Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2007

5.56X45mm

Milforum Mac Daddy
Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2007 (Introduced in House)

HR 1022 IH

110th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 1022

To reauthorize the assault weapons ban, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

February 13, 2007

Mrs. MCCARTHY of New York introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To reauthorize the assault weapons ban, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2007'.

SEC. 2. REINSTATEMENT FOR 10 YEARS OF REPEALED CRIMINAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO ASSAULT WEAPONS AND LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICES.

(a) Reinstatement of Provisions Wholly Repealed- Paragraphs (30) and (31) of section 921(a), subsections (v) and (w) and Appendix A of section 922, and the last 2 sentences of section 923(i) of title 18, United States Code, as in effect just before the repeal made by section 110105(2) of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, are hereby enacted into law.

(b) Reinstatement of Provisions Partially Repealed- Section 924 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--

(1) in subsection (a)(1), by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the following:

`(B) knowingly violates subsection (a)(4), (f), (k), (r), (v), or (w) of section 922;'; and

(2) in subsection (c)(1)(B), by striking clause (i) and inserting the following:

`(i) is a short-barreled rifle, short-barreled shotgun, or semiautomatic assault weapon, the person shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not less than 10 years; or'.

SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

(a) In General- Section 921(a)(30) of title 18, United States Code, as added by section 2(a) of this Act, is amended to read as follows:

`(30) The term `semiautomatic assault weapon' means any of the following:

`(A) The following rifles or copies or duplicates thereof:

`(i) AK, AKM, AKS, AK-47, AK-74, ARM, MAK90, Misr, NHM 90, NHM 91, SA 85, SA 93, VEPR;

`(ii) AR-10;

`(iii) AR-15, Bushmaster XM15, Armalite M15, or Olympic Arms PCR;

`(iv) AR70;

`(v) Calico Liberty;

`(vi) Dragunov SVD Sniper Rifle or Dragunov SVU;

`(vii) Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, or FNC;

`(viii) Hi-Point Carbine;

`(ix) HK-91, HK-93, HK-94, or HK-PSG-1;

`(x) Kel-Tec Sub Rifle;

`(xi) M1 Carbine;

`(xii) Saiga;

`(xiii) SAR-8, SAR-4800;

`(xiv) SKS with detachable magazine;

`(xv) SLG 95;

`(xvi) SLR 95 or 96;

`(xvii) Steyr AUG;

`(xviii) Sturm, Ruger Mini-14;

`(xix) Tavor;

`(xx) Thompson 1927, Thompson M1, or Thompson 1927 Commando; or

`(xxi) Uzi, Galil and Uzi Sporter, Galil Sporter, or Galil Sniper Rifle (Galatz).

`(B) The following pistols or copies or duplicates thereof:

`(i) Calico M-110;

`(ii) MAC-10, MAC-11, or MPA3;

`(iii) Olympic Arms OA;

`(iv) TEC-9, TEC-DC9, TEC-22 Scorpion, or AB-10; or

`(v) Uzi.

`(C) The following shotguns or copies or duplicates thereof:

`(i) Armscor 30 BG;

`(ii) SPAS 12 or LAW 12;

`(iii) Striker 12; or

`(iv) Streetsweeper.

`(D) A semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine, and that has--

`(i) a folding or telescoping stock;

`(ii) a threaded barrel;

`(iii) a pistol grip;

`(iv) a forward grip; or

`(v) a barrel shroud.

`(E)(i) Except as provided in clause (ii), a semiautomatic rifle that has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.

`(ii) Clause (i) shall not apply to an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.

`(F) A semiautomatic pistol that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine, and has--

`(i) a second pistol grip;

`(ii) a threaded barrel;

`(iii) a barrel shroud; or

`(iv) the capacity to accept a detachable magazine at a location outside of the pistol grip.

`(G) A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.

`(H) A semiautomatic shotgun that has--

`(i) a folding or telescoping stock;

`(ii) a pistol grip;

`(iii) the ability to accept a detachable magazine; or

`(iv) a fixed magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds.

`(I) A shotgun with a revolving cylinder.

`(J) A frame or receiver that is identical to, or based substantially on the frame or receiver of, a firearm described in any of subparagraphs (A) through (I) or (L).

`(K) A conversion kit.
...........
 
`(L) A semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General. In making the determination, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any Federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event.'.

(b) Related Definitions- Section 921(a) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(36) Barrel Shroud- The term `barrel shroud' means a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel of a firearm so that the shroud protects the user of the firearm from heat generated by the barrel, but does not include a slide that encloses the barrel, and does not include an extension of the stock along the bottom of the barrel which does not encircle or substantially encircle the barrel.

`(37) Conversion Kit- The term `conversion kit' means any part or combination of parts designed and intended for use in converting a firearm into a semiautomatic assault weapon, and any combination of parts from which a semiautomatic assault weapon can be assembled if the parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.

`(38] Detachable Magazine- The term `detachable magazine' means an ammunition feeding device that can readily be inserted into a firearm.

`(39) Fixed Magazine- The term `fixed magazine' means an ammunition feeding device contained in, or permanently attached to, a firearm.

`(40) Folding or Telescoping Stock- The term `folding or telescoping stock' means a stock that folds, telescopes, or otherwise operates to reduce the length, size, or any other dimension, or otherwise enhances the concealability, of a firearm.

`(41) Forward Grip- The term `forward grip' means a grip located forward of the trigger that functions as a pistol grip.

`(42) Pistol Grip- The term `pistol grip' means a grip, a thumbhole stock, or any other characteristic that can function as a grip.

`(43) Threaded Barrel- The term `threaded barrel' means a feature or characteristic that is designed in such a manner to allow for the attachment of a firearm as defined in section 5845(a) of the National Firearms Act (26 U.S.C. 5845(a)).'.

SEC. 4. GRANDFATHER PROVISION.

Section 922(v)(2) of title 18, United States Code, as added by section 2(a) of this Act, is amended--

(1) by inserting `(A)' after `(2)'; and

(2) by adding after and below the end the following:

`(B) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any firearm the possession or transfer of which would (but for this subparagraph) be unlawful by reason of this subsection, and which is otherwise lawfully possessed on the date of the enactment of this subparagraph.'.

SEC. 5. REPEAL OF CERTAIN EXEMPTIONS.

Section 922(v)(3) of title 18, United States Code, as added by section 2(a) of this Act, is amended by striking `(3)' and all that follows through the 1st sentence and inserting the following:

`(3) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any firearm that--

`(A) is manually operated by bolt, pump, level, or slide action;

`(B) has been rendered permanently inoperable; or

`(C) is an antique firearm.'.

SEC. 6. REQUIRING BACKGROUND CHECKS FOR THE TRANSFER OF LAWFULLY POSSESSED SEMIAUTOMATIC ASSAULT WEAPONS.

Section 922(v) of title 18, United States Code, as added by section 2(a) of this Act, is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(5) It shall be unlawful for any person to transfer a semiautomatic assault weapon to which paragraph (1) does not apply, except through--

`(A) a licensed dealer, and for purposes of subsection (t) in the case of such a transfer, the weapon shall be considered to be transferred from the business inventory of the licensed dealer and the dealer shall be considered to be the transferor; or

`(B) a State or local law enforcement agency if the transfer is made in accordance with the procedures provided for in subsection (t) of this section and section 923(g).

`(6) The Attorney General shall establish and maintain, in a timely manner, a record of the make, model, and date of manufacture of any semiautomatic assault weapon which the Attorney General is made aware has been used in relation to a crime under Federal or State law, and the nature and circumstances of the crime involved, including the outcome of relevant criminal investigations and proceedings. The Attorney General shall annually submit the record to the Congress and make the record available to the general public.'.

