Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 9/10/2004 11:22:01 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/10/2004 11:22:01 AM EST by FrankSquid]
I am adding a bayonet lug and flash supressor to my AR15 after the ban lifts. Should I document this in case of future bans that have a grandfather clause?

Should I just write out the description and serial number of the gun and have it notarized? Would that be sufficient?

I am also adding a pistol grip to an Ithaca 37. I know it is legal now, but should I document it in case of other future bans with a grandfather clause?

What are you guys going to do?

Out


moved to GFD from the SF by FS :)
Link Posted: 9/10/2004 8:28:53 AM EST
1) change (fix) weapon

2) don't worry about documentation

3) take some photos if it makes you sleep well at night

4) if another Ban passes, there won't be a Grandfather Clause. We'll be lucky to get Registration instead of Confiscation
Link Posted: 9/10/2004 8:31:49 AM EST
Asl long as this is still America you shouldn't have to prove anything, it is the requirements of those wanting to prosecute you to prove that the rifle was never modified this way before the ban. Pretty much an imposible case. If your rifle is made before some hypothetical new ban you will be able to keep the goodies on it.

The fear is that there would be a new ban, and especially that it would not have a grandfather clause.
Link Posted: 9/10/2004 8:40:01 AM EST
Question: How do you prepare for a ban that doesn't exist?

Answer: You don't!
Link Posted: 9/10/2004 9:29:03 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/10/2004 10:34:29 AM EST
TJ,
Can you explain the newspaper thing to me? I have heard several people mention this as a way to show status at a particular time but I don't see how it works? I can take a picture of my glock 30 laying on top of a newspaper that says "Germany Surrenders" but that doesn't make my Glock 50 years old....

Link Posted: 9/10/2004 10:41:25 AM EST
Point the muzzle at 'em and say "does it look legal now?"
Link Posted: 9/10/2004 12:56:06 PM EST
I'm saving all my receipts for the evil features that I put on. The receipts are dated and stapled to my original bill of sale for my firearms.

Link Posted: 9/10/2004 1:08:47 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/10/2004 1:10:44 PM EST by ALAN308]

Originally Posted By innocent_bystander:
Question: How do you prepare for a ban that doesn't exist?

Answer: You don't!




I do not have a crystal ball either. Enjoy what you can wile you can. Look what just happened in N.J. Here in So. Fl., They tried to push thru local laws wile all citizens were asleep. It did leak out and they were defeated. They did try however. We have some nasty self serving democrats here. They forget what it is they have come to and why it was here for them.
Link Posted: 9/10/2004 2:17:38 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/10/2004 2:18:11 PM EST by BLY]

Originally Posted By Bhart89:
TJ,
Can you explain the newspaper thing to me? I have heard several people mention this as a way to show status at a particular time but I don't see how it works? I can take a picture of my glock 30 laying on top of a newspaper that says "Germany Surrenders" but that doesn't make my Glock 50 years old....




When I first read your post, I thought to myself "Uhhhh.... You don't understand??" - Then I realized what you were saying.

You're right, I don't see how taking pictures of your "AW" laying on a news paper will be of any use. If it was, then I could've taken a picture of all of mine in such configuration while the evil ban was still in place using a news paper from before the ban was put into law...

Might as well take the pictures with your AWs against a plain background. Right?
Link Posted: 9/10/2004 3:06:12 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/10/2004 4:45:26 PM EST

Originally Posted By TomJefferson:
No it doesn't prove a thing, however does create "Reasonable Doubt" and like I said some bragging rights.

If you wanted some sort of proof then you could write a sworn statement, have it witnenessed by two witnesses,and then notorized and sealed.

I don't think I'd care to do that like my flash suppressor of the early 80s if they want a deal out of it then I can get sworn statements at that time.

Tj



Ah, I see. Maybe it's not such a bad idea to snap a few pictures this Monday. Just for fun if anything.
Yeah, if something's in the breeze then I'll get it notorized to be safe.
Link Posted: 9/10/2004 5:01:51 PM EST

Originally Posted By fight4yourrights:
1) change (fix) weapon

2) don't worry about documentation

3) take some photos if it makes you sleep well at night

4) if another Ban passes, there won't be a Grandfather Clause. We'll be lucky to get Registration instead of Confiscation




+1
Link Posted: 9/10/2004 5:24:37 PM EST
I am more worried about a state ban.

Having it notarized seems much better and legal than "taking pictures."
Link Posted: 9/10/2004 5:35:15 PM EST
Not another one of these foolish threads.

