Firearms restrictions

A place to discuss regulations, or the over regulation in most case, that our members have to deal with in their respective countries. Hopefully discussion will lead to more rules based on common sense, rather than fears by the government.

Moderators: skeetshot, deerhunter338mag

Post Reply
thechamp
Administrator
Posts: 8729
Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 11:25 pm
Location: San Antonio
Location: San Antonio, Tx.

Re: Firearms restrictions

Post by thechamp »

BTW accordingn to GunAuction the list of companies is now 98 plus Wilson and Magpul which makes it an even 100. So far the biggest (as near as I can tell anyway) company to have joined the ban is Midway. Cheaper than Dirt gets some bad PR from time to time but they're on the side of the good guys too.


2A Armament
2A Firearms
3RI Technologies
3 Rivers Precision
556 Tactical
Allegiance Ammunition
Allstar Tactical
Alpine Guns Alex Arms
American Spirit Arms
Ammoclip
Arrowhead Shooting Sports
Black Mountain Survival
Bison Armory
Badger Peak
Barrett Firearms
Big Horn Armory
Big Sky Ammunition
Boise Tactical
Bravo Company USA
Bullwater Enterprises
Chaos Arms
Cheaper Than Dirt
Citizen Arms
Clark Fork Tactical
Climags
CMMG Inc
Controlled Chaos Arms
Critical Survival
Crusader Weaponry
Csspecs Magazines
Daniel Byer FFL
Dead Bang Guns
Delmarva Shooting Supply
DogLeg Arms
Doublestar Corp (J&T Distr. & Ace LTD)
Evolution Weaponry
Exile Machine
Extreme Firepower Inc, LLC
Franklin Armory
GWACS Armory
Head Down Products
Hill Country Black Rifles
Huntertown Arms
Iron Goat Guns
J&G Sales
JABTAC
JCW Industries
Kiss Tactical
Lanco Tactical
LaRue Tactical
Lauer Custom Weaponry
Liberty Suppressors
Midway USA
MFI
NEMO Arms
Norton Firearms
OCS Guns
OFA Tactical
OJ’s Gun Shop
Old Grouch’s Military Surplus
Olympic Arms
One Source Tactical
Paige Firearms
Precision Firearms
Predator Intelligence
Predator Tactical
Primary Weapons Systems
Progressive Micro Devices
Quality Arms Idaho
Red Jacket Firearms
Rhino Arms
Rock River ArmsShade’s Landing
Rocky Top Tactical
Semper Fi Arms
Shade's Landing Inc.
Smith Enterprise
Southern Appalachian Arms
Southwest Shooting Authority
Spike’s Tactical
SRT Arms
Stoner Arms
Tactical Solutions
Templar Custom
Templar Tactical Arms
The Tactical Toolbox
Thunder Beast Arms
Tier One Arms
Top Gun Supply
Trident Armory
Umlaut Industries
Umbrella Corp
Victory Defense Consulting
Volquartsen Custom
Warbirds Custom Guns
West Acre Sporting Goods
West Fork Armory
West Michigan Tactical
York Arms

thechamp
Administrator
Posts: 8729
Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 11:25 pm
Location: San Antonio
Location: San Antonio, Tx.

Firearms restrictions - Beretta leaving Maryland

Post by thechamp »

Well Beretta said if the ridiculous restrictions that were proposed were made into law they'd be forced to leave. They've announced that they're pulling out of Maryland. Lot of payroll, taxes, etc., leaving another state that's probably as broke as the other blue states.


http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/ ... dium=email

Beretta Leaves Maryland Because of Stricter Gun Laws

By Dabney Bailey, Thu, April 04, 2013

New legislation is forcing gun manufacturing company Beretta to uproot and take their business elsewhere.

Established in 1526, Beretta holds the distinction of being the oldest active firearms manufacturer in the world. The U.S. factory is located in Accokeek, Maryland, and has been a staple of the local economy for years.

Beretta warned that stricter gun control laws would push the company outside of state lines, but that didn’t stop Maryland legislators. Jeffrey Reh, a spokesman for Beretta who also serves as the President of Stoeger Industries under Beretta, announced that the company would begrudgingly uproot and take its business elsewhere. He said, “We don’t want to do this, we’re not willing to do this, but obviously this legislation has caused us a serious level of concern within our company.”

