Feinstein suggests national compulsory buy back of "assault weapons"

Printable View

12-22-2012, 22:02
Ridge

Feinstein suggests national compulsory buy back of "assault weapons"

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/se...8#.UNZbG6NMHFo
12-22-2012, 22:31
rtr

So how many guns would they be "buying/confiscating"?
12-22-2012, 22:51
patrick0685

that would suck for those that had guns...sold all of mine over the panic
12-22-2012, 22:52
ChunkyMonkey

Democrats [fail]
12-22-2012, 22:57
BushMasterBoy

Eff Feinstein. Period.
12-22-2012, 23:21
TS12000

Re: Feinstein suggests national compulsory buy back of "assault weapons"

Hey morons, the violent crime rate has skyrocketed in Austrailia since they innvoluntarily bought back all those guns. Wonder why that wasn't mentioned.
12-22-2012, 23:46
Zundfolge

Quote:

Originally Posted by TS12000

Hey morons, the violent crime rate has skyrocketed in Austrailia since they innvoluntarily bought back all those guns. Wonder why that wasn't mentioned.

Violent crime going up would be yet another pretext for more power transfered to the centralized authority and less liberty for the individual.

These people are pure evil. They hate liberty, they hate the sovereignty of the common man and they want to eliminate liberty and our constitution and make themselves the absolute rulers of every facet of our lives. They wish for our every moment to be completely under their control and our very existence to be at their whim.

These people don't give two shits about your health, safety or stopping criminal activity (other than thought crime against their absolute authority). They care only about their own power.

Feinstein and every other liberal is a traitor to the human race.
12-23-2012, 00:39
BPTactical

The REALLY fucked up part is they will "purchase" them from us for $300 bucks, turn them over to Holder and get $4000.00 ea from Mexico and balance the budget.
12-23-2012, 00:49
DeusExMachina

She can buy back my ammo, one bullet at a time.
12-23-2012, 08:10
Rucker61

Quote:

Originally Posted by rtr

So how many guns would they be "buying/confiscating"?

About 12.
12-23-2012, 08:24
Kraven251

None. It would never pass the House and runs a foul of the 2A pretty damn fast.

Beyond that the stripped lower receiver is the only piece considered the "gun."
12-23-2012, 09:22
roberth

Compulsory huh. Good luck with that Diane. I got an idea Diane, why don't you yourself Diane stand there at the 'compulsory' line instead of some lackey and we'll see what happens.
12-23-2012, 10:27
palepainter

So in theory, we will be buying back our own guns... That bitch can kiss our asses.
12-23-2012, 23:42
lllRorlll

Quote:

Originally Posted by patrick0685

that would suck for those that had guns...sold all of mine over the panic

.. As did i..
12-24-2012, 10:19
ringhilt

How 'bout this. If they want to buy them back. OK, but no taxpayer money can be used and they must buy at market value. (note market value is way up right now). If feinstein wants our guns, she can pony up the money to buy them. She's a multi-millionare. So is chucky shumer, bloomberg, fat ass michael moore, rosanne barr, obummer and moochele are also millionares. and all these hollywood actors and singers are also millionares. So let them pay for it.
Make the anti's put their money where their mouth is. If they really have such strong convictions about guns, then they can pay for it. Betcha they won't. They want the taxpayer to pay up. They want gun owners to compromise once again. Well, no more. Taxpayers have paid enough and gun owners have given enough.
Time for the lefties to payup or shut up. And to top it off all these elitist snobs need to also give up their armed security. They can have security, just not armed with guns. they can live the way the rest of us live.

Just my $1.02 worth.
12-24-2012, 10:34
Storm

One Word. Non-compliance.

This is a civil right issue.
12-24-2012, 10:38
milwaukeeshaker

Sold all of mine.
12-24-2012, 11:26
TFOGGER

You guys owned guns? The HORROR!

Swinestain can avail herself of a compulsory buyback of my breakfast. It should be available for her consumption in about 8 hours...
12-24-2012, 15:43
hatidua

Quote:

Originally Posted by ringhilt

How 'bout this. If they want to buy them back. OK, but no taxpayer money can be used and they must buy at market value. (note market value is way up right now). If feinstein wants our guns, she can pony up the money to buy them. She's a multi-millionare. So is chucky shumer, bloomberg, fat ass michael moore, rosanne barr, obummer and moochele are also millionares. and all these hollywood actors and singers are also millionares. So let them pay for it.
Make the anti's put their money where their mouth is. If they really have such strong convictions about guns, then they can pay for it. Betcha they won't. They want the taxpayer to pay up. They want gun owners to compromise once again. Well, no more. Taxpayers have paid enough and gun owners have given enough.
Time for the lefties to payup or shut up. And to top it off all these elitist snobs need to also give up their armed security. They can have security, just not armed with guns. they can live the way the rest of us live.

Just my $1.02 worth.

Makes too much sense, sorry.
12-24-2012, 16:08
roberth

My boats are playing jihad with my guns, the damn boats keeps sinking themselves and taking my guns with them.
12-24-2012, 17:08
Kraven251

So where is the ACLU in all of this ? They will defend WBC right to protest at funerals...why aren't they defending the 2A with the fervor they go after the 1A. I just haven't seen a peep out of them on this.
12-24-2012, 17:43
Goodburbon

People who are members of a gun centric forum who claim to have no guns, due to a "boating accident" or "selling them all" perplex me.

