Senate Bans Import of Hi-caps Mags!... (HUH ???!!!???)

Gentlemen: Attack using the law. We need to get a ruling on the Second Amendment , and to file suit on the concept that regulations on the parts of "arms" as noted in the Bill of Rights , is the same infringement as of the "arms" themselves.
Our founding fathers didn't say that you may keep and bear arms , only if they are not ugly, or have bayonets, or flash suppressors , nor did they say you may only carry 10 musket balls in your cartridge belt.

They have no possible right to limit the capacity of the arm, for that limits the ultility of the the arm , functionally limiting the Right itself.

You all do realize that part of the military purpose for flash suppressors was to serve as a muzzle protector from mud and dirt when the soldiers "hit the dirt"... so by limiting them , they render our firearms less battle worthy that those of the government.
The limits of mag capacity is obvious !

------------------
What part of "INFRINGED" don't they understand?
 
I suggest a three-pronged approach.

1. Vote Libertarian. Screw the Republicrats. Libertarian policy:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS

The Bill of Rights recognizes that an armed citizenry is essential to a free society. We affirm the right to keep and bear arms and oppose all laws at any level of government restricting, regulating, or requiring the ownership, manufacture, transfer, or sale of firearms or ammunition. We oppose all laws requiring registration of firearms or ammunition. We also oppose any government efforts to ban or restrict the use of tear gas, "mace," or other self-protection devices. We further oppose all attempts to ban weapons or ammunition on the grounds that they are risky or unsafe.

We support repeal of the National Firearms Act of 1934 and the Federal Gun Control Act of 1968, and we demand the immediate abolition of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms.

We favor the repeal of laws banning the concealment of weapons or prohibiting pocket weapons. We also oppose the banning of inexpensive handguns ("Saturday night specials"), and semi-automatic or so-called assault weapons and their magazines or feeding devices.[/quote]
They're the only party that actively agrees with all of us on this issue. www.lp.org

2. Support the more "hard-core" gun rights groups: Gun Owners of America www.gunowners.org , and Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership www.jpfo.org .

3. Menos has it right - go for a legal solution. Force the Supreme Court to determine what "shall not be infringed" means. I dare them to twist it. The Second Amendment Foundation ( www.saf.org ) is trying to use Constitutional law to bring us back where we belong. It seems the courts are afraid of this issue, as there's only one way to rule. The recent Texas case may be a runner, but we should push for more. DC's conspiracy clause sounds promising, too.
 
Bull dog , that link expired.. Maybe ytou could post the search area itself and the jey words you used to find the info....

------------------
-Essayons
 
Rob, the reason that huge numbers of mags were still coming in is campaign contributions.What do you think all that money from China buys ? Norinco, also known a China Sports, is probably the largest arms manufacturer in the world and is owned by the PRC government. Follow the money........
 
The problem is that the Supreme Court has purposely refused to hear a 2nd amendment case since 1938.
We have discussed this til we are blue in the face....THE COURT DOESN'T WANT TO OPEN THAT CAN OF WORMS!!
The only way that may happen is if the court of appeals overturns the Emerson case.

Get with it guys...think! The only way to beat this is to get legally creative...do the same damn thing the anti's have done. They attack and regulate guns thru domestic violence, women's safety, childrens safety, health and commerce issues....none of which are a direct attack on the 2nd A de jure.
Waiting for the Supreme Court to fix this is typical liberal thinking. Just like waiting for the Republicans.
Sheesh!

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes"
 
Well then here is the real question in all of this …

At what point do we stop playing the game and FIGHT ?


Where is the line that must be crossed ?
 
A tactic that has never been tried in history is a barrage of individual suits.
This concept came up when the cities first started sueing manufacters....yet no one within a particular jurisdiction filed any sort of suit against their own city for abuse of power, fiscal mismanagement or any other myriad of causes.
They are not going to come for our guns people...their first goal is to prevent future sales, then they start taking out particular guns. They know we won't turn them in but, how could we use them? Take a banned gun hunting, target shooting or the range and they get ya. One at a time....no incidents to rally the rest of us. Later on they will come up with some BS about searching moving vans...some new twist on drug crime....they catch a few more gunowners that way.