He added that Beretta paid approximately $31 million in taxes, employs 400 people, and had invested $73 million in the business over the past several decades. Despite being such a prominent player in the local economy, Beretta was unable to prevent legislators from passing tighter gun control laws. Ironically, Beretta manufactures some firearms that are now banned in Maryland.

Republican state Delegate Anthony J. O’Donnell lamented: “Losing [Beretta] would be a big disappointment. Maryland has a reputation for having a horrible business climate, and this would be one more nail in the coffin.”

Legislators had ample warning. Back in the ‘90s, when Maryland beefed up gun control laws, Beretta moved one of its warehouses a short drive away to Virginia.

Beretta’s bold move is regrettable but understandable. Reh told reporters, “Why expand in a place where the people who built the gun couldn’t buy it?”

All of Beretta’s pleas fell on deaf ears. Even as Reh lamented Beretta’s looming departure and emphasized the company’s centrality in the local economy during the hearing, Maryland legislators grilled Reh on self-defense.

One legislator stated: “Other than target shooting, the only other reason [for a semi-automic firearm] would be for self-defense… [Why would you need a] rifle that accommodates 20 rounds semi-automatic for deer hunting? … It’s only very infrequently that someone commits a crime with an assault weapon – why do you need one for self-defense?”

Sources: Fox, Washington Times, The Blaze

thechamp
Administrator
Posts: 8729
Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 11:25 pm
Location: San Antonio
Location: San Antonio, Tx.

Re: Firearms restrictions, back to Conn for more crazy stuff

Post by thechamp »

Just when you think you've seen really crazy ideas implemented into law they figure out how to go nuttier on you. High capacity magazines have to be 'registered' (no serial number on any of them that I've ever seen) and you can load them with 30 rounds at home but when you leave home you can only have 10 rounds in them unless they are at an approved shooting range. Really????? As the author mentions, what if you misplaced some and find them later? Even the Walther P88 mags that I have which now retail for over $100 each have no serial numbers on them.

Ammo links need to be registered by the number each one has. :? What happens when they're shot? Register the shorter belt? :doh:



Connecticut Gun Owners Betrayed by Their State Legislature
Permalink | Print


Connecticut is known as a progenitor of American Liberty. There were some small War of Independence battles fought at Stonington (1775), Danbury (1777), New Haven (1779), and New London (1781.) But sadly, legislators in Connecticut just dutifully lined up for their Kool-Aid cups and voted for a ban so-called "assault" weapons, a ban on private party sales of used guns, creates a new "ammunition eligibility certificate," and mandates a ban on the manufacture or sale and a registry for high capacity magazines. Do these buffoons have any concept of how many millions of magazines larger that 10 round capacity exist, or that virtually none of them carry a serial number? How do they expect to register a commodity? And what happens if someone miscounts their magazines, or misses a few of them in some forgotten box in the back of a closet? Does that make them a felon? And how, pray tell, is someone supposed to register each link in a disintegrating belt? (The last time I bought .223 and .308 links, they came to me in boxes of roughly 1,000 or 2,000 links per box. They are difficult to count, so they are sold by the pound. You can buy 1,000 of them for as little as $17, and of course they can be assembled ("manufactured") into belts of any length desired. So exactly how will that part of the registry work? Would someone have to ask to have a belt de-registered, once it is fired and hence no longer of 11+ round length? And how could a belt be linked together longer than 9 rounds, after the effective date of the new law? Talk about "Unintended Consequences"!

Oh, and let's not forget the new Connecticut law's New York style "honor system" provision, which dictates that owners of full capacity magazines can load their magazines up to 30 cartridges, but only at home, but just 10 rounds if they are carried outside of their homes unless they're at an approved shooting range. Miscounting cartridges and loading just one too many would be a punishable offense. Stopping short of enacting an outright ban on full capacity magazines and this idiotic honor system provision were characterized as "gracious compromises." As one commenter at the Northeast Shooters Forum aptly put it: "... how generous our Overlords are." Do any Connecticut legislators believe that mass murderers will abide by any of this arbitrary nonsense?

