Yeah ****ing right. More like a CZ-75 and Pistol Dynamics bobtailed Scout boner. Glocks don't make my loins quiver and quake.
Doing it right.
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Yeah ****ing right. More like a CZ-75 and Pistol Dynamics bobtailed Scout boner. Glocks don't make my loins quiver and quake.
Yea it is.
Ayotte is really confusing the hell out of me.
On the one hand she wrote a decently good response to the letters were are sending her to not vote for this BS.
Then she turns around and sides with those listed above.
This isn't a WTF moment for us with regard to Ayotte but it is concerning.
If she votes yes on the final bill, then it is a WTF moment considering what she has stated in her responses to us.
I read on the CNN story that the bill includes some form of reciprocity???? Can anyone back this up?
the expansion of FOPA, glocks, and CZs make me quiver, but the prospect of additional legislation and the possibility for it to be instantly abused (why would they do ANYTHING in our favor?) makes me go instantly soft.
I believe the states are free to impose their own additional restrictions, which would most likely negate any benefit from this bill wrt interstate transfers. I hope I'm wrong, but look at the current situation in MA.
So I'm still researching. I missed the talk earlier. Is this a ... relatively good thing? I know we shouldn't give them an inch.... But if this will keep the liberal public quiet... Is it a good thing? Besides giving up FTF transfers, what are we losing? VS What we're getting?
I believe the states are free to impose their own additional restrictions, which would most likely negate any benefit from this bill wrt interstate transfers. I hope I'm wrong, but look at the current situation in MA.
Q: May a licensed dealer sell a firearm to a non-licensee who is a resident of another State?
Generally, a firearm may not lawfully be sold by a licensed dealer to a non-licensee who resides in a State other than the State in which the seller’s licensed premises is located. However, the sale may be made if the firearm is shipped to a licensed dealer whose business is in the purchaser’s State of residence and the purchaser takes delivery of the firearm from the dealer in his or her State of residence. In addition, a licensee may sell a rifle or shotgun to a person who is not a resident of the State where the licensee’s business premises is located in an over-the-counter transaction, provided the transaction complies with State law in the State where the licensee is located and in the State where the purchaser resides.
[18 U.S.C. 922(b)(3)]
A state can not make it illegal to buy something while in another state, no matter how hard that c*** martha tries. The only way they could stop it would be to literally make it illegal to own guns that aren't on the list.
Under current Federal law, an FFL/licensee cannot transfer a firearm to a resident of another State if it would be in violation of that States gun laws...
This is why that even though an FFL in another State can sell you a longarm (without it having to be shipped to a MA FFL), it would still be illegal for them to sell you a post ban AR in pre-ban configuration.
IOW... if this legislation passes, it doesn't mean a MA LTC holder can go to the Kittery Trading Post and legally purchase an "off llist" handgun and walk out the door with it. However... that same person could legally purchase any of the "approved" handguns without having to have it shipped to a MA FFL.
Regardless how this new scheme is supposed to work, I wouldn't count on too many out of state FFL's that would be willing to conduct the sale because one... they're not going to take the time (or care), to understand MA firearms laws, and two... they're not about to risk the chance that any sale they make, or their business practice, could come under the scrutiny of the MA AG's office.
Mind you, IANAL, so I could easily be completely wrong about this.
Doesn't matter what the States say or do... rules governing what an FFL cann and cannot do is dictated by Federal law.
When is this actually being voted on? Tomorrow or Friday? Will it be televised or on the internet?
There will be a cloture vote tomorrow, if it passes they will begin debate over it and amendments, if it doesn't pass there may be a filibuster...
This is bullsh!t! It's not gonna stop someone from going postal!
Ayotte is struggling to remain credible - taking an "extreme" stance cancels any potential for a junior Senator. Blame the less junior or more senior Senators more for not backing a filibuster. If she votes for the "right" bill (which today is no bill), then she remains useful.
On another topic - the "announced" agreement is not quoted in detail anywhere - I scanned the thread and Google, but see no text. I assume there is no final text yet, for either the NRA-rejected or NRA-backed bill/amendment? No doubt they are market-testing the plan to see what ending sells...
A few questions, with the expansion of the background checks proposed in this bill to include mental health records, does that include EVERYONE's mental health records or just those who have been deemed by a physician to be a potential threat to themselves or others? Also, by exempting P2P transfers between family, friends, neighbors, etc, wouldn't that effectively cancel out anything bad in this bill? I mean if asked, you could always just say the guy selling you something at a gun show is your buddy from way back. (that's if anyone would bother to ask, which I doubt they would). Also, the interstate handgun sales provision is a beautiful thing, no? As long as only potentially dangerous people get their medical records submitted to NICS, I don't really see this bill causing much of a problem or hurting us in any way. Plus it'll shut the moonbats up for a while because they will have been duped into thinking they did something... just my take.
Sure, go ahead and cede more ground. I'm sure this time they'll say we have enough laws, and I'm sure they'd never demand everyone's records
What we need are laws to be repealed, not new ones passed.