HR 6257 - AWB Reinstate

I have a hard time reading this mumbo jumbo, but, I think it says i can keep it if i had it upon enactment of the bill.

but his website says
"CHICAGO (WLS) -- More flights have been cleared to land at O'Hare Airport. The Federal Aviation Administration is lifting flight caps that have limited arrivals at the airport since 2004.

The weapons were banned in 1994 but that ban expired in 2004. Monday, Kirk joined local law enforcement leaders to push for new legislation that would get assault weapons off the streets.

Kirk says, without the ban, even police officers in full body armor are in danger.

"They can feel somewhat protected from a normal pistol, but against weapons like these body armor offers no significant protection for a police officer," said Rep. Mark Kirk, (R) Illinois.

The proposed legislation would make it illegal to manufacture, transfer or possess semi-automatic assault weapons and ammunition.

Opponents say the law will not cut down on the number of violent crimes. "

that little word "possess" is what bothers me

also on his page is a photo of him and Nancy Pelosi together. Man this guy has screwed himself politically
 
Castle was a completely useless jackass as gov of Delaware and it seems he's anxious to show parade his idiocy around Congress now. FWIW, even though he's a "republican", he's just an inch or two to the right of his buddy Joe Biden.
 
Obama surely will!
Click to expand...

He probably let the states decide if they want it or not, which means a bunch of states that will and a bunch that won't. Of course McCain would also probably sign it too and Bush has already said he would sign it, but the later is no surprise. He signed in plenty of antigun laws over the past 8 years, especially early on. All it takes it attaching it to another bill and make it sound like you are cracking down on the criminals or the evil commie/islamic terrorist/gang members/christian militia terrorist group/current enemy of the week. The tactics have worked for both parties for decades.
 
He probably let the states decide if they want it or not, which means a bunch of states that will and a bunch that won't.
Click to expand...

Because Obama is such a staunch supporter of states rights. Give me a break, Hes a big government socialist. Not that McCain is much better....
 
Politically, he is in complete accordance with the district he represents. On the national scene, yes, he may be screwed. On the other hand, I don't think he cares about his national status. Kirk has always gone his own way, and often does not toe the line when it comes to the national party positions. He has his own group of representatives that he meets with regularly, and they work out positions that work for them, not for what the national party wants.
Some of that is to his credit. Sometimes not.
 
They still push it as cop protection from gangs...even though we have squashed that arguement several times. Do they think the public are this stupid, or are really that few Congress critters knowledgeable about firearms?
 
what peeces me off is the deal with pistol grips. thats just retarded. "Spray from the hip" I wish somebody would correct the media on their retardedness.
Bayonet lugs?? So that little bayonet lug could kill somebody? HMM how?? Might need a BAYONET attached to it.
Threaded muzzle?? WHY?? How the hell are you going to put a muzzle break on it???

And mostly ...shroud. To protect the users hands from getting burned??? Hell, I hold the front of the magazine more than the evil shroud anyhow. These people are freaking idiots!! SERIOUSLY!! How did these tards get into office????
 
RESTRICTION ON MANUFACTURE, TRANSFER, AND POSSESSION OF CERTAIN SEMIAUTOMATIC ASSAULT WEAPONS.

Ok in english. "POSSESSION OF" Does this mean it will be illegal to own the ones you have now? or does it mean they can not manufacture anymore.
 
No, you can keep what you got, ...if you can figure out how to prove you owned it before the ban was instated.

"7 ‘‘(v)(1) It shall be unlawful for a person to manufac
8 ture, transfer, or possess a semiautomatic assault weapon.
9 ‘‘(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession
10 or transfer of any semiautomatic assault weapon otherwise
11 lawfully possessed under Federal law on the date of the
12 enactment

I still see lots of problems with LEO if the ban passes. I foresee lots of searches and seizures and " prove you owned it before the ban" thing.
And that cute little rifle you got probably wont do much without ammo.
May the force be with the NRA on this one.
 
We need to throw in a rider to another bill that's guaranteed to pass that states that a 75% majority is needed to pass any restrictions on firearms OR imposes a 5 year prison sentence on anyone voting for such restriction.
 
"I foresee lots of searches and seizures and " prove you owned it before the ban" thing."

While I don't doubt that's true, I would always have thought that it would be required that the prosecution to prove otherwise, since you have a right to be silent. I think the government should have to establish all elements of the crime.

Tim
 
"I foresee lots of searches and seizures and " prove you owned it before the ban" thing."

While I don't doubt that's true, I would always have thought that it would be required that the prosecution to prove otherwise, since you have a right to be silent. I think the government should have to establish all elements of the crime.

Tim
Click to expand...

Glad you trust the legal system...
 
While I dont have a receipt of when I bought my rifles, I guess I need to find out a way to prove when I bought it. Maybe a warranty confirmation from the manufacturers? I have not even though of "proving I owned it " before the ban. I just fear getting pulled over by the state trooper and getting searched. And him finding my AR-15 in the backseat. Crap snowballing from there..."hey, thats a nice rifle, why do you own it? IT's illegal " blah blah balh....
 
maybe the week before the ban takes place, they'll have an announcement that everyone who has one has to bring it to their local police station and register it (or pay for a tax stamp on it) so that it will be a known grandfathered firearm?
 
That is indeed scary. And this guy is from Texas? Amazing. He must be one of the old "I believe the Second Amendment protects my right to hunt and to have the PC firearms with which to do so". Get rid of him. With friends like that, who needs the VPC and the Brady Bunch.
 
I kinda feel sorry for the cops. I mean, If I was a cop I dont think I would want to go door to door in the ghetto's asking for guns. And I really would'nt want to go to some of these backwoods area's around the country asking either. Scary thoughts IMO! I think I'll sell all mine now and avoid the confusion.;)
 
Well, as it reads now it clearly states that any firearm or "large capacity ammunition feeding devices" will have to be clearly marked with the date of manufacture starting on the date that this is enacted. It also states in sec 3.4 that the burden of proof is on the government and that the lack of such a serial number (containing the date of manufacture) is presumptive proof that it is not subject to the prohibition.

That applies to the magazines, I can only assume that the same rationale will apply to the serial numbers on rifles as well. So the way I see it anything without the required date in the serial number will be considered "pre-ban" and be legal to own.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top