Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 5/21/2003 12:54:49 PM EDT
Here's what it says (this is right from VPC suggestions guys/gals) :



`(L) A semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General. In making the determination, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any Federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.'.

CRC
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 1:00:25 PM EDT
Umm, bye bye Remingtons 870s and Mossbergs. Well, at least the 870s would be a loss.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 1:24:25 PM EDT
What I see is (aside from those already mentioned): No DCM guns (M1, M1A, AR-15/DCM) -Zmeja
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 1:38:32 PM EDT
Also say goodbye to a very popular hunting rifle, the Remington 700 series in which the .308 version is used by military snipers.
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 2:03:11 PM EDT
So a Trapdoor springfield would be banned?, Its military. GG
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 3:15:26 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Raptor22: Also say goodbye to a very popular hunting rifle, the Remington 700 series in which the .308 version is used by military snipers.
View Quote
Uh my dad has a two 700s and they're bolt actions, not semi-autos. CRC
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 3:33:59 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack: Umm, bye bye Remingtons 870s and Mossbergs. Well, at least the 870s would be a loss.
View Quote
Last time I checked, those were PUMPS, not semi auto! This bill is just a "Lowball" bid. They'll change their tune soon, and introduce the a carbon copy of the senate bill in the house. ...They'll call it "Compromise" NO COMPROMISE
Link Posted: 5/21/2003 3:37:16 PM EDT
Lock and load boys. This could be the 'big one'.
Link Posted: 5/22/2003 8:18:29 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Mugzilla:
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack: Umm, bye bye Remingtons 870s and Mossbergs. Well, at least the 870s would be a loss.
View Quote
Last time I checked, those were PUMPS, not semi auto! This bill is just a "Lowball" bid. They'll change their tune soon, and introduce the a carbon copy of the senate bill in the house. ...They'll call it "Compromise" NO COMPROMISE
View Quote
McCarthy won't! She is hell bent on getting this bill passed even if it ruins her polticial career or takes her life! I'm sure of it. CRC
Link Posted: 5/22/2003 8:27:49 AM EDT
Wow. I guess some people have their own 'edited' copy of the Constitution. Funny, how they edit documents issued as 'the truth' for their own purposes. Typically this includes the good book as well... I don't want to get into the issues for fear of being called a bigot, etc and everyone's opinions are their own, but the comparison applies, regardless. It'd certainly be hard to say they maintain a strict interpretation. It's really nice though that they'll be getting the guns out of the hands of crooks, such as ourselves.
Link Posted: 5/22/2003 7:26:18 PM EDT
Originally Posted By CRC: McCarthy won't! She is hell bent on getting this bill passed even if it ruins her polticial career or takes her life! I'm sure of it. CRC
View Quote
I wonder if anyone will miss her. She should read the book "Unintended Consequences". It is an amazing history of the U.S. written a decade or two prior to actually becoming history. Provided I live a normal lifespan I will see it as U.S. history.
Link Posted: 5/22/2003 8:54:38 PM EDT
It doesnt say it has to be semi, only used by the military.
Link Posted: 5/22/2003 9:22:34 PM EDT
[b]`(L) A [red]semiautomatic[/red] rifle or shotgun ...[/b]
View Quote
Link Posted: 5/22/2003 9:26:14 PM EDT
Oops, maybe I need to read more closely. Still, bye bye benellis.
Link Posted: 5/22/2003 11:34:56 PM EDT
a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.
View Quote
This sounds too much like Jabberwocky. A firearm being suitable for use in a sporting event doesn't mean that it is suitable for sporting purposes. Very "Through the Looking Glass."
Link Posted: 5/23/2003 12:02:50 AM EDT
Either the AG needs to take a balls-on stance on this issue, or the S.C. needs to resolve it. I've often wondered why the S.C. even entertains firearms-related cases involving civilians if civilian/private ownership is prohibited under the constitution. Seems that a civilian wouldn't even have standing to present a case. The slope is just getting slicker.
Top Top