TexasCHLforum.com

This guy says an obscure portion of DiFi's AWB could be construed to ban all Glocks

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

posting from phone do can't embed video

As I understood it, it bans all guns "capable" of using a magazine over 10 rounds.
That includes all 1911s too

1911 .45 Acp 15 - Rd. Mag



and really, all guns which accept magazines

I think we'll find that it bans anything with a "grip". Page 13, IIRC.

Okay. Which one is crazier? DiFI or that other one that thought Guam might tip over if we put too much stuff on it?

C-dub wrote:Okay. Which one is crazier? DiFI or that other one that thought Guam might tip over if we put too much stuff on it?

Those islands "flip over" all the time.

Wodathunkit wrote:

C-dub wrote:Okay. Which one is crazier? DiFI or that other one that thought Guam might tip over if we put too much stuff on it?

Those islands "flip over" all the time.

Actually no, they don't.

I grew up in Southeast Asia. Went to high school there.

Been to Guam at least a half-dozen times.

Lived in the Philippines for seven years.

Guam is not going to tip over and sink into the ocean.

Skiprr wrote:Guam is not going to tip over and sink into the ocean.

Well, it won't if we don't put too many sailors on it. If we were to overload it, you could never tell what would happen.

RPB wrote:As I understood it, it bans all guns "capable" of using a magazine over 10 rounds.
That includes all 1911s too

1911 .45 Acp 15 - Rd. Mag

[ Image ]

and really, all guns which accept magazines
[ Image ]

Fortunately, you are mistaken in saying that Feinstein's bill, S.150, would ban all firearms capable of using a magazine over 10 rds. The bill specifically exempts by name various arms capable of using mags of greater than 10 rds. Among these specified exemptions are versions of the Mini 14, Mini Thirty, and M1 Carbine that have a fixed stock. What the bill actually proposes is bad enough without us claiming it says things that it does not.

Here's the text of the bill: http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/ ... e69f517fb4" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Bottom line is that it is not going to ban anything. It is NOT going to pass in the Senate or the House!

srothstein wrote:

Skiprr wrote:Guam is not going to tip over and sink into the ocean.

Well, it won't if we don't put too many sailors on it. If we were to overload it, you could never tell what would happen.

Pfft, someone has never sat the wrong way on an inner tube...

Amazing how those lava rocks are light enough that they'll keep that entire island floating! When did they tether Guam in that area? It was around WWI, right?

MadMonkey wrote:

srothstein wrote:

Skiprr wrote:Guam is not going to tip over and sink into the ocean.

Well, it won't if we don't put too many sailors on it. If we were to overload it, you could never tell what would happen.

Pfft, someone has never sat the wrong way on an inner tube...

Amazing how those lava rocks are light enough that they'll keep that entire island floating! When did they tether Guam in that area? It was around WWI, right?

Right afterwards, yeah.

AEA wrote:Bottom line is that it is not going to ban anything. It is NOT going to pass in the Senate or the House!

I believe that you are almost certainly correct. The chair of the committee with jurisdiction over the bill, Sen. Patrick Leahy of VT, has indicated that he might not even vote to send the bill to the floor and is not confident it will make it out of committee. The Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, voted against the 1994 ban, and hasn't committed to allowing it to come to a vote on the floor even if it gets out of committee. Reid can count and knows there probably aren't enough votes in the Senate for passage. If the bill comes to the floor in the Senate it will put many red/purple state Dem senators in a lose-lose situation. If they vote for the bill, they anger their constituents; if they don't, they anger the base of the Dem party. And the bill's chances in the House are even worse.

How about instead of banning firearms and magazine clips and barrel shrouds and mufflers we ban all the people that think the world is full of unicorns and Care Bears from seeking public office and/or speaking on network news/television of any sort...

You keep your ideas in your own fantasyland and ill keep my glock 1911 and Evil Black Rifle

All candidates could be easily screened by asking them one simple question that has a one word answer. The ones that answer it correctly would likely be qualified on all counts:

"Do you believe that government can create wealth?"

Those that answer "Yes" can go get themselves a job as a dog robber. Those that answer "No" can get their names on the ballot.

Tam your being unfair to dog robbers, they are good people.