No Profanity *** No Flaming *** No Advertising *** No Anti Trappers ***NO POLITICS
No Non-Target Catches *** No Links to Anti-trapping Sites *** No Avoiding Profanity Filter
It shall be unlawful for a person to import, 17 sell, manufacture, transfer, or possess, in or affecting 18 interstate or foreign commerce, a semiautomatic assault 19 weapon. 20 (2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession, 21 sale, or transfer of any semiautomatic assault weapon oth22 erwise lawfully possessed under Federal law on the date 23 of enactment of the Assault Weapons Ban of 2018. 24 (3) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any firearm 25 that
E 'Honey Badger Militia' Sleep, the anti woke adote.
Re: HR-5057 a Federal Assault Weapons BAN of 2018
[Re: coydog2]
#6175166 03/02/1809:24 AM03/02/1809:24 AM
I am thinking it will not go anywhere.Wanted to let you all know what is going on with the ones that is out to push this.If it dose happened it will be some thing to see what the out come will be.It will not be good. I know they do not want it out about it. That way they think then can try to slid it in.
Life member of DAV,NTA,NRA,ITA.Also member of FTA,CBA
Re: HR-5057 a Federal Assault Weapons BAN of 2018
[Re: coydog2]
#6175194 03/02/1809:50 AM03/02/1809:50 AM
Good way to make an honest guy a criminal.I don't have a traffic ticket,never arrested and have security clearance.Just another human with their idea is all.
Re: HR-5057 a Federal Assault Weapons BAN of 2018
[Re: coydog2]
#6175288 03/02/1811:14 AM03/02/1811:14 AM
They sign agreements between schools and law enforcement to ignore bad crimes and than when it back fires on them they blame law abiding citizens for the problem.
Blanket laws don't work. Maybe thier gun control recommendations should only apply to heavy populated areas where these people live
Re: HR-5057 a Federal Assault Weapons BAN of 2018
[Re: coydog2]
#6175291 03/02/1811:17 AM03/02/1811:17 AM
What i said came true. I told the forum liberals on the Trump thread that they wouldn't need to worry about what Trump said if Dems. were in charge like Reps. are. that there'd be a semi ban already done by the Dems. And that's exactly what this is.
Im glad yall have faith this wont pass. Im afraid we are gonna wake up one day and it was passed in the middle of the night like obamacare. Just scrolling through that mess made my head hurt.
"If you're gonna be stupid you better be tough"
Re: HR-5057 a Federal Assault Weapons BAN of 2018
[Re: coydog2]
#6175386 03/02/1812:34 PM03/02/1812:34 PM
It won't take many Republicans to go with them to get through congress. Our advantage isn't very large over them. I can't see Trump passing it tho. Glad he's in and not Hillary!!!!!
Re: HR-5057 a Federal Assault Weapons BAN of 2018
[Re: coydog2]
#6175440 03/02/1801:28 PM03/02/1801:28 PM
I hope Trump doesn't start a twitter war with the NRA....then sign a bunch of gun laws to spite them...seems like that is the way this guy does business.
Glittering prizes and endless compromises shatter the illusion of integrity
Re: HR-5057 a Federal Assault Weapons BAN of 2018
[Re: coydog2]
#6175510 03/02/1802:26 PM03/02/1802:26 PM
the laws needed are already on the books, if government did the job that it assigned it's self and promised it would do prohibited people would all be in the NIC database but since they did not the president would have authority over US DOJ and military courts to have them review and ensure all persons were properly reported , like wise every governor could also instruct the state DOJ to insure all prohibited persons were properly reported. then any one found lying on a 4473 could be prosecuted under this law
but I have to wonder if politicians don't want that law enforced because then when they lie about expense or travel reimbursements they would be subject to the same punishment.
America only has one issue, we have a Responsibility crisis and everything else stems from it.
Re: HR-5057 a Federal Assault Weapons BAN of 2018
[Re: coydog2]
#6175624 03/02/1804:02 PM03/02/1804:02 PM
I wonder too Pete. Read the last link i put up. It is designed to do that and would have caught at least two of the last few shooters, but Dems blocked it demanding laws that have nothing to do with the shootings we had. I just can't wrap my head around stalling such bills.
