Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
1,000 Percent Tax Increase On ‘Assault Weap
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Seadog" data-source="post: 3793645" data-attributes="member: 9018"><p>Ok devils advocate. Those suppressors and other fun toys have been restricted for a long time. Either since 1934, 1968 or 1986. I’ll use the word precedent. That’s just how it’s been and it’s been accepted. In my opinion there would be a major backlash and uproar. Not to mention I think there’d be enough people saying that there would have to be an amendment to the 2A in order for this to legally happen.</p><p></p><p>For them to attempt to do this now would be like taxing us going to the voting polls. It wouldn’t fly in my opinion especially with the Supreme Court justices that we have now thanks to the real President Donald J Trump.</p><p></p><p>These guns have been in private hands since 1955. There are millions of them in circulation. They weren’t restricted in 1968 or 1986. On top of this they are mentioned in the Heller Supreme Court decision as Justice Antonin Scalia stated. They are common place. Nothing like the few hundred thousand machine guns that are on the registry. There are millions of AR style weapons in circulation right now. The modern sporting rifle as some like to say.</p><p></p><p>I seem to recall Connecticut banning the position of these style rifles within the last decade. There was major noncompliance including law-enforcement. They estimated over 100,000 that were not turned in. I can picture the major majority of people giving the bird to the Democrats if this should ever actually succeed.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Seadog, post: 3793645, member: 9018"] Ok devils advocate. Those suppressors and other fun toys have been restricted for a long time. Either since 1934, 1968 or 1986. I’ll use the word precedent. That’s just how it’s been and it’s been accepted. In my opinion there would be a major backlash and uproar. Not to mention I think there’d be enough people saying that there would have to be an amendment to the 2A in order for this to legally happen. For them to attempt to do this now would be like taxing us going to the voting polls. It wouldn’t fly in my opinion especially with the Supreme Court justices that we have now thanks to the real President Donald J Trump. These guns have been in private hands since 1955. There are millions of them in circulation. They weren’t restricted in 1968 or 1986. On top of this they are mentioned in the Heller Supreme Court decision as Justice Antonin Scalia stated. They are common place. Nothing like the few hundred thousand machine guns that are on the registry. There are millions of AR style weapons in circulation right now. The modern sporting rifle as some like to say. I seem to recall Connecticut banning the position of these style rifles within the last decade. There was major noncompliance including law-enforcement. They estimated over 100,000 that were not turned in. I can picture the major majority of people giving the bird to the Democrats if this should ever actually succeed. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
1,000 Percent Tax Increase On ‘Assault Weap
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom