I mentioned here that I think that people should get out and buy a black rifle for a multitude of reasons, not the least of which being the possibility that they could be banned by any number of the potential presidents that we could have. Sebastian also thinks that you should stock up on magazines, preferably those of a capacity higher than ten rounds. I also think that’s a good idea; but the discussion in one of his posts got me thinking about ways in which a new president could restrict our firearms rights.
I tend to agree that Obama, being a relative outsider and idealistic would be the greatest threat to our rights; Hillary has seen what can happen when you ram gun bans down the throats of America’s gun owners, they get rather upset. McCain is a wild card, because I don’t have to stretch my imagination to see him “reaching across the aisle” to ban EBRs a gesture of good faith or some foolishness like that.
An area of legislation I’m concerned about would be the passing of “arsenal laws”, i.e. legislation which would require a special license to posses more than X number of rounds of ammunition, or Y number of firearms without a special permit. Not that I’m trying to give the Brady Campaign ideas or anything, because this kind of law has been proposed; and I personally think would stand a better chance of passing than an assault weapons ban, or even a micro-stamping regulation.
If you recall, the first AWB played off the hysteria created in the media to literally get people to believe that the guns being banned were somehow more deadly than Grandpa’s hunting rifle; in terms of propaganda and misinformation it was a glorious effort. That same fear and hysteria could easily be leveled against people who have “arsenals” in their houses. “Why do you need more than five guns”, or “why does someone need more than 200 rounds of ammo” would become the rallying cry of the anti-gun movement. They could easily attach the “terrorism” buzzword to such bans, which would only help the hype and misinformation.
Yes, I’m concerned about another Ban on Scary Looking guns, and I do believe that you should buy one, and some hi-cap magazines while you’re at it. But if that’s out of your price range for whatever reason, stock up on ammo. Of all the types of potential anti-gun legislation, I’m most afraid of an “arsenal law”. The concept of subjecting your average firearms owner to the tender ministrations of the BATFE if that person wants to keep more than X bullets, or Y firearms in their home concerns me greatly. It is a type of law that will concern me no matter which candidate gets elected, specifically because of the ability to twist that sort of legislation into some kind of “anti-terrorism law”.
That indeed is a frightening proposal. Thanks for posting, for I have never heard of such legislation being proposed before.
Went to the Fort Worth Gun Show this weekend. Absolutely packed with people, and just about everyone was buying. I had to wait in line just to LOOK at many tables. I heard several dealers telling folks it would be a 30 minute wait to buy a gun because of the back-up. Another dealer had a line of more than a dozen people waiting to fill out their paperwork. Lots of EBRs and concealable pistols being bought. I’ve been to a number of the Fort Worth shows, and this was the biggest and most heavily attended I’ve seen. People are worried about November.
The gun show this weekend in NoVA was packed, also. Lots of folks buying EBRs – especially the Sig 556 and the FN P90. I felt like such a dunce buying a Henry lever action carbine, but I have a several EBRs and always wanted a lever action carbine. It’s a beauty.
McCain voted against the AWB and its potential renewal. I think he sees it as B.S. (hopefully).
If “arsenal” legislation seems unavoidable, it should be gutted as much as possible. It would only cover owning 100 firearms of the same model (with interchangeable parts) plus at least 5,000 rounds of ammunition per gun. And said firearms would have to be less than 50 years old.
There, that might actually count as an arsenal.
If memory serves, Chuck Shumer proposed legislation that would define an arsenal as 1,000 rounds – with primers counting as rounds. Even trapshooters took exception to that flavor of gun control.
Comments are closed.