freddy
.308 Win
The detachable magazine would be the 'logical' item to ban. If they ever bother to even attempt understanding that which they fear.
5 0r 6 rounds before a manual reload.You pull the trigger on a revolver and get a round ,pull the trigger on a semi and you get a round, The only difference is the hammer goes to the rear after a semi trigger is pulled. Who fires a revolver by cocking it after every shot in a "situation" More BS from propaganda city. What they would accomplish in this "proposal" is limit handgun capacity by only allowing revolvers.
5 0r 6 rounds before a manual reload.
The guy was ATF Deputy Director and Acting Director for 18 months. He is not just someone commenting on the ATF.
That is why I suggested them.SCOTUS ...They refuse to hear gun cases
I have thought about those two words used together many times. 'Public Safety'. Specifically worded...Threat to Public SafetyThe big goal is to get rid of all guns . We all know this . ALL auto loading guns is the goal for now ... There is a well thought reason we are hearing the term "weapons of war ". That is the new mantra .... The 1911 was conceived to serve the military .... Now we have all its bastard offspring ... Glocks ... Sigs ... all down the line . These will be next ... If one looks at court cases involving the AR-15 it is talked about keeping a community safe ... There are reasons why that language is there . We are not dealing with dummies folks . Public safety will be a driving point in the move to ban autoloaders. More people being killed with auto handguns than anything else . That is a fact that is true. .. They will argue and refer to the AR-15 court case as precedent.. And be successful in doing so.
I have said this more than one on this forum . Everyone needs to own at least one revolver that one is comfortable with as a carry gun . First there could be a run on them if the drive to ban automatics is successful and if one could find one that say .. S&W 686 with a 3 inch ... could be running five times the price (or more ) due to scarcity .
The regulation would be void right off the bat. Heller decision said banning common use firearms is unconstitutional. There is nothing more common than the semiautomatic firearm.
2 completely different circumstances. 1) the state banned features not type of actions. 2) the federal government could have sued the state ( but the libs owned the Justice Department). Had the Justice department sued NY over the SAFE act NY would have lost when they could not present a compelling argument for the law.The Heller decision didn't do squat against the safe act. Look what was banned here in Ny.