It is noteworthy that the vote on this legislation came on Monday, April 1, 2013. (April Fools Days.) What fools (and tools) they are!

I urge Connecticut residents to do your best to fight this legislatively in the courts, but if all else fails, then vote with your feet. Speaking of which... I just heard that in light of this new legislation Todd Savage of SurvivalRetreatConsulting.com has announced that he has added Connecticut to his list of states that qualify for a 20% discount for "gun law refugee" clients. He is now extending the 20% discount to residents of California, Connecticut, Colorado, Maryland, New Jersey, and New York who identify themselves as gun law refugees. - J.W.R.

thechamp
Administrator
Posts: 8729
Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 11:25 pm
Location: San Antonio
Location: San Antonio, Tx.

Obama the gun salesman.....

Post by thechamp »

Considering all the huffing and puffing and ridiculous laws that have been passed as well as proposed it is a safe assumption that no president in history has sold more guns than the current one. Since he's come into office the FBI has done *70,291,049 background checks through their NICs system! Granted the exact number of 'new' guns is probably unknown since the NICs checks are run when anyone buys any gun from a licensed FFL dealer.

Considering the number of guns here and the fact that we are #1 in private gun ownership in the world it should be mentioned that we are also not even in the top 25 for murders committed by firearms in the world. Pretty remarkable considering how the left has painted the country as nothing more than an 'OK Corral' where shootouts are commonplace and used to settle all differences.

* According to US News the USA has roughly 313 million citizens and many of them are under age to buy a gun via the NICs system I am wondering what percentage of the legal age American population has purchased a gun since Obama became president. The percentage has to be fairly high.
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/rob ... ion-people


http://www.gunnews.com/obamas-backgroun ... double-ws/

According to data released by the FBI, there have been 70,291,049 background checks for gun purchases since President Obama took office. Over the same time period, the number of background checks completed under President George W. Bush was 36,090,415, or just over half of those conducted under Obama.

In 2009, the FBI conducted 12,819,939 background checks for the months of Feb-Dec. Obama did not assume office until the end of January 2009. The FBI conducted 14,409,616 background checks in 2010, 16,454,951 in 2011, and 19,592,303 in 2012.

Add to that Jan 2013 (2,495,440), Feb 2013 (2,309,393), and March 2013 (2,209,407), and the total number of background checks under President Obama comes to 70,291,049.

thechamp
Administrator
Posts: 8729
Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 11:25 pm
Location: San Antonio
Location: San Antonio, Tx.

Firearms restrictions - Drones that can detect armed people?

Post by thechamp »

The information coming from our government on a daily basis has to leave one wondering what's next. Following report by an Oklahoma New Station regarding the testing of technology that would be used by Drones to determine if a person is armed or not armed. Appears some of the residents of Oklahoma aren't real pleased to know this is happening there either.


http://theanti-media.org/2013/04/08/lea ... oma-video/

thechamp
Administrator
Posts: 8729
Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 11:25 pm
Location: San Antonio
Location: San Antonio, Tx.

Re: Firearms restrictions

Post by thechamp »

A little more red meat for people to digest. Seems that the State of Missouri decided to violate their own laws and share information with the Federal Government regarding residents who have Concealed Carry Licenses. It appears there isn't a day or two that goes by in our country where some government agency violated the law. Individual citizens are held accountable if they violate the law. Yet governments just shrug their shoulders and say 'who cares', and continue to violate more laws.


http://www.redstate.com/dloesch/2013/04 ... state-law/

Missouri Secretly Shares Entire CCW List With Feds Against State Law
By: Dana Loesch (Diary) | April 10th, 2013 at 09:13 PM | 22

Missouri State Senator Kurt Schaefer confirmed today that the Missouri Highway Department did in fact share confidential CCW lists with the federal government in violation of Missouri law.


(The Missouri State Highway Patrol has twice turned over the entire list of Missouri concealed weapon permit holders to federal authorities, most recently in January, Sen. Kurt Schaefer said Wednesday.