Are we already so afraid of our government that we can not admit publicly that we own arms? Yet you have no problems posting here?

I'm sorry, it's a running joke, haha. It's not funny anymore. It's sad.
12-26-2012, 08:11
losttrail

Sold all my guns and paid cash for all our families Christmas gifts. No credit card debt!

Don't want the hassle of firearms anymore.

But I still like reading and watching TV shows about them.
12-26-2012, 11:06
Ronin13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goodburbon

People who are members of a gun centric forum who claim to have no guns, due to a "boating accident" or "selling them all" perplex me.

Are we already so afraid of our government that we can not admit publicly that we own arms? Yet you have no problems posting here?

I'm sorry, it's a running joke, haha. It's not funny anymore. It's sad.

I'm thinking this is an instance where we do need to get up and do something then... "When people fear the government there is tyranny"- seems to me like a lot of folks on here are feeling the pressures of tyranny already. [Shake]
12-26-2012, 11:15
Dave_L

Every day I wake up and read more BS coming from the media and politicians. It makes me so mad. We'll see what actually comes down the pipeline in January but it's not looking good. Just the fact that they are "considering" this sickens me.
12-26-2012, 12:25
spqrzilla

If everyone who ever bought an AR got serious about writing to their legislators, we'd have this nonsense shut down immediately. And we'd put paid to the failed Brady Campaign/VPC people once and for all.
12-26-2012, 13:36
Zundfolge

Quote:

Originally Posted by kraven251

So where is the ACLU in all of this ? They will defend WBC right to protest at funerals...why aren't they defending the 2A with the fervor they go after the 1A. I just haven't seen a peep out of them on this.

The ACLU is openly anti 2A. Here's what their official position is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by American Communist Lawyers Union

Second Amendment
Gun Control
Updated: 7/8/2008

The Second Amendment provides: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
ACLU POSITION
Given the reference to "a well regulated Militia" and "the security of a free State," the ACLU has long taken the position that the Second Amendment protects a collective right rather than an individual right. For seven decades, the Supreme Court's 1939 decision in United States v. Miller was widely understood to have endorsed that view.
The Supreme Court has now ruled otherwise. In striking down Washington D.C.'s handgun ban by a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court's 2008 decision in D.C. v. Heller held for the first time that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to keep and bear arms, whether or not associated with a state militia.
The ACLU disagrees with the Supreme Court's conclusion about the nature of the right protected by the Second Amendment. We do not, however, take a position on gun control itself. In our view, neither the possession of guns nor the regulation of guns raises a civil liberties issue.
ANALYSIS
Although ACLU policy cites the Supreme Court's decision in U.S. v. Miller as support for our position on the Second Amendment, our policy was never dependent on Miller. Rather, like all ACLU policies, it reflects the ACLU's own understanding of the Constitution and civil liberties.
Heller takes a different approach than the ACLU has advocated. At the same time, it leaves many unresolved questions, including what firearms are protected by the Second Amendment, what regulations (short of an outright ban) may be upheld, and how that determination will be made.
12-26-2012, 14:38
Kraven251

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zundfolge

The ACLU is openly anti 2A. Here's what their official position is.

Yay! ...fucking wankers.
12-26-2012, 16:41
rbeau30

Quote:

Originally Posted by patrick0685

that would suck for those that had guns...sold all of mine over the panic

Interesting, so did I. Couldn't resist the markups!
12-27-2012, 10:04
Dave_L

http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/publ...ssault-weapons
12-27-2012, 11:12
Ronin13

Yep, I wouldn't last 5 min in Congress... I'd be yelling for DiFi to be brought up on treason charges for infringing upon the constitutional rights of Americans...
http://www.chrysander.com/lebowski/walter_rules.jpg
12-27-2012, 15:09
funkymonkey1111

i'll be happy to sell them back all the guns they've sold to me, which have been exactly zero.
01-03-2013, 23:57
Ghosty

Not sure if this is the "main" Diane Fascistein AWB thread on AR-15.co, but here's an interesting viewpoint from a member on CRN. Opinons without just bashing?

Quote:

Lets say Feinsteins bill gets passed in its current form, which probably won't imo, and the end game is to confiscate certain firearms (Assault Rifles) for law abiding citizens. One I don't see the feasibility of hiring enough federal agents to do this as the number of owners now far exceed bodies of what can be placed on the payroll. I could be wrong on that based purely on speculation. Two and probably the most important..is there enough money government (state or federal) can pay you to go to some ranch home in the boonies and acquire 3 registered assault rifles as well as a host of other weapons that is not "registered" by Bob Smith? Who knows what else he has in his possession. "Not no but HELL NO!" there isn't enough money. Talk about playing real life roulette as to if the next door you knock will be your last.

Barring some crazy executive order, I see strong 2nd amendment proponents (both political isles) laying down from the pressure resulting in the halt of manufacturing high capacity magazines and assault rifles. You and I both know that the piece of paper this law is written on won't mean shit. High capacity magazines will continue to be made via the black market. With regards to assault rifles....Nocoastpunk's post already speaks of the futility of writing "feel good" legislation with respect to firearm(s) and accessory bans.