cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Wed May 10, 2023 3:24 pm
MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed May 10, 2023 2:58 pm
cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Wed May 10, 2023 1:36 pm
MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed May 10, 2023 10:21 am
cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Wed May 10, 2023 10:11 am
MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed May 10, 2023 9:16 am
cradle, making these weapons illegal nationally, coupled with a national buyback program, will separate the law abiding citizens who simply want to go hunting with a rifle or have a handgun for personal protection from the nutcases who want to use military-style assault weapons for... assault.
Automatically, these weapons won't be legal in "open-carry" areas, rather they will immediately be seen as a violation of law.
It will change the culture of what is acceptable, much less attractive.
I've suggested that a smart compromise would be allowance of these weapons at well regulated gun ranges, with secure storage there only. But any possession away from those ranges would be illegal.
One problem with what you propose. The serious hard core gun fanatics will never go for it. The biggest drawback is making criminals out of millions of gun owners with the stroke of a pen. These folks are not bullchitting you when they say you'll have to pry their guns out of their cold dead fingers. If that is the road you think the government should travel down then good luck with that. I can only see the chitstorm that will arise when any government official proposes a nation wide ban.
In the real world MD that is never going to happen. The gun culture and the love of firearms is too deeply ingrained in our culture. IMO the best option for starters is making it very tedious to go through the process of purchasing a high powered semi automatic weapon. That being said there are 50 different states that view this issue totally differently. You will not find any common ground in what Texas thinks is prudent as opposed to what New York thinks.
We've already done it and it worked, cradle. On a national basis.
It won't eliminate all of these weapons overnight, but those who wish to not be criminals will either turn them in "buy-back" or store and use them at the gun range. Big boon to gun range businesses, there will be many more...but they can be regulated for safety procedures etc.
I don't expect the national government to be going door to door, but when someone is suspected of committing a crime and a warrant is obtained, the illegal possession will have legal consequences. These can be escalatory in terms of #'s of weapons, sale to others, use in public areas, etc. A simple fine for the one weapon someone "forgot" but had well secured. But those are unlikely to ever be an issue if the person never uses it publicly or doesn't commit some other crime and then be subject to a warrant. It's only going to be the flagrant offenders and/or perpetrators of other crimes (eg drug or human trafficking).
But no brandishing in public, no shooting off one's porch...that draws attention and a response with real teeth.
Culture change takes time, but we can bend this thing.
So you think a nationwide ban by the federal government will pass muster when it winds up which it most certainly will in front of the SCOTUS? The right of the people to keep and bear arms not being infringed creates a huge bar to cross. You think your side really wants to fight this battle at this point in time? I wish your peeps were as hard-line when it comes to stopping the flow of fentanyl into the country. I already know what your gonna say. Well Cradle that is a fight for some other day. In the words of John Fogarty SOMEDAY NEVER COMES but you already know that now don't you? FTR and I could be wrong people were still able to purchase assault weapons even during the Brady ban. I use to peruse the gun counter at Dicks and Gander Mountain and I remember some variety of these rifles still for sale. I know they didn't suddenly vanish from the gun cases. I'll dig into it a little deeper.
It didn't take much digging MD. The assault weapons ban you speak of banned and I emphasize this... CERTAIN TYPES of Semi automatic weapons. A little fact that you left out.
King Andy tried the same thing with the SAFE ACT in NYS. The folks at Ruger made and are still making big money from the sales of their mini 14. Those sales have been off the charts. You already know the magic ingredient in the Ruger weapon IT DOES NOT REMOTELY RESEMBLE AN AR 15. Performance and ballistic wise it is the same God damn rifle that can still be purchased with the former King of NYS approval. How can you effectively ban a weapon type that you struggle to define? Well you can try but then it gets complicated. Well MD the gubmint decided a number of years back than banning booze would be a good thing for the nation. Refresh my memory how that worked out at the end of the day. Alcohol is not even protected by the Constitution like fire arm ownership is.
ugh, brick wall.
Regulation of weapons is definitely Constitutional, and defining the weapons to be included is not actually "hard", as I believe ggait earlier made clear much earlier, as well as others have explained. It's been done before and can be done again, on a national basis. And if the list or definition requires updating, that too can evolve as needed.
Moreover, under my suggested program private citizens can not only "keep and bear arms" (regulated), they can "keep and bear" even assault weapons, at a well-regulated gun range.
We can also regulate the process of purchasing ANY gun, as well as its storage, and the appropriate time and place of its discharge.
All Constitutional, including under the current SCOTUS regime.
Ranting otherwise isn't persuasive.
You have a lot of ideas. The problem is once they are introduced to the real world they fall to pieces. Do you really think some one is going to pluck down a thousand dollars for his/her dream rifle and hand it over to people he doesn't know at a secure facility for his own protection. Do you ever actually think through some of troublesome little devilish details in your ideas?? Your heart is in the right place but you just don't seem to be in touch with reality as to how they could be implemented. The only way your idea works, and it is not a bad idea in theory can only be accomplished on a voluntary basis.
ohh, it's "voluntary"...you want to own an assault rifle? Fine, pass the background checks and agree to use them only as allowed at a well-regulated gun range. Want to rent one at the gun range, that's fine too.
Already own one, take it to the gun range for safe keeping. Well-regulated can include insurance requirements.
Or turn it into the buy-back program.
Will there be scofflaws? sure.
And if they're super quiet about it and don't provide reason for a warrant that otherwise discovers their illegal storage of such a weapon, no big deal...but most people who intend to be "law-abiding citizens" will do either the buy-back or the safe storage at the range.
But hey, if you're saying that this will discourage people from put down "a thousand dollars for their dream (assault) rifle", I sure hope so!
No one
should consider this their "dream rifle"; that's the problem, people imagining, "dreaming" of being some sort of warrior...let's go shoot up a school or shoot at someone turning around in the driveway...stop those "dreams"