House Passes 2022 AWB; Senate Up Next

teamRR

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Apr 24, 2019
Messages
2,269
Likes
1,848
Meh — while I still get mildly hot and bothered over Marines lying about the “weapons of war” we used and pretending they are AR-15s, as I continue a career in the .mil, I am less impressed by the folks who can’t let a 4 year year footnote in their life go.

You’re a f***ing liar if you were a grunt and pretend that an AR is the same thing as the various actual “weapons of war” an infantry battalion has at its disposal. So is an M9 by that logic. I’m sure that dude served admirably, bravely, and honorably. Doesn’t make him less of a piece of shit now. I have friends whose politics I disagree on — I don’t really care. I don’t know that we would keep hanging out if they were in congress actively working to dismantle our rights, especially if leveraging lies based on a shared past.

I've met and known lots of military folks, and I'm sure you know more - I've never met one who was not extremely pro 2A. Where these types come from who aren't is perplexing, I honestly think they are just liars who don't believe in squat other than getting noticed or furthering their career.

Yes I have heard some dumb shit referenced relating to say some shooting, like "Everyone should be required to take training" - basically someone beating their own chest (as if training helps deter a school shooter). Never once a negative peep about civilian gun ownership though.
 

teamRR

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Apr 24, 2019
Messages
2,269
Likes
1,848
If you really want to get something, you should get a couple of 80% frame/receivers ( AR15, AR10 and G19). Pay cash for them, the LPKs and whatever uppers you want. At this point, even those in free states should have a few guns that don’t have a 4473 or even a credit card associated with them.

I mostly agree, and after the bullshit lately I might have a bunch of that sorta stuff stocked up...

But for an AR10-ish thing, you give up a lot with a p80. The trouble is they are semi proprietary - use an 80% lower and anything other than a simple flat top upper is gonna be a Frankenstein sorta thing. An Aero M5E1 has a lot of + features built in, you can put together a fairly high end rifle via their recievers and guards that is all going to fit together and look/function just right (as I'm sure say a DD model does too). But off an 80% that's tough, the nicer stuff comes in pairs with them lower+upper recievers.

AR15s, Glocks, a whole different thing, lots more options, you can build high end spec stuff.
 

MGnoob

NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
Aug 12, 2014
Messages
7,545
Likes
6,677
I keep making the same argument with pro-gun people who insist that crime is exploding.

No. It's not. Stop buying into news coverage as a statistic.
It’s like another one of these things were they make statistics mean whatever they want.

There we less shootings when no one left their house for two years except to go to riots, wait I mean “mostly peaceful protest” Where they had to shut down portions of cities for months just to let people shoot, Rob,steal,rape each other?

Wait there were less mass shootings when you couldn’t congregate in places with large numbers of people?


So now mass shootings are through the roof by hundreds of percents… All while they redefine what a mass shooting is. The new definition causing every single act of violence with a gun to be counted as a mass shooting?

If you’re going to use their definition my shooting ranges is near a preschool. So every time I shoot a gun its a school shooting?
 

amm5061

NES Member
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Jun 20, 2016
Messages
7,717
Likes
6,489
Location
Holliston, MA
I've met and known lots of military folks, and I'm sure you know more - I've never met one who was not extremely pro 2A. Where these types come from who aren't is perplexing, I honestly think they are just liars who don't believe in squat other than getting noticed or furthering their career.

The ones who aren't are the dipshit a**h***s who had to have their weapons dummy corded to them the entire time they were deployed because they kept f***ing losing them. Guaranteed Moulton was one.
 

mothybee

NES Member
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Joined
Nov 13, 2015
Messages
3,929
Likes
4,482
Location
merrimac, ma
It’s like another one of these things were they make statistics mean whatever they want.

There we less shootings when no one left their house for two years except to go to riots, wait I mean “mostly peaceful protest” Where they had to shut down portions of cities for months just to let people shoot, Rob,steal,rape each other?

Wait there were less mass shootings when you couldn’t congregate in places with large numbers of people?


So now mass shootings are through the roof by hundreds of percents… All while they redefine what a mass shooting is. The new definition causing every single act of violence with a gun to be counted as a mass shooting?

If you’re going to use their definition my shooting ranges is near a preschool. So every time I shoot a gun its a school shooting?
You stumbled across the perfect solution to stop mass shootings, outlaw gatherings of two people or more.
 

bauer

NES Member
Rating - 100%
23   0   0
Joined
Sep 1, 2015
Messages
803
Likes
2,045
Location
The Land of Rocks & Holly
Interesting MSNBC (yeah I know) piece about the last Senate passed Assault Weapons Ban in 1994.