Questioning in the Senate Appropriations Committee revealed that on two occasions, in November 2011 and again in January, the patrol asked for and received the full list from the state Division of Motor Vehicle and Driver Licensing. Schaefer later met in his office with Col. Ron Replogle, superintendent of the patrol.

After the meeting, he said Replogle had given him sketchy details about turning over the list, enough to raise many more questions. Testimony from Department of Revenue officials revealed that the list of 185,000 names had been put online in one instance and given to the patrol on a disc in January.)



I’ve been following this story for weeks and today spoke with Sen. Schaefer on my program about this issue. Earlier he stripped the Department of Revenue of their budget, around $3.5 million.


Additionally:

(“Apparently from what I understand, they wanted to match up anyone who had a mental diagnosis or disability with also having a concealed carry license,” Schaefer said. “What I am told is there is no written request for that information.”)


How is it that agencies who answer directly to Governor Jay Nixon were allowed to repeatedly break Missouri law unless sanctioned by the governor himself? Missouri state law prohibits the full compliance with the Real ID act, so who gave these departments the go-ahead and will Attorney General Chris Koster uphold Missouri law and take action?


*UPDATE: This just in from Senator Schaefer’s office:


Sen. Kurt Schaefer to Hold Press Conference on Department of Revenue Investigation

JEFFERSON CITY—State Sen. Kurt Schaefer, R-Columbia, will host a press conference tomorrow (4-11) to discuss recent developments in the ongoing investigation of the Department of Revenue regarding the collecting and scanning of private documents.

Senator Schaefer has spearheaded the inquiry into allegations concerning the department’s unauthorized collection and sharing of protected personal information.

Press Conference

Who: Sen. Kurt Schaefer

What: Department of Revenue investigation

When: Thursday, April 11, 2013, at 9:45 a.m.

Where: Sen. Schaefer’s Capitol Office, Rm. 221

Questions regarding this press conference may be directed to Sen. Schaefer’s office at (573) 751-3931.


*REMINDER: Missouri is the same state that issued a report naming tea partiers, libertarians, and anyone who flew the military authorized Gadsden Flag as potential domestic terrorists.

thechamp
Administrator
Posts: 8729
Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 11:25 pm
Location: San Antonio
Location: San Antonio, Tx.

Re: Firearms restrictions

Post by thechamp »

Well for the time being the overall United States of America is a bit safer from those who work 24/7 to destroy it. The US Senate failed to approve the gun bill by a required 60/40 vote and for the time being is dead. I say time being because the proponents promise to keep after it and will have a campaign chest of money from the zealots who want the public disarmed.

As usual these bills are never really discussed in detail nor examined by the masses and we go by what we're told and tidbits of what we read here and there. A writer for Red State tonight actually went into the guts of the bill and exposed it to be exactly what the gun owners feared it would lead to. The bill forbid the Attorney General to put together a National Gun Registry based on background checks and NICS forms filled out at dealers. Problem is that any other person in the hierarchy of the Federal Government at the direction of the President could do exactly that! The bill would have created the Registry that would eventually lead to confiscation.

As with anything else there are groups purporting to exist to protect our rights and they all need money to function. I've been an NRA member for years and at times they didn't do what I thought they should be doing but you tend to take the good with the bad. I've watched the CCRKBA group badmouth the NRA and other groups during this same time period. I have an issue with an organization that can't sell itself without stepping on others. After tonight I find my suspicions about them confirmed.

Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms otherwise known as the “CCRKBA” lead by Allan Gottlieb were played for the fools they are by Manchin-Toomey. They were sold a bill of goods that was removed from the final bill yet their public endorsement of the bill was spread all over the MSM and internet for that matter and USED by Toomey and Manchin to try and get more Senate votes for their bill. BTW Gottlieb nor his group caught the obvious that this was a bill legalizing a National Gun Registry by simply omitting the right wording. He’s been more wrong than right yet people seem to think he has a clue. Makes him a nice living I suspect so you can’t blame him for stroking the dummies who send him 'dues'.


http://www.redstate.com/2013/04/17/the- ... nd-switch/

thechamp
Administrator
Posts: 8729
Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 11:25 pm
Location: San Antonio
Location: San Antonio, Tx.

