jump to navigation

Mass AG bans all semi-auto rifles July 22, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, persecution, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, unbelievable BS.
trackback

The decree – because it’s not a law, it’s simply the decree of a politician – is allegedly only targeted at so-called “assault weapons,” but it is so broadly worded that virtually any semi-automatic rifle could be judged “illegal.”  In fact, the provisions are so broad even many bolt-action or other types of weapons could be included.  That’s the real danger of this illegal decree, it is so vague and nebulous an overly zealous cop or prosecutor could wreak havoc with people’s lives, all for owning a gun that is perfectly legal by the letter of the law.

Also note that the language of the decree leaves plenty of room to confiscate weapons that were perfectly legal when bought, though now allowed to remain under a grandfather clause:

 Gun buyers raced to snap up military-style weapons on Wednesday as Attorney General Maura Healey moved to bar the sale of rifles that have been altered slightly to evade the state’s assault weapon ban……[The edict was announced Wednesday, and went into effect the next day.  Nice.  How would leftists react if a state attorney general declared abortion illegal, with the ban going into effect the next day?  They’d lose their minds.  And yet one cannot find even a remote justification for baby-slaughter in the Constitution, while the 2nd Amendment is as clear as day.]

…….The stores were responding to an order Healey issued to the state’s 350 gun dealers telling them to immediately stop selling “duplicate” versions of common assault rifles like the AR-15, which she argues are illegal under the state’s 1998 assault weapons ban.

The law bans duplicate weapons but has left it to gun manufacturers to define which weapons would fall into that category. [That is completely untrue.  In fact, it’s an inversion of the Truth. When the federal assault weapons ban was first brought forward by the Clinton Administration in the early 90s, teh NRA and gun manufacturers immediately conveyed their concern that no one knew just exactly what an assault weapon was.  So, in the federal law, upon which the Mass law was based, defined a number of (meaningless) features in an attempt to define an “assault weapon.”  To be an assault weapon, a firearm had to possess 2 or 3 of the listed features.  Now, these distinctions were false and dumb and only intended to ban certain weapons entirely, but because distinctions had to be made to arrive at a definition, it was also possible to produce a gun that didn’t have those features/distinctions and thus was compliant with the ban.  Blaming gun manufacturers/owners for figuring ways around a rule written by their mortal enemies and then accusing them of getting to “define the weapons” is lunacy]

Manufacturers exploited that “loophole,” she said, to produce assault rifles that had “small tweaks” but were functionally identical to the banned weapons. Some, for example, had no flash suppressor or featured a fixed instead of a folding stock.

She said the directive clarifies that duplicate guns are those that have internal operating systems that are essentially the same as illegal assault weapons, or have key functional components that are interchangeable with those of banned weapons.

You can see from the last paragraph just how ill-defined and dangerous this is.  This is, in fact, a back-door way to banning huge swaths of firearms used today, even relatively prosaic hunting rifles, shotguns, and handguns.  There are only a few basic operating systems to make a semi-auto rifle work.  Because of that, and because of the wide number of firearms listed in the ban, virtually any semi-auto, including handguns, could be interpreted to be in violation.  Then there is the issue of a key functional component?  There is no mention of what that includes.  Because things like tactical stocks, flash suppressors, rails, and other components are added to certain bolt-action, lever action, and even break-action rifles, are they now illegal?  No one knows, because this edict was only issued Wednesday and went into effect yesterday.

Disarming citizens has been the goal of every leftist government that has ever come to power.  That disarmament led directly to the slaughter of millions of that government’s own citizens.  I would say this lawless edict would never stand, but with Scalia dead, the Supreme Court deadlocked, and Hillary waiting in the wings, I don’t think we can assume anything about the courts anymore – except, likely, just more and more and more bad news.

This is really just a paving of the way for a Hillary administration to ban guns by executive fiat.  This is a test case, and I promise you it was carefully crafted and timed to be heading through the courts in the early months of Hillary’s administration, should the sorrowful witch be elected.  Buy now, and buy lots.

This  may sound a bit excessive, but how long before certain books are banned and burned, books conveying ideas too dangerous for people to be able to “handle,” ideas that “provoke violence” or “intolerance?”  How many Americans already hold the Bible in such ill-repute?  The same exact logic that now applies to guns could easily be extended to books or other sources of information, for if a “bad gun” can kill a dozen, a “bad idea” can kill millions. In truth, the bad ideas are mostly on the other side, but they don’t see it that way, and they have the whip hand.

Comments

1. Tim - July 23, 2016

More reason to accept the reality that at this time, like it or not, barring Divine intervention, Trump is the only one who can stop Hillary.
Wise up all “never-trumpers”!


Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: