Regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act.
- Thread starter bobk538447
- Start date
I just found this video of Kalashnikov47
- YouTube
Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.youtube.com
I don't care if primers are $1/1000 or $1000/1000, that's just plain stupid.
I'm prepared to put as much effort into obeying any BS "law" passed by this administration as all the courts did into investigating voting irregularities.
If they can’t convict Trump, they can’t pass that crap. We can thank Regan for the state of the nfa. It’s political theatre, just like the shit republicans go on about when they are playing for control and don’t do. Crying about it it is just about like plotting to spend your reparations check.
It goes back much longer than that. 1934 was the beginning of the end.
blah blah blah blah till they do something . talk is cheap and I still ain't handing over my property .
Between all the passion and anger associated with this possibility ... fully justified IMHO ... the core question for each of us would be: "What will you do?". The choices appear to be:
The interesting "permutation" of this is to consider how we'd react if existing AR ownership was "grandfathered" ... and the only weapons included are those sold "in the future". That changes those "What would I do?" questions just a bit.
I'd have to ask if my perception of my Constitutionally derived right to "keep and bear arms" ... personally interpreted by me to include weapons banned or in my belief "unreasonably regulated" ... is compelling enough to me to risk arrest and imprisonment to avoid payment and registration if this proposal turns into an actual and enforceable law?
Not rendering a judgement on this hypothetical ... just thinking out load.
What we really need to do now is to use every legal tool in the toolbox to keep this decision from ever making the trip from "Hypothetical" ... to "Actual".
- Comply, pay, and legally retain possession
- Not comply, don't pay, and illegally retain quietly and in secret
- Participate in some "buy-back" (confiscation) program
- Engage in open and public opposition and defiance
- Sell weapons in this class to others willing to pay and register
The interesting "permutation" of this is to consider how we'd react if existing AR ownership was "grandfathered" ... and the only weapons included are those sold "in the future". That changes those "What would I do?" questions just a bit.
I'd have to ask if my perception of my Constitutionally derived right to "keep and bear arms" ... personally interpreted by me to include weapons banned or in my belief "unreasonably regulated" ... is compelling enough to me to risk arrest and imprisonment to avoid payment and registration if this proposal turns into an actual and enforceable law?
Not rendering a judgement on this hypothetical ... just thinking out load.
What we really need to do now is to use every legal tool in the toolbox to keep this decision from ever making the trip from "Hypothetical" ... to "Actual".
It actually goes back to Teddy Roosevelt and the devil Woodrow Wilson (federal reserve).
Woodrow Wilson might be the single most evil president ever...
History shows registration ALWAYS goes down one road, history always shows when the balance of power between the people and the state gets too far off bad things happen.
Power comes first from words and thoughts, failing that it comes from force, the amendment are in their order for a damn good reason.
Don’t ignore history, insanity is doing the same thing over again and expecting a different result.
Remember a bunch of hippies who just wanted to smoke a leaf and get high had the balls to say “f’ you” and laugh in the face of bad “laws”, and they won.
Try to at least be as brave as the stoner eating pop tarts in his moms basement.
Power comes first from words and thoughts, failing that it comes from force, the amendment are in their order for a damn good reason.
Don’t ignore history, insanity is doing the same thing over again and expecting a different result.
Remember a bunch of hippies who just wanted to smoke a leaf and get high had the balls to say “f’ you” and laugh in the face of bad “laws”, and they won.
Try to at least be as brave as the stoner eating pop tarts in his moms basement.
TLDR - Man up, don’t be a pussy. There will be a surplus of one and a deficit of the other further down the road.
The weak can rationalize anything and they will follow the dominant winner no matter what deeds he has done to come out the other side. Everyone should be able to agree that today we have a degenerate justice system, at best, and treasonous at worst. Let’s hope the same justice system does not evolve into openly genocidal but the public evidence is pointing to a greater evil in motion.
I absolutely do and so does everyone else on this forum. You see there are certain rights granted to me by God that the gov cannot take away. That’s the original intention of the BOR and the Constitution as a whole is something many of us swore to uphold and defend. What I choose to protect myself with is nobody’s Biz but my own. You see the law is the law until it ain’t. The only reason this place goes round is because 90% or more of the people out there follow the law. There are some things out there that many feel pretty strongly about and one of them is the 2A. Besides what do you think they going to come after next, if they get this? Everything else, literally. Ever seen how much damage someone with a knife can do in a crowd of people? How bout a hammer? How bout a truck? You don’t need Guns to do major stuff and in a lot of ways these other things are worse and easier to get. Banning guns isn’t going to do anything but make a few people feel better. Fortunately, God granted us the 2A and the entire purpose is to put limitations on the gov. So you do you and I’m sure everyone else will do them.
Similar threads