DOOP!

We need a "ChickenShit Gun Owner" Forum.
Link Posted: 9/11/2004 4:36:43 AM EST
Markm -

Sorry, some of us have FAMILIES and gave up the macho outlaw stuff when we were 16. I would think that being SMART is better than being in jail.

Out
Link Posted: 9/11/2004 5:53:39 AM EST
ALthough taking a photo/saving receipts/ getting sworn statements notarized might not prove anything in the future, IT CAN'T HURT TO HAVE IT. Better to be a little paranoid and not need the proof than have Joe ATF cuffing you because you have no way to prove anything IMHO.

And to anyone who says that the burden of proof is on the government for a future ban, I simply direct them to the '94 ban. As far as I understand it, it is your burden of proof to show that the weapn was a fully assembled preban configuration rifle prior to 1994. Of course that don't mean sh*t in about 48 hours!

Link Posted: 9/11/2004 7:24:43 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/12/2004 2:41:58 AM EST by raf]
Link Posted: 9/11/2004 7:33:42 AM EST
I am going to do EXACTLY what MILLIONS of guys did in 1994 to "prove" the "pre-ban" status of their wepons...................................

NOTHING!!!

It seemed to work just fine for 10 years.
Link Posted: 9/11/2004 7:36:09 AM EST

Originally Posted By AmericanPatriot1776:
Markm -

Sorry, some of us have FAMILIES and gave up the macho outlaw stuff when we were 16. I would think that being SMART is better than being in jail.

Out



I have a family. I've owned AR's for about seven years now. No one has ever asked me to prove that my shit was compliant BECAUSE NOBODY CARES.
Link Posted: 9/11/2004 8:12:08 AM EST
nobody cares...........YET.

Out.
Link Posted: 9/11/2004 9:30:48 AM EST
SeaCrest OUT!
Link Posted: 9/13/2004 8:20:15 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/13/2004 8:34:56 AM EST
I'm going to get pics of me TEA BAGGING all of my guns!
Link Posted: 9/13/2004 8:50:30 AM EST

How should I "prove" my firearms are legal?


Why do you have to prove anything up front? Do you have to prove to anyone that you are a capable driver before you drive somewhere?
Link Posted: 9/13/2004 9:02:50 AM EST

Originally Posted By hardcase:

How should I "prove" my firearms are legal?


Why do you have to prove anything up front? Do you have to prove to anyone that you are a capable driver before you drive somewhere?



I think he means in case a new, similarly structured ban is passed later.
Link Posted: 9/13/2004 9:43:10 AM EST
Excuse my ignorance, BUT..


Who would you have to prove your guns are legal to ? As I understand it, the burder of proof lies with the person or agency challenging that your weapons are in fact 'illegal'.


So if the person, officer, or agency says your guns are illegal, THEY should have to prove it, not you.
Link Posted: 9/13/2004 9:44:01 AM EST
I was going to post this same question, glad I caught this.

I'm going to go with notorization myself. better safe than sorry.

GM
Link Posted: 9/13/2004 9:46:11 AM EST
Easy- Prove it to them muzzle end first.
Link Posted: 9/13/2004 10:06:32 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/13/2004 10:07:51 AM EST by rickinvegas]

Originally Posted By goodmedicine:
I'm going to go with notorization myself. better safe than sorry.



Why not play it REAL safe...............just get rid of those baby killing bullet hoses. Then there is no chance of "getting in trouble".

No flame intended here, really. I just don't understand this kind of thinking. We are doing nothing illegal (and we have the letter from the AFT now to prove it ), why are gun owners acting this way? It's time we all start acting a little less like scared children and a little more like Rosa Parks. Like her, I kinda like my seat on the bus right now and I'm not giving it up to anyone!
Link Posted: 9/13/2004 10:19:11 AM EST

Originally Posted By fook:
Excuse my ignorance, BUT..


Who would you have to prove your guns are legal to ? As I understand it, the burder of proof lies with the person or agency challenging that your weapons are in fact 'illegal'.


So if the person, officer, or agency says your guns are illegal, THEY should have to prove it, not you.



Fook,

The maxim "innocent until proven guilty" is all well and good, but it does not take into account the parameters of what constitutes "guilt". Under the now-expired 1994 AWB, the law outlawed ALL "assault weapons" and provided a defense if the gun in question was legally owned prior to enactment of the ban. Thus, under the old law, all the government had to prove was that the gun in your possession met the statutory definition of a banned "assault weapon" and it was up to you to prove your defense. The way the law was framed, the fact that a gun was a grandfathered "pre-ban" was a defense to the charge, and the prosecution does not have to disprove all possible defenses; its up to the defendant to raise and prove his defense.

