Hypothetical Assault Weapon Ban Question...

[FWJK]

Given the recent catastrophe in Orlando and lib politicians immediately connecting this to our need for more gun control - I have a quick question for INGO that I was thinking about this morning. Let's say that they are able to somehow ban "assualt weapons" (AR/AK types). I understand that you would no longer be allowed to purchase going forward. But what about those (most) of us that already own those rifles? Will they be able to confiscate them? Or would we be grandfathered in?

 

[KLB]

That would depend upon how they wrote the law.

 

[Cameramonkey]

Most likely grandfathered in like the last time. But if they do choose to go the confiscation route expect two things:

"Sorry officer, they were lost in a tragic boating accident and I no longer am in possession of them." (Please disregard the freshly disturbed soil in the back yard)

Or

"You can have my rifle one bullet at a time... "

But this does bring up one fun problem with a ban. The dude that was caught out in Cali with supposed plans to harm someone at the gay pride parade? His two rifles found in the car were supposed to have been surrendered I heard this AM on the drive to work; He had a conviction for intimidation (or something like that) for brandishing a firearm in a threatening way and part of his plea deal/probation agreement was to get rid of all of his guns. Im quite positive this type of "oversight" is far from unique.

 

[KLB]

Most likely grandfathered in like the last time. But if they do choose to go the confiscation route expect two things:

"Sorry officer, they were lost in a tragic boating accident and I no longer am in possession of them." (Please disregard the freshly disturbed soil in the back yard)

Or

"You can have my rifle one bullet at a time... "

But this does bring up one fun problem with a ban. The dude that was caught out in Cali with supposed plans to harm someone at the gay pride parade? His two rifles found in the car were supposed to have been surrendered I heard this AM on the drive to work; He had a conviction for intimidation (or something like that) for brandishing a firearm in a threatening way and part of his plea deal/probation agreement was to get rid of all of his guns. Im quite positive this type of "oversight" is far from unique.

The LEOs are now saying he never said he was going to harm anyone.

 

[Cameramonkey]

The LEOs are now saying he never said he was going to harm anyone.

Agreed. That is why I said "supposed". The initial reports are changing. It now sounds more like "wrong state with the wrong trunkload of range gear". (disregarding the probation)

But lets not get off track from the OP too quickly.

 

[KLB]

Agreed. That is why I said "supposed". The initial reports are changing. It now sounds more like "wrong state with the wrong trunkload of range gear". (disregarding the probation)

But lets not get off track from the OP too quickly.

Is this not INGO?

 

[Kutnupe14]

That would depend upon how they wrote the law.

Lol... yeah, that would be my thinking as well

 

[Cameramonkey]

Is this not INGO?

Notice I said too quickly. That means 10 posts or half a day, whichever comes first. LOL

Lets at least let the OP's pixels settle in first.

 

[Kutnupe14]

To answer OP's question, no, there will be no confiscation, at least in the door-to-door "and over your weapons" way. That's too dangerous for the collectors, and would create hella backlash. The climate simply doesn't exist to confiscate weapons, though a ban on particular weapons is indeed possible.
A smart tyrant, would simply require that all firearms of a particular type are registered and non-transferrable. When the owner dies, they revert to the state. If they can't be located, because of a tragic boating accident, no problem.... but if they ever turn up, in the back of someone's car you'll probably be imprisoned.

 

[BogWalker]

I believe grandfathered firearms in Canada are taken possession of by the authorities upon the owner's death. Ban, grandfather, register, and wait a couple of decades. No door-to-door confiscation needed.

 

[FWJK]

Thanks for the responses guys!

 

[singlesix]

I'd assume they would look at NY's Safe Act and CT(?)'s laws which required registration, those were not very successful.

 

[junk]

only the receiver on an AR would have to be turned in . 80% lowers could be used to replace them .no requirement to register a ghost gun .

 

[jd4320t]

No.

Who would enforce it?

 

[singlesix]

only the receiver on an AR would have to be turned in . 80% lowers could be used to replace them .no requirement to register a ghost gun .

So the run on 80% Lowers begins.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Given the recent catastrophe in Orlando and lib politicians immediately connecting this to our need for more gun control - I have a quick question for INGO that I was thinking about this morning. Let's say that they are able to somehow ban "assualt weapons" (AR/AK types). I understand that you would no longer be allowed to purchase going forward. But what about those (most) of us that already own those rifles? Will they be able to confiscate them? Or would we be grandfathered in?

FWJK, not being sarcastic, but we cannot answer these questions until we see any proposed language.

Now is the time to fight this nonsense. Join up, send money, get active.

As well, lowers and mags. Fill up the Rubbermaid tubs, but you should have been doing that since September 2004.

 

[Expat]

I have been buying odds and ends for the last few years. I think the wife is starting to wonder...

 

[KLB]

I have been buying odds and ends for the last few years. I think the wife is starting to wonder...

Only starting?

 

[Expat]

Only starting?

 

[frenchiectfd2203]

The glock had a lot of clips in it. Per Obama and this brilliant news bulletin that I am watching. I have watched this and you hear more about gun control than the victims.