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.
Short of outright confiscation of mags or AR's, it may be tough for MA to top CT. Confiscation is probably out for takings reasons (state has no money to compensate anyone for confiscating their guns).
I suppose they could go with a single round only concept. Start practicing the single shot/reload/single shot drill.
How about competing for the toughest laws on violent crime, instead of on lawful citizens?
Because this does not allow govt. to grab more power.How about competing for the toughest laws on violent crime, instead of on lawful citizens?
From what I've read on the subject it doesn't sound like Deval is proposing further magazine limits or "assault weapon" restrictions. Biggest changes would be "enhanced" background screening, and a 1 gun per month limit on purchases. Which is ridiculous.
How about competing for the toughest laws on violent crime, instead of on lawful citizens?
I read the link about Maryland's new legislation. It sounded strangely familiar to what we just had to endure here in CT. The left was totally successful in pegging the AR15 as a dedicated military killing machine, don't ya know, and there's no place in a civil society for them, period. So, like CT they'll make them illegal from here on out.
Here in CT I got good intel from an insider who was privy to the debate in the caucus between the Dems and Repubs here in HArtford. The word is that when it was decided to take total confiscation of both the rifles and magazine off the table, a number of hardnose, progressive liberals stormed out of the meeting. That's how far some of the legislators here wanted to go with this: outright confiscation of our rifles and magazine. That would not have gone over well with the general public here, let me tell you. So, we got this "grandfather' situation. Keep and register what you have and you can't have anymore.
My wife (a scientist and pro 2a supporter) has occasional conversations with young adults (in the 30s) at her work. These youngsters are totally and absolutely uneducated about any of this and just go with the flow; "who needs guns, etc., etc. bullets are bad, etc., etc". That's who's fueling this whole mess, the uneducated, undereducated, ignorant, general public. The 2a is meaningless in today's modern day and age. When she asks them who is going to protect them from a rotten government in the future, she might as well have lobsters crawling out of her ears, she said. Why would our government want to harm us? At that point the conversation ended and she went on her way.
These people follow those arrogent, narsassistic, greedy bastard politicians who know just how to push those sheeps to the slaughter. Unless we fight back at some point soon, we're screwed.
Rome
He's got the popular support. No stopping it I'm afraid. The only viable option for us is... you know the answer.You aren't paying attention. If you read the bills, instead of just listening to what they are saying, you'll see that they are trying to effectively bans most semi-automatic weapons.
The provisions of Patrick's bill defines all firearms/magazines capable of holding more than 7 rounds as assault weapons or high capacity, bans all mags over 10 rounds, and changes the definition of assault weapon to one feature. Linsky's bill changes LTC 's so they no longer permit you to buy, sell, or possess high capacity firearms or magazines, keep them in your home, and adds insurance and mental health record inclusion. It also changes FID to may issue.
They are, in fact, going to take your guns away. Or at least they are trying to.
Boil the frog... No go time.
So the states of CT, NY, and MD have banned the AR-15 and AK variants as well as magazines with capacity in excess of x. They get around the polarizing nature of confiscation by making illegal the ability to transfer or sell the now-banned firearm in state. If you have a "pre-ban" weapon, you either leave the state with it or die, and your weapons are destroyed or sold out-of-state. They placate current owners by allowing you to keep what you already have (gee, thanks).
Bottom line, if these laws stay on the books for the next 20 or 30 years, there won't be a need to confiscate because the ban will have removed firearms from circulation among the law-abiding. Looks to me like the Liberal and gun grabber statists have taken the long-term view to break the 2A...
Is that enough for "Go Time" or is it too soon, as we still have 40+ states to move to that embrace 2A?
To extract the Froglube?Boil the frog... No go time.