Info from Feinstein on proposed ban(update on pg 2)

What's going on in Washington, D.C.?

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton

Re: Info from Feinstein on proposed ban(update on pg 2)

Postby anygunanywhere » Mon Dec 31, 2012 9:11 pm

I have not figured out what he is clinging to but it ain't his firearms or second amendment rights.

Anygunanywhere
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. - Thomas Jefferson
III%
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/
User avatar
anygunanywhere
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4927
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 9:16 am
Location: La Grange, Texas

Re: Info from Sen Feinstein's website on proposed ban

Postby cling » Tue Jan 01, 2013 4:33 pm

srothstein wrote:
cling wrote:
anygunanywhere wrote:Let us all know how that "keep them if they are registered" thing works out for you.

It's been working for almost 80 years as far as I can tell. Look, I don't like it, but the reality is if the NFA is Constitutional then adding semiautomatics to the list of NFA firearms doesn't change that. Say what you want but that's reality.


That depends on how you define working.

anygunanywhere specifically asked about Americans being able to keep firearms that are registered.

That was the question asked and answered truthfully. I have been able to keep everything I have on the national registry. His response to that dose of reality was ad hominem attacks. I thought there was a forum rule against that but maybe I should thank him for the reminder why I spend my online time in other venues.

Good luck to all of you. With friend like him, you're going to need it.
Better. Not Bitter.
User avatar
cling
Member
 
Posts: 100
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 12:48 pm

Re: Info from Sen Feinstein's website on proposed ban

Postby VMI77 » Tue Jan 01, 2013 5:28 pm

cling wrote:
srothstein wrote:
cling wrote:
anygunanywhere wrote:Let us all know how that "keep them if they are registered" thing works out for you.

It's been working for almost 80 years as far as I can tell. Look, I don't like it, but the reality is if the NFA is Constitutional then adding semiautomatics to the list of NFA firearms doesn't change that. Say what you want but that's reality.


That depends on how you define working.

anygunanywhere specifically asked about Americans being able to keep firearms that are registered.

That was the question asked and answered truthfully. I have been able to keep everything I have on the national registry. His response to that dose of reality was ad hominem attacks. I thought there was a forum rule against that but maybe I should thank him for the reminder why I spend my online time in other venues.

Good luck to all of you. With friend like him, you're going to need it.


You realize that the current proposal is for a $200 tax on every banned rifle and every magazine that holds more than 10 rounds, right? If you have an AR15 and five 30 round pmags you'll be paying $1200 to register them. I hope you also realize that this isn't 1930 and the context of registration is entirely different. Therefore, you can't reliably extrapolate the past into the future. You're on new ground and you can't depend on what has happened in the past.
"The amount of harm caused by any politician can be estimated by his life expectancy in public without bodyguards."

Oleg Volk of Oleg Volk blog
User avatar
VMI77
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3838
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 5:49 pm
Location: Victoria, Texas

Re: Info from Sen Feinstein's website on proposed ban

Postby Jumping Frog » Tue Jan 01, 2013 7:31 pm

srothstein wrote:
cling wrote:
anygunanywhere wrote:Let us all know how that "keep them if they are registered" thing works out for you.

It's been working for almost 80 years as far as I can tell. Look, I don't like it, but the reality is if the NFA is Constitutional then adding semiautomatics to the list of NFA firearms doesn't change that. Say what you want but that's reality.

That depends on how you define working. Remember that the original tax was the same $200 it is now, which put them out of reach for most people when the law passed.

And then all it took was one minor little change as part of a compromise to ban them from the market. In 1986, they just closed the registry and no new full auto weapons could be put on the list or bought. The price of the existing ones went up by about 1000% (from an average of $2000 to more than $20,000) and is still climbing. Have you tried to buy one lately?

The other side of that same coin is also an issue. I've never been interested in paying $5,000-$10,000-$15,000 or whatever for an NFA auto because one signature on legislation anytime in my or my children's lifetime to confiscate those guns would see all that artificial market value disappear in a puff of smoke.

