Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[PhaelixWW]

Good lord. California legislators just took four stalled and dead bills and turned them into gun control proposals halfway through the current legislative year.

Now there are four different bills (AB-1663, AB-1664, SB-880, and now AB-1135) that say the exact same thing in an attempt to ban the bullet button as a workaround to the assault weapons ban in California.

Which is all sort of ridiculous since there's a new type of bullet button (ARMagLock) that would satisfy even these more restrictive changes to current definitions. So "assault weapons" would still be able to be legally purchased in California even if one of these proposed laws passes.

On top of that, anyone who already has an AR would be grandfathered after registering, and if my reading of the bill text is correct (I'm no lawyer, but it seems clear enough), then they would be entitled to take the existing bullet button out of any grandfathered AR that they own and replace it with the standard easy-push mag release button. If the whole point of the bullet button was to keep the firearm from being considered an assault weapon, but now the firearm is considered an assault weapon, but a legal one, then there'd be no more need for the cumbersome bullet button.

So why aren't those politicians pushing for this legislation worried about the 10s of millions of AR owners in California all of a sudden being able to revert their firearms to an easy-magazine-swapping-weapon-of-doom-and-guaranteed-mass-shooter configuration?

[Svifnymr]

So why aren't those politicians pushing for this legislation worried about the 10s of millions of AR owners in California all of a sudden being able to revert their firearms to an easy-magazine-swapping-weapon-of-doom-and-guaranteed-mass-shooter configuration?

You're being disingenuous, you know exactly why. They have no clue about guns and think current bullet buttons are the same as magazine releases, so they're making it "tougher". The fact it's probably spurred on by a terrorist shooting that involved removing the bullet button is also lost.

[Rooflesstoofless]

Ok serious gun question: I am using the super low mounts for my scope on my Ruger American 30-06. I shake to much to worry about grouping and pretty much focus on 8x8 steel. Currently I can hit 9 of 10 at 200yds, at 300yds it drops off to like 3-4 of 10. Would going to a mid-hieght set of rings help?

Yes. If the comb of your stock and eye height call for it you should definitely move to taller rings. You shouldn't be getting that kind of accuracy drop off [with that model/caliber of rifle] at 300 yards if your scope is holding zero.

edit: clarification

[PhaelixWW]

You're being disingenuous, you know exactly why. They have no clue about guns and think current bullet buttons are the same as magazine releases, so they're making it "tougher". The fact it's probably spurred on by a terrorist shooting that involved removing the bullet button is also lost.

I think "disingenuous" is a bit harsh.

It's a very valid question, though yes, it was somewhat rhetorical. And while I think we're pretty sure we know the answer to the question, we can't be absolutely positive, and the question serves to underscore just how shortsighted some (most? all?) politicians can be.

Either that, or it shows how shortsighted politicians think their constituents are, which isn't really any better.

[Svifnymr]

I think "disingenuous" is a bit harsh.

Nyah, was just joking.

It's a very valid question, though yes, it was somewhat rhetorical. And while I think we're pretty sure we know the answer to the question, we can't be absolutely positive, and the question serves to underscore just how shortsighted some (most? all?) politicians can be.

Either that, or it shows how shortsighted politicians think their constituents are, which isn't really any better.

California is a perfect example of anti-gunners that get all the different laws they could want and yet still think "man, they're still getting guns, we must pass more laws!".

[Roxinius]

How did this thread go from shit slinging to legit gun chan?!

pretty simple the anti crowd lacks stamina

[TITAN308]

For those of you in GA and SC, Governor Nikki Haley just signed the reciprocity bill into law.

That has been a long time coming and for those of us that live on the border of the states and often travel into one another you can now carry with your state issued license.

https://mobile.twitter.com/RobGodfre...719378944?s=09

[Stormdash]

Nyah, was just joking.



California is a perfect example of anti-gunners that get all the different laws they could want and yet still think "man, they're still getting guns, we must pass more laws!".

The essential assumption of anti-gun wingnuts is that there are is a wide market of people in more 2A friendly parts of the country who -- despite lacking felony records and being able to easily pass NICS checks -- are then turning around and maintaining a vigorous black market of interstate firearm sales. You hear this about Chicago a lot, about them "driving to Indiana". Nevermind that a pretty substantial number of urban-dwelling gangmember and violent persistent felons never really leave their city of residence from cradle to grave, they are nonetheless driving out of state and hooking up with these magic rainbow black market arms dealers (who, again, routinely pass NICS checks) and then driving back to corrupt their anti-gun utopias.

Or, almost more hilarious, these same criminals are getting help setting up NFA trusts to buy through, or (even MORE hilarious) to buy Class 3 weapons.

