H.R.1808 - Assault Weapons Ban of 2022

I have a 357 Desert eagle, I have shot maybe five boxes of shells through it since I bought it back in the late eighties. It is in perfect shape, if they want to take my gun, I want full book on it which is at least fourteen hundred bucks because that is what it is booked at...that way I can buy a high quality six shooter and shells to replace my present stuff. I want a good gun to protect me when I am out fishing on creeks or picking berries. I also need a good holster. My desert eagle holster is high quality. Plus since my gun is downgraded, I should get the balance of the money from what the brand new six shooter costs and what the desert eagle is worth....plus I will have to shoot about three hundred shells with it to get accurate with it.

My guns are not just inaccurate cheap guns, if you cannot hit the target with open sites with a pistol at a hundred yards, it is junk for me. It is my second gun for a backup for deer hunting if my rifle messes up. My deer rifle is a pre-WW11 30-30 and it is in good shape, but if you forget to put a shell in the barrel first, the first shell coming up jams....a problem with the gun which is original...if I do order a part to fix it the guns value is cut in half. So a spare gun is nice if I shoot the deer and the gun jams when I use the lever action to put in the next round. It is my dads gun, I am going to keep it till I die and then hand it down to a responsible kid, grandkid, nephew of my sister, nephew of my brother, or brother...it stays in the family not to be sold.

I hope the senate kills this bill because if they don't I will join in to the legal fight to stop this bill. I will never vote democrat again in my life....they are punishing all the good people just because some looneys out there are causing problems with guns.

a reply to: rickymouse

I have a 357 Desert eagle,

Yes, we know...braggart!!

For the class, how can these bills keep going forward that are blatantly against the constitution AND the SCOTUS?

Does this mean the abortion issue is on the back burner for awhile?

I'm so confused; I don't know what I'm supposed to panic over today.

originally posted by: nugget1
Does this mean the abortion issue is on the back burner for awhile?

I'm so confused; I don't know what I'm supposed to panic over today.

China and Russia.

Ooops, sorry, that's next week.

I am a gun owner (norhing that would qualify as an "assault rifle"), but I don't get all of the doom porn. Most of the rest of the developed world survives just fine without them. You know what else they don't have? Frequent school shootings.

originally posted by: LordAhriman
I am a gun owner (norhing that would qualify as an "assault rifle"), but I don't get all of the doom porn. Most of the rest of the developed world survives just fine without them. You know what else they don't have? Frequent school shootings.

What is an assault rifle?

Most of the rest of the developed world survives just fine without them.

You're free to go there. Until then....shall not be infringed.

originally posted by: LordAhriman
I am a gun owner (norhing that would qualify as an "assault rifle"), but I don't get all of the doom porn. Most of the rest of the developed world survives just fine without them. You know what else they don't have? Frequent school shootings.

Less that 40 per year average school shooting victims for over the last 50 years. Yet 151 are killed in school bus accidents yearly. When are we going to eliminate school buses?

originally posted by: JinMI
You're free to go there. Until then....shall not be infringed.

Working on it. I plan on being either a Norwegian or Icelandic citizen in 5-6 years. This place sucks.

originally posted by: LordAhriman

originally posted by: JinMI
You're free to go there. Until then....shall not be infringed.

Working on it. I plan on being either a Norwegian or Icelandic citizen in 5-6 years. This place sucks.

Perfect.

I wish you the best of luck.

originally posted by: beyondknowledge
When are we going to eliminate school buses?

School busses provide a use that isn't killing. Accidents happen, school shootings aren't accidents.

originally posted by: JinMI
[Perfect.

I wish you the best of luck.

I wish I would have made the decision before I had kids. Back then though, it wasn't like this. I actually really enjoyed living here.

originally posted by: LordAhriman

originally posted by: JinMI
You're free to go there. Until then....shall not be infringed.

Working on it. I plan on being either a Norwegian or Icelandic citizen in 5-6 years. This place sucks.

Good, request permission to physically boot you in the butt to help you leave.

a reply to: JinMI

The ruling's in question are District of Columbia v. Heller - 2008 (Supreme Court ruling - Heller PDF) and McDonald v. City of Chicago - 2010 (Supreme Court ruling - McDonald PDF).

The result of both cases finally settled some of the arguments -
* - The 2nd amendment applies to the individual
* - A person does not have to be part of the military or state militia to own and carry a fire arm.
* - The 2nd amendment, per scotus, is not absolute, allowing some restrictions put in place by the government (Federal and State).

Scotus, in it's Heller ruling, established a test that legislation must meet in order for the legislation to be lawful and constitutional.

With that finding as an anchor, the Court ruled a total ban on operative handguns in the home is unconstitutional, as the ban runs afoul of both the self-defense purpose of the Second Amendment – a purpose not previously articulated by the Court – and the "in common use at the time" prong of the Miller decision: Since handguns are in common use, their ownership is protected.

The "in common use" is the portion Democrats are trying to destroy and their efforts will fail as Scotus clearly spells out what "in common use" means and the interpretation of handguns as being in "common use".

Several appeals court ruled favorably for states, like CA, that regulated ammunition and the number of rounds for a magazine. Because of the different district court and appeals court rulings, it will eventually go to Scotus and imo Heller will be specifically expanded to also include ammunition and magazines.

Democrats attempts to end run around the courts will blow up in their faces.

Democrats love to use the same 2 arguments -
1 - Why do you "need" a gun?
2 - Does a person need 30 rounds to hunt deer?

The best answers I have ever seen -
1 - Why did Rose Parks "need" to sit at the front of the bus? (A person does not need a reason to exercise their rights).
2 - A person does not need 30 rounds to hunt but the 2nd amendment was not adopted on the off chance "the deer" turn against the people.

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0
Good, request permission to physically boot you in the butt to help you leave.

"Err herpiddy durr I hate you because vaccine bad and it's all I ever think about".

Get over yourself.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Much like the tried/trying with "weapons of war."

The M4 is in common use btw......as is the Glock 19 or the Sig M17

See where I'm going with this?

originally posted by: LordAhriman

originally posted by: beyondknowledge
When are we going to eliminate school buses?

School busses provide a use that isn't killing. Accidents happen, school shootings aren't accidents.

Both are tragedies but which kills more?

Both need to be reduced or eliminated, that involves the tool operator and not the tool.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: rickymouse

I have a 357 Desert eagle,

Yes, we know...braggart!!

For the class, how can these bills keep going forward that are blatantly against the constitution AND the SCOTUS?

The eagle has a rifled barrel even though it only has an eight inch barrel. It would be fairly accurate at shooting a deer at say fifty yards. It is not easy to find a pistol that is accurate for hunting large game.

As far as you calling me a braggard.......this is about the only thing I can consider good enough to brag about that I have anymore. I did have a nice potato patch but the deer ate the tops off almost all the plants...there are just foot long stubs sticking up and it looks like a porcupine now...can't brag about that at all now.

I just think if the government is going to take away your gun they should give you a good price for it. I paid over five hundred bucks for it back in the late eighties, it was expensive but it kept up it's value in respect to inflation.

a reply to: rickymouse

Well, you do live in the great UP, surely that's brag worthy.

You have vast knowledge on nutrients and compounds as they relate to the human body, again, brag worthy.


The Deagle is just icing buddy!

a reply to: JinMI

yup and that is the problem Democrats are constantly going to encounter - people who know a hell of a lot more about guns and laws than the Democrats do.

The bill bans a certain weapon because the plastic parts make it look like a "weapon of war" yet a few pages later in the bill the exact same gun, using wood instead of plastic. are ok.


The other major issue that Democrats can't wrap their tiny brains around is Law Enforcement. The mindset of "just call the police" does NOT take into account that the police are the last party called to an incident. Meaning the criminal act is already complete by the time we get there. The other issue is, per Scotus, Law Enforcement does NOT have a duty to protect the individual.

With politicians constantly repeating their ignorance on the topic makes things worse - for everyone.

The first person at a crime scene is the suspect.
The second person at a crime scene is the victim.

Going through the academy (at least my academy) we did scenario training where the "officer" is put into a situation where they had to go hands on with the suspect. Grappling with a suspect for 30+ seconds (the time it takes for your backup to arrive) is an eye opener for some.

I can only imagine a civilians response knowing that some of the civilians would never survive the encounter (during the training several "officers" did not survive either. Add in the fact that some states have a "duty to retreat" law makes it worse. If a person can safely remove themselves from the scene they must. Failure to do so can result in charges against the civilian.

I wish civilians had 24 hour police protection like members Congress, the Federal judges and the President / V. President do. Politicians are now allowed to use campaign funds to pay for their personnel security, which is absolute bull#.

My coworker (x) was startled with the loud noise of a bang outside his house. Runs outside. A kid just tried to smash his window of his car. X pulls out his pistol.. does not aim it but just draws it out of holster. Looks the kid dead in the eye. The kid looks back to his partner in the getaway car. By now the noise has drawn out most neighbors to the porch. Dude in the car waves the kid to come back. No violence or shots fired. But this settled the situation in a neighborhood of New Orleans. Whose police have been quiting the job at an unprecedented rate. Staffing is under 50% recommended for a city that size. 911 response time is average 2 and a half hours. …. The government wants to come for our guns…. I can’t make this stuff up. The city is a powder keg right now. One cop quit on the spot mid shift when he was sent to a violent situation by himself no backup. www.reddit.com... me=iossmf&utm_term=link

www.fox8live.com...


www.reddit.com... f