Military Arms Channel - AWB 2013 Video

This is a discussion on Military Arms Channel - AWB 2013 Video within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; I just sent my message also....

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 68
Like Tree34Likes

Thread: Military Arms Channel - AWB 2013 Video

  1. #16
    Member Array the6shooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    458
    I just sent my message also.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #17
    Moderator
    Array Bark'n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    West Central Missouri
    Posts
    9,917
    Mac forgot to mention one important fact.

    All your weapons which may be grandfathered, but will force you to register them as an NFA item... Along with the photo ID, fingerprints and mountain of paperwork which will accompany each gun being registered, it also means a $200 tax on each gun registered!

    Say you have 5 handguns, 3 rifles and a shotgun you plan on registering as NFA weapons just for the privlege of having them grandfathered. You gonna plop down $1,800 just for the privlege of keeping your Glocks, M&P's, Sig's and AR's?

    Of course, the government is all for that. Millions of people trying to register millions of weapons at $200 a pop coming into the government's coffers. They see that as a new form of untapped revenue and don't think for a minute they won't collect the maximum tax they can get. Heck, they may even make it a $500 tax instead of the usual $200 tax they have for SBR's, Suppressors & Select Fire weapons.

    TX expat, no intention to hijack your thread, but if anyone hasn't read the excellent commentary by J.D. Longstreet and posted in the thread "Too good not to share", I encourage everyone stop by and read it.
    TX expat likes this.
    -Bark'n
    Semper Fi


    "The gun is the great equalizer... For it is the gun, that allows the meek to repel the monsters; Whom are bigger, stronger and without conscience, prey on those who without one, would surely perish."

  4. #18
    Member Array vanagonnuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    203
    One last point I have too, What happened to having leaders that also had served in some sorta millitary/navy level type of service? dianne seems more like she should be punching dates in the back of libary books NOT re-difing our rights and amendments....it's no wonder DC doesn't have a clue on AW's or even a gun...its all info from the movies

    I need some tums.
    Last edited by vanagonnuts; December 29th, 2012 at 12:41 AM. Reason: more complaining.

  5. #19
    Senior Member Array MilitaryArms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    553
    Quote Originally Posted by Bark'n View Post
    Mac forgot to mention one important fact.

    All your weapons which may be grandfathered, but will force you to register them as an NFA item... Along with the photo ID, fingerprints and mountain of paperwork which will accompany each gun being registered, it also means a $200 tax on each gun registered!

    Say you have 5 handguns, 3 rifles and a shotgun you plan on registering as NFA weapons just for the privlege of having them grandfathered. You gonna plop down $1,800 just for the privlege of keeping your Glocks, M&P's, Sig's and AR's?

    Of course, the government is all for that. Millions of people trying to register millions of weapons at $200 a pop coming into the government's coffers. They see that as a new form of untapped revenue and don't think for a minute they won't collect the maximum tax they can get. Heck, they may even make it a $500 tax instead of the usual $200 tax they have for SBR's, Suppressors & Select Fire weapons.
    In the past these fees have been waived. When the ATF reclassified the Street Sweeper and USAS 12 as "destructive devices" the registers were not required to pay the tax. They most likely would do the same otherwise it would likely fail a court challenge.
    Bark'n, Crashoften and TX expat like this.
    Please visit my YouTube channel: The Military Arms Channel

  6. #20
    Member Array Frado's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Some where in Michigan
    Posts
    126
    I am only discerning and not judging but she reminds me of the Evil Emperor Palpatime on Star Wars. Almighty GOD help us all...

  7. #21
    VIP Member Array Crowman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    West Allis WI
    Posts
    2,761
    Senator Feinstein intentionally "stacked the deck" in order to get compromises from those that might flat out reject a weaker bill.

