calls for confiscation of magazines over 10 rounds and even includes 22LR weapons.

(d) Seizure and forfeiture of large capacity ammunition feeding devices.—Subsection (d) of section 924 of title 18, United States Code,

And doesn't even exempt Stevens single shot shotguns by name like it does others, so if it's not expressly exempt, it must not be.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/4269/text
 
We seen this all happen before.....in a little country we call England.
 
Maybe as a whole.

But not all.

Remember, it only took the 3% to form a more perfect union. Which tells me there have always been too many pussies, but there have always been enough men to make up for it.

memory card dump pics 124.jpg
 
It won't even hit the floor for a vote... but a damn shame that folks are entertaining the thought. My guess... the Dems sponsoring the bill are trying to look big and tough in order to bolster their voter base. "Hey look... I stood for common sense gun control...vote for me"
It won't go anywhere as AK noted. I think they are only bringing it up now so that during the election next year they can use it against the republicans. Despite poll after poll showing a lack of support for anti gun laws the democrats seems primed and ready to make the next election about guns. The old saying "those that forget the past are doomed to repeat it" is true and the democrats seem to have short memories. Guns cost them Congress in 1994 and likely Al Gore the presidency in 2000.
 
In a way, I am glad to see it. No more pussy footing. They put their cards on the table. They are not trying to hide behind all that common sense BS. For that, I like it. Let everybody who has tried to rationalize it see what they really want. They want your guns...period. Take care. Tom Worthington
 
Anyone else notice this verbiage in the opening title?

To regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited
 
Anyone else notice this verbiage in the opening title?

To regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited
Yes, one of the first things to catch my eye.
 
Back
Top