Assault Weapons?

[oldno7]

Once again--Well thought out and accurate!!
Something that is COMPLETELY lacking on the liberals side.

[oldno7]

And--heres a democrat Senator from Connecticut, he wants to ban "teflon coated bullets"

Yes--TEFLON COATED BULLETS!!!

TEFLON COATING HAS NO CHARACTERISTIC THAT WOULD MAKE IT PIERCE ARMOR-NONE!!

The only thing that can make a bullet pierce armor--is the internal components used to produce bullets.

TEFLON COATING

Would it also become illegal to spray your bullets with Pam to keep them from penetrating armor??(man, I hope they don't figure this one out)

So--heres his bill




For more information, contact our office at (202) 224-2823
http://blumenthal.senate.gov/ammunit...ck-act-of-2013
Bill Summary: Ammunition Background Check Act of 2013
This month, Senator Blumenthal will introduce legislation to require instant background checks on sales of ammunition.
Under current law, it is illegal to sell both firearms and ammunition to certain groups, including,
 felons
 fugitives
 drug addicts
 people deemed “mentally defective” by a court, or committed to a mental institution
 persons under a protective order for, or convicted of, domestic abuse
But under current law, firearms and ammunition are not treated the same way. If a felon walks into a store licensed to sell firearms and tries to buy a gun, the store will run an instant background check of an FBI database (National Instant Background Check System, or NICS), and the purchase will be denied. By contrast, if a felon walks into the same store to buy ammunition, he can load up an entire shopping cart with ammunition, pay up, and walk out, no questions asked. The store is not required to run an instant background check for ammo purchases. In fact, the store couldn't run a background check even if it wanted to – because the FBI database is only available for firearms purchases, not for ammo.
Background checks have worked in many cases to keep firearms from falling into the wrong hands.
 According to the FBI, over the last decade, more than 100 million background checks have been run on firearms purchases.
 The vast majority of checks took about 30 seconds. Approximately 700,000 people under the law were prohibited from purchasing guns – including felons, domestic abusers, and the mentally ill.
The Ammunition Background Check Act of 2013 would require that every buyer of ammunition would undergo an instant background check under the FBI’s National Instant Background Check System (NICS).
 Federally licensed gun dealers could simply use their existing system to run checks on purchasers of ammunition (either electronically or by telephone).
 Sellers of ammunition who are not federal licensees can continue to sell simply by conducting a background check through an existing licensee or by getting a federal license.
In addition to requiring background checks, the legislation would reestablish recordkeeping and reporting requirements on ammunition sales. Prior to the 1986 Firearm Owners Protection Act, sellers of ammunition had to track their inventory and keep records of their customers.
 The Ammunition Background Check Act restores these requirements so that law enforcement can ensure that sellers are complying with the law and can use seller records to solve gun crimes.
 The Act also requires sellers of ammunition to report to law enforcement when a purchaser buys more than 1,000 rounds of ammunition or when a large quantity of ammunition is stolen.
Finally, the bill bans Teflon-coated bullets and incendiary ammunition. The current federal ban on armor-piercing ammunition exempts certain kinds of Teflon-coated bullets, as well as incendiary ammunition designed to ignite or explode on contact. Both of these kinds of ammunition can defeat body armor, and pose a grave danger to law enforcement. They should be banned.

[oldno7]

This proposed democrat legislation has the potential to drive up plumbing costs.

Wait till Merica learns teflon penetrates steel.

[oldno7]

blumenthal went to:

Harvard
Yale
Cambridge

2 out of 3 Ivy's
Go education

[oldno7]

Rumors I'm hearing, are that barry zero's EO is to be about banning AR parts and magazines.

[oldno7]

Another "gun nut" according to some.........

Man, I wish these "gun nuts" could make a calm,reasoned,common sense argument just once.....



http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/13/wa...G7nbZFEBvY_80D

http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/13/wa...G7nbZFEBvY_80D


And then on the liberal talking points, jesse jackson points out AR15's are a homeland security threat, they can bring down planes with these things.

http://nation.foxnews.com/jesse-jack...ity?intcmp=fly

[James_B_Wads2000]

Wow what a thread! Been trying to catch up on it over the last couple days. The whole gun debate is a huge can of worms. This thread shows how hard it is to have a discussion about gun violence without booth sides becoming completely deaf to the other sides arguments.