Face it, a full-auto AK selling for $10,000 is simply ridiculous when you can buy one in Somalia for $75.
-Bob . . . NRA Life member, TSRA Life member, TFC member, JFPO member, and OFCC Patron member

This froggie ain't boiling! Shall not be infringed! Μολών Λαβέ
More Obamination. Idiots.
User avatar
Jumping Frog
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4672
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 9:13 am
Location: Klein, TX (Houston NW suburb)

Re: Info from Sen Feinstein's website on proposed ban

Postby The Annoyed Man » Tue Jan 01, 2013 7:52 pm

VMI77 wrote:
cling wrote:
srothstein wrote:
cling wrote:
anygunanywhere wrote:Let us all know how that "keep them if they are registered" thing works out for you.

It's been working for almost 80 years as far as I can tell. Look, I don't like it, but the reality is if the NFA is Constitutional then adding semiautomatics to the list of NFA firearms doesn't change that. Say what you want but that's reality.


That depends on how you define working.

anygunanywhere specifically asked about Americans being able to keep firearms that are registered.

That was the question asked and answered truthfully. I have been able to keep everything I have on the national registry. His response to that dose of reality was ad hominem attacks. I thought there was a forum rule against that but maybe I should thank him for the reminder why I spend my online time in other venues.

Good luck to all of you. With friend like him, you're going to need it.


You realize that the current proposal is for a $200 tax on every banned rifle and every magazine that holds more than 10 rounds, right? If you have an AR15 and five 30 round pmags you'll be paying $1200 to register them. I hope you also realize that this isn't 1930 and the context of registration is entirely different. Therefore, you can't reliably extrapolate the past into the future. You're on new ground and you can't depend on what has happened in the past.

EXACTLY! I'm doing the math in my head right now, and to be "ALLOWED TO KEEP" that which I have already legally purchased, my own investment in fees would be $800 in fees for the rifles, $600 in fees for the pistols, and $10,000 (roughly, I was trying to count them all in my head) in fees for magazines. Clinger, you say that we are not very good observers of this forum's rules, but when you so casually dismiss the financial burden tied to being ALLOWED TO KEEP that which is already legally ours, how can you possibly fault anyone for getting angry? I'm not a rich man, but you're suggesting that it is perfectly OK for the government to force me to pay more in fees than the total value of my guns JUST TO BE "ALLOWED TO KEEP" THEM?"

"ALLOWED TO KEEP" is the single most arrogant thing anybody has ever said on these pages which involves me personally. How DARE anyone in arrogant and grasping officialdom assume that they have a right to determine what I should be "ALLOWED TO KEEP" when I bought it legally to begin with? THAT is EXACTLY the attitude that WILL eventually result in the burning of the Constitution. People think it stinks when conservatives begin to discuss the possibility of door to door confiscations and political violence? THAT is the attitude that gets people to talking about it.

And in a world when BATF can take up to a year to process the paperwork for a single suppressor, how long does anybody with a brain think it is going to take to process (and approve) all these new registrations? And what are we supposed to do with our guns until we get the paperwork back? Are they to be impounded somewhere until the paperwork is approved?

I can't even believe that I'm having to mention the obvious to someone who purports to support the 2nd Amendment.

(EDITED TO FIX A FORMATTING TAG....)
Last edited by The Annoyed Man on Wed Jan 02, 2013 9:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Give me Liberty, or I'll get up and get it myself." — Me
"Every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under." — H. L. Mencken
"A ragamuffin knows he’s only a beggar at the door of God’s mercy." — The Ragamuffin Gospel, by Brennan Manning
User avatar
The Annoyed Man
Senior Member
 
Posts: 16551
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: Grapevine, Texas

Re: Info from Sen Feinstein's website on proposed ban

Postby anygunanywhere » Wed Jan 02, 2013 7:43 am

cling wrote:
srothstein wrote:
cling wrote:
anygunanywhere wrote:Let us all know how that "keep them if they are registered" thing works out for you.