SEC. 7. STRENGTHENING THE BAN ON THE POSSESSION OR TRANSFER OF A LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICE.

(a) Ban on Transfer of Semiautomatic Assault Weapon With Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device-

(1) IN GENERAL- Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after subsection (y) the following:

`(z) It shall be unlawful for any person to transfer any assault weapon with a large capacity ammunition feeding device.'.

(2) PENALTIES- Section 924(a) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(8] Whoever knowingly violates section 922(z) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.'.

(b) Certification Requirement-

(1) IN GENERAL- Section 922(w) of such title, as added by section 2(a) of this Act, is amended--

(A) in paragraph (3)--

(i) by adding `or' at the end of subparagraph (B); and

(ii) by striking subparagraph (C) and redesignating subparagraph (D) as subparagraph (C); and

(B) by striking paragraph (4) and inserting the following:

`(4) It shall be unlawful for a licensed manufacturer, licensed importer, or licensed dealer who transfers a large capacity ammunition feeding device that was manufactured on or before the date of the enactment of this subsection, to fail to certify to the Attorney General before the end of the 60-day period that begins with the date of the transfer, in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Attorney General, that the device was manufactured on or before the date of the enactment of this subsection.'.

(2) PENALTIES- Section 924(a) of such title, as amended by subsection (a)(2) of this section, is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(9) Whoever knowingly violates section 922(w)(4) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.'.

SEC. 8. UNLAWFUL WEAPONS TRANSFERS TO JUVENILES.

Section 922(x) of title 18, United States Code, is amended--

(1) in paragraph (1)--

(A) in subparagraph (B), by striking the period and inserting a semicolon; and

(B) by adding at the end the following:

`(C) a semiautomatic assault weapon; or

`(D) a large capacity ammunition feeding device.'; and

(2) in paragraph (2)--

(A) in subparagraph (B), by striking the period and inserting a semicolon; and

(B) by adding at the end the following:

`(C) a semiautomatic assault weapon; or

`(D) a large capacity ammunition feeding device.'.

SEC. 9. BAN ON IMPORTATION OF LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICE.

(a) In General- Section 922(w) of title 18, United States Code, as added by section 2(a) of this Act, is amended--

(1) in paragraph (1), by striking `(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2)' and inserting `(1)(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B)';

(2) in paragraph (2), by striking `(2) Paragraph (1)' and inserting `(B) Subparagraph (A)'; and

(3) by inserting before paragraph (3) the following:

`(2) It shall be unlawful for any person to import or bring into the United States a large capacity ammunition feeding device.'.

(b) Conforming Amendment- Section 921(a)(31)(A) of such title, as added by section 2(a) of this Act, is amended by striking `manufactured after the date of enactment of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994'.
Well, if any American here believes in the right to bear arms. I introduce you to our enemies.

Gun Banners just don't want to ban .50 Calibers or Magazine Fed Rifles. They want to ban everything. Why, because once they take away my AR-15s and AK-47s what do you think they will go after next. Do you think that your .30-30 Lever Action is safe? Nope, they're going to call it a high powered multi-shot sniper rifle. Or what about the simple .22LR pistol? They are going to call it a small assassination pistol.

Logic does not apply to these people. They want to strip us of our GOD GIVEN RIGHTS. The Bill of Rights doesn't mention restrictions and outlawing of firearms. It says that you and I have the legal right to keep and bear arms. Nothing else.

Write to your elected members of the government. Inform them that if they go against our rights that they will be out of a job. The Government works for us not the other way around.
 
You get to keep your assault rifle, and some wacko goes on a spree. You claim you have them to protect yourself yet some poor sap just got shot along with 30 other people. Is this worth something that you oo and ahh over and get an erection while you fire it at the range?
 
You get to keep your assault rifle, and some wacko goes on a spree. You claim you have them to protect yourself yet some poor sap just got shot along with 30 other people. Is this worth something that you oo and ahh over and get an erection while you fire it at the range?

