Here we go....

[wdswtr]

Honestly is there people actually stupid enough to believe this crap feel good policy proposals? I mean who is stupid enough to believe that just because a rifle has a pistol grip, or any of the stupid details claimed in these bills that makes them illegal to own are more deadly than any other rifle out there? Feel Good Politiions trying to shut the anti-gun fanatics up with virtually useless strategy to stop any crime invovled with a weapon of any choice. Yet we know what the future holds, as more guns get banned crime rates and murder rates rise, the obvious answer is ban more guns to the point the crime rate is so high and there is nothing left for self protection let alone to hunt which will be an American pastime. How in the world do these people keep getting elected into office? This isnt funny anymore its real, in your face real. If we stay on this path I will guarantee you I wont be burried in the country, I will live my life out some where else. When our freedoms are being taken away, our money given away, our rights disappearing and every reason behind being American are in jeopardy, there is no reason to not live somewhere else. Think about what it took our ancestors to do to get to America and this is how we thank them? We rip every reason why they moved here to start our bloodline in america only to shame them in the end. Disgraceful to even think about.

[nyslowhand]

Guess it doesn't suprise me the legislators behind these gun control proposals represent Manhattan, Bronx & Queens. (Silver, Diaz & Peralta). And of course with Bloomberg's full blessing, I'm assuming. No offense to fellow forum members from the NYC vicinity, but you have some real idiots representing you!!!

[cdmckane]

What about the language that proposes to change the definition of Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the First Degree? Definition 2: "Possession of ten or more firearms"

I guess someone who has a slug gun, a bird gun, a couple deer rifles, a muzzleloader, a .22 for plinking, a .17 for chucks, a .223 for yotes, maybe dad or granddad's old shotgun, .243 for the wife, and a pistol or two is going to be a felon. RIP 2A.

Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk 2

[Culvercreek hunt club]

What about the language that proposes to change the definition of Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the First Degree? Definition 2: "Possession of ten or more firearms"

I guess someone who has a slug gun, a bird gun, a couple deer rifles, a muzzleloader, a .22 for plinking, a .17 for chucks, a .223 for yotes, maybe dad or granddad's old shotgun, .243 for the wife, and a pistol or two is going to be a felon. RIP 2A.

Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk 2

BINGO!!

[joe12]

This is part of their plan to completely disarm the American public. They start with these "assault weapons", then when there is no difference in crime, they will wait for the next tradgedy and say that all semi-autos need to be banned. Then when that doesn't work they will limit all firearms to 3 rounds etc etc etc.

[joe12]

The definition of the semi-auto assault rifles is confusing. The part about the barrel being covered is a question for me. Does this mean that a standard remington 30-06 deer rifle would be banned? There is a wooden stock covering the barrel so that you could hold it.

[WNYBuckHunter]

No, it would have to be completely shrouded, like an SKS, et al.

[WNYBuckHunter]

Actually I stand corrected. It says shrouded completely or partially so it can be held by the non trigger finger without being burnt, which could mean damn near every semi auto or pump action rifle out there.

How are you anti-black gun guys liking what you have asked for now? Still think you should cheer on the bans?

[nybuckboy]

so does this mean that my 30-06 semi auto and my ruger 10/22 will be illegal ? cause they have a clip... according to what it said its any semi auto rifle. ?

only if it can hold more than 10 rounds.

22. "ASSAULT WEAPON" MEANS ANY:

(A) SEMI-AUTOMATIC OR PUMP-ACTION RIFLE THAT HAS THE CAPACITY TO

ACCEPT A DETACHABLE MAGAZINE AND HAS ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING:

(I) A PISTOL GRIP;

(II) A SECOND HANDGRIP OR A PROTRUDING GRIP THAT CAN BE HELD BY THE

NON-TRIGGER HAND;

(III) A FOLDING OR TELESCOPING STOCK;

(IV) A SHROUD ATTACHED TO THE BARREL, OR THAT PARTIALLY OR COMPLETELY

ENCIRCLES THE BARREL, ALLOWING THE BEARER TO HOLD THE FIREARM WITH THE

NON-TRIGGER HAND WITHOUT BEING BURNED, BUT EXCLUDING A SLIDE THAT

ENCLOSES THE BARREL; OR

(V) A MUZZLE BRAKE OR MUZZLE COMPENSATOR;

( SEMI-AUTOMATIC PISTOL, OR ANY SEMI-AUTOMATIC, CENTERFIRE RIFLE

WITH A FIXED MAGAZINE, THAT HAS THE CAPACITY TO ACCEPT MORE THAN TEN

ROUNDS OF AMMUNITION;

© SEMI-AUTOMATIC PISTOL THAT HAS THE CAPACITY TO ACCEPT A DETACHABLE

MAGAZINE AND HAS ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING:

(I) A SECOND HANDGRIP OR A PROTRUDING GRIP THAT CAN BE HELD BY THE

NON-TRIGGER HAND;

EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets

[ ] is old law to be omitted.

