When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
On the plus side, some folks may want to consider moving to Missoureh:
Missouri lawmaker introduces bill that would require residents to own AR-15s
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. —A lawmaker wants to require some Missouri residents to own AR-15 guns.
Andrew McDaniel, (R-Deering), introduced House Bill 1108 on Feb. 28. According to the bill’s description, it would establish the McDaniel Militia Act, “which requires every person between 18 and 35 years of age who can legally possess a firearm to own an AR-15 and authorizes a tax credit for a purchase of an AR-15.”
Documents presented during the bill’s proposal said any person who qualifies as a Missouri resident on Aug. 28, 2019, and who does not own an AR-15, would have a year to purchase one. In addition, anyone who becomes a Missouri resident after Aug. 28, 2019, would have to purchase an AR-15 within a year.
In addition, McDaniel filed a bill that would require every person 21 years of age and older to own a handgun if they are legally able to. That bill, House Bill 1052, was introduced two days prior to House Bill 1108.
I like it, solid way to enter a discussion anytime somebody says "compromise" on guns. You want a ban. I want mandatory gov't subsidized ownership. Lets "meet in the middle".
Not everyone owns a gun or can afford one, and there's huge gun ownership inequality with those who do. So we need the gov't to step in and put a fix to it.
Not everyone owns a gun or can afford one, and there's huge gun ownership inequality with those who do. So we need the gov't to step in and put a fix to it.
If you own a home, you get a tax deduction. If you didn't wear a condom, you get a tax deduction. If you lose money at the casino, you get a tax deduction. If you professionally castrate rats within your own home, you get a deduction.
What misleading but pleasant-sounding name* do you suppose Congress would give the "Let's create yet another silly IRS deduction which benefits only a subset of the population" act?
Think of the "Patriot Act," the "Internet Freedom Act," the "Defense of Marriage Act", etc. All sound very positive, all decreased individual liberty.
And bump-stocks are now considered machine guns... which is nothing more than throwing a bone. Personally, I think they're stupid, but I'm always curious what deal was made in the backroom of some secret society clubhouse to get the NRA to support banning them. https://www.npr.org/2019/03/26/70690...ourt-for-delay
Background: last year, California passed a law ending the grandfathering of anybody who owned a magazine holding more than 10rds. You could not purchase a magazine that holds more than 10rds in California since 1994 (I think). There is a lawsuit, Duncan vs. Becerra that challenged this new "end of grandfathering" as unconstitutional. In order to give the courts time, the law was temporarily put on hold (injunction). Today, we won the case, and the law is declared un-Constitutional... so not only do people get to keep their grand-fathered magazines, but its illegal for the State of California to ban the magazines in the first place.
THIS IS CURRENTLY AT THE CALIFORNIA STATE DISTRICT COURT (Southern iirc).
For those of you who have never read an actual court decision, and have an interest in learning about such things, should read this. It's a good primer on the Constitution in general and covers a huge history of gun-rights legislation. It's gonna take you 15 minutes or so because you'll have to re-read some of it twice to make sure you understant the legalese. I've gone through it twice and still have more to digest. Thankfully, most of it is written at a very lay level.
The conspiracy theorist in me is throwing a fit on the timing of this decision.
What do I think?
Well, I'm supposed to believe that all judges are impartial and blind to political orientation... so I feel a little disgusted when I start talking about "activist judges" and what their motivations might be. I feel really sick to imagine a panel of judges holding a meeting to hash out their ruling like politicians do when writing a law... but when it comes to the 9th Circuit and gun-laws, they get it so wrong, so often, that you gotta assume strings are getting pulled.
What do I really think?
The President will possibly get at least one more seat on the Supreme Court, and will almost certainly get 2 more should he win in 2020. The last big 9th Circtuit gun case that was heard en-banc (Peruta), we lost, and the appeal to the Supreme Court was denied. With Kavanaugh now, it's likely that any gun-rights case that is accepted to the Supreme Court, we'll WIN, and it will be the law of the land, rather than just a win at a lower level. AND, the longer it gets dragged out, the bigger a chance there is that the Supreme Court is stacked deep red by the time it gets there.
