Serious topic, what if they ban the AR-15

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Skinner

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 28, 2008
    8
    3
    Hendricks County
    Two things here for me.

    The first personal. Owning, shooting, and tinkering with firearms is an important part of my life. Like any other hobby, I probably spend too much time, energy, and money on it. But I enjoy it. I could find other hobbies. But I don't want to. Bans and restrictions, in their own way, interfere with my pursuit of happiness.

    Second is the Constitutional aspect. We can discuss(and may disagree) what the Federal Government is allowed to do in regard to the 2nd Amendment. But, IMO, it's there to protect the people's right to self-defense from ANYTHING that may endanger life or liberty.

    Sure, I can find a way to make my firearms "disappear". But what do I gain from that. Nothing. Just another loss of liberty. Am I allowed to enjoy the personal aspects of being a firearm owner. Not without threat of imprisonment. Am I allowed to possess arms for self-defense? Again, not without threat of imprisonment.

    I've thought long and hard about this. I suppose if the Government chooses to make me a criminal, I'll just have to be a criminal. I'm tired of being told, "Sit down, shut up, and do what you're told" by clueless Legislators and Executives whose only goals are **** off the other party.

    Also, someone once said, "If it's time bury your guns, it's time to dig them up!"
     

    AtTheMurph

    SHOOTER
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 18, 2013
    3,147
    113

    Tenth Amendment​

    The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

    There is no power delegated to the United States to limit which arms we wish to bear arms.

    The 2nd amendment was always a mistake to place in the Constitution. It has always been used as a gateway to restrict that which the Federal government has no power to restrict.

    If the Constitution does not enumerate a power to limit what types of arms we wish to bear, then the Federal government, as stated in the 10th Amendment does NOT have the power to restrict us.
     

    DFacres

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Sep 14, 2015
    146
    28
    This sphere
    President Harris...er...I mean...Biden wrote down their plans. Since both houses of Congress and the Presidency are all Democrat controlled, they should be able to enact any legislation they darn well please.


    I understand your question. You are hoping to gain insight so you can prepare for what is coming. The only way I know of to be prepared is to either.....1. get ready to voice your objections and get peacefully politically active.....OR.....2. Sell everything but your muzzle loaders (those will only be allowed with permits, licenses and multiple excessive fees).

    The past AWB had a grandfathering exception as well as a sunset provision. Many in the Democrat party have stated that they will not make that mistake again. If this is true, then if a new AWB is passed, it will be a whole different ballgame we have not encountered before.

    They have touted that “weapons of war” do NOT belong on the streets nor the hands of the peasants. Muzzleloaders are “weapons of war”, afterall, we won our freedom & independence from England with such evil “weapons of war”. Surely they don’t want peasants owning them.
     

    JeepHammer

    SHOOTER
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 2, 2018
    1,904
    83
    SW Indiana
    "Banned" once before, simply grandfathered in the old ones, some minor mods on the new ones.

    Another scare tactic BS round of crap.

    "O'Bammers cumin fer yer GUNS"!
    For the last 12 years is getting REAL old...

    Just as a side note...
    There ARE other semi-auto rifles in the wild besides ARs and Chinese AK clones.

    About as bothersome as a single cloud on a sunny day to me.
     

    Route 45

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    92   0   0
    Dec 5, 2015
    14,884
    113
    Indy
    "Banned" once before, simply grandfathered in the old ones, some minor mods on the new ones.

    Another scare tactic BS round of crap.

    "O'Bammers cumin fer yer GUNS"!
    For the last 12 years is getting REAL old...

    Just as a side note...
    There ARE other semi-auto rifles in the wild besides ARs and Chinese AK clones.

    About as bothersome as a single cloud on a sunny day to me.


    hua.jpg
     

    1nderbeard

    Master
    Local Business Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    38   0   0
    Apr 3, 2017
    2,529
    113
    Hendricks County
    I told my socialist friend when Biden whom he voted for tells him to turn in his Bushmaster ACR which are running over $3200 right now that I would buy it for $201.99. He then said he would not comply to said law. Did he just flip from leftist to somewhat right?
    All it takes for someone to go from left to right is a well paying job and about 15 minutes with me explaining how much the government is screwing them.
     

    edporch

    Master
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    25   0   0
    Oct 19, 2010
    4,660
    149
    Indianapolis

    Tenth Amendment​

    -snip-
    The 2nd amendment was always a mistake to place in the Constitution. It has always been used as a gateway to restrict that which the Federal government has no power to restrict.
    -snip-

    Originally, the Bill of Rights, incuding the 2nd Amendment only applied to the federal government.

    Each state had it's own army, and the states didn't want the federal government to have the power to make arms laws for the states.
    Originally, each state had the power to write it's own firearms laws.
    AND ALL federal firearm laws were unconstitutional.
     

    edporch

    Master
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    25   0   0
    Oct 19, 2010
    4,660
    149
    Indianapolis
    "Banned" once before, simply grandfathered in the old ones, some minor mods on the new ones.

