Three Reasons Gun Control Isn't Going to Happen

[Caster]

Remember another thing guys, when it comes to banning guns.

They cannot ban machinists. That's what I did for about 13 years. The last four we're spent on a CNC mill. Now, I may not be able to painstakingly handcraft a Browning A bolt, but I can make something will work reliably and be very accurate. Have you seen the backwater crapholes that make perfectly serviceable AKs?
They can't can't get rid of squat!
I cannot do it myself but I know men who can; a good die maker worth his salt can build you a die set capable of stamping out magazine body halves. Tack weld them together and there you go. Winding a spring is nothing, the floor plate is simple, the follower is the hardest part to make and still quite easy to make.

There's nothing they can do so everyone just relax. During WWII England made Stens in bicycle shops.
If inspiration hits you, buy a mill and a lathe and learn to use them. Edited December 22, 2012 by Caster

[Mark@Sea]

Well, the majority of the country was against Obamacare. They couldn't get it done in the house, so they 'deemed it passed' and wrote it in the senate, then rammed it through the house with bribes and extortion. First everybody thought it would never get passed, then everybody thought the Supremes would shoot it down. Yet look where we are now. I am not so sure.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

It all stems on Boehner, or his replacement. We need a bulldog of a Speaker, and a heck of a Whip. House is the

only defense we have and, if it fails there, we would be getting what Obama wants us to have. We don't want that.

 

Really, we need a purge of the GOP, replaced by Tea Partiers who would not give a damn about the Potomac Fever

and start ramming bills down their throats in the Senate. It would only take one primary bill passed in the House to

sink the Senate. That would be a true middle class tax cut of ten percent, leaving everything else alone. If Obama

got to veto it, or the Senate wouldn't take it up, the Senate would go red and Obama would be neutered. That may

be why House members are pushing on the secret ballot for Speaker. They've been catching so much flack from

their constituents and certain talking heads that they have to start looking conservative again.

 

If that scenario plays out, there will be no ban even considered. That commission Biden is in charge of probably won't

even meet. Obama gets his fiscal cliff, taxes go up, and Obama would lose a lot of the bark he thinks he has. Of course,

I was wrong about the election, also.

[mcurrier]

History of gun control is cautionary tale for those seeking regulations after Conn. shooting http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/history-of-gun-control-is-cautionary-tale-for-those-who-want-more-regulations/2012/12/22/73a07294-4afc-11e2-a6a6-aabac85e8036_print.html

[Oh Shoot]

"I see the gunshow loophole going away"

 

This one does not upset me personally because I don't buy and sell guns to and from strangers.  I don't want the heat from the BATFE because I bought a stolen gun or sold one to someone who shouldn't have it.  When they talk about the loop hole are they talking about one guy passes another guy and they buy/trade guns or are they talking about the guy who sets up a table with 20 guns on it and they treat it like a private party sale?

 

It means banning all private sales. Everything would have to go through FFL with background check for transfer.

 

- OS

[mikegideon]

It means banning all private sales. Everything would have to go through FFL with background check for transfer.

 

- OS

But, since there will be no records of transactions prior to this piece of "meaningful legislation", it won't be all that meaningful. Unless they know where they are now (registry), they won't know when it changed hands.

[Oh Shoot]

But, since there will be no records of transactions prior to this piece of "meaningful legislation", it won't be all that meaningful. Unless they know where they are now (registry), they won't know when it changed hands.

 

True, but it'll pretty much stop most folks from selling to anyone they don't already know, which is how most personal sales happen.

 

- OS

[mikegideon]

True, but it'll pretty much stop most folks from selling to anyone they don't already know, which is how most personal sales happen.

 

- OS

I've only had two (oops) transaction with somebody I didn't know. The rest were with people we both know :).

Edited December 23, 2012 by mikegideon

[Guest 6.8 AR]

It means banning all private sales. Everything would have to go through FFL with background check for transfer.

 

- OS

And I don't see that happening. May get a  law passed just to make more of us into criminals, but so be it.

There are already criminals doing that. The pool would get bigger. It would be like having to go to a used

car lot to sell your car to another. Barbara Streisand!

 

I don't see it happening.

Edited December 23, 2012 by 6.8 AR

[mikegideon]

And I don't see that happening. May get a  law passed just to make more of us into criminals, but so be it.

There are already criminals doing that. The pool would get bigger. It would be like having to go to a used

car lot to sell your car to another. Barbara Streisand!

 

I don't see it happening.

Hell, if we turn into criminals, at least they'll protect our rights for a change :)

[Oh Shoot]

And I don't see that happening. May get a  law passed just to make more of us into criminals, but so be it.

There are already criminals doing that. The pool would get bigger. It would be like having to go to a used

car lot to sell your car to another. Barbara Streisand!

 

I don't see it happening.

 

I reckon.

 

But it will stop you and me from hanging out on the front steps of a gunshow selling a few pieces to random folks, even if they show a driver's license or even HCP.

 

Would stop me, anyway. Course, I haven't sold/traded but two pieces in my whole life to someone I didn't already know, but many do. Hell, there's a pile of folks just on TGO where holding onto a piece for 6 months or more seems the exception rather than the rule. :)

 

- OS

Edited December 23, 2012 by Oh Shoot

[mikegideon]

I reckon.