    As to the posted video I did find a possible misunderstanding or her bill. No, I am not in any way defend her bill. At around 6:30 into the video he talks about Glock and other handguns will be banned however after viewing a summary of the bill she will introduce I do see it as he did. The following is from the summary: "Bans the sale, transfer, importation, or manufacturing of:
    Certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and have one military characteristic." As I see it unless your handgun has a military characteristic(why that makes it more dangerous is anyone's guess) it will not be banned. Although in the summary no weapon will be allowed to have more than a 10 round magazine(detachable or fixed)

    He did fail to inform(other than a flash blurp) that in the summary along with registration for grandfathered weapons that when the registered owner dies the weapon will be fortified to the government. Such weapons will no longer be able to be passed on to heirs. Essentially at some point in time no civilian will ever again own such weapons.

    He did bring up the cost of registration. Again not in defensive of her bill she covers that in her summary:"Dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration." With registration one has to buy a tax stamp for $200.00 for each registration. I am not sure but I believe that is $200.00 a year(someone correct me if I'm wrong on per year).

    A side FYI: The prior bill that included the "assault" weapon ban was written by Joe Biden. This is the bill that created a "definition" for "assault" weapons. Mainly it was created so the public would come to believe that if you call a weapon an "assault" weapon its only propose is to be used by the military and law enforcement because they should be the only ones to deal with bad people with weapons. It sure did work, even many of 2nd amendment advocates have bought into the rhetoric of there is no need for civilians to have such weapons. The 2nd amendment per se has nothing to do with need it is about the right of the people.
    "One of the greatest delusions in the world is the hope that the evils in this world are to be cured by legislation."
    --Thomas B. Reed, American Attorney

    Second Amendment -- Established December 15, 1791 and slowly eroded ever since What happened to "..... shall not be infringed."

  8. #22
    SDG
    SDG is offline
    Member Array SDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    35
    Quote Originally Posted by Crowman View Post
    ...handguns, shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and have one military characteristic." As I see it unless your handgun has a military characteristic(why that makes it more dangerous is anyone's guess) it will not be banned...
    Is the light/laser rail considered a "military characteristic"?

  9. #23
    Moderator
    Array Bark'n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    West Central Missouri
    Posts
    9,917
    Quote Originally Posted by MilitaryArms View Post
    In the past these fees have been waived. When the ATF reclassified the Street Sweeper and USAS 12 as "destructive devices" the registers were not required to pay the tax. They most likely would do the same otherwise it would likely fail a court challenge.
    Good point Mac, and thanks for that information.

    However, that is of little consolation considering the gravity of the entire proposal by Sen. Feinstien. I find her conscious dissemination of disinformation and her general lack of comprehension of facts regarding all weapons in general to be repugnant.

    One would think that banning guns being her signature legislation, she would be as intimately knowledgeable of weapon nomenclature as my Marine Corps Drill Instructors were.
    -Bark'n
    Semper Fi


    "The gun is the great equalizer... For it is the gun, that allows the meek to repel the monsters; Whom are bigger, stronger and without conscience, prey on those who without one, would surely perish."

  10. #24
    VIP Member Array pittypat21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,487
    I emailed my senators and representative for GA last night after finding out about the bill. My hope is that it will be shot down, without any compromises being made. I'm hoping and praying that it won't even make it out of the senate. We'll see, though.
    "Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everyone you meet."
    -General James Mattis, USMC

  11. #25
    Moderator
    Array Bark'n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    West Central Missouri
    Posts
    9,917
    Here's another consideration...

    Say one intends to be a "conscientious objector" and choose not to register your guns in order to have them "grandfathered." Instead, you choose to tell the authorities that you've sold them in legal "private sales" prior to the ban, or they were stolen, or lost in the infamous "boating accident."

    Well, you might as well just bury all of them until the zombie apocolypse because they'll be useless.
    You won't be able to go shoot them at any public range or get caught with them in your possession at any time.

    You won't even be able to use your Glock (or whatever weapon) for self defense without in the end, going to prison for possessing a "prohibited weapon." You may not get gigged for the lawful use of lethal force for self defense, but they will throw you in prison for the possession of a federally prohibited weapon.
    -Bark'n
    Semper Fi


    "The gun is the great equalizer... For it is the gun, that allows the meek to repel the monsters; Whom are bigger, stronger and without conscience, prey on those who without one, would surely perish."

