The editor of LA Times claims I'll be able to step right in and buy an UZI? Is that a promise?? Because I'll sure be lined up to buy one.
Now, would it be possible with a class action lawsuit against the LA times if their claim fails to come through?
It sure ain't gonna happen in California! We've got our own "AW ban". Very few "registered" their "AW's", so we're well armed for when the confiscation attempt comes. Of course, I don't know anybody who has one, and they fell in the lake on a hunting trip anyway!
The editor of LA Times claims I'll be able to step right in and buy an UZI? Is that a promise?? Because I'll sure be lined up to buy one.
They're correct, but the critical point they "forget" to mention is that the UZI (or AK-47) in question will be the CIVILIAN version, which is SEMI-automatic (i.e., one shot per trigger pull).
The gun-grabbers in the media like to leave that out in order to give the FALSE impression that it's the FULLY automatic (i.e. "machinegun") version of these firearms that will become legal to buy if the ban expires. Those will still be heavily regulated, just as they were before the AWBan passed in 1994. There is not a SINGLE machine-gun affected by the AWBan -- it deals SOLELY and EXPLICITLY with only SEMI-automatic firearms.