ursavus.elemensis
New member
I need a history lesson from you guys about what happened to lawful owners of rifles when some states passed restrictive laws...
I am thinking of getting an AR-15 style 9 mm carbine, and in particular I want to get it before Hilary and Friends pass the expected new version of the Lawful Citizen Firearms Ban.
Anyway, I was talking about it with a buddy on the way home from a range trp yesterday and he said that if they ban these kind of rifles, I'd have spent all the money to get one, and then it would get taken away from me. I said that they'd never do that (take the "banned" rifles away from law-abiding citizens who owned them prior to the ban). Not in the United States of America, anyway. He replied that he thinks they would take them, and the substance of his point was that there are some states, such as the People's Democratic Republik of New Jersey and the People's Socialist Republik of Maryland, etc which heavily regulate the personal ownership of firearms, AND, his point was that when the restrictive laws were passed, anyone who owned the weapons being banned would have had to surrender them. (Did that really happen?)
Can anyone (who was around at the time, and involved with firearms) shed some light on what actually happened in those states to law-abiding people who owned rifles that have become restricted? For example, I'm sure there were people in Kalifornia who owned AR-15's before the AWB and before that state enacted it's ridiculous gun laws. So, what happened after the laws were passed? Did everyone get to keep anything they owned before the bans? Or, did they have to hand them in? I guess another example would be someone with a 30 round magazine, owned legally before a state banned them. What happened then? Did people have to dump them to avoid getting in trouble?
I am thinking of getting an AR-15 style 9 mm carbine, and in particular I want to get it before Hilary and Friends pass the expected new version of the Lawful Citizen Firearms Ban.
Anyway, I was talking about it with a buddy on the way home from a range trp yesterday and he said that if they ban these kind of rifles, I'd have spent all the money to get one, and then it would get taken away from me. I said that they'd never do that (take the "banned" rifles away from law-abiding citizens who owned them prior to the ban). Not in the United States of America, anyway. He replied that he thinks they would take them, and the substance of his point was that there are some states, such as the People's Democratic Republik of New Jersey and the People's Socialist Republik of Maryland, etc which heavily regulate the personal ownership of firearms, AND, his point was that when the restrictive laws were passed, anyone who owned the weapons being banned would have had to surrender them. (Did that really happen?)
Can anyone (who was around at the time, and involved with firearms) shed some light on what actually happened in those states to law-abiding people who owned rifles that have become restricted? For example, I'm sure there were people in Kalifornia who owned AR-15's before the AWB and before that state enacted it's ridiculous gun laws. So, what happened after the laws were passed? Did everyone get to keep anything they owned before the bans? Or, did they have to hand them in? I guess another example would be someone with a 30 round magazine, owned legally before a state banned them. What happened then? Did people have to dump them to avoid getting in trouble?