Not everyone is a mental case, and if our government had not shut down all of the mental facilities these people wouldn't be on the street.

Personally I cant see the pleasure in collecting china cups, salt shakers or many other things, but that doesn't mean that the people do it to gain some weird sexual satisfaction as you seem to insinuate for those who collect military weapons. Get a life, or is it just that you have some sexual hangup?
 
I am pro Gun-CONTROL. (Please note that is control, not a ban).

In American society we have limits on most things. For example who can Drive, Drink, Vote, join the military, to name a few. There is a group of people in the gun lobby who think there should be no restictions on guns at all, despite the fact their are restrictions on NC-17 movies.

I cannot think of any justifiable reason for civilians (excluding LEO, security or military professions) to own weapons who sole intend is to inflict mass casualties. I am not talking about so much as about the semi-auto as I am about the clip size.

First of all a assault rifle is not for home defense, you don't need a 20 or 30 round clip to defend yourself. If you cannot defend yourself after the first half dozen shots, you probably shouldn't be owning a gun anyway.

Therefore a handgun, or a pump shotgun is more than enough.

Some goes for hunting, you don't need a 50 round drum in order to hunt, unless your prey is the kind that walk upright and might shoot back.

As for sportsmen, they can simply buy a second 8-10 round clip and reload. Its not very expensive and the minor inconvience to reload offsets the very real possibilty that the larger clips be used for crimes.

And yes, I enjoy target shooting. I use a single shot bolt-action '22 Springfield rifle. More than sufficient for me.
 
Last edited:
This is b******t. I hate anyone who thinks like they do, and wish them great suffering in the afterlife.

In any case, I better buy that JLD-91 and FAL now, before the dems get in the white house (boy I hope Obama wins the primary, no way in hell a black man is gonna be president for at least 40 more years).
 
Hey, Mmarsh, please. Geez...I want to have many rifles, assaults rifles, pistols, and bullets as I can. Jesus. I'm from Texas and country boy. (No offense, just tellin')

I noticed the House want to ban M1 Carbine and AR-15. That's bullcrap! F:cen:ing Democrats.
 
I am pro Gun-CONTROL. (Please note that is control, not a ban).

In American society we have limits on most things. For example who can Drive, Drink, Vote, join the military, to name a few. There is a group of people in the gun lobby who think there should be no restictions on guns at all, despite the fact their are restrictions on NC-17 movies.

I cannot think of any justifiable reason for civilians (excluding LEO, security or military professions) to own weapons who sole intend is to inflict mass casualties. I am not talking about so much as about the semi-auto as I am about the clip size.

First of all a assault rifle is not for home defense, you don't need a 20 or 30 round clip to defend yourself. If you cannot defend yourself after the first half dozen shots, you probably shouldn't be owning a gun anyway.

Therefore a handgun, or a pump shotgun is more than enough.

Some goes for hunting, you don't need a 50 round drum in order to hunt, unless your prey is the kind that walk upright and might shoot back.

As for sportsmen, they can simply buy a second 8-10 round clip and reload. Its not very expensive and the minor inconvience to reload offsets the very real possibilty that the larger clips be used for crimes.

And yes, I enjoy target shooting. I use a single shot bolt-action '22 Springfield rifle. More than sufficient for me.

Of all the rights you outlined as being limited, none except this one is in the Constitution:

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Notice, the word "arms" was not specifically defined for a reason. The better the arms, the better the defense of the Nation. Smart guys those Founding Fathers.
 
Yeah, the founding fathers were smart guys. Anyway, question: Why is the AK-47 still popular among organized criminal elements? Wasn't it invented back in the late 1940s?
 
Of all the rights you outlined as being limited, none except this one is in the Constitution:

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Notice, the word "arms" was not specifically defined for a reason. The better the arms, the better the defense of the Nation. Smart guys those Founding Fathers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Again the keyword is control. Control does not mean a ban, but everyone assumes it does. First of all there is no politician in Washington that wants to ban firearms completely. Not even the most ardent flaming left, anti-gun politican has signed on to that.

