“(iii) a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned;"
I wonder who dreamed this one up.
I believe the only reason the Biden Administration hasn't moved on gun control yet is that they are waiting until they pack SCOTUS. They know that they can't obtain all they want with the current Court makeup so they have to pack it with liberal activist judges. He did form a judical commission yesterday to explore such a possibility. By this time next year they will have accomplished packing the Court and then look out!I may be optimistic but I personally have not heard Biden mention gun control since being elected. I know he wants it but I don't think the democrats will do much this early in the administration. They won't risk the mid terms and loosing all that power. They will want to get alot more progressive/communist crap passed first before pulling the gun control lever Im sure they remember the carnage they suffered after the 1st assault weapons ban. After the midterms though all bets are off. Kamala will be president by then. And everyone knows shela Jackson Lee is a kook. So yea gun control is comming and in a big way but I think we have 2-4 years...So by the time things smooth out...well you know
Yes. The general "you" that didnt care about bumpstock bans because "you" dont own any and think they were silly.I assume you mean "you" in a general term, not to me?
Ok that's what I figured, just checking. Didn't want to come off as a bumpstock banner.Yes. The general "you" that didnt care about bumpstock bans because "you" dont own any and think they were silly.
Now if that applies to you... you can be offended.
It's their way of trying to outlaw AR and AK style pistols. They don't want you to be able to have a hand guard. If you have to hold the barrel directly it gets too hot to shoot.“(iii) a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned;"
I wonder who dreamed this one up.
...but, LEOSA!Maybe it will for those here that voted for it.
The person you seein the mirror every morning.So who exactly pays for this over-reaching 'psychological evaluation'?
I really wish some could get off the high horse of they were against the bump stock ban.Yes. The general "you" that didnt care about bumpstock bans because "you" dont own any and think they were silly.
Now if that applies to you... you can be offended.
The psych eval is even worse than I thought. It includes other members of the family, even ex-spouses.
Thank youI’ll post a draft for our elected officials later this evening.
Just how do you propose to get criminals to submit to a background check? Because people who know they aren't allowed to possess guns are simply going to ignore this law and continue buying guns on the street the same way they do today.There is no reason why common background checks that so many of us have already won't work with firearms ownership.
Totally agree. Although I've decided to use the funds to invest in the market. Having a secure financial future is very important. I still have ammo, spare parts, and gear; but I will be divesting of those quickly as I no longer need them.It is a good thing that the financial impact of your (the government) handling of the whole COVID crisis forced me to sell all of my items that held any value, including my guns, to insure my family had food on the table and to purchase my medications. I have nothing left to register.
WAY too far...
There is no reason why common background checks that so many of us have already won't work with firearms ownership.
To drive a truck with Hazardous Materials and/or food, it's about 4 of these Homeland Security checks already...
And that's just to drive a truck!
Checks with LE and criminal records, and of course, past mental health issues should be plenty.
Prying into a person's family and friends group is just WAY too far if there isn't a red flag alert (family reporting strange behavior, threats, ect.).
I've never opposed instant background checks, cuts a lot of the rif-raf out and gives legal coverage to the seller.
I've been a proponent of "Assault Weapons" background checks ONCE.
No reason to do it on every firearm/magazine (like NFA devices), that just doesn't make sense, way too much red tape & expense for common items like magazines and the millions of semi-autos that take detachable magazines.