LBD05841-02-3

[13BVET]

Only an idiot would support this crap. Whatever happened to "Due Process"???

[loworange88]

Ok, the other 2 bills noted are, more common sense measures for employees that work at gun shops etc, and the record keeping of sales etc. I'm not so worried about those ones...But that first one is scary.

Like some of the other bills being proposed usually there is a link to where you can send emails or messages to members of congress.....Who or where do we go to petition these bills? Or would that just fall to our local elected officials like good ol' Chuck Schumer?(heavy sarcasm).

[Culvercreek hunt club]

http://www.taurususa.com/product-details.cfm?id=403&category=Rifle

evil evil assault rifle

[silent death]

only if it can hold more than 10 rounds.

22. "ASSAULT WEAPON" MEANS ANY:

(A) SEMI-AUTOMATIC OR PUMP-ACTION RIFLE THAT HAS THE CAPACITY TO

ACCEPT A DETACHABLE MAGAZINE AND HAS ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING:

(I) A PISTOL GRIP;

(II) A SECOND HANDGRIP OR A PROTRUDING GRIP THAT CAN BE HELD BY THE

NON-TRIGGER HAND;

(III) A FOLDING OR TELESCOPING STOCK;

(IV) A SHROUD ATTACHED TO THE BARREL, OR THAT PARTIALLY OR COMPLETELY

ENCIRCLES THE BARREL, ALLOWING THE BEARER TO HOLD THE FIREARM WITH THE

NON-TRIGGER HAND WITHOUT BEING BURNED, BUT EXCLUDING A SLIDE THAT

ENCLOSES THE BARREL; OR

(V) A MUZZLE BRAKE OR MUZZLE COMPENSATOR;

( SEMI-AUTOMATIC PISTOL, OR ANY SEMI-AUTOMATIC, CENTERFIRE RIFLE

WITH A FIXED MAGAZINE, THAT HAS THE CAPACITY TO ACCEPT MORE THAN TEN

ROUNDS OF AMMUNITION;

© SEMI-AUTOMATIC PISTOL THAT HAS THE CAPACITY TO ACCEPT A DETACHABLE

MAGAZINE AND HAS ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING:

(I) A SECOND HANDGRIP OR A PROTRUDING GRIP THAT CAN BE HELD BY THE

NON-TRIGGER HAND;

EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets

[ ] is old law to be omitted.

LBD05841-02-3

yes but it is a loaded question. cause any ruger 10/22 can except bigger mags so how do you limit them. do you see my point .basically what i think this bill means is any semi auto rifle weather its a 22 or a cf they want to ban if there are high cap mags for it or one can be used... i mean a factory mag for a ruger is 10 rounds .i think its a bs bill

Edited January 4, 2013 by hung4wheeler

[joe12]

Actually I stand corrected. It says shrouded completely or partially so it can be held by the non trigger finger without being burnt, which could mean damn near every semi auto or pump action rifle out there.

How are you anti-black gun guys liking what you have asked for now? Still think you should cheer on the bans?

Thats how I interpreted as well. It does give an exception for a "slide that encloses the barrel". What is a slide?

[joe12]

(H) MODIFICATIONS OF SUCH FEATURES, OR OTHER FEATURES, DETERMINED BY

RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF STATE POLICE TO BE

PARTICULARLY SUITABLE FOR MILITARY AND NOT SPORTING PURPOSES. IN ADDI

TION, THE SUPERINTENDENT OF STATE POLICE SHALL, BY RULES AND REGU

LATIONS, DESIGNATE SPECIFIC SEMIAUTOMATIC CENTERFIRE OR RIMFIRE RIFLES

OR SEMIAUTOMATIC SHOTGUNS, IDENTIFIED BY MAKE, MODEL AND MANUFACTURER'S

NAME, TO BE WITHIN THE DEFINITION OF ASSAULT WEAPON, IF THE SUPERINTEN

DENT OF STATE POLICE DETERMINES THAT SUCH WEAPONS ARE PARTICULARLY SUIT

ABLE FOR MILITARY AND NOT SPORTING PURPOSES. A LIST OF ASSAULT WEAPONS,

AS DETERMINED BY THE SUPERINTENDENT OF STATE POLICE, SHALL BE MADE

AVAILABLE ON A REGULAR BASIS TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC.

PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT SUCH TERM DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY WEAPON THAT HAS

BEEN RENDERED PERMANENTLY INOPERABLE.

(H) MODIFICATIONS OF SUCH FEATURES, OR OTHER FEATURES, DETERMINED BY

RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF STATE POLICE TO BE

PARTICULARLY SUITABLE FOR MILITARY AND NOT SPORTING PURPOSES. IN ADDI

TION, THE SUPERINTENDENT OF STATE POLICE SHALL, BY RULES AND REGU

LATIONS, DESIGNATE SPECIFIC SEMIAUTOMATIC CENTERFIRE OR RIMFIRE RIFLES

OR SEMIAUTOMATIC SHOTGUNS, IDENTIFIED BY MAKE, MODEL AND MANUFACTURER'S

NAME, TO BE WITHIN THE DEFINITION OF ASSAULT WEAPON, IF THE SUPERINTEN

DENT OF STATE POLICE DETERMINES THAT SUCH WEAPONS ARE PARTICULARLY SUIT

ABLE FOR MILITARY AND NOT SPORTING PURPOSES. A LIST OF ASSAULT WEAPONS,

AS DETERMINED BY THE SUPERINTENDENT OF STATE POLICE, SHALL BE MADE

AVAILABLE ON A REGULAR BASIS TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC.

PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT SUCH TERM DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY WEAPON THAT HAS

BEEN RENDERED PERMANENTLY INOPERABLE.

Anybody pick up on this little nugget as well. In addition to the weapons defined in their list, the law would give the superindentent of state police the authority to deem any other weapon an assault rifle. This means that further laws would not even need to be passed. The state police superintendent could decide that revolvers or lever actions are not for "sporting purposes" and designate them as assault rifles as well.

[Doc]

One thing I haven't seen commented on here is the specific wording in the bill : "Increases the penalty for the possession, use, or sale of assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices and certain other weapons and redefines "assault weapon". This is not just a ban on buying, but also a ban on possession or use. That's confiscation .... folks. You know the idea that everyone was joking about in other threads as though gun confiscation was impossible. I didn't read anything about these weapons being grandfathered in. So all those that are rushing to buy black rifles for exhorbitant prices may find that their expensive purchase is illegal and worthless. I also didn't read any plan there for buy-back, so basically the government is simply stealing these weapons. Did I miss something?

[joe12]

Doc you are correct. The law specifically crosses out the grandfather date language.

[josephmrtn]

This had BETTER NOT go thru or we ALL are gonna be in BIG trouble!!!!!

[WNYBuckHunter]

One thing I haven't seen commented on here is the specific wording in the bill : "Increases the penalty for the possession, use, or sale of assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices and certain other weapons and redefines "assault weapon". This is not just a ban on buying, but also a ban on possession or use. That's confiscation .... folks. You know the idea that everyone was joking about in other threads as though gun confiscation was impossible. I didn't read anything about these weapons being grandfathered in. So all those that are rushing to buy black rifles for exhorbitant prices may find that their expensive purchase is illegal and worthless. I also didn't read any plan there for buy-back, so basically the government is simply stealing these weapons. Did I miss something?

No, you arent missing anything Doc. No grandfathering, no exceptions, just turn it in or confiscation and jail.

[13BVET]

Interesting.......Weren't there some people who said this would NEVER happen?

[Sogaard]

And I stick by it.

There is a big difference between proposed laws and actual laws. I would hold off on the "I told you so" for now.

Edited January 4, 2013 by Sogaard

[13BVET]

We'll see. I have no trust in this government, not to mention this is NY, by far one of the most liberal states.

[ants]

And I stick by it.

There is a big difference between proposed laws and actual laws. I would hold off on the "I told you so" for now.

What do you think about the fact that these laws are being "proposed"? Do you agree with them?

[silent death]

its alll down hill from here i think

Edited January 4, 2013 by hung4wheeler

[Sogaard]

What do you think about the fact that these laws are being "proposed"? Do you agree with them?

This isn't the first time radical gun control has been proposed. I think I've stated where I stand on the subject more than once on different threads on this forum, no need to derail this.

Hint: Since I'm in the market for a .223 semi-auto, I'm probably not in agreement with at least that part.