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
AWB- is it imminent now?
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="Blue Heeler" data-source="post: 3493522" data-attributes="member: 46613"><p><u>Yes</u> ... After the (failed) AWB the anti-gun rights folk said that the AWB didn't work because it "didn't go far enough". It was then when the ever-so disingenuous Dianne Feinstein said on her "60 Minutes" interview that if she had the votes, she would have voted for "confiscation." </p><p></p><p>Would not think that they would overreach with "confiscation". Logistics of such, court likely saying "no" and the chance of a pesky civil war that would hurt reelection chances may dampen that. BUT they will tax to restrict our rights. Sadly, Biden's plan is not to have Puto O'Rourke go door-to-door asking for guns but to tax each so-called "assault weapon" $200 and each mag $200. </p><p></p><p>Hope that the court will say that such taxes would unduly restrict one’s Second Amendment right since such tax essentially prohibits guns “in common use” for “purposes like self-defense” (<em>District of Columbia v Heller</em>). Semi-auto weapons have been defined by the court as “common” (<em>Staples v. United States</em>). While local laws may be able to screw with ownership (<em>Friedman v. Highland Park</em>), it may not be easy at the federal level. </p><p></p><p></p><p>[ATTACH=full]187167[/ATTACH]</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Blue Heeler, post: 3493522, member: 46613"] [U]Yes[/U] ... After the (failed) AWB the anti-gun rights folk said that the AWB didn't work because it "didn't go far enough". It was then when the ever-so disingenuous Dianne Feinstein said on her "60 Minutes" interview that if she had the votes, she would have voted for "confiscation." Would not think that they would overreach with "confiscation". Logistics of such, court likely saying "no" and the chance of a pesky civil war that would hurt reelection chances may dampen that. BUT they will tax to restrict our rights. Sadly, Biden's plan is not to have Puto O'Rourke go door-to-door asking for guns but to tax each so-called "assault weapon" $200 and each mag $200. Hope that the court will say that such taxes would unduly restrict one’s Second Amendment right since such tax essentially prohibits guns “in common use” for “purposes like self-defense” ([I]District of Columbia v Heller[/I]). Semi-auto weapons have been defined by the court as “common” ([I]Staples v. United States[/I]). While local laws may be able to screw with ownership ([I]Friedman v. Highland Park[/I]), it may not be easy at the federal level. [ATTACH=full]187167[/ATTACH] [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
AWB- is it imminent now?
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom