Posted on 11/08/2008 12:05:17 AM PST by Marie
Ancient history, but 17 round magazines that cost $12 in 1992 were going for $120 in 2002.
And that’s with a sunset possibility. Glock magazines are in high demand, and the dirty secret is they are prone to wear out faster than about any other gun part from any supplier.
The mag catch area starts to get iffy after a few hundred inserts, you’ll see the wear. Eventually they can start falling out during firing if old and worn.
Metal mags last as long as they don’t rust though. But like I said, within 8 years Glock mags went up 10x value, and I paid it too. They get horded and they wear out, insane stuff for plastic junk parts really that cost probably a buck to make.
I'll bet you couldn't imagine a ban on political speech within a certain period of time before an election, the sentences of juvenile murderers being overturned because laws in other countries don't permit such sentences, and companies being owned by the feds, either. If we've learned anything, it's that we can no longer safely assume that it can't happen.
In particular with guns, I think you're going to see one of the attacks being the notion that only those in a well regulated militia are allowed to own guns. As you know, the gun grabbers claim this means something like the National Guard. Now, on July 2 of this year in Colorado Springs, Chairman Hussein told us of the plan he has for his own well regulated militia:
"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."You don't have to go very far to see Congress passing a law defining Obama's civilian national security force as the well regulated militia of the 2nd Amendment.
So just keep mind that while you can't imagine it, the RATS are imagining it and they have the means, for now, to push a lot of it through.
I took that same oath in 1970. I take it very seriously. The fact I am no longer in uniform does not change my allegiance to the Constitution.
“And can someone please explain to me what exactly is an ‘assault weapon’??”
An “assault weapon” to a liberal, who is inherently ignorant or anything relating to firearms, is any firearm that “looks scary.”
In reality, an assault weapon is a select-fire weapon that has the ability to fire both automatic and semi-automatic rounds, the change being accomplished by the flipping of a switch or toggle.
An “assault weapon” is whatever the Democrats say it is. The new assault weapon ban that the Dems tried to introduce during the Bush years uncluded nearly every semi-auto that had a detachable magazine including M-1 carbine, Mini 14, M-1A and many others. Expect more of this in years to come. I put a muzzle brake on my MIni 14 before the first ban; it would have made it an illegal firearm if done during the ban years. I need to figure out how to ensure that I can prove that it was added before any new laws are enacted.
“First of all, the left is afraid of citizens owning guns - especially rifles - that would be the most useful during a revolution. If the radical left takes over the government, they don’t want citizens, armed with effective rifles, fighting the secret police or whatever. They want isolated, unarmed subjects who can be easily rounded up to the reeducation camps. The Founding Fathers did not know about reeducation camps, but they did understand tyrants. That is why they envisioned a citizenry owning the same type of military small arms that the army has. Also, the liberals think that the safety of a criminal is more important than your property rights, so they think it is wrong for you to use force against someone stealing your property. The big picture is, the left wants citizens to be disarmed and helpless against tyrants and common criminals.”
You’ve put it succinctly in a nutshell. MOLON LABE!
I have just discovered, in a roundabout way, that the Second Amendment was really only intended for trap shooting. Yes, the Founders meant that the only right protected was for the busting of clay plates with single-shot fowling pieces on a Sunday afternoon, and then only under the careful supervision of our Masters. That was the only right intended. The “gun nuts” have to get with the program, and stop this fiction that the Second Amendment was intended for the people as a last-resort against tyranny. /s
Instead of yes we can it should be no we won't. Stand up and reject the bastards.
It won't be a court battle.
Exactly. Welcome to the light.
“Assault weapons”, as defined in the Clinton AW ban, are semiautomatics that have a few scary-looking features - features which are downright harmless (and provide only a discernible advantage in the depths of full-blown warfare). The great joke of the AWB was that you could still buy exactly the same gun, just without the largely pointless flash suppressor.
You’re right. It wasn’t about M16s or machineguns, as those have been strictly regulated since 1934, and any made after 1986 are outright prohibited.
There was a limit on magazine size: 10 rounds max, when the norm was 12, 15, 17, 20, 30 or more for various guns. While that was certainly an annoyance for guns designed to hold/use more, a curious result was the explosion of the “subcompact handgun” and “big bore handgun” markets: if you can’t have over 10 rounds, then either make the gun really small (subcompact 9mm Glock 26) or really powerful (full-size .45ACP M1911).
The only “guns” actually banned in the last “assault weapon ban” were extremely large handguns which are little more than novelties.
So yes, an “assault weapon” is basically a gun that looks scary. “Looks” is the important part.
Now, with all that background...
Obama intends to restore the ban and make it permanent. This time, it won’t be just about looks. Expect a ban on any semi-automatic that uses detachable magazines.
...thing is, it wasn’t, and won’t be, about machineguns. They’re already effectively banned completely (save for a very few, very old, very very overpriced ones).
Buy Buy Buy!
JoMa
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.