First of all you are not completely right on your first point. A NC-17 movie is a film, filmmaking is considered art. Art as we know, is an expression of free speech and expression (protected by the 1st Amendment). And yet there are some (not many) restrictions on art. So just because something is in the constitution doesn't necessarily mean its an open and shut case.

The Constitution says you have the right to keep and bear arms, but it doesn't say that Congress cannot control what weapons are available. It just forbids Congress from instituting a total ban.

Lets be honest, the Founding Fathers were referring to flintlock muskets. That was the only type of 'arm' that was available in 1789. So if you want to go by a literal intrepretation of the constitution, the only weapon the Constitution gaurentees you is a muzzle loader. It does not guarantee you the right to a AK-74, or even anything that might be considered a firearm accessory. My guess is the Founding Fathers never imagined the Constitution would be used 200 years later.

And of course their are some that would argue (like the ACLU) that the Second Amendment is only meant for the creation of the state militia. Not for the individual. That doesn't happen to be my opinion, but the question remains unanswered.

While the Constitution is a critical document, one must remember that it was written for the year 1789, not for 2007. Situations do change in 200+ years. Despite what it might says (or what you think it says) sometimes rules must be modified to fit modern society. Precisely why we don't stone adulters to death ot cut off the hands of thieves the way the Old Testment would tell us to.

In reference to firearms, Having been born and raised in a big US city, I can tell you that big cities and assault rifles (guns in general) is a REALLY bad mix. -I speak from personal experience. Most of you seem to be in the country, but whats right with the country is not right for other parts of the country.

Finally, gun control is hardly a new subject. Ever been to the OLD WEST? Dodge, Silverado, etc? You can still see the signs "No guns in town" "No guns in saloon" etc. If memory serves me, wasn't the shootout at the OK Corral over the refusal of a group of cowboys to hand over guns whilest in city limits.
 
Last edited:
I lived in New York City for 5 years. I don't see how assault rifles in the hands of regular citizens would make anything worse. It would be much more difficult to use it in a crime as opposed to, say, one of those $50 GLOCK 17s with the serial numbers scratched off you can find anywhere in the city.
 
Well, folks as a POLICE OFFICER. I feel that the civilian population should be able to own weapons such as the AR-15 or AK-47.

Less than .2% of gun crimes use weapons like these. .2%.

When people say that only the military and police should have high capacity magazines. I laugh in their faces. Why should I be allowed to have them for my own defense yet a fellow law abiding citizen cannot?

Tell me why? You can't....

If you want to ban an item that causes death. Ban automobiles, 5 gallon buckets, and swimming pools. More adults are killed by driving and more childern are killed by drowning than by firearms combind.

Lastly, as a Police Officer and prior service member of the US Army. I took two oaths to uphold and defend the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Not just a select few of them but all of them.

Driving isn't a right it's a privallge, firearms are a God Given Right.

Next time you talk about the fact that civilian don't need weapons like those that they want to ban. Read up about the LA Riots, Hurricane Andrew, Hurricane Katrina, and look at places where firearm rights were banned and taken away from their civilian population.

On a side note. The Criminal element does not use the AK-47 for crimes. They use firearms like Hi-Point or Jennings. Cheaply made firearms that can fit into their pockets. Not a freaking rifle that cost between $450-$1000.

Here is the price range for all of the firearms that they want to ban.

AK Series - $450-$1000
AR-10 - $1000-$2000
AR-15 - $900 - $3000
AR70 - $1500 - $3000
Calico - $1000 - $2000
Dragunov - $700 - $1500
FN FAL - $500 - $3000
FN FNC - $1500 - $3000
Hi-Point - $250 - $500
H&K Series - $1000 - $10,000
Kel-Tec - $500 - $700
M1 Carbine - $800 - $10,000

So on and so forth. Most of the firearms are over $500 easily. Most criminal use weapons that cost $100 or less.