————
“The original ban was championed in the Senate by Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, who pushed the policy as an amendment to a larger criminal justice package. On Nov. 17, 1993, it passed 56 to 43, fueled in part by 10 Republican votes.

Some readers are probably thinking, “Wait, how could the measure have passed with only 56 votes? Didn’t it need 60?” The answer is, no, it didn’t need 60 — and therein lies the point of this stroll down memory lane.

In 2022, filibusters requiring supermajorities are the norm for every bill in which the tactic can be applied, but what often goes overlooked, even by some sitting senators who apparently don’t know better, is that the Senate didn’t used to work this way. The routinization of the 60-vote threshold is a modern invention wholly at odds with the institution’s historical norms.

Indeed, Feinstein’s assault weapons ban was approved by a simple majority because it wasn’t filibustered. As recently as 1994, most bills were considered on majority-rule votes.


Consider the relevant data: In the first two years of Clinton’s presidency, there were 46 cloture votes — and by historical standards up until that time, that was a fairly large number. So far in the current Congress — which still has several months remaining — there have been 262 cloture votes.

Taking a look back at the way in which the original assault weapons ban passed is like looking through a window at an unrecognizable political landscape: Not only were there 10 Republican senators willing to help pass a worthwhile gun bill intended to save lives, but the Senate itself was willing to consider the legislation as if were still a majority-rule institution.

When opponents of Senate reforms insist that the status quo must be maintained, it’s important to remember that they’re protecting abuses, not norms. The current system too often fails to meet the nation’s needs, not because of design flaws in the Senate, but because the Senate itself no longer resembles the chamber it once was.”


Funny how it doesn’t mention that the democrats are the only reason we have a filibuster. They only like it when it works in their favor, apparently.

Also convenient how they fail to mention that Senators were selected by state legislatures for the first 130 years of the Republic. Perhaps we should go back to that as well
 

amm5061

NES Member
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Jun 20, 2016
Messages
7,717
Likes
6,489
Location
Holliston, MA
Also convenient how they fail to mention that Senators were selected by state legislatures for the first 130 years of the Republic. Perhaps we should go back to that as well

The Senate was supposed to be the representation of the States, whereas the House was the representation of the people, but of course this is never taught in schools anymore. I doubt many people even know about how our government was originally set up vs how it is now.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Apr 25, 2018
Messages
2,195
Likes
3,492
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Apr 25, 2018
Messages
2,195
Likes
3,492
There it is folks this piece of shit could never had been a "Good Marine", He is a F**KING WHORE who will say and do whatever advances his personal gain. He has changed parties, WHY? What is it that he was looking for?


BornJacob Daniel Auchincloss · January 29, 1988 · Newton, Massachusetts, U.S.
Political partyDemocratic (before 2013, 2015–present)
Other political affiliationsRepublican (2013–2014) · Independent (2014–2015)


https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=d88a...FlqSm1OV0poWGw1ZVhpUkZiblJwZEhreVgyVnUi&ntb=1
 
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
11,422
Likes
5,715
Location
Green Eggs and...
I've met and known lots of military folks, and I'm sure you know more - I've never met one who was not extremely pro 2A. Where these types come from who aren't is perplexing, I honestly think they are just liars who don't believe in squat other than getting noticed or furthering their career.

Yes I have heard some dumb shit referenced relating to say some shooting, like "Everyone should be required to take training" - basically someone beating their own chest (as if training helps deter a school shooter). Never once a negative peep about civilian gun ownership though.

The military is a cross-section of America. It skews conservative/libertarian, but that’s all it is, a “skew.”

As far as congresscritters go — there may be a small handful out there who are decent people. Regardless of their politics, I think it’s generally safe to assume there’s something “wrong” with most people in higher level politics. I don’t think many are principled — at all.
 

safetyfirst2125

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Mar 5, 2020
Messages
11,327
Likes
27,918
Interesting how this went down….

“The monkey wrench thrown into the cogs of this otherwise rapidly churning legislative sausage-making machine was a last-minute decision Thursday to bring to the House floor on Friday a bill making it a crime to sell, manufacture, transfer, import, or possess designated semiautomatic weapons. Earlier in the week, the Rules Committee was scheduled to take up that bill along with six other gun-violence/public health and safety related measures. But the planned Tuesday meeting was postponed shortly beforehand, “subject to the call of the chair.” Something was obviously afoot or gone awry, but no public explanation was given.

As the Washington Post reported on Saturday (July 30), the assault weapons ban that passed on its own Friday, 217-213, was a “politically fraught issue that tested the unity of the [Democratic] Caucus.” Five Democrats voted against the assault weapons bill and two others were persuaded at the last minute to change their votes from “nay” to “yea” to save the bill from defeat.

