Doc

Why don't they just shut that place down and get out of town to make way for a real outdoor store?

At last, someone who has put the proper perspective to all these posts of false bravado, in a factual fashion that maybe will sink in. Unless you are a street hardened criminal accustomed to such things, I would suspect that a pair of handcuffs and the prospect of some time in jail with some big grinning greasy-looking fella, might change some of that tough talk.

A great read for anyone who is trying to explain the true nature of so-called "assault weapons" to those that think they are weapons of war, or machine guns, or that they are in any way more lethal than any semi-automatic sporting weapon.

Are they legal to sell now? I think if you no longer want any of your guns that fall into the assault weapons legal definitions, you have to destroy them, turn them in to the authorities, or sell them out-of-state. Even without registration being set up yet, I believe all the other areas of the new law are enacted and in force as of the day of the signing.

Took 2 minutes.

I don't blame people for not wanting to sacrifice their hunting for something that is aimed at the wrong people. And you know what .... I am not going to go out and randomly poke a neighbor in the nose because this law was passed either. What is the point of that? I have a specific target (don't take that word literally ....lol) for my revenge. I have a state senator that voted for this law. He's the one I'm going after, not some random agency in the government. You know, if we all somehow were to boycott the hunting seasons, the only message that would come out of that is that hunter numbers are once again plummeting .... I can see the headlines now. That action is not even related to passage of this latest gun law. It makes absolutely no sense, and it will not make any sense to anyone else. I can't for the life of me figure out how some here are making that connection between the DEC and the lawmakers who proposed and voted for that law. Can someone explain to me how the DEC was in anyway responsible for anti-gun legislation?

I agree that everytime one of these crazy things happen, it blackens the eye of the entire gun-owning community. Of course the problem lies with those shallow thinkers who seem to want to link misuse with all those that are responsible gun owners. It's just the unfortunate position we find ourselves in. There is no way that we are ever going to change human nature, and people are going to make these kinds of un-intelligent linkages. But, incorrect thinking does not make them right.That is why we have to continually remind people that the vast majority of legal gun owners do not create these unfortunate situations and should not be legislated against for the acts of a very miniscule number of people.

I think some of you people are losing focus on who is the real problem here. Certain politicians decided to attack your 2nd amendment rights (not the DEC). They are the problem (not the DEC). Let's put our efforts toward eliminating the problem (not the DEC). Those who live in a voting district that had one or more of these politicians who voted for this law need to work very hard to see that they are replaced. And by the way, it doesn't even matter what they are replaced by. Send that message that we are not to be messed with. An anti-gun vote will cost you your job. In fact even if you are unsuccessful, and you simply make the vote turn out close, the message will be sent and these guys will begin to understand that they have a group of people that they need to be concerned about. Remember .... politicians are all about votes .... nothing else. Never mind the boycotts and other such random acts. Keep your eyes on the target ..... the politicians!

Sounds like you have a much bigger problem than a simple lack of AR. There is something weird with your population if you don't have any bucks.

Basically, the opening question in your reply reflects most of what's wrong in this country. Today's attitudes pretty much follow the selfish philosophy of, "Let someone else do it". There is no shortage of examples of that kind of thinking. And failure to support one's advocacy organizations is just one of those examples. Now it appears that there is a sub-division of that group of individuals, that actually find themselves conflicted between having someone working on behalf of their 2nd amendment rights, and their political idealogy. That one is fun to watch.

Lol .... That is just the natural progress of any AR discussion. We have hundreds of pages on the subject over the years, and this is just a re-hash of the same stuff. It all could be done with simple copy and paste activity. But that's ok. Everyday we have new members, and this is how they all get updated on all the controversy. So, these guys are answering the question and supplying a "why" component to their answer. It's all good. Pretty calm stuff so far .... lol.

If you believe that we cannot operate as a unit in our voting reaction to having our representatives working to destroy our 2nd amendment rights, What on earth makes you think for one minute that we can unite over a hunting license ban? The purpose of the vote is to give people a way to react to such injustices. If we can't work within a system that is specifically set up for such retaliation, where are we going to get the where-with-all to organize action against the DEC who by the way had absolutely nothing to do with this law. And by the way, the DEC is not any kind of direct link between the gun owner and elected officials. What you are forgetting is that it wasn't all elected officials that voted for this law. It wasn't the DEC that voted for this law. It wasn't the wildlife management programs that you are willing to sacrifice that were involved in this law. And actions to punish the DEC for a gun law is a bit of cutting off your nose to spite your face. And I sincerely believe that you would never get a significant number of hunters to actually do that .... and for good reason. It is specific legislators who supported and voted for this law, and it is those specific legislators that should pay the price, nobody else.

I'm not sure how much of this is actually due to hoarding. It appears there is a panic run on ammo and components that has pretty much shut the whole supply down. I wonder how long this situation is going to go on. If the demand continues at this pace, I see cost reacting to demand, and the price of all this stuff may become prohibitive. I was checking on line, and haven't found many components that are actually in stock. What a difference from a few weeks back when I got supplies for my new .270. I should have doubled or tripled my order.

And as a registered weapon, they will cost the owner a periodic additional fee to own. Also, if I read this all correctly, their value has been reduced to zero because they are not legal to re-sell (except maybe on the black market).