In my short career as a Police Officer I have never arrested someone with a rifle. Our Major, who has been with the PD for 32 years has never arrested someone with any listed weapon.

Lastly, the section of the ban that states "a forward grip" is every long arm made. That is where you place your hand while holding the longarm so you do not burn you hand.

Every nation on Earth that has abused it's people has disarmed them.

Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Castro, Mao, Franco, etc.... has disarmed it's civilian population.

In the end, if you are for this than you are against the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights.


 
Hey mmarsh, the Founding Fathers did not mean the Flintlock Musket. They meant arms for self defense.

Back in the day you can own Cannons, Flintlocks, Sowrd, and such.

The Cannon at that periods of time was the most powerful weapon on the field of battle.

As for those saying that the people have no rights because the 2nd Amendment means the Militia and not the people. Think again. Every other amendment that mentions "People" means we the people. Not the militia, not the state government, not the fedreral government. IT MEANS WE THE PEOPLE!!!!!!!!

If you don't want to own arms. Go right ahead. I'm not going to stop you. But the moment you and your kind steps on my rights. ANY OF MY RIGHTS. That's going to lead to a fight. Because I did not fight and bleed to lose those rights. My friends did not give their lives to lose those rights. All of us in uniform did not take an oath to protect and defend those rights just to see someone with a traitor's mind to take away those rights that we fought and died for.

I will fight to the death to defend my rights.... That's all you need to know.
 
If you cannot defend yourself after the first half dozen shots, you probably shouldn't be owning a gun anyway.

Ever consider the possibility of multiple assailants? I've heard stories of people being beaten in their own homes when 20 cars rolled up and unloaded black gangstas. Of course, you'd probably have to be involved with them for something like that to happen.
 
You serve to protect your countymen only to have one killed by a legally owned weapon? What a waste. Stop with the god given right stuff as well, the constitution is one made by man, not one of the 10 commandments.

If people want to own these weapons then they should be required to be put into government controlled armouries and only be allowed to be used there at the range.
 
Ever consider the possibility of multiple assailants? I've heard stories of people being beaten in their own homes when 20 cars rolled up and unloaded black gangstas. Of course, you'd probably have to be involved with them for something like that to happen.

Major liability

Actually it happen to me. A friend and I had just closed shop of our store very late we were approached by a group of 4 thugs with a switchblade. (This was in pre-Guiliani NYC era). My friend pulled out a (illegal) 9mm from his belt. They immediately backed off. We didn't need an assault rifle.

I have no idea when you were there. But I grew up in the high crime rates when guns were legal and later they were banned after Guiliani (a Republican) banned them. I can tell you the difference was noticeable.

5.56

If you have never seen a AK-47 (or a copy) in crimes you have never been to L.A. Its quite common.

Yes they were talking about flintlock weapons, Because nothing else had been invented yet. And times have changed. In 1789 a soldier carried his personal weapons into battle. It hasn't been that way in over 180 years. Nowadays when you join the militia (National Guard) they give you a rifle, you don't need to bring your own.

If your really an LEO, then you would know that guns a migratory species. They start up in the hands of law biding citizens but can end up in the hands of criminals. They also start in the country or suburbs and then migrate to Big Cities. Most weapons used in crimes are stolen. Thats why certain guns and items should be out of civilian hands.

I have never heard of cannon being under private ownership, even in 1789 most of them belonged to state arsenals.

Do you know why its called a fire 'arm', it means a weapon that you can carry in your arms. A 6 pound Napoleon Cannon doesn't qualify. You'll have to provide some evidence to the contrary.

And the right to a firearm is NOT a God-given right, its a constitutional right. The only God Given rights are to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Your not listening. As I said (about 3 times) nobody is suggesting a total ban.

Show me a single politician that wants to ban ALL Guns. Not even Hillary has suggested such a bill.

What is suggested is controls, just as their are controls on most other things. Remember this is 2007, not 1789. Society if very, very, different.
 
Back
Top