What was at play, according to the Post account, were battles among various factions within the party: the Congressional Black Caucus, the Progressive Caucus, and a band of moderate Democrats from swing districts. The CBC wanted “guardrails” on the law enforcement assistance measures to prevent abuse; the Progressives were insisting on first passing the assault weapons ban that week, while delaying action on the other six bills until August to allow for further modifications. The moderates were squeezed-out in the middle and apparently furious that the balanced package approach they supported was jettisoned.

Add to all this the outrage of House Republicans when an emergency Rules Committee meeting was called at 7 p.m. Thursday (the same hour former professional baseball player Roberto Clemente Jr. threw-out the first pitch at the congressional baseball game). What the Democrats needed was a special rule to waive the requirement of a two-thirds vote for same-day floor consideration of a second rulemaking in order for the assault weapons ban vote on Friday.

At 9:15 a.m. Friday, the initial waiver rule was called-up, debated, and then adopted around 11:45. Then, at high noon, the Rules Committee met in another emergency session to clear the way for the second rule providing for consideration of the gun ban bill by a majority, rather than two-thirds, vote. (If you have followed all this procedural jerking-around thus far, you deserve a gold medal, or at least a neck rub).

While the overflow of procedural moves seemed like a cascading river of riveting drama, it was not riveting enough to hold the presence of 28 percent of House members. By the time of the final passage vote at 6:30 p.m. Friday, only 309 of the 431 sitting House members were still around in the chamber to vote, even though 377 members were there for the first vote that morning.

What saved the vote for Democrats was that 121 members (including some Republicans) cast their votes remotely by proxy (compared to only 64 proxy votes cast around noon). Proxies have been allowed since May 2020 to protect the institution during the pandemic emergency. The emergency rule allowed members to sign a letter to the Clerk affirming they were “unable to physically attend the proceedings of the House” because of “the public health emergency,” and allowed them to designate in their letter a member to cast their votes for them on the floor, specifying how they would vote on each anticipated rollcall.

Friday, July 29, was “senior skip day,” or, more accurately, “member sick-out day.” Although most of those new-born proxy huggers had not suddenly been stricken by illness, by invoking the health threat in their signed affirmation letter, the ploy opened a convenient loophole for them to leave town early while still being held accountable for their votes. Fortunately, fellow passengers on their flights back home were not aware of the fleeing members’ agony of retreat. “

Source - The Hill/MSN:
 

Dadstoys

NES Member
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Messages
19,423
Likes
21,129
Location
North Shore
It’s like another one of these things were they make statistics mean whatever they want.

There we less shootings when no one left their house for two years except to go to riots, wait I mean “mostly peaceful protest” Where they had to shut down portions of cities for months just to let people shoot, Rob,steal,rape each other?

Wait there were less mass shootings when you couldn’t congregate in places with large numbers of people?


So now mass shootings are through the roof by hundreds of percents… All while they redefine what a mass shooting is. The new definition causing every single act of violence with a gun to be counted as a mass shooting?

If you’re going to use their definition my shooting ranges is near a preschool. So every time I shoot a gun its a school shooting?
Hey we can now redefine what a recession is .
If a man can now become pregnant then the sky is the limit.
 

Qwikdraw45

NES Member
Rating - 100%
25   0   0
Joined
Jan 1, 2014
Messages
2,090
Likes
2,883
Location
Rochester NH
I’m afraid I have to agree with @paul73 on this one. Very few people will actually put their life on the line for the right to keep and bear arms. I’d be surprised if 1/1000th of 1 percent shot back. Without some type of organized resistance, individuals will not stand a chance. Look at the French Resistance during WW2. They were pretty well organized and had a larger share of the population supporting them than you would probably get here, yet they had no hope of throwing the Nazis out until the Allies invaded.

Our only real hope would be that many in the Military and in LEO take their oath to uphold the Constitution very seriously. US military officers take an oath to the Constitution, not the Government, not the President, not even to their military leaders. This is one reason the Progressives are working so hard to delegitimize it. As long as the majority of the folks with guns are dedicated to supporting our Constitution, we stand a chance.

5 U.S. Code § 3331 - Oath of office​


Note the "all enemies, foreign and domestic”.
Seems to be a problem with the officer corps. Lots of the Generals seem to favor gun control and treason. Hmmm, Benedict Arnold, Milley Vanilley....although it also seems that most of the former officers who go into politics are anti-2A.
No one cares about cities. Let the meek hand in their guns. In the towns and villages where food is grown, confiscators will be shot. The cities will simply starve to death. Whether by the food producers winning immediately or EVERYONE starving due to them dying.

