Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 26

Thread: They are after our guns again....

  1. #1
    Member Float Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Kachemak Bay Alaska
    Posts
    4,214

    Default They are after our guns again....

    110th U.S. Congress (2007-2008)
    H.R. 1022: To reauthorize the assault weapons ban, and for other purposes
    Introduced:Feb 13, 2007Sponsor:Rep. Carolyn McCarthy [D-NY](no cosponsors)
    Cosponsors
    Cosponsorship information sometimes is out of date.

    Last Action:Feb 13, 2007: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.Full Text:View Full Text of Bill
    Floatplane,Tailwheel and Firearms Instructor- Dragonfly Aero
    Experimental Hand-Loader, NRA Life Member
    http://site.dragonflyaero.com

  2. #2
    Member dwhunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Texas/Alaska
    Posts
    468

    Default

    That is certainly one reason I did not vote for anyone in Nancy Pelosi's crew.

    Doug

  3. #3
    Member tyrex13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Anchorage/Soldotna
    Posts
    1,176

    Default

    I guess I better keep on stocking up.

  4. #4
    Member SoldotnaDave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    133

    Default

    And the best reason to always get out and vote in the future.
    Formerly known as one who clings to guns and religion

  5. #5
    Member Flintlock's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    214

    Default AWB

    Write your congressman, write your senators, write Conyers, write Pelosi, buy all the standard capacity magazines you need, buy that "scary black rifle" you always wanted, and pray.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Soldotna
    Posts
    24

    Default

    Am I the only one to notice that the number on the House resolution is the same number as a Ruger .22 rifle?

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Kenai
    Posts
    132

    Default

    i noticed it, too. you do know that the congressional morons have that gun in their sights...

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Chugiak, AK
    Posts
    46

    Default

    Well, we knew that was coming when this congress took over, after all they are just looking out for our well being..........they care.........and don't forget the most important reason, the children. McCarthy is such a &*$!! they fawn all over her back in NY where from what I could see she rode her husband,s death on the Long Island railroad for all its worth. I haven't ever seen a speech by her that did not include that in it.

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Chugiak, AK
    Posts
    46

    Default

    (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.
    .

    I guess that would preclude just about any long gun except maybe a
    lever action as they never have procured a lever gun. Bolt actions,
    single shots, pumps, etc all have been issued by the military by
    istelf let alone any Federal LE agency.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Posts
    1,460

    Default

    Thanks Float Pilot for the FYI post...the struggle is never ending. Last month, in anticipation of actions like this one, I upgraded my NRA Life Membership to Endowment Member. I'll bet Don Young already knows about HR 1022, but I left a message on his public opinion line just in case. His number is 271-5791 if other Alaskans would like to do the same.

    Doc

  11. #11
    Member RainGull's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    The S.E. of the N.W.
    Posts
    950

    Default

    http://www.outdoorlife.blogs.com/zumbo/

    Jim Zumbo's take!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    "I see no place for these weapons among our hunting fraternity. I'll go so far as to call them "terrorist" rifles."

    "We don't need to be lumped into the group of people who terrorize the world with them, which is an obvious concern."

    "This really has me concerned. As hunters, we don't need the image of walking around the woods carrying one of these weapons. To most of the public, an assault rifle is a terrifying thing. Let's divorce ourselves from them. I say game departments should ban them from the praries and woods."

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Fairbanks
    Posts
    520

    Default

    We just picked up a copy of the Constitution for our home schooled sons. I keep reading it and rereading it and it seems to say "The right of the people to keep and bear ARMS shall not be infringed". I'd like to see the version some people seem to be reading that says "The right of the people to keep and bear SPORTING GOODS shall not be infringed" .......Louis

  13. #13
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Bethel, Cantwell, Fort Yukon, Skagway, Chevak and Point Hope
    Posts
    967

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by imthenra View Post
    ‘‘(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.’’.

    I guess that would preclude just about any long gun except maybe a
    lever action as they never have procured a lever gun. Bolt actions,
    single shots, pumps, etc all have been issued by the military by
    istelf let alone any Federal LE agency.


    Winchester made several hundred thousand Model 1895's for the Russian Military chambered in 7.62X54. This chambering was more than all the other 1895's ever put on the market.

    Some of the Roughriders used Model 1895's in the charge up San Juan Hill.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Chugiak, AK
    Posts
    46

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AlleninAlaska View Post
    Winchester made several hundred thousand Model 1895's for the Russian Military chambered in 7.62X54. This chambering was more than all the other 1895's ever put on the market.

    Some of the Roughriders used Model 1895's in the charge up San Juan Hill.
    We better hope that they don't include foriegn government issued!!! As far as I know the Roughriders that used the '95's were using their own because the .30-40 Krags were underpowered against the Mausers.

  15. #15
    Member Flintlock's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    214

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by imthenra View Post
    (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.
    .

    I guess that would preclude just about any long gun except maybe a
    lever action as they never have procured a lever gun. Bolt actions,
    single shots, pumps, etc all have been issued by the military by
    istelf let alone any Federal LE agency.

    Winchester repeating rifles were used by General Bufords' dismounted cavalry at the onset of the battle of Gettysburg in 1863.

  16. #16
    New member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Juneau
    Posts
    8

    Default

    *sigh*
    They include the M1 Carbine in the list of what would be absolutely illegal. Those horrible 15-round mags ... I better get one, and an AR soon, in case the ban gets passed again.

    The paragraph that imthenra quoted seems pretty ambiguos. It looks like it gives almost innumerable powers to the AG. Whatever happened to checks and balances?

    "National Match shooting events? Nah, that's not 'particularly suitable for use in a sporting event.'"

    Of course, we're all preaching to the choir here. Time for me to get out and do something.

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Fairbanks
    Posts
    520

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by flamekiller View Post
    *sigh*


    Of course, we're all preaching to the choir here. Time for me to get out and do something.
    Amen to that. I don't believe (hope) any Alaskan Rep.'s are supporting that bill but if there are any here who's rep's are, the matter needs to be (respectfully) addressed with them.

    Why is it that the people who feel the current administration is getting too much power are the same ones who want to put the citizens in a position of absolutely no power if someone did want to impose a dictatorship? It's not about sporting arms, it's about checks and balances. In a society where the people are in power, arms, being a source of power, belong in the hands of the people.....Louis

  18. #18
    Member Alaskacajun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by imthenra View Post
    I guess that would preclude just about any long gun except maybe a
    lever action as they never have procured a lever gun. Bolt actions,
    single shots, pumps, etc all have been issued by the military by
    istelf let alone any Federal LE agency.
    Apparently you've never watched Walker Texas Ranger, he carry's a Colt 45 SA and a Winchester lever gun.... Geez!

    - Clint

  19. #19
    Member Alaskacajun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Louis View Post
    We just picked up a copy of the Constitution for our home schooled sons. I keep reading it and rereading it and it seems to say "The right of the people to keep and bear ARMS shall not be infringed". I'd like to see the version some people seem to be reading that says "The right of the people to keep and bear SPORTING GOODS shall not be infringed" .......Louis
    I believe "their" argument would be that there were only black powder rifles and handguns at the time. Not Evil Black Rifles and semi auto assult pistols with 100 round drums that are easily converted to full auto by filing down certain parts in the gun... {continues to dig hole in crawl space for weapon's storage}

    - Clint
    Last edited by Alaskacajun; 02-19-2007 at 15:18.

  20. #20
    Member tyrex13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Anchorage/Soldotna
    Posts
    1,176

    Default

    At the time of the writing of the Constitution, the frontiersman had more advanced rifles than the military and government did. To me, that should always be true. FA's and suppressors for everyone!

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •