TexasCHLforum.com

jason812 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 08, 2019 6:41 pm

Gator Guy wrote: ↑Fri Mar 08, 2019 9:51 am

RicoTX wrote: ↑Wed Mar 06, 2019 2:21 pm

K.Mooneyham wrote: ↑Wed Mar 06, 2019 10:57 am

montgomery wrote: ↑Wed Mar 06, 2019 9:41 am

Gator Guy wrote: ↑Wed Mar 06, 2019 9:30 am Unless somebody doesn't comply with NFA already, I'm skeptical they will start, no matter what other firearms fall under that unconstitutional un-law.

Non-compliance is a cowardly act in the absence of performing a patriot act.

Can someone explain to me what those two statements are supposed to mean in this context? I seriously do not get it.

I agree with gator guy.
Basically I think gator guy means if you already comply with the rules, chances are you will comply in the future regardless of the rules. In other words, you haven't fought back yet regarding 2a restrictions, why would anyone believe differently in the future?

I think what Montgomery is saying is that most people won't put their money (and freedom/life) where their mouth is... basically.

My interpretation.... apologies to both if I missed the mark.

You understood what I meant, but I can only speak for myself.

A lot of people in a lot of gun forums say they won't comply with a semi-auto ban. I think the percentage of online stalwarts who actually break bad if this passes will be lower than the percentage of people who actually follow through with a new year resolution for long term weight loss. Maybe I'm wrong, but there's only one way to prove it, and it doesn't involve more talking.

You mean all the people that didn't register their guns in Colorado or turn their magazines in Massachusetts? I think the numbers are way higher for noncompliance than you think.

Don't forget how badly Connecticut's little registration-or-else scheme went. Can't remember the percentage that complied, but it was really low compared to what the authorities there thought it would be...and that is an EXTREMELY "blue" state.

montgomery wrote: ↑Wed Mar 06, 2019 9:41 am

Gator Guy wrote: ↑Wed Mar 06, 2019 9:30 am Unless somebody doesn't comply with NFA already, I'm skeptical they will start, no matter what other firearms fall under that unconstitutional un-law.

Non-compliance is a cowardly act in the absence of performing a patriot act.

Can someone explain to me what those two statements are supposed to mean in this context? I seriously do not get it.

So, the BATFE is the agency which would be charged with enforcing this proposed law, like they are the agency charged with enforcing the current NFA laws. A quick search I did shows that there were about three thousand armed agents, as of 2017. Let's say that was doubled, or even tripled. Ten thousand armed agents, sounds like a LOT of agents...until you compare that to the tens of millions of people who own semi-automatic rifles and shotguns. Even if those agents didn't do anything else but track down people who hadn't registered their firearms, they would still never complete their task. In fact, a serious attempt at full enforcement would become a suicide mission, as a certain unknown, and likely large, percentage would refuse to comply. The law is simply unenforceable. In fact, the Democrat Congressman who proposed this thing likely knows that not only is it unenforceable, but also that it won't pass. He wants to be able to blame "evil Republicans" in the Senate and/or the POTUS, so he can fundraise for his reelection campaign. It's a garbage law, and all it will do is cause a bunch of people to be upset. It's just political dirt.