It's been working for almost 80 years as far as I can tell. Look, I don't like it, but the reality is if the NFA is Constitutional then adding semiautomatics to the list of NFA firearms doesn't change that. Say what you want but that's reality.


That depends on how you define working.

anygunanywhere specifically asked about Americans being able to keep firearms that are registered.

That was the question asked and answered truthfully. I have been able to keep everything I have on the national registry. His response to that dose of reality was ad hominem attacks. I thought there was a forum rule against that but maybe I should thank him for the reminder why I spend my online time in other venues.

Good luck to all of you. With friend like him, you're going to need it.


A friend like me? Luck? There is no such thing as luck.

I did not attack you personally. I attacked your position. I have posted that I do not understand what you are clinging to and I stand by my posts since your posts support my stance.

My main point with your posts is that registration will lead to confiscation. If you want to register your soon to be legislated NFA items and pay the $200.00 tax on each go right ahead and do so. No one will stop you.

When they come for your registered items, don't go looking for me and my friends to come to your aid.

Anygunanywhere
Last edited by anygunanywhere on Wed Jan 02, 2013 10:21 am, edited 3 times in total.
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. - Thomas Jefferson
III%
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/
User avatar
anygunanywhere
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4927
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 9:16 am
Location: La Grange, Texas

Re: Info from Feinstein on proposed ban(update on pg 2)

Postby anygunanywhere » Wed Jan 02, 2013 9:00 am

In case some here have not been properly schooled in some of the history of current legislation I provide the following. I can't make them read it but here goes anywhay. This is history on the Gun Control Act of 1968. The GCA of 1968 is almost word for word the same as Hitler's.

http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/registration_article/registration.html

Registration and grandfathering will be fine. Right.

Anygunanywhere
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. - Thomas Jefferson
III%
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/
User avatar
anygunanywhere
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4927
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 9:16 am
Location: La Grange, Texas

Re: Info from Feinstein on proposed ban(update on pg 2)

Postby RPB » Wed Jan 02, 2013 9:12 am

anygunanywhere wrote:In case some here have not been properly schooled in some of the history of current legislation I provide the following. I can't make them read it but here goes anyway. This is history on the Gun Control Act of 1968. The GCA of 1968 is almost word for word the same as Hitler's.

http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/registration_article/registration.html

Registration and grandfathering will be fine. Right.

Anygunanywhere

from your link:
After invading, Nazis used pre-war lists of gun owners to confiscate firearms,

IIRC, Kuwait Invaders did similarly.
As with Illinois
FOID cards ..

viewtopic.php?f=94&t=60920&p=748857#p748857

Kuwait Invasion (this article has been removed)
How Iraq Invaded Kuwait:

http://www.arabtimesonline.com/arabtime ... 5642&cat=a
Panel passes bill on gun ban, penalty on illegal arms raised; Independent Bloc elects executive committee members


KUWAIT: The National Assembly’s Legislative and Legal Committee on Satur-day passed two laws once regarding the ban on ownership of firearms and the other on transfer of properties. Under the first law, the penalty for the illegal ownership of light firearms was raised from five years to ten years in jail while the penalty for acquiring automatic firearms was raised from seven years to 15 years in jail. As for the fines to pay in either case, they are not less than KD 2,000 and not more than KD 10,000, the committee rapporteur MP Waleed Tabtabaei said. He added that the transfer of property was put under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Finance instead of the Kuwait Municipality. Meanwhile, in another development, the Independent Bloc Saturday elected MPs AbdulWahed Al-Awadhi, Jamal Al-Omar, Saleh Ashour, Abdullah Al-Fahma, and Dr Barrak Al-Noun as members of its executive committee. These MPs will work along with General Coordinator of the bloc MP Talal Al-Ayyar.