Either way the Democrat power centers die.

The US will Balkanize in my lifetime.
Hmmm, sounds like a familiar plot...something about hunger, and the sticks resisting against the cities....
Hmmm...I thought once IN a Marine, always IN a Marine.
FIFY. They never get the Seaman out of them. [rofl]
 

CatSnoutSoup

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jul 9, 2015
Messages
6,565
Likes
17,737
Location
Westgardminsterham MA
Auchincloss was a good Marine while he was in, Left or right of the aisle, your service record should speak for itself but not be used to lend credence to your personal opinions becoming national policy.

I wore boots while in the Marine Corps, therefore I think you should give extra credence to my call to ban Crocs!

🐯
 

safetyfirst2125

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Mar 5, 2020
Messages
11,327
Likes
27,918

President Joe Biden released a statement on Wednesday urging the Senate to take action on gun control, marking the third anniversary of the shooting massacre in El Paso, Texas in 2019.

In a letter, Biden called on Senate Republicans to pass a bill banning assault weapons nationwide and reflected on the hate-fueled shooting at a Walmart that left 22 dead.

“We will never forget the lives lost, or the courage and resilience of those injured and the loved ones they left behind,” Biden wrote. “The House recently passed a bill that would ban the weapons of war like the one the El Paso gunman and so many others have used to take and injure so many innocent lives in a matter of minutes. The Senate needs to act on that critical piece of legislation.”

The assault weapons ban, which passed the House in July, would prohibit the sale of certain high-powered weapons, including rifles, shotguns and pistols, except for specific antique and sporting models.

Republicans have already called the bill “unconstitutional” and a ploy by Democratic lawmakers to confiscate guns.

In June, Biden signed the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, which he called the “most significant gun violence reduction legislation in 30 years.”

“I signed bipartisan legislation to improve hate crimes reporting and enhance training for law enforcement to identify and respond to hate crimes,” Biden said. “And last year, my administration laid out our country’s first-ever comprehensive effort to counter the threat posed by domestic terrorism.”

The act would also provide $250 million in funding for community-based violence prevention initiatives.

On Aug. 3, 2019, a 21-year-old extremist entered a Walmart in El Paso, Texas, and opened fire, killing 22 people and injuring 26 others.

Other deadly shooting tragedies that have taken place in recent history include Uvalde, Texas, where another gunman killed 19 children and two teachers at Robb Elementary School in May.

Earlier that same month, an 18-year-old extremist shot and killed 10 Black people in a Buffalo, New York, supermarket.
 

safetyfirst2125

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Mar 5, 2020
Messages
11,327
Likes
27,918
“The House recently passed a bill that would ban the weapons of war like the one the El Paso gunman and so many others have used to take and injure so many innocent lives in a matter of minutes. The Senate needs to act on that critical piece of legislation.”

“Critical” for who exactly. And why.
 

Mountain

NES Member
Rating - 100%
22   0   0
Joined
Jan 6, 2013
Messages
17,471
Likes
22,061
For the AR10 discussion. One option, like any AR, get your lower, figure the rest out later. For free state folks anyway.

Aero stuff is gtg and available. 2 choices, about $175 get a stripped lower. If you don't want to assemble then for $315 get your assembled version. Honestly isn't much different $$ wise, but I'd be upgrading the trigger right away and the stock if you get a model with a shitty one. But those mil spec parts are cheap, so you really are only wasting like $40 if you buy a pre assembled version.

Same options available when it comes time for an upper, stripped or assembled, in a bunch of versions.


Aero definitely GTG. Rather than jam up this thread with the particulars, here's this week's panic buy project fueled by some Mrs. Mountain arm twisting: Aero M5 'Project' - Sub MOA Made Simple

1659819337890-png.646914


The heavy weight, VG6 brake, and squishy butt pad make it a relatively soft shooter- perfect for Mrs. Mountain.

Folks, don't wait- do it! [rofl]
 
Last edited:

safetyfirst2125

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Mar 5, 2020
Messages
11,327
Likes
27,918
Aero definitely GTG. Rather than jam up this thread with the particulars, here's this week's panic buy project fueled by some Mrs. Mountain arm twisting: Aero M5 'Project' - Sub MOA Made Simple

1659819337890-png.646914


The heavy weight, VG6 brake, and squishy butt pad make it a relatively soft shooter- perfect for Mrs. Mountain.

Folks, don't wait- do it! [rofl]
I think yours and my freshly assembled DD5 V3 may have the same birthday 🙂
 
Top Bottom