Re: Firearms restrictions

Post by thechamp »

Been a while so an update is in order. As of now 55 of 62 Colorado Sheriffs have joined in a lawsuit regarding the laws that were passed concerning gun restrictions. There are two additional 'sheriffs' but neither one of them is elected so they are NOT free to join the suit. One of those however is a supporter.

A paragraph from the below page gives one a quick idea of the thinking that went into these laws:

"One recent example was a solider deploying to Afghanistan for 3 months and planning on leaving his handgun with his fiancée who he shares a home with. The young serviceman would be committing a crime in doing so."

http://13cgunreviews.blogspot.com/2013/ ... -suit.html



Copy of the lawsuit as it was filed: (It is a very long read but IMO it's well worth the time to see the results of these laws and the basis for throwing them out.)

http://www.i2i.org/files/file/54-sheriffs-complaint.pdf

Couple of excerpts detailing how ridiculous these laws are:

#13. The requirement for “continuous possession” makes it impossible for
firearms to be used or shared in ordinary and innocent ways, such as a gun owner
loaning his or her firearm with the magazine to a spouse, family member, or friend;
entrusting it to a gunsmith for repair; a military reservist leaving firearms and
their associated magazines with a spouse when he or she is called into service away
from home; or even temporarily handing a firearm with its magazine to a firearms
safety instructor so that the owner can be shown by the instructor how to better
grip, aim, or otherwise use the firearm.

14. The requirement of “continuous possession” prohibits the
grandfathered owner from ever allowing anyone to hold or use his firearm if the
firearm is in a functional state (with a magazine inserted) – an extreme
infringement of Second Amendment rights.




In the meantime recall petitions are being circulated to have the politicians who passed this nonsense have to face the voters in a special election to keep those seats. Hopefully they'll get them in and done quickly.



Side comment I believe that Sheriff Terry Maketa has a bright future not only as a Sheriff but also for higher offices should he so be inclined. The man is intelligent and stands on his convictions. Sure would like to see him in DC as a Senator from Colorado instead of the goofballs they now have.

thechamp
Administrator
Posts: 8729
Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 11:25 pm
Location: San Antonio
Location: San Antonio, Tx.

Re: Firearms restrictions

Post by thechamp »

Some good news on the NICS front. After much publicity by the anti-gunners that firearm sales were 'way down' since President Trump was elected the FBI finally released the NCIS checks for February. I gave up looking for them on the 5th so not sure when they finally got them out. Bottom line is gun checks/sales in February were HIGHER than in January! In fact February turned in the 3rd highest number in NICS history.

The February 2017 number is 2,234,817, trailing 2016's 2,613,074 and 2013's 2,309,393.
https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/nic ... r.pdf/view

As many of us have predicted people are still buying guns and many have awakened to the fact that the police can not protect you and your family. I did speak with the owners of a local range and gun store and asked them how things looked. They said they were doing great and that people were 'finally' spending money again. They said their 2016 was one of the worst they'd had and sales had been low for them. They were very up beat about the future. Obviously what holds true for some dealers isn't the same as others.

In a recent press release American Outdoor Brands, parent company of S&W said that their handgun sales had fallen more than their long gun sales which I found interesting. Their handgun sales were down 19% versus long arms at 2%. They still did very well but forecast that their predicted future sales wouldn't be what they had predicted earlier. Bottom line they're still doing exceptionally well which is a point totally lost on the agenda driven news media.

Here is a recent article telling us that the NICS numbers for Febuary would "give investors an indication of just how severe the downturn will be, and there are some indications it won't be pretty." His wording makes it appear that the sky is falling and that couldn't be further from the truth. Url below and a quote to show the BS that they're using to make things look bad for the gun companies and gun owners. I'm sure this jackass will come out with another article telling us just how bad this February was compared to the last one which set the record that will probably hold as long as the Republicans control the oval office.

https://www.fool.com/investing/2017/03/ ... yptr=yahoo

"December's NICS numbers were down 16% year over year, which wasn't unexpected, but the degree to which January's sales declined -- another 20% -- caught everyone off guard. Now, all eyes are on the February numbers."

Post Reply

Return to “International Firearms Freedoms”