[enragedgorilla]

The essential assumption of anti-gun wingnuts is that there are is a wide market of people in more 2A friendly parts of the country who -- despite lacking felony records and being able to easily pass NICS checks -- are then turning around and maintaining a vigorous black market of interstate firearm sales. You hear this about Chicago a lot, about them "driving to Indiana". Nevermind that a pretty substantial number of urban-dwelling gangmember and violent persistent felons never really leave their city of residence from cradle to grave, they are nonetheless driving out of state and hooking up with these magic rainbow black market arms dealers (who, again, routinely pass NICS checks) and then driving back to corrupt their anti-gun utopias.

Or, almost more hilarious, these same criminals are getting help setting up NFA trusts to buy through, or (even MORE hilarious) to buy Class 3 weapons.

So it makes it ok to punish the law abiding...that is the point you are missing or ignoring.

If you are "gun running" as you describe, you are not a law abiding citizen, just like anyone who "straw mans" for a felon or knowingly sells a gun to a criminal.
Law abiding only has ONE definition.
No buts,if's or "except whens".


CA laws are wrong and are getting more oppressive as the days go on.
I think there are 4 bills on the floor now that ....are just astounding really.
Want to know WHY 2 A groups give ZERO ground in the fight?
Look at CA, Give a gun control advocate an inch, they come back asking for more.
I copied the bills from the NRA website....yeah there is their view on them but it gives the idea of what the gun control groups "no one wants to take your guns" lie ...is.

Assembly Bill 1664 would change the existing definition for detachable magazine to mean “an ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm without disassembly of the firearm action, including an ammunition feeding device that can be removed readily from the firearm with the use of a tool," which would in turn expand the number of firearms that California considers “assault weapons.” Changing the definition of "detachable magazine" would strike a major blow to competitive high-power rifle competition in California, along with semi-automatic rifles commonly used for hunting and self protection. AB1664 would subject them to the onerous transfer and use restrictions imposed on “assault weapons” – and future sales in California would be banned. The California State Sheriffs’ Association also opposes this egregious bill.

Assembly Bill 1673 would expand the definition of “firearm” to include unfinished frames and/or receivers that can be readily convertible. AB 1673 would essentially treat pieces of metal as firearms, subjecting them to California’s exhaustive regulations and restrictions currently applicable to firearms.

Assembly Bill 1674 would expand the current restriction on the number of firearms an individual can purchase within a 30 day period. AB 1674 will have no impact on criminal access to firearms and instead significantly hamper law abiding individuals, causing increased costs, time and paperwork to purchase multiple firearms. Criminals will continue to ignore this law purchasing firearms illegally, ignoring this burdensome and ineffective restriction.

Assembly Bill 1695 would require the Attorney General to send notice to each individual who has applied to purchase a firearm informing him or her of laws relating to firearms, gun trafficking, and safe storage. This is just another example of the government wasting resources on “feel good” programs.

Assembly Bill 2607 would expand the class of individuals who could seek a Gun Violence Restraining Order (GVRO).” GVRO’s were opposed by NRA during the 2014 session because of the lack of due process when depriving an individual of their right to keep and bear arms.


There was one more, I believe it was the ammunition background check bill, it was dropped ...I believe.

[Stormdash]

Oh, these are not my assumptions -- indeed, I find the premise startlingly idiotic. I would guess that, nation-wide, this sort of cottage industry could be narrowed down to fewer than a dozen operations, if that, and they'd probably only have a throughput of maybe 1-2 guns a year. It's just the only way irrational people can come up with to blame the legal sale and ownership of firearms for the actions of criminals in hyper-regulated areas.

[Rooflesstoofless]

Assembly Bill 1673 would expand the definition of “firearm” to include unfinished frames and/or receivers that can be readily convertible. AB 1673 would essentially treat pieces of metal as firearms, subjecting them to California’s exhaustive regulations and restrictions currently applicable to firearms.

lol...just about everybody active in the shooting community here in CA seems to know a guy who knows a guy with a CNC machine that can cut a AR15 or AR10 receiver straight from blocks of aluminum which I imagine would be nearly impossible to regulate. Only a matter of time before the same thing with Glock and 1911 receivers since shops can cut 80% Glock lowers already. I don't think that genie is going back in the bottle.

[TITAN308]

lol...just about everybody active in the shooting community here in CA seems to know a guy who knows a guy with a CNC machine that can cut a AR15 or AR10 receiver straight from blocks of aluminum which I imagine would be nearly impossible to regulate. Only a matter of time before the same thing with Glock and 1911 receivers since shops can cut 80% Glock lowers already. I don't think that genie is going back in the bottle.

Glock lowers are made from polymer, I am not aware of any mainstream sellings of 80% glock lowers.

Even 1911 80% lowers are not that popular.