It will never be direct

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes"
 
I know this sounds stupid, but sometimes I wish that Schummer, Fienstien, McCarthy, and Klinton would all get their way. Ban all guns EVERTHING!! Make it an automatic capitol offence for the possesion of a BB gun, then gun owners would finally unite, or else I would not have to be worried about gun rights as the line would be clearly drawn and I probably would not be alive to worry about it.

Later
Daren
 
But, Darren,

How do they bleed you dry?

A drop at a time. A drop at a time.

Slow murder is murder, nonetheless.

It is known that such drastic action will cause anyone with half an oz of gumption to fight. Taking away one at a time (fully auto guns- inexpensive guns- ugly guns- exotic shotguns- heavy guns- expensive guns- guns too big- guns too small...(you get the ****ing picture) is working well enough, wouldn't you say?
 
Yes it is working, that is what makes me so mad. I have listened to people in gun stores say things like "one gun a moth isn't so bad", "You don't need an assault rifle", you all know the deal. How do we combat this? I really don't feel that what we are doing is working as well as it should. Damn the Media!!
Later
Daren
 
Tea Party
Tea Party
Tea Party
Tea Party
Tea Party
Tea Party
Tea Party
Tea Party
Tea Party


------------------
RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE
 
Morgan, THANK YOU!

All,

You know a defensive battle can't be won. Republican legislators are merely fighting a defensive battle and every year the federal government usurps more power and the rights of the citizenry are infringed that much more. If you vote Republican you are part of the problem, not part of the solution!

VOTE LIBERTARIAN! Lets go back to a government based on the US Constitution. Vote for a party not only devoted to holding the line for civil liberties but intent on actually dismantling the infringements already in place.
Pull up the web sites, read the position papers, get educated.
Don't worry about splitting the Republicans with your vote because as you see, they are only a finger in a crumbling dike of federal power legislation.
Give power back to the people and the states and leave the feds doing their jobs - national defense, trade and treaties, etc, instead of pushing legislation on that affects every facet of our lives.




------------------
Keith
The Bears and Bear Maulings Page: members.xoom.com/keithrogan
 
I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedoms of the people by gradual and silent encroachment of those in power than by violent and sudden upsurpation. J. Madison

------------------
"Solidarity is the Key"
 
Never thought I would see it. Handgun Control is more accurate than you folks.

The original law banned, effective Sep. 13, 1994, the manufacture, for other than police and military, of ammunition feeding devices (primarily detachable magazines) which hold more than 10 rounds. It did not ban the sale or possession of such devices made before that date.

BATF originally interpreted that to include an import ban as of that date. Some importers wanted to bring in old Browning HPs and pointed out that the law did not prohibit imports of hi-cap magazines after that date, only the importation of such magazines made after that date. BATF agreed and allowed the importation of hi-cap magazines made before the cutoff.

This has driven Feinstein nuts because it exposed the simple fact that she is too stupid to write a law that says what she means. If the change goes through, future magazine imports will have to be 10 rounds or less or sold only to police/military. I assume there would be another cutoff date.

No magazines would be confiscated or banned from sale by people who already own them. Feinstein and Schumer would love sending gun owners to death camps, but that day is not here yet.

Jim
 
Jim,

I believe that if you go back and read the posts that the gist of what you posted was there if not the details.

I will stand by my statement that Feinstein's goal will be the eventual banning of ALL high capacity magazines including those already owned by private citizens.
 
It occurs to me that this could also have the effect of banning the import of certain guns as a whole. For instance, my Enfield .308 was manufactured and imported with a 12 round magazine.
 
Sorry Rob. Do the search at rs9.loc.gov . You should be able to find any information on the bills there.

Pay particular attention to HR 1037 IH and S.594.IS. HR 1037 IH is the one that extends the bill to include the transfer of privately owned, pre-ban magazines.


[This message has been edited by Bulldog (edited May 16, 1999).]
 
Jim,

I think we understand the truth and your post, but, frankly, HCI and your post both could lead someone to believe that Glock could make a hi cap mag in Austria TODAY and import under current law.. such is not the case and hasn't been since 1994.

This import ban will really have little affect, most of the mags that ever would be brought into the country have already been brought in. Yes, I understand that there about 20 bazillion AK mags out there, but I don't think Norinco is swapping 3rd world rebels for pre-ban mags that they can import to the US for $2.00 each...

What I am still trying to find out is wheterh or not this new legislation will affect the transfer or possession of preban hicaps, as is mentioned above. I am still on the road, but I may check that Link in a while, thanks again Bulldog....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top