Re: HR-5057 a Federal Assault Weapons BAN of 2018
[Re: coydog2]
#6175627 03/02/1804:03 PM03/02/1804:03 PM
so politicians don't want a bill without pork for their district
and it doesn't fit the narrative they want , simply having people do the jobs they were already assigned to doesn't ban and continue the narrative of an unarmed populace where only the rich and politically well connected have any security.
America only has one issue, we have a Responsibility crisis and everything else stems from it.
Re: HR-5057 a Federal Assault Weapons BAN of 2018
[Re: coydog2]
#6175681 03/02/1805:25 PM03/02/1805:25 PM
I seen on the morning news this morning that Trump have talk with the NRA during the night and will not go for more gun control laws.Time will tell on that for the time to come. I also read some other place that for that bill is like the one that was show by a Sen. in CA and was shot down. That is the same one that was sitting next to Trump for the statement he said about taken on the NRA and she had a smile on her face for him to say it. Now I hear that smile is wipe off her face for Trump said after talk with the NRA last night. See what will come of it all.
Life member of DAV,NTA,NRA,ITA.Also member of FTA,CBA
Re: HR-5057 a Federal Assault Weapons BAN of 2018
[Re: hippie]
#6175691 03/02/1805:37 PM03/02/1805:37 PM
I wonder too Pete. Read the last link i put up. It is designed to do that and would have caught at least two of the last few shooters, but Dems blocked it demanding laws that have nothing to do with the shootings we had. I just can't wrap my head around stalling such bills.
Its easy They want total control , starting with getting all guns out of the way to get to that goal. If existing laws would be enforced and on top of that gun free zones eliminated, it would cure the problem. They don't want that as it is their leaver to get their gun bans past. The more folks get shot, the better for them and thats what they count on.
Let's go Brandon
"Shall not comply" with morons who don't understand "shall not infringe."
Re: HR-5057 a Federal Assault Weapons BAN of 2018
[Re: coydog2]
#6175694 03/02/1805:43 PM03/02/1805:43 PM
one step would be to go back and see who at the Air Force should have reported the Texas church shooter to the NICs system , give their command the option of reviewing every case tried by the air force and resubmitting every prohibited person or everyone in that command line can take a Dishonorable discharge for Dereliction of duty.
things may not be as easy on the civilian side to get moving along but a few big law suits might help
America only has one issue, we have a Responsibility crisis and everything else stems from it.
Re: HR-5057 a Federal Assault Weapons BAN of 2018
[Re: GREENCOUNTYPETE]
#6175773 03/02/1806:43 PM03/02/1806:43 PM
Off Topic But Apparently The Department Of The Interior Declined To Issue A Protest Permit To The Parkland High School Anti-Gun Protesters To Assemble On The National Mall in D.C.
Like others have said, I'm thinking it won't pass but I have written all four of my state representatives just in case. Never hurts to be too safe. I'd encourage anyone else who has not yet written to their representatives to do so.
Real name Eric The sharpest hammer in the box of crayons.
Re: HR-5057 a Federal Assault Weapons BAN of 2018
[Re: coydog2]
#6176657 03/03/1804:14 PM03/03/1804:14 PM
Im glad yall have faith this wont pass. Im afraid we are gonna wake up one day and it was passed in the middle of the night like obamacare. Just scrolling through that mess made my head hurt.
And the Federal Reserve act and many hundred's of other's by both Dem's and Repub's.
Last edited by muddyriverdogz; 03/03/1805:02 PM.
You only live once, so get over it!
Tactics may change but the goal remains the same.
Re: HR-5057 a Federal Assault Weapons BAN of 2018
[Re: The Possum Man]
#6176696 03/03/1805:22 PM03/03/1805:22 PM
My question, why would you ( gun owners) not already have at least 10 "assualt weapons". Some day this type of crap will become law and then it will to late to get some
Last edited by Michigan Trappin; 03/03/1808:35 PM. Reason: WORD NOT WAS MISSING
Every day is a gift from GOD, don't waste it!!
If they have plenty of food, give them something interesting to smell
Re: HR-5057 a Federal Assault Weapons BAN of 2018
[Re: coydog2]
#6177786 03/04/1806:45 PM03/04/1806:45 PM
The answer to your question: Because I was a Marine and I don't need that many shots to accomplish the goal should I need to defend the 2nd Amendment against tyranny.