Ha - ha - ha ..... We always get a lot of pages of discussion on this subject, don't we? That's good. Anytime things get a little slow, some body can just start a thread that mentions antler restrictions, and instantly we have a discussion going. I'm a party-pooper when it comes to this subject .... lol. I really don't care a whole lot. I believe there are bigger fish to fry. I suppose that if I was forced to take a position, it probably would be against AR as an across-the-state regulation, but I really wouldn't get all crazy about it. But then, I live in a WMU of plenty, so there really isn't much of a hardship one way or the other. Heaven help those guys that have trouble just maintaining a deer population, if they ever get saddled with AR on top of that. I think way too much is made out of this issue when compared with other management issues that are going un-addressed. So anyway, keep up the good fight. It's good for the forum.

I'll say it again..... It shouldn't have to be a party line issue. Come on people take a few moments to find out who your State Senator and State assembly man are, and then go see how they voted. Once you have done that, you know exactly who the culprits are, and you know how to vote in the next election. That is the very least you can do if you are really upset by this law..... the very least! Forget the lazy man's way of trying to vote party lines. Do a little bit of research and punish the right people. In fact I have a state Senator (O'Brien) that has to go, so next election, I am going to do a bit of election volunteer work to help ensure that he's out of here. All you people who are truly outraged by this law should be thinking of similar things to do in order to exact the proper punishment against the proper people.

Wrong question. The real question is "How many lives will be lost in home invasions and such because the homeowner was mandated by law to be out-gunned by the criminals?" Also, understand that there were some Republicans that voted for this bill as well. Look up the voting results and use this vote as a litmus test to determine your vote in the next elections ..... not party lines. In close elections, this single issue (the vote on this bill) may just start sending a few messages when these creeps start going down for their vote. If gun owners are ever to have any credibility and control, we have to do this ...... all of us.

Don't be using party lines to decide. You have a perfectly good litmus test right here with this bill. You can look up who voted for what and party lines be damned ...... vote the creeps that voted for this law out! Also, don't adopt the same attitudes that the anti-gunners do. They say that because there are some illegal use of firearms, we should take it out on innocent gun owners that have nothing to do with the evil deeds. Well, taking it out on the DEC and other un-associated innocent people is the same mentality. It's the politicians that did this to us, and it is the politicians that should feel the wrath of the voting gun owners. No need for others to suffer for the screwing the politicians handed us.

I have a state senator that has to go also.

And so the mystery continues. Is there anyway of telling at what point in the investigation this video report was made? In other words was this early on and refuted by subsequent other reports, or was this kind of after the dust had settled which of course would give this account more credibility. I never can understand why there is always this kind of contradictory information that comes out. Can't these reporters ever get it right? Where are they getting their information? There never seems to be any names associated with sources of info.

Well, here's the deal ..... We already have universal background checks for initial purchases. A few weeks back when I bought my Ruger American .270, I had a background check run on me along with all kinds of other info filled out on a form. So, what's new? Ok, here is what's new: background checks required for private sales. The question is, is this just another version of outlawing private sales of guns because of the unrealistic plan of having a federal firearms dealer run the check for you for some piddly little fee (which is just another way of saying that it will never actually happen) and your firearms will be virtually unsaleable.

There is only one realistic way to fight these kinds of screw-jobs by politicians, and that is to become a single-issue voter, and remember who voted for what on this. Of course we are in the minority, but you would be surprised how powerful a minority can be if we can just get our gun owning people to vote as a unified block. We can indeed put the fear of God back into these creeps. Also, actively work and campaign for the defeat of those that voted for this mess. Volunteer a bit of time as campaign workers. I understand that this state is a liberal, pinko, bastion of commies, but we have voted in Republican state senators and assemblymen before, and we can do it again if we can just keep in mind exactly who screwed us and who took us and our 2nd amendment rights seriously. We have to make it politically expensive for the politicians that thumbed their noses at us. We need a list made of Assembly and Senate who are our allies, and who are our enemies and vote accordingly during the next election.

That was the first thing that crossed my mind as I was reading that part. How many disturbed people will this law keep from seeking help with their mental problems? I agree with the intent of the mental health clauses in this bill, and I have no idea as to how to achieve what they are trying to achieve in any other ways, but I have to believe that this stuff just may have made the situation of wackos with guns actually worse instead of better.

I do believe that that was what was behind the hi-balling of this legislation. They were afraid of letting the NRA get too organized, so they fired this legislation through without adequate public comment period and so quick that probably most of those that voted for it didn't even have a chance to understand what they were voting for. When is the last time anyone here has ever seen legislation move anywhere near that fast before. It just never happens unless they are trying to slip something over on the public. It shows the sneaky underhanded tactics that the Dems are willing to use when ever they want to screw the public.

Yes, this thread is very unsettling ......... but true. If you all think that this is the end, just wait until the next multiple murder. They aren't done yet. And by the way, we aren't done yet either. There is still the federal action coming. Keep those emails, letters and phone calls coming folks. And then there is the follow-up activity where every vote for this legislation should mean an automatic vote for that candidate's opponent in the next election. If our sincerity about this kind of crap is to maintain any credibility, we had better follow through with our determination to bring havoc on the re-election campaigns of any of these people that are voting against our 2nd amendment rights.