Thus, the reason you are now seeing threads as this one is because IF another ban is enacted, and IF it is similarly structured as the last one, people want to be covered just in case. Call it proactive CYA.
Link Posted: 9/13/2004 10:43:45 AM EST
Yep CYA!
Link Posted: 9/13/2004 11:14:14 AM EST
Thank you for coming to my defense.........
Link Posted: 9/13/2004 11:55:48 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/13/2004 11:56:33 AM EST by TomJefferson]
Link Posted: 9/13/2004 1:26:20 PM EST
How do I prove that the bag of frozen peas I just purchased is "legal"?

You know, just in case there's a Frozen Peas Ban in the future...

...I want to be ready.
Link Posted: 9/13/2004 3:56:08 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/13/2004 3:57:07 PM EST by AmericanPatriot1776]
Cincinnatus -

You can worry about your "frozen peas" all you want, some people here are talking about protecting their rifles.......

If Kerry is elected you can play with your frozen peas all you want.

Out

PS - the burden of proof is on you to prove your firearms are legal...not the governments.

Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:29:34 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/15/2004 2:32:53 AM EST by Cincinnatus]
Don't be a pussy.

Protecting your rifles' legality is just a matter of having some balls.
Trying to worry about the future, tedious hoops that some yet to be passed law may require us to jump through is a waste of energy.
If there is no current law that prohibits you from purchasing or possessing your weapon, don't lose sleep about the DETAILS of a law that is yet to exist.

Who here made all sorts of notarized preparations for the '94 Ban?
What's that?
No one?

Why don't you ask the government to keep a database of registered AWs, so that way, when they ban them in the future, yours will be safe?
Sounds like a bad idea?
Then why do it to yourself?
You're talking about "self registration", that in the future you will show the government, hoping it satisfies their needs.

The only elaborate "paper trail" I'm going to keep, to "protect my Rifles", is a little note I'll keep in my wallet.
It'll read: "Fuck them, these guns are mine."

Link Posted: 9/14/2004 7:41:38 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 7:48:09 AM EST

Originally Posted By raf:


Why don't you ask the government to keep a database of registered AWs, so that way, when they ban them in the future, yours will be safe?
Sounds like a bad idea?
Then why do it to yourself?
You're talking about "self registration", that in the future you will show the government, hoping it satisfies their needs.



Wrong again. It's my private database, pertaining to me alone, and safely stored under my control away from prying eyes..


It's a database that you will keep to someday show the government, after the enactment of some future Ban, in the hopes that they will deem your weapons "legal", based on your records.

By the way... my post was in reply to "AmericanPatriot1776", not you.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 9:07:31 AM EST
[sarcasm]Come on guys just stick your head in the sand. They won't ban these guns again. [/sarcasm]
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 9:15:27 AM EST
Three things--Don't register, don't register, and third, don't register.

And remember the three S's, and don't register.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 11:10:09 AM EST

Originally Posted By A_Free_Man:
Three things--Don't register, don't register, and third, don't register.

And remember the three S's, and don't register.


Bingo.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 2:45:43 PM EST
Cincinnatus-

Sir, I do not know you. I can only assume that you are very passionate about your guns and place your ownership of them above all else. I however, value some other things higher.....on this point you and I disagree.

I do find it commical however, that you have sank to the level of name calling, especially on an online forum, where you know that you and I will never meet. Name calling is usually the result of not having something constructive to say.

You have made your point clear and it is obvious that you disagree with me - that is fine because both you and I want the same things - to keep our guns. We just have differnet opinions about how to do it.

There are several people on this thread who seem to agree with me and have thought of the same things. I hope you let us continue this discussion without repeating your opinion over and over again.......we get your point already, but disagree. You stating it over and over again is probably not going to change anyone's mind.

Cincinnatus-thank you for your input.

So......does anyone think that a notarized signature on a document that includes the guns serial number will be enough? Any lawyers in this group?

Out
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 3:31:37 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/14/2004 3:33:47 PM EST by Cincinnatus]
Name calling?
C'mon, don't be a pussy.
I didn't call you any names.
I gave you sound advice.

You may choose to ignore it. But I think you'd be well served to look at the majority opinion here, rather than seek satisfaction in gleaning those few who agree with you about this.
I meant no insult, it's just an expression.

<­BR>
Top Top