Durable optics. A good bolt rifle. It would be wise to have two, one each in .223 and a 7.62X39, because ammo availability may be the real issue in success and survival, and you don't know from whom the challenge may come.
Last edited by Ringbill5196; 03/04/1806:54 PM.
Re: HR-5057 a Federal Assault Weapons BAN of 2018
[Re: coydog2]
#6177796 03/04/1806:59 PM03/04/1806:59 PM
The answer to your question: Because I was a Marine and I don't need that many shots to accomplish the goal should I need to defend the 2nd Amendment against tyranny.
Durable optics. A good bolt rifle. It would be wise to have two, one each in .223 and a 7.62X39, because ammo availability may be the real issue in success and survival, and you don't know from whom the challenge may come.
How about those of us who weren't Marines? Is it ok for us to have a semi for the barbarian hordes that will come when the apocalypse hits?
I don't own an AR but that will be remedied shortly.
"Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon". Milton Friedman.
Re: HR-5057 a Federal Assault Weapons BAN of 2018
[Re: Ringbill5196]
#6177837 03/04/1807:33 PM03/04/1807:33 PM
The answer to your question: Because I was a Marine and I don't need that many shots to accomplish the goal should I need to defend the 2nd Amendment against tyranny.
Durable optics. A good bolt rifle. It would be wise to have two, one each in .223 and a 7.62X39, because ammo availability may be the real issue in success and survival, and you don't know from whom the challenge may come.
Ooh-Rah! Get some! Hey Ringbill, who were you with and when? I was FDC with HQ/11 from 2007-2011, down in Pendleton.
Real name Eric The sharpest hammer in the box of crayons.
Re: HR-5057 a Federal Assault Weapons BAN of 2018
[Re: coydog2]
#6177840 03/04/1807:36 PM03/04/1807:36 PM
The answer to your question: Because I was a Marine and I don't need that many shots to accomplish the goal should I need to defend the 2nd Amendment against tyranny.
Durable optics. A good bolt rifle. It would be wise to have two, one each in .223 and a 7.62X39, because ammo availability may be the real issue in success and survival, and you don't know from whom the challenge may come.
You should be ready at any distance and any situation, as a Marine you of anyone should know the value of a good weapon cache, AR15s included. I can promise you that with your trusty bolt gun you will be no match for what they send at you if/when the SHtF but I think you know that already.
Seriously a 7.62x39 chambered rifle? That is about the last caliber I would take onto a battlefield, it is inherently inaccurate for anything but short ranges, it does pack a punch but I would go with a 7.63x51 Nato/.308 Winchester, you are about as apt to find ammo for a .308 as the 7.62x39 rifles and gain all the accuracy advantages as well as the increased range of the .308 and greater knockdown power. Again I think these are points you already know. You could very well be of the same mindset as I am (sort of) in that I stock all Nato/American weapons with enough ammo for 2 or 3 combat load-outs so if it is Nato they send after us they will bring me the ammo, if it is Eastern-bloc countries then I will pick up weapons on the field along with any ammo leftovers if needs be.
Let us all pray it never comes to that, ever. My company Commander always said, "Never fear a man with a gun, fear the man with a gun that wants to use it!".
Mark Skokan, Buffalo MN.
MTA and NTA Member.
Re: HR-5057 a Federal Assault Weapons BAN of 2018
[Re: coydog2]
#6177848 03/04/1807:43 PM03/04/1807:43 PM
The answer to your question: Because I was a Marine and I don't need that many shots to accomplish the goal should I need to defend the 2nd Amendment against tyranny.
Durable optics. A good bolt rifle. It would be wise to have two, one each in .223 and a 7.62X39, because ammo availability may be the real issue in success and survival, and you don't know from whom the challenge may come.
You should be ready at any distance and any situation, as a Marine you of anyone should know the value of a good weapon cache, AR15s included. I can promise you that with your trusty bolt gun you will be no match for what they send at you if/when the SHtF but I think you know that already.
Seriously a 7.62x39 chambered rifle? That is about the last caliber I would take onto a battlefield, it is inherently inaccurate for anything but short ranges, it does pack a punch but I would go with a 7.63x51 Nato/.308 Winchester, you are about as apt to find ammo for a .308 as the 7.62x39 rifles and gain all the accuracy advantages as well as the increased range of the .308 and greater knockdown power. Again I think these are points you already know. You could very well be of the same mindset as I am (sort of) in that I stock all Nato/American weapons with enough ammo for 2 or 3 combat load-outs so if it is Nato they send after us they will bring me the ammo, if it is Eastern-bloc countries then I will pick up weapons on the field along with any ammo leftovers if needs be.