 

But it will stop you and me from hanging out on the front steps of a gunshow selling a few pieces to random folks, even if they show a driver's license or even HCP.

 

Would stop me, anyway. Course, I haven't sold/traded but two pieces in my whole life to someone I didn't already know, but many do. Hell, there's a pile of folks just on TGO where holding onto a piece for 6 months or more seems the exception rather than the rule. :)

 

- OS

As we have discussed. This is the most valid complaint the anti's have.

 

Now, for the one thing that I haven't seen discussed. What if these zealots craft legislation that will destroy the value of our existing assets, especially AR-15's? Would you take part in a major sell-off to anybody that had the money? Let's assume there's a little prior warning, and no legal penalty.

[Oh Shoot]

As we have discussed. This is the most valid complaint the anti's have.

 

Now, for the one thing that I haven't seen discussed. What if these zealots craft legislation that will destroy the value of our existing assets, especially AR-15's? Would you take part in a major sell-off to anybody that had the money? Let's assume there's a little prior warning, and no legal penalty.

 

Well, the only two things I can see that would do that is:

 

- banning possession of them totally. If they do that, would there really be a market before? Or banning them with an attached gummit buyback for a certain length of time, hard to imagine that one, and banning them totally seems more constitutionally possible than the latter to me.

 

- making them NFA possessions only. Then the question is would I pay $200 more for each of the ones I have now (4), or sell some or all. Maybe the mags would become NFA items too, with a tax on each one? (no serial numbers though, dunno how that could work).

 

- OS

[mikegideon]

Well, the only two things I can see that would do that is:

 

- banning possession of them totally. If they do that, would there really be a market before? Or banning them with an attached gummit buyback for a certain length of time, hard to imagine that one, and banning them totally seems more constitutionally possible than the latter to me.

 

- making them NFA possessions only. Then the question is would I pay $200 more for each of the ones I have now (4), or sell some or all. Maybe the mags would become NFA items too, with a tax on each one? (no serial numbers though, dunno how that could work).

 

- OS

We don't know what our geniuses will propose. Say banning them totally, and you find someone that's willing to give you 300 bucks for each?

Edited December 23, 2012 by mikegideon

[Oh Shoot]

We don't know what are geniuses will propose. Say banning them totally, and you find someone that's willing to give you 300 bucks for each?

 

Just don't know, Mikey. I suspect I might become a criminal and sell a couple, stash a couple, maybe stash all four,  but it would only be a "survivalist/revolution" bent that would make me do it.

 

Certainly, if I thought there's no chance of them being able to be used in my lifetime due to anarchy from meltdown or a patriot uprising, I'd probably let them go, as don't even have anyone to leave them to, which I guess would also be illegal even if I did.

 

- OS

Edited December 23, 2012 by Oh Shoot

[mikegideon]

Just don't know, Mikey. I suspect I might become a criminal and sell a couple, stash a couple, maybe stash all four,  but it would only be a "survivalist/revolution" bent that would make me do it.

 

Certainly, if I thought there's no chance of them being able to be used in my lifetime due to anarchy from meltdown or a patriot uprising, I'd probably let them go, as don't even have anyone to leave them to, which I guess would also be illegal even if I did.

 

- OS

I'm asking because it's crazy out there right now. Can the government zero the value of those assets? If they do, what is our recourse? Or, will they just make us look like homos...

 

Edited December 23, 2012 by mikegideon

[Oh Shoot]

I'm asking because it's crazy out there right now. Can the government zero the value of those assets?...

 

Well, no gun or heh, clip, that was actually in folks' possession has ever been outright banned from ownership, so I'd imagine there would be some constitutional probs there. I don't think the "deprived of property/due process of law" is really referring to legislative acts but rather individual folks in court proceedings, but then I'm no constitutional lawyer. Actually, not any kind of lawyer at all, come to think of it. :)

 

The closest of course was the machine gun ban, but you were allowed to keep them for 200 clams and there was a pretty good window within which to chose to do it or not.

 

- OS

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Mike, did you get some new ones in those art/deco mods? I promise I won't tell. :D

 

That's a pretty pink art/deco camo Eotech.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

They'll only zero value all the assets not attached to anything and make tangible, once again, have meaning.

[Oh Shoot]

They'll only zero value all the assets not attached to anything and make tangible, once again, have meaning.

 

Wanna try that one again? :)

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Zeroing asset value, Mac. The guns are tangible, have real value, unlike our currency.

[Oh Shoot]

Zeroing asset value, Mac. The guns are tangible, have real value, unlike our currency.

 

Just couldn't make sense of the arrangement of words, maybe just me.

[mikegideon]

Just couldn't make sense of the arrangement of words, maybe just me.

Nope. Wasn't just you :)

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Nah, probably me. :D

 

"I'm asking because it's crazy out there right now. Can the government zero the value of those assets?..."

That's what I responded to. I was flatulating at that moment.

Edited December 24, 2012 by 6.8 AR

[Jonnin]

I hope he is right. I see the gunshow loophole going away and maybe it cost more for a CCW and the extra cost going to "Crime Prevention"

at this point, given the "we will do it" obama and company attitude, a tax & loss of private sales would be a frustrating but almost a winning situation for us (compared to other stuff that is being considered).    Its still a loss, but that would be a small price to pay vs if the AWB or mag capacity or "all semi autos" bans were enacted.

Edited December 24, 2012 by Jonnin