Oh, they squirm and spit about phantom "injury" of various kinds, but that brass-tacks, bottom-line, striaght-up answer is "No, the assault weapons ban has not affected my ability to buy whatever the hell I want whenever the hell I want."
However, I was wondering if anyone has been denied or even arrested for violating this ban.
Domestic Violence arrestees/convictees can't purchase a firearm. I saw one complaint about that.
Question is, should ANYONE be restricted from owning a firearm?
Pot smokers, rapist, wife beaters, speeders, shoplifters, killers?
What is the limit, or should there be one?
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
I have to pay $60 for $30 twenty-round magazines for my rifle. My Glock 30 round magazine cost me $85 when it should be selling for a mere $30. My son will never be able to buy magazines over ten rounds if the ban continues unless he wants to pay over $400 per magazine.
They are chipping away the Second Amendment one piece at a time until you will not be able to own any firearms at all because of all the restrictions and regulations on them.
Well that 100 round mag I want is now over 400 bucks so that's affected my ability to purchase it.
The heck it hasn't. I wanted a rebuilt G-3(H&K designed .308 semi-auto) but you can't get them with a flash hider. I hate the muzzle brake I had to settle for instead, it makes shooting from under cover at a range unpleasant for everyone, the shooter and those using nearby positions. It gets you some really nasty looks too. Before the AWB, my finances were such that I couldn't afford to buy one, or an AR-15 for that matter. Afterwards, when I could afford one, I couldn't get one with the flash hider. Yes I could have one with no muzzle device at all, but that's not what I wanted, and you did say "want".
Mike