Let us all pray it never comes to that, ever. My company Commander always said, "Never fear a man with a gun, fear the man with a gun that wants to use it!".
Might as well entrench myself fully onto a government watchlist here...
Whatever platform you choose should be chambered in 5.56 NATO, and 9mm for your sidearm. As paranoid as it sounds, if you were to end up fighting a tyrannical government it only makes sense to use whatever resources you could scab off of them.
To paraphrase Sun Tzu... Turn the enemies strength into a weakness.
Mike
One man with a gun may control 100 others who have none.
Vladimir Lenin
Re: HR-5057 a Federal Assault Weapons BAN of 2018
[Re: coydog2]
#6177887 03/04/1808:22 PM03/04/1808:22 PM
My question, why would you ( gun owners) not already have at least 10 "assualt weapons". Some day this type of crap will become law and then it will to late to get some
A semi auto is not a assualt weapon.
Last edited by coydog2; 03/04/1809:10 PM.
Life member of DAV,NTA,NRA,ITA.Also member of FTA,CBA
Re: HR-5057 a Federal Assault Weapons BAN of 2018
[Re: Scuba1]
#6177969 03/04/1809:27 PM03/04/1809:27 PM
I never thought much of 7.62x39 but when we were poor college students buying 100 dollar rifles it didn't matter. we bought brown paper sacks of 50 rounds of ammo for 5 dollars at a local sporting goods shop we didn't much care, it was good enough. we managed to put together enough money to buy a rifle but for some reason we we never found the 149 dollars to buy a 440 round span can
then I was at a known distance shoot last summer we shot standing at 100 2 minutes, transition to seated at 200 yards 55 seconds with reload , transition to prone with reload at 300 65 seconds and prone slow fire at 400 yards 4 minutes.
we had a young Navy MP he was living on base and had to borrow a gun so someone lent him a AK with a 2-7 scout scope , he came very close to to qualifying but each time he came up just short
so I think a little more of the 7.62x39 but he qualified the next day with a borrowed AR-15 in 223 with no trouble.
America only has one issue, we have a Responsibility crisis and everything else stems from it.
Re: HR-5057 a Federal Assault Weapons BAN of 2018
[Re: coydog2]
#6178024 03/04/1810:09 PM03/04/1810:09 PM
Clarifying....My post was in regard to why I don't own 10 AR's. You all can own as many as you like. I want to be able to shoot and move in guerrilla style. Long enough out to negate thermal imagery.
And that mortar idea is gold, but you got to carry it. And bless your heart for offering. (This word is unacceptable on Trapperman) things are heavy but put fear in the heart of any man properly fired.
And to you naysayers, jealousy of The Corps gets you nowhere.
But to all of us, Pray to St. Michael for protection from evil. It is rearing its ugly head yet again.
Re: HR-5057 a Federal Assault Weapons BAN of 2018
[Re: coydog2]
#6178405 03/05/1811:55 AM03/05/1811:55 AM
I'm not carrying my mortar anywhere. When dark days come i will be sitting on my couch posting on tman. Once in awhile to out go out to the pit and fire a harassment mission to keep them away.
Last edited by FlyinFinn; 03/05/1811:56 AM.
Re: HR-5057 a Federal Assault Weapons BAN of 2018
[Re: Nelly]
#6178415 03/05/1812:02 PM03/05/1812:02 PM
I'm not carrying my mortar anywhere. When dark days come i will be sitting on my couch posting on tman. Once in awhile to out go out to the pit and fire a harassment mission to keep them away.
It is a comfort to know that when truly dark days come, The interweb will be spared. I like the mortar idea as well.
I aways thought the 7.62 x 39 was a short range , urban warfare round myself, and I don't own one yet.....
I have had no military shooting expererience, but I did grow up stalking tweety birds.
"Those who hammer their guns into plowshares will plow for those who do not."
Re: HR-5057 a Federal Assault Weapons BAN of 2018
[Re: coydog2]
#6178462 03/05/1812:48 PM03/05/1812:48 PM