Posted on 12/13/2006 12:22:37 PM PST by DCBryan1
Our founding fathers did...Article 1 Section 10 (as I recall): "...and no ex post facto law shall be passed."
The BATF is violating this tenet of the constitution as well as the second ammendment with this ruling.
Start your stockpiling...Here we go again !
Be careful citizen, you might be seen as a trouble maker.
I understand what you are saying, but if you read the ATF documentation, they said, we researched your product, and no, under federal law, and our careful examination, your product is NOT a machinegun, and you don't need any stinking licenses, permits, fees, etc...so you can go forth and make millions of dollars....
Only later to come back and say NOT!.
It is anti-captialism, anti-constitutional, anti-freeenterprise, anti-entrepreneur, and just plain anti-american to do this to a company wanting to provide (formerly) legal supply to a enthusiastic demand.
"Firing 25 or 50 rounds on a single trigger pull, IMO, qualifies this as a machine gun."
It's not a single trigger pull. Each round is fired by a individual trigger pull. The trigger recoils along with the receiver and is slammed forward into the finger resulting in a trigger pull for each round fired.
I was told that it (BATF) meant:
Burn
All
Toddlers
First.
Absolutely right. According to ATF, this now is considered a machinegun:
Any weapon that will slam fire
any weapon whose sear breaks and double fires,
any weapon which gets hot and has a "runaway" fire,
Any person who "limpwrists" a pistol and it fires twice
any "bump fire",
any inertia fire
Can you see where this is going?
Absolutely right. According to ATF, this now is considered a machinegun:
Any weapon that will slam fire
any weapon whose sear breaks and double fires,
any weapon which gets hot and has a "runaway" fire,
Any person who "limpwrists" a pistol and it fires twice
any "bump fire",
any inertia fire
Can you see where this is going?
I would say so as well. But the government has no business banning any firearms, especially from law-abiding people. The right to keep and bear arms does not specify certain types of arms, after all.
Gun laws - any of them - are unconstitutional.
I've seen a guy stick a cartridge in each ear, as field-expedient ear protection. I thought it was dumb ... that goes 'way beyond dumb.
How do you set up 550 round magazines?
Yup, I agree with everything you said. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, etc... However, I STILL think the Constitution took a major hit when they (in effect) outlawed machine guns, and they never should've done it. They had no right to do it, and I'm still highly ticked off about it! So this buttstock thingy ban is just adding insult to injury as far as I'm concerned.
Start? I have not stopped since 9-11. ;)
Note that this maroons finger is on the trigger!
But I am sure it would have been called an "accedental" shooting. (AD my butt)
Wound up selling the AK off.
BATF= BOHICA
Think about it, though ... The guy in that pic is (presumably) a BATFag ... so a bullet passing in one ear, through his skull, and out the other will do precisely ZERO damage to him ...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.