My two cents:
These violent massacres are a manifestation of some serious problems in this country. Guns being the most visible and therefore easiest part to blame. A comprehensive approach to these problems should be used leaving nothing "off the table", including changes to gun laws.




James

[Iceaxe]

Alright.... I made my decision.... there is no way in hell I'm voluntarily surrendering any of my rights granted to me in the Bill of Rights.

To back it up I sent a big ass check off to the NRA this morning as they seem like the organization most intent on protecting the 2nd amendment.

I've given this a lot of thought and my conclusion is law abiding civilians have a right to be armed equally with their local police force. My reasoning is based on the fact that you as a private citizen face the exact same criminal element as your local police. Police do not carry firearms to protect you, they carry firearms to protect themselves. If it is good enough for my local police force it is good enough for me. FWIW: My local police force carries AR15's and semi auto handguns with 17 rounds in the magazine.

[Sombeech]

This thread shows how hard it is to have a discussion about gun violence without booth sides becoming completely deaf to the other sides arguments.

I was under the impression this thread remained fairly civil, replying directly to opposing views.

[oldno7]

Download and print your mags

Seems these gun guys in Merica can't be stopped.

[oldno7]

And of course, confiscation could never happen in the USA.

How many libs here have uttered these very words.

Some of us know better.

[James_B_Wads2000]

I was under the impression this thread remained fairly civil, replying directly to opposing views.

Yes this thread has been very civil (except when you told me I was fat). My point was that both sides are so deep in there opposing views that It doesn't appear to be much wiggle room. :(



James

[oldno7]

Video not working

[oldno7]

I hope Some Utah representatives have this much backbone.

[oldno7]

Yes this thread has been very civil (except when you told me I was fat). My point was that both sides are so deep in there opposing views that It doesn't appear to be much wiggle room. :(



James

I have lots of wiggle room---right here, right now--I'll give up teflon coated bullets.....There, Wiggled

[oldno7]

Starting to look like some folks don't like to be dictated to.


"Rep. Steve Stockman (R-Texas) is threatening to file articles of impeachment against President Barack Obama if he moves to change gun regulations through executive order.
“I will seek to thwart this action by any means necessary, including but not limited to eliminating funding for implementation, defunding the White House, and even filing articles of impeachment,” Stockman said.
In a statement, Stockman didn’t hold back, saying Obama is launching an “attack on the very founding principles of this republic.”
“The President’s actions are an existential threat to this nation,” Stockman said in a statement. “The right of the people to keep and bear arms is what has kept this nation free and secure for over 200 years. The very purpose of the Second Amendment is to stop the government from disallowing people the means to defend themselves against tyranny. Any proposal to abuse executive power and infringe upon gun rights must be repelled with the stiffest legislative force possible.”

[oldno7]

I'm thinking maybe if Anonymous would shut down barry zero's daughters, i phones and i pads, he wouldn't have so much time on his hands for tyranny.

hell hath no furry like 2 teenage daughters, unable to text!!!

[Iceaxe]

I have lots of wiggle room---right here, right now--I'll give up teflon coated bullets.....There, Wiggled

I agree with giving up Teflon bullets.... and to improve the deal I'm also willing to toss those pop up shoulder thingy's into the mix....

Sent using Tapatalk

[Sombeech]

Yes this thread has been very civil (except when you told me I was fat). My point was that both sides are so deep in there opposing views that It doesn't appear to be much wiggle room. :(



James

Is there a single solution offered by the gun control crowd that would reduce violence in any way? No sane person wants violence, no matter what side of the fence they are on. But the usual conclusion from a gun control supporter is "Well I don't know but something has to change" after all of their ideas have been walked through in a logical manner.

[Byron]

And of course, confiscation could never happen in the USA.

How many libs here have uttered these very words.

Some of us know better.

There you have it...the thing to do is always deny that you have a firearm. If you see these guys coming, hide them and play dumb. It's too bad that it can come to that, but in this situation you have to lay low...especially with some jacked up meat head with a badge just itching to blow someone's head off.

I hate to say it, but I think most cops and military would follow the confiscation orders gleefully. That sucks.