Editorial: Ghost Guns And Bump Stocks — Ban Them Both (barf alert)

Hartford Courant ^ | 23 feb 2018

[FiddlePig]

I’ll start the obvious, that gun bans will won’t(can’t) work. It is always near impossible to enforce a prohibition on what was once a legal product (see 1920s, thugs became billionaires… same as “war on drugs” today). Especially with 300+million firearms already in the land. I read a post that the very mention of President Trump considering banning “bump stocks” has sent sales through the roof. We Americans is a rebellious lot (ain’t we?)... imagine the volume of government blood and treasure required to disarm all us gun owning “Bitter Clingers” and “Rednecks”? Law enforcement would have time for little else. Constitution would also have to be shredded top to bottom, as ALL people by default become suspects.

[The Toll]

No.

Now what pussy?

[Drew68]

Assemble a WEAPON, yes, but an ‘assault weapon’? Please define ‘assault weapon’. (If if just a tongue slip, using the Leftist lingo gives them all they need to turn the tide in the debate).

I’m in the military and prefer the term assault weapon to describe the black, semi-automatic “modern sporting rifles” that I own. I’ve never had patience for pedantic gun lingo. Often, I’ll refer to a magazine as a clip just to savor the butthurt that ensues. I’m kind of an asshole that way! ;-)

[NativeSon]

I’m interested in metal working and am looking to pick up a Bridgeport mill. Being able to fabricate something useful from a hunk of metal seems like magic.

[Yo-Yo]

I’ll start the obvious, that gun bans will won’t(can’t) work.

And I'll finish with the obvious, which is why 100% gun registration is necessary before confiscation.

Without registration he government can't demand what they don't know you have after they ban it, but with registration you cannot hide what you registered with the government when they knock on your door asking for rifle serial number xxxxx.

That is why universal gun registration is fought so hard by the NRA. Unfortunately, it is a reality in many states, and may become more so in the future.

[libertylover]

It is perfectly legal, at the moment, to go online and buy most of an unassembled gun, without a serial number, without any registration requirements.

Gee, I didn't know that. Thanks for the info.

[Big Red Badger]

Quite a Ruckus Indeed!

[Morpheus2009]

Yes let’s ban the ghostbusters proton packs for being illegal nuclear weapons.

[KrisKrinkle]

“Please define ‘assault weapon’.”

A weapon used for an assault. I can assemble an assault weapon with a handsaw and a tree and assault someone with it. That won’t work out so well for a military assault but it will do just fine against most people for a criminal assault, unless they have something better.

[eyeamok]

There is No good reason to own an unlicensed. unregistered or unregulated High Capacity transmission device to spread lies and propaganda

[Who is John Galt?]

"Because we’re talking about 100 year old technology here."

Bingo! If you think about it, an AR receiver is just a box holding the fire control parts in position, to which are attached the barrel, recoil assembly, mag well, etc. I just removed an old satellite dish from the roof of my house, and I saved part of the support arm because it looks like it will make a dandy lower receiver, with no complex machining required. (Wait - maybe the federal government should ban satellite dish support arms? ;>) If you're not limiting yourself to reproducing an exact copy of a specific design, the sky's the limit...

[i_robot73]

>
I’m in the military and prefer the term assault weapon to describe the black, semi-automatic “modern sporting rifles” that I own. I’ve never had patience for pedantic gun lingo. Often, I’ll refer to a magazine as a clip just to savor the butthurt that ensues. I’m kind of an asshole that way! ;-)
>

You too? /s

My point was co-opting the Leftist lingo. One thing to stir-da-puddin’ in company of FRiend. Quite another when in linguistic battle w/ the Left.

IMO, I’ve seen threads quickly turn to to emotional/logical Schiff, when we should be (I would hope) better than most at laying out concise, reasoned points to counter the Leftist revolution (and, if one doesn’t think it’s been a successful ‘revolution’ hasn’t been keeping track of elections, let alone the recent FL shooting narrative....100+ yrs of indoctrination w/ nary a skirmish to push-back. But, I digress).

As R.L noted: Even strong words, if delivered properly to a liberal, may injure them (should be a tagline somewhere).

[nobamanomore]

Even in Connecticut, which passed some of the nation’s toughest gun laws in the wake of the Sandy Hook shootings, anyone could get a ready-to-assemble gun by mail.

You can order a rifle kit all you want, but it has to be mailed to an FFL dealer in every state. You can get an 80% receiver which is FAR from ready to assemble, so yes everything the idiot says is total BS.

[Harpotoo]

Connecticut? Don’t they have about 300K felons now who refused to surrender their 2nd amendment rights? Will the police ever start going door to door to find them?-)

[aMorePerfectUnion]

[Yo-Yo]

You can order a rifle kit all you want, but it has to be mailed to an FFL dealer in every state.

No, it does not. As long as the rifle kit, like the one from CDNN Sports that I linked to, does not include the registered piece (lower receiver in the case of an AR), it can be shipped to your door as long as the resulting firearm is legal in your state.

The AR lower receiver must be transferred by an FFL unless purchased face-to-face with another individual in your state, again given that such sales are legal in your state.

[nobamanomore]

I’m quite familiar with that. They said you could order a ready to assemble AR15 in the mail. You have to have a lower. You are talking about a rifle kit less a lower, which can be shipped. To get a complete rifle ready to assemble, you would have to go through an FFL. I have probably built 20, I know you can mail an upper receiver!