[Spectral]

You're being disingenuous, you know exactly why. They have no clue about guns and think current bullet buttons are the same as magazine releases, so they're making it "tougher". The fact it's probably spurred on by a terrorist shooting that involved removing the bullet button is also lost.

I think Ken White blogging at Popehat articulated this best:

It's hard to grasp the reaction of someone who understands gun terminology to someone who doesn't. So imagine we're going through one of our periodic moral panics over dogs and I'm trying to persuade you that there should be restrictions on, say, Rottweilers.

Me: I don't want to take away dog owners' rights. But we need to do something about Rottweilers.
You: So what do you propose?
Me: I just think that there should be some sort of training or restrictions on owning an attack dog.
You: Wait. What's an "attack dog?"
Me: You know what I mean. Like military dogs.
You: Huh? Rottweilers aren't military dogs. In fact "military dogs" isn't a thing. You mean like German Shepherds?
Me: Don't be ridiculous. Nobody's trying to take away your German Shepherds. But civilians shouldn't own fighting dogs.
You: I have no idea what dogs you're talking about now.
Me: You're being both picky and obtuse. You know I mean hounds.
You: What the fuck.
Me: OK, maybe not actually ::air quotes:: hounds ::air quotes::. Maybe I have the terminology wrong. I'm not obsessed with vicious dogs like you. But we can identify kinds of dogs that civilians just don't need to own.
You: Can we?

Because I'm just talking out of my ass, the impression I convey is that I want to ban some arbitrary, uninformed category of dogs that I can't articulate. Are you comfortable that my rule is going to be drawn in a principled, informed, narrow way?

[Rooflesstoofless]

Glock lowers are made from polymer, I am not aware of any mainstream sellings of 80% glock lowers.

Even 1911 80% lowers are not that popular.

You're right, I should have said CNC and/or milling machine.

Polymer80 is the only mainstream Glock (Gen3, I believe) but a few 'mom and pop' machine shops here in CA have been kicking out their own offerings without BATF approval for a while now.

[TITAN308]

Got my Vortex Strike Eagle installed today. This thing is pretty heavy. With that said seems pretty awesome so far, the 3.5" eye relief is pretty darn nice.

Basically the gun is complete, just waiting on the Gemtech suppressor to get out of jail, with any luck end of next month.

[Svifnymr]

Got my Vortex Strike Eagle installed today. This thing is pretty heavy. With that said seems pretty awesome so far, the 3.5" eye relief is pretty darn nice.

Basically the gun is complete, just waiting on the Gemtech suppressor to get out of jail, with any luck end of next month.

2 months into wait for two efile form 1 SBRs, 1 month into a form4 Dead Air Sandman Ti. Bleh.

Did get my 9mm LW commander, still waiting on the M9A3, CDNN has a deal on Ruger Americans so I got a 3006.

And yeah, need to scope a few things.

Also need to sell off a Charles Daly mauser receiver and an unrelated VZ58 parts kit, but too tedious to bother with right now.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh, and Buds had some factory refurbished Taurus Gauchos, so I got a 45lc since it was a deal at $299.

[TITAN308]

Oh this is golden:

"We need to get these weapons of war off the streets. We had an assault weapons ban, it expired, and we need to reinstate it. From San Bernardino to Aurora, Colorado to Sandy Hook and now to Orlando, we have seen the devastation that these military style weapons cause," the former secretary of state explained.

Dear Mrs. Clinton, your husband's 10 year AWB was a complete failure. It cost many democrats their seats (and some republicans) and studies show it had a zero percent effective rate on crime.

Carry on I suppose.

[Mayhem]

Dear Mrs. Clinton, your husband's 10 year AWB was a complete failure. It cost many democrats their seats (and some republicans) and studies show it had a zero percent effective rate on crime.

Carry on I suppose.

Did it also had a zero percent effective rate on mass shootings?

[TITAN308]

Did it also had a zero percent effective rate on mass shootings?

I would hazard a guess if we are going based on the FBI's definition, probably.

Edit: Can you change your avatar back to that asshole deadpool, its kind of hard to be salty with you now that you have that new one. Its just to damn funny looking.

[Stormdash]

The AWB was a ban on combinations of cosmetic features that did absolutely nothing, NOTHING, to amend, abridge, or limit the type and functionality of legal firearms. It was one of the most gobsmackingly retarded bits of legislation in the history of the country in general and the Democrat party in particular (usually pioneers in this regard).

Since very few "mass shootings" (either actual mass shootings or the Bloomberg cult's new definition whereby a mass shooting is any shooting that takes place with more than one person in earshot) involve long guns at all, it had no effect at all. And even if you wish it had, all the AWB meant is that you might have to lose the flash suppressor and mount a fixed stock on your AR-15 variant and continued as usual, so you are below the "2 or more of these features" prohibition. Literally, it was a ban only on what a gun looks like.