By Ben Arfaj Al-Mutairi - Special to the Arab Times and Agencies


not much info on Wiki ... but I recall hearing that lists of the few registered (rich) (legal) gun owners were kept, the invaders obtained the lists after overtaking govt offices ... I KNOW I heard it, whether it is fact or fiction I cannot say.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Kuwait
Towards the end of the first day of the invasion, only pockets of resistance were left in the country.
Last edited by RPB on Wed Jan 02, 2013 9:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
I'm no lawyer

"Never show your hole card" "Always have something in reserve"
RPB
Banned
 
Posts: 8697
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 8:17 pm

Re: Info from Sen Feinstein's website on proposed ban

Postby The Annoyed Man » Wed Jan 02, 2013 9:34 am

cling wrote:
srothstein wrote:
cling wrote:
anygunanywhere wrote:Let us all know how that "keep them if they are registered" thing works out for you.

It's been working for almost 80 years as far as I can tell. Look, I don't like it, but the reality is if the NFA is Constitutional then adding semiautomatics to the list of NFA firearms doesn't change that. Say what you want but that's reality.


That depends on how you define working.

anygunanywhere specifically asked about Americans being able to keep firearms that are registered.

That was the question asked and answered truthfully. I have been able to keep everything I have on the national registry. His response to that dose of reality was ad hominem attacks. I thought there was a forum rule against that but maybe I should thank him for the reminder why I spend my online time in other venues.

Good luck to all of you. With friend like him, you're going to need it.

And Cling, you still haven't addressed why you even think this is OK. It's one thing if you purchased an NFA item, knowing that you would have to jump through all these hoops to get permission to BUY the item. But how can you in good conscience say that there is no harm done by requiring gun owners to pay thousands of dollars in fees retroactively for purchases made when no such fees were necessary at the time of purchase? Those retroactive fees constitute a taking, since if they are not paid, the items in question would be confiscated. Can't you even see the injustice of this? And if you can, how is it that you're still OK with it?

And if you're OK with it, how can you be surprised that your intransigence angers people, since you're OK with them getting screwed for having made a perfectly legal purchase at the time?

I am frankly surprised that you are surprised at the reaction to the injustice you propose, your avatar being a representation of the Most Just. Or is it a symbol that means nothing to you?
"Give me Liberty, or I'll get up and get it myself." — Me
"Every decent man is ashamed of the government he lives under." — H. L. Mencken
"A ragamuffin knows he’s only a beggar at the door of God’s mercy." — The Ragamuffin Gospel, by Brennan Manning
User avatar
The Annoyed Man
Senior Member
 
Posts: 16551
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: Grapevine, Texas

Re: Info from Sen Feinstein's website on proposed ban

Postby Purplehood » Wed Jan 02, 2013 9:40 am

cling wrote:
srothstein wrote:
cling wrote:
anygunanywhere wrote:Let us all know how that "keep them if they are registered" thing works out for you.

It's been working for almost 80 years as far as I can tell. Look, I don't like it, but the reality is if the NFA is Constitutional then adding semiautomatics to the list of NFA firearms doesn't change that. Say what you want but that's reality.


That depends on how you define working.

anygunanywhere specifically asked about Americans being able to keep firearms that are registered.

That was the question asked and answered truthfully. I have been able to keep everything I have on the national registry. His response to that dose of reality was ad hominem attacks. I thought there was a forum rule against that but maybe I should thank him for the reminder why I spend my online time in other venues.

Good luck to all of you. With friend like him, you're going to need it.[Signature block: Better, not bitter]


Really? That seems like the same thing that you are berating...
Life NRA
USMC 76-93
USAR 99-07 (Retired)
OEF 06-07
User avatar
Purplehood
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4632
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 3:35 pm
Location: Houston, TX

Re: Info from Sen Feinstein's website on proposed ban

Postby VMI77 » Wed Jan 02, 2013 11:41 am

The Annoyed Man wrote:
cling wrote:
srothstein wrote:
cling wrote:
anygunanywhere wrote:Let us all know how that "keep them if they are registered" thing works out for you.

It's been working for almost 80 years as far as I can tell. Look, I don't like it, but the reality is if the NFA is Constitutional then adding semiautomatics to the list of NFA firearms doesn't change that. Say what you want but that's reality.


That depends on how you define working.

anygunanywhere specifically asked about Americans being able to keep firearms that are registered.

