Posted on 12/12/2019 6:40:02 PM PST by Farcesensitive
The state of Washington on Thursday proposed bans on the sale of "assault weapons" and high capacity magazines, part of a package of gun laws meant to address a rising wave of U.S. mass shootings.
If successful, Washington would become the seventh U.S. state to ban assault weapons, which it defines as semi-automatic rifles with at least one military feature, and the ninth to limit the capacity of ammunition magazines.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Harry Tracy killed six people with a common 30-30 Winchester. No one declared the Winchester to be “bad”.
Oh, thanks. I never heard that expression before.
UN must be planning something big, this is a global gun ban going on. They’re trying the same thing in Canada too.
Make it mandatory that those with more than 1 year of University, cannot ever vote unless they serve in a combat zone. The happiest society would be one without any lawyers, and laws written simple enough for Elementary students to understand.
That would be a great start to a new State.
Wow- the military isn’t going to be able to buy high capacity magazines anymore? Because ONLY the military and a very very few civilians with special permits actually own assault weapons
Good to hear that.
The “militia” mentioned in the 2nd amendment was defined in several rulings by the SCOTUS as a body of citizens organized for military purposes. They then went on to say that when summoned to appear as members of the militia, they were expected to appear with weapons supplied by themselves and of the type in common military use at the time. (Presser vs Illinois, Miller)
Accordingly, the firearms that that citizen militia should have access to should have the most direct military utility of those available. For example, the AR-15 in 5.56 NATO configuration is the closest modern equivalent to the Brown Bess musket. It’s ammo is interchangeable with standard military ammunition, almost all of it’s parts; save those of the fire control group that enable selective fire options, are interchangeable also.
Semi-auto fire from an individual non belt fed shoulder firearm is superior to full auto fire for most tactical situations anyway, save for gaining initial fire superiority, suppressive fire, the final stages of an assault, and when firing along final protective lines in a defensive situation.
We must not be afraid to DEMAND access to military grade firearms, of whatever type, for the individual militia soldier. The 2nd amendment ain’t about shooting bunny rabbits. It is about protecting the community from internal and external threats, and opposing tyranny. In short “necessary to the security of a FREE state.”
This is the kind of stupid $h1t politicians dream up. None of these morons have the slightest clue about firearms.
Semi-automatic rifles with at least one military feature. Where do I start? Garand M-1, Johnsons, carbines, etc.
During the Hungarian Revolution, they took on Russian tanks using lengths of water pipe jammed between the treads and the rear sprockets. This popped the tread, leaving the tanks turning in circles, to be finished off with Molotov cocktails.
Where there’s a Will, there’s a Way.
That Is an
Assault Vehicle!
Wow!
“the west will comply, the east will hide them.”
And the Deep South will not participate at all.
The Supreme Court agrees with you (and me). From U.S vs Miller (1938)
In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a "shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length" at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense. Aymette v. State, 2 Humphreys (Tenn.) 154, 158.
The court was lied to by the government during oral briefs. Sawed off shotguns (the subject of the case) were used in the trench warfare during WWI. The court ruled in favor of the lying U.S. attorneys because they didn't know any better, and the other side was not presented for brief. What the court was saying, was only military weapons were protected by the Second Amendment (which is wrong IMO). The NFA is therefore unconstitutional on its face.
Good reply, and your tagline is spot on. It is my fervent wish also.
France stunned after truck attacker kills 84 on Bastille Day in Nice
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/15/nice-attack-leaves-84-dead-and-france-in-shock
How did that work out in Colorado?
“Make it mandatory that those with more than 1 year of University, cannot ever vote unless they serve in a combat zone.”
So I can’t vote? Go find some nutcase site to post that crap.
“Laws written simple enough for Elementary students to understand”
I take it you can’t understand our laws? Try a few years of University, or at least high school lol.
The more insidious gun control advocates will be pushing hard for a leftist woman to be nominated for the Supreme Court. She’ll have groomed a false appearance of being conservative for years in advance. It’s not a new tactic.
The elephant in the room in regards to those commie states:
* They legalize dope dealing with the red herring of comparing dope smoking to the right to keep and bear arms, as though dealing dope were a constitutional right.
* Then they outlaw modern sporting rifles to disarm straight and sober people for the legitimized dope gangs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.