TexasCHLforum.com

ldavidson wrote:It proposes adding to USC Title 18 Section 921(a) Definitions:

"(36) Definition of Semiautomatic Assault Weapon
[...]
(v) A semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm."

It is possible that a ruling might stick that all Glock models are semiautomatic versions of a Glock 18. I doubt a change in caliber would be an issue.

I imagine there are other pistols that could run afoul of the same attack.

Or am I misunderstanding what it seems to say?

That came to mind when I read the bill too. That honestly would be a path to unconstitutionality after DC v. Heller though. Not to say that the rest of the bill is not entirely unconstitutional, because it really is.

Beiruty wrote:To enforce private sale vial FFL, you need to have reregistration. Otherwise, how do you know who own what at the time when the ban goes into force?

I agree. Registration is not a requirement in this bill, but that does not mean it wouldn't be introduced in the future.

This "loophole" is intentionally left in the law, as to leave room for "need" for registration in the future. It is also one of the reasons I am very leery about all of the gun trafficking legislation. Since this bill requires transfers of grandfathered firearms to go thru a FFL, failing to do so would make you a gun trafficker, even if you know the person you are transferring to and 100% know they would pass a background check.

Excaliber wrote:
Note that the only way to establish an individual gun was lawfully possessed by a given person at a given time is to register the gun to that person.

I think everyone knows what comes after registration.

I want to start by saying that I am very opposed to this bill. If you read the full text of the bill, the way they will tell if a gun was legally possessed at the time the ban goes into effect is the fact that it doesn't have a date of manufacture on it as would be required for all weapons manufactured after that date. The bill says that transfers of firearms not already legally possessed by an unlicensed individual is illegal. Those firearms will have been logged into whatever FFL's inventory that happens to be unlucky enough to have not sold them and they will be unable to sell them after the ban goes into effect.

Please not that according to the bill a grandfathered firearm can be transferred, it just has to go through an FFL.

Again, I am completely opposed to the bill, but it does not provide for registration. However, if by some stroke of bad luck it passes, I could see them wanting registration in the future.