[MineralMan]

"How do you know which calibers, cartirdges, and actions you should have a right to. Where do you draw the line? How do you know where to draw the line?"

I don't. I have the firearms I've purchased, and the ones given to me by dead relatives. All are normal sporting firearms, with the exception of the Sharps carbine, which was military issue. All were purchased through commercial channels, except for the Sharps.

None fall into any category likely to be affected by any bans.

I'm not planning to go to war.

[Maelstrom]

Yes, they do fall under weapons to be banned.

You're guilty of everything this guy is guilty of, absent a bit of hearsay to bring the fuzz down on you. Paint you as a lunatic, owner of an arsenal, someone who uses guns, why, you probably even transport them to a targetting range...that could make your vehicle a "war wagon".

Your Sharps qualifies as "anti-aircraft" and the BATF is happy to tell you that it doesn't matter how well it works.

[El Gato]

All are normal sporting firearms, with the exception of the Sharps carbine, which was military issue...

None fall into any category likely to be affected by any bans.

If any of them have, or can accept, scopes, they'll soon be "sniper rifles" and that big old Sharps can transmorgify into a "cannon" when reported by the likes of this "reporter". If they can say that anything over .50 has "no sporting purpose" why not .40? And then there goes your Sharps.