  12. #26
    Senior Member Array MilitaryArms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    553
    We have not seen the characteristic list. They could make any rail a characteristic or having a detachable magazine a characteristic. We don't have the full bill yet. They also exempt "900" firearms from the list of banned items. This is a very big list and I would like to see it, assuming the list exists yet.
    Bark'n likes this.
    Please visit my YouTube channel: The Military Arms Channel

  13. #27
    Senior Member Array MilitaryArms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    553
    Quote Originally Posted by Crowman View Post
    He did fail to inform(other than a flash blurp) that in the summary along with registration for grandfathered weapons that when the registered owner dies the weapon will be fortified to the government. Such weapons will no longer be able to be passed on to heirs. Essentially at some point in time no civilian will ever again own such weapons.
    I'm not sure how I can mention something in text as a "flash blurb" then be accused of not mentioning it...

    He did bring up the cost of registration. Again not in defensive of her bill she covers that in her summary:"Dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration." With registration one has to buy a tax stamp for $200.00 for each registration. I am not sure but I believe that is $200.00 a year(someone correct me if I'm wrong on per year).
    You are incorrect. The comment of dedicated funding likely has nothing to do with a tax on transfers. The funding would be to pay for the cost of all the ATF and FBI agents that would have to be hired to process the paperwork and enforce the new law. The $200 tax is something you pay once in your life per firearm. Not all taxes are $200. Registering a AOW is only $5. Regardless, this tax would likely be waived as it has been in the past.
    Please visit my YouTube channel: The Military Arms Channel

  14. #28
    Moderator
    Array Bark'n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    West Central Missouri
    Posts
    9,917
    Quote Originally Posted by MilitaryArms View Post
    I'm not sure how I can mention something in text as a "flash blurb" then be accused of not mentioning it...


    You are incorrect. The comment of dedicated funding likely has nothing to do with a tax on transfers. The funding would be to pay for the cost of all the ATF and FBI agents that would have to be hired to process the paperwork and enforce the new law. The $200 tax is something you pay once in your life per firearm. Not all taxes are $200. Registering a AOW is only $5. Regardless, this tax would likely be waived as it has been in the past.
    I agree.

    And regardless of whether they charge a tax or not for registering your "grandfathered" weapons, you are very much correct that in the end, it's still "registration" of the gun/serial number, and attaching that to an "owner." And historically, all gun registrations have led to gun confiscations!

    That is the crux of the situation. Once they have individual guns tied to specific owners, they know just where to go when they come to get them. And you better be able to produce them, or have a plausible excuse why you can't. Which could get ugly.
    -Bark'n
    Semper Fi


    "The gun is the great equalizer... For it is the gun, that allows the meek to repel the monsters; Whom are bigger, stronger and without conscience, prey on those who without one, would surely perish."

  15. #29
    Member Array DenverPilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    22

    Military Arms Channel - AWB 2013 Video

    Quote Originally Posted by Bark'n View Post
    That is the crux of the situation. Once they have individual guns tied to specific owners, they know just where to go when they come to get them. And you better be able to produce them, or have a plausible excuse why you can't. Which could get ugly.
    A Bill of Sale to a fake dead Chicago voter won't cut it? ;)

  16. #30
    Senior Member Array MilitaryArms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    553
    I will also mention that the one characteristic we know for certain on the "no go" list is a pistol grip. Any firearm with a pistol grip and detachable magazine is subject to this proposed law. Handguns have only one grip, a pistol grip (hence the name). The list of 900 excluded firearms is likely so lengthy because it probably includes things like popular handguns, or so we can only hope.
    Please visit my YouTube channel: The Military Arms Channel

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

2013 awb
,
900 exempt guns
,
900 exempted guns list
,
900 firearms exempted list
,
900 guns exempt list
,

awb 2013

,
list of 900 exempt guns
,
list of 900 specific exempt guns
,

military arms channel

,
possible weapons to be banned in 2013 awb
,
what guns are exempt from the awb
,
what is the nra doing to stop the awb?
Click on a term to search for related topics.