    Another scare tactic BS round of crap.
    -snip-
    If you were around then and following it, you'd remember the only reason for the grandfathering with the 10 year gun and magazine ban was because the left didn't have the votes for more.
    And they really hated that.
    The left is never going to stop coming at us and chipping away at our rights no matter how long it takes for them to succeed.
     

    Bennettjh

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Jul 8, 2012
    10,434
    113
    Columbus
    "Banned" once before, simply grandfathered in the old ones, some minor mods on the new ones.

    Another scare tactic BS round of crap.

    "O'Bammers cumin fer yer GUNS"!
    For the last 12 years is getting REAL old...

    Just as a side note...
    There ARE other semi-auto rifles in the wild besides ARs and Chinese AK clones.

    About as bothersome as a single cloud on a sunny day to me.
    Have you actually read their plans? As far as "grandfathering", they'll have to be NFA registered. They won't just ban making "assault weapons" for 10 years like '94.

    Their biggest regret was the grandfather clause and sunset of the '94 ban.
     

    miguel

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    Oct 24, 2008
    6,614
    113
    16T
    I'm getting close, but no banana yet. LOL

    Let me put it a different way...

    There appear to be people on this site who, based on their historical posts, have NFA items registered, but are saying they won't register their semi-auto AR/AK/etc as an NFA item if a new law is passed requiring such.

    I'm not trying to bust anyone's balls about this, I just find that seeming contradiction interesting and am wondering why, if one already has an NFA item, would they not want to add one more to the list? What makes it the deal breaker?

    And no, I am not FBI, ATF, DHS, CCP, BLM or YMCA...nor do I want anyone to have to register a damn thing as an NFA item. Just curious for someone to articulate the deal breaking nature of that point of view is.

    I'm like an INGO Jacques Cousteau that way...
     

    Route 45

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    92   0   0
    Dec 5, 2015
    14,884
    113
    Indy
    If NFA registration becomes the law for semi-auto rifles, any such rifle not registered will be basically worthless. It cannot legally be sold, traded or passed down to a family member. In the case of a defensive shooting with such a rifle, the possessor would be open to federal prosecution, regardless of whether the shooting was justified or not. You couldn't even take it to the range without the cloud of potentially becoming a felon hanging over your head.

    For anyone who says they will bury their guns or lOsE tHeM iN a bOAtiNg aCciDeNt...congratulations, you just took them out of service and basically did the government's job for them. If you don't have use of them, what's the point?

    There is, of course, one good use for an unregistered rifle, but we're not really supposed to talk about that on INGO. I find myself wondering if mandatory NFA registration of common semi-auto firearms is the line in the sand.
     

    thompal

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Sep 27, 2008
    3,545
    113
    Beech Grove
    I'm getting close, but no banana yet. LOL

    Let me put it a different way...

    There appear to be people on this site who, based on their historical posts, have NFA items registered, but are saying they won't register their semi-auto AR/AK/etc as an NFA item if a new law is passed requiring such.

    I'm not trying to bust anyone's balls about this, I just find that seeming contradiction interesting and am wondering why, if one already has an NFA item, would they not want to add one more to the list? What makes it the deal breaker?

    And no, I am not FBI, ATF, DHS, CCP, BLM or YMCA...nor do I want anyone to have to register a damn thing as an NFA item. Just curious for someone to articulate the deal breaking nature of that point of view is.

    I'm like an INGO Jacques Cousteau that way...

    It could be the $200 per item tax. Or it might be the restrictions placed on NFA items, and the rest.
     

    miguel

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    Oct 24, 2008
    6,614
    113
    16T
    If NFA registration becomes the law for semi-auto rifles, any such rifle not registered will be basically worthless. It cannot legally be sold, traded or passed down to a family member. In the case of a defensive shooting with such a rifle, the possessor would be open to federal prosecution, regardless of whether the shooting was justified or not. You couldn't even take it to the range without the cloud of potentially becoming a felon hanging over your head.

    For anyone who says they will bury their guns or lOsE tHeM iN a bOAtiNg aCciDeNt...congratulations, you just took them out of service and basically did the government's job for them. If you don't have use of them, what's the point?
    OK, this may not be the fully ripened banana I was looking for, but it is at least a plantain, so +1 for you!
     

    Route 45

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    92   0   0
    Dec 5, 2015
    14,884
    113
    Indy
    OK, this may not be the fully ripened banana I was looking for, but it is at least a plantain, so +1 for you!
    I don't have any NFA items. I am with you in wondering why someone who is already on the list would refuse to register a firearm category newly added to the NFA. Other than the $200 tax, of course, but when the ATF was rumbling about adding braced pistols to the NFA, they did float a potential "free" registration. Would probably be the same for newly added "assault rifles."
     
    Top Bottom