So... as of today, it's not illegal to own a gun magazine that holds more than 10rds in California. However, this case will likely be appealed to the 9th District Court, and there will be another injunction. The State of California will not take this lying down, clearly. At the 9th, the case will be heard by a panel of 3 judges. If we win, the State of California will appeal AGAIN to the 9th to hear the case EN BANC, which means instead of just a "panel" of 3 judges, they'll pull a dozen or so circuit judges (I don't know exactly how many) to hear the case, assuming that 12 judges can make a better decision than just 3. And if the State loses at the 9th, it becomes the law in MT, ID, WA, OR, CA, NV, AZ, HI, AK also.
And if the State of California loses at the 9th, it's highly unlikely they will appeal to the Supreme Court because they'd very likely lose, and then it will be the law of the entire country... certainly will lose with another Trump appointee or two.
I can guarantee you that there is right now an emergency conference of all blue-state Attorney Generals trying to figure out how they want to handle this one.
But my feeling is that on Monday you can expect there will be an emergency stay requested by California to give them a week or two to figure out wtf they're going to do. Right now it's just California... and the District Judges ruling is pretty awesome. Crazy anti-gun California could blow it for the rest of the anti-gun states.
Judge blocks California's ban on magazines holding more than 10 rounds
U.S. District Court Judge Roger T. Benitez said the rule violates the Second Amendment and infringes upon citizens’ rights to defend themselves.
“California’s law prohibiting acquisition and possession of magazines able to hold any more than 10 rounds places a severe restriction on the core right of self-defense of the home such that it amounts to a destruction of the right and is unconstitutional under any level of scrutiny,” he wrote in an 86-page decision.
Obama - greatest arms salesman ever. An even more interesting chart is the one showing gun sales during his Presidency.
Both terms of the Obama Presidency is captured in the chart.
You can see that in 2008, 12.7 million were sold... the last year of Bush. In 2016, Obama's last year, there were 27.5 million sold... a 113% increase in 8 years. Very impressive, Mr. President.
Some interesting takes from the chart:
The 1+million increase in sales from Nov-Dec 2015 Nov/Dec usually enjoys a healthy bump from regular Fall numbers because of people buying deer rifles and Christmas gifts for kids. Those numbers are usually a couple hundred-thousand... not a full 1,071,564.
December 2016 (the month after Hilldog lost), you can still see a normal Xmas-time increase in sales, but they were 514,000 lower than the previous December. This is the start of the liberal media declaring the gun industry was suffering under Trump and then used the statistics from 2017 to show how people just didn't like guns anymore and that gun-owners were losers. However, at just the most cursory glance and a general knowledge of the political climate, you can see that 2016 was a total anomaly year because of Hillary, and after the panic buying was over, the gradually increasing curve went right back to where it was prior to the election year and has been increasing ever since.
December 2012... the month after Sandy Hook. +780,000 sales vs. November. The largest month-to-month increase on the whole chart.
Contrast the month after Sandy Hook with last month... while March is usually a banner month for gun sales, just a bit shy of 600,000 more guns sold in March 2019 than Feb.2019. There is no explanation for this that I can find.
Is it wrong that I want to start making gun parts once I get my mill. Then start donating heavily to all the Dem candidates. I think that is a proper business expense for advertising.
Is it wrong that I want to start making gun parts once I get my mill. Then start donating heavily to all the Dem candidates. I think that is a proper business expense for advertising.
Don't joke too seriously. It's not an unreasonable scenario that we end up entirely blue in 2020... and major gun control is the first thing Congress sends up. You'll see every wish-list bill passed as quickly as they can with no ***** given. Say hello to a sweeping AWB, mag limits, background checks, waiting periods, NICS for ammo sales, taxes, the whole Brady buffet. If not in '20, then '24, or '28... it's kinda inevitable. Honestly, now is the time to buy everything you want and figure out where you're gonna bury it all when the time comes.
03-15-2019, 05:21 PM
0