That was the question asked and answered truthfully. I have been able to keep everything I have on the national registry. His response to that dose of reality was ad hominem attacks. I thought there was a forum rule against that but maybe I should thank him for the reminder why I spend my online time in other venues.

Good luck to all of you. With friend like him, you're going to need it.

And Cling, you still haven't addressed why you even think this is OK. It's one thing if you purchased an NFA item, knowing that you would have to jump through all these hoops to get permission to BUY the item. But how can you in good conscience say that there is no harm done by requiring gun owners to pay thousands of dollars in fees retroactively for purchases made when no such fees were necessary at the time of purchase? Those retroactive fees constitute a taking, since if they are not paid, the items in question would be confiscated. Can't you even see the injustice of this? And if you can, how is it that you're still OK with it?

And if you're OK with it, how can you be surprised that your intransigence angers people, since you're OK with them getting screwed for having made a perfectly legal purchase at the time?

I am frankly surprised that you are surprised at the reaction to the injustice you propose, your avatar being a representation of the Most Just. Or is it a symbol that means nothing to you?


Seems like that might create an interesting legal situation. The fee may not be considered a ex post facto law because it's a civil penalty, but by not paying it and keeping your property you incur a criminal penalty, which does constitute an ex post facto law.
"The amount of harm caused by any politician can be estimated by his life expectancy in public without bodyguards."

Oleg Volk of Oleg Volk blog
User avatar
VMI77
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3838
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 5:49 pm
Location: Victoria, Texas

Re: Info from Feinstein on proposed ban(update on pg 2)

Postby VMI77 » Wed Jan 02, 2013 2:07 pm

There is another aspect of registration under the NFA we haven't been discussing: you give up your 4th Amendment right against search and seizure. Registration under the NFA allows the BATF to enter your home to inspect your registered devices anytime they please.
"The amount of harm caused by any politician can be estimated by his life expectancy in public without bodyguards."

Oleg Volk of Oleg Volk blog
User avatar
VMI77
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3838
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 5:49 pm
Location: Victoria, Texas

Re: Info from Feinstein on proposed ban(update on pg 2)

Postby Dave2 » Wed Jan 02, 2013 2:08 pm

VMI77 wrote:There is another aspect of registration under the NFA we haven't been discussing: you give up your 4th Amendment right against search and seizure. Registration under the NFA allows the BATF to enter your home to inspect your registered devices anytime they please.

:eek6 I'd forgotten about that.
I am not a lawyer, nor have I played one on TV, nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, nor should anything I say be taken as legal advice. If it is important that any information be accurate, do not use me as the only source.
Dave2
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2762
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 1:39 am
Location: Plano, TX

Re: Info from Sen Feinstein's website on proposed ban

Postby bayouhazard » Wed Jan 02, 2013 2:15 pm

The Annoyed Man wrote: if they are not paid, the items in question would be confiscated. Can't you even see the injustice of this?

Refuse to pay property taxes and see how long Texas lets you keep "your" house.
bayouhazard
Senior Member
 
Posts: 811
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 2:30 pm
Location: Wild West Houston

Re: Info from Sen Feinstein's website on proposed ban

Postby VMI77 » Wed Jan 02, 2013 2:54 pm

bayouhazard wrote:
The Annoyed Man wrote: if they are not paid, the items in question would be confiscated. Can't you even see the injustice of this?

Refuse to pay property taxes and see how long Texas lets you keep "your" house.


A key difference being that when I bought a house I knew there would be taxes and how much the taxes would be. Another key difference is that the tax is based on the value of the property. No one buys a $180,000 house and pays a $1,200,000 property tax. Another difference is that Texas can't decide tomorrow to raise your property taxes by six times. And not even in commie Kalifornia are the taxes on property higher than the value of the property itself.
"The amount of harm caused by any politician can be estimated by his life expectancy in public without bodyguards."

Oleg Volk of Oleg Volk blog
User avatar
VMI77
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3838
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 5:49 pm
Location: Victoria, Texas

PreviousNext

Return to Federal

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest