What if HR.8 Passes

[spencer60]

I agree... but to be honest, I think it's ok to regulate what arms can be privately owned.

If you want to really go down the rabbit hole then it would be possible for there to be private armies with tanks and war planes. I have watched to many movies too think it's a good idea for Google (or some corporation) to have an army. Serious. If you allow private citizens to have tanks it'd be tough to stop private entities to have them in mass.

Lots of private entities have tanks, planes, artillery, etc. None of these are illegal to own if you have enough money.

One of the founders of Microsoft has a WWII addiction, and he has fully operational version of all the above, plus machine guns, grenades and all the non-NFA stuff.

Or go down to World of Tanks down in Texas sometime. Those aren't decommissioned, most are fully functional.

The simple fact is that to own heavy weaponry you just have to be rich enough to afford the price tag, including the legal costs.

 

[dakatl]

Once again you are making my point.
Chip away ...one right after another...chip chip chip....

I live in Georgia I don't have to abide by Vermont laws and neither do you. Thus your argument is mute.

 

[GAgunLAWbooklet]

If I could afford a tank, I think I could afford the $200 NFA tax to have the cannon functional.
(And maybe even some high explosive shells, which would have that same $200 tax on each round, each one being its own "destructive device.")

 

[spencer60]

"If I want to sell a pistol right after H.R. 8 takes effect, I'll still list it here, and anybody can buy it, provided that we complete the deal at an agreed-upon brick-and-mortar FFL shop."

Fair enough, your personal choice. What happens if I show up with my concealed carry permit that was renewed the day before - does this carry any weight if it isn't specifically covered by H.R. 8? Serious question. Thanks.

That's a good question. In GA you simply have to fill out the 4473 if you have a carry license. There's no BG check at all. So if the buyer has a GWL would there be anything to do but fill in the form and file it?

Once again you are making my point.
Chip away ...one right after another...chip chip chip....

I live in Georgia I don't have to abide by Vermont laws and neither do you. Thus your argument is mute.

Not following you.

My point is that Vermont is the safest state in the US without ANY state gun laws.

 

[spencer60]

If I could afford a tank, I think I could afford the $200 NFA tax to have the cannon functional.
(And maybe even some high explosive shells, which would have that same $200 tax on each round, each one being its own "destructive device.")

Yup, if you have deep enough pockets it's not a problem.

 

[rustyboy]

The day after it becomes law, we meet it in a very obvious location, maybe surround state house or ATF building. We all bring stripped lowers. We all pass one to left. We go home. Tyranny deserves no respect.

 

[dakatl]

Vermont gun laws just changed in Feb 2021.
Chip Chip Chip.

 

[zesty]

Actually, there is little to no correlation between 'gun crimes' committed in a state and how 'strict' the laws are.

I would suggest going through the site below since I'm sure you are getting this information from some of the studies this criminologist pokes holes in.

http://www.gunfacts.info/

A common sense question will give you the answer though. What is the safest state in the US, and what are it's gun laws?

Year after year that state is Vermont, and until a few years ago, they literally had NO state gun laws unless they were required by the feds. Today the only laws they have are a 15 round mag limit of I remember correctly.

That just plays into gun control advocate talking points though. They're saying that state laws don't work, they need country wide legislation. Look at countries that have enacted strict gun control and there's different results. There are lots of other contributing factors for Vermont. Australia had a few school shooting and went full tilt gun control. Mass shooting are greatly reduced now. The fact is that less guns means less shootings. I agree that the cost is not worth more gun control though. Just saying that the gun control "facts" are not fact, but are not all totally false either.

Lots of private entities have tanks, planes, artillery, etc. None of these are illegal to own if you have enough money.

One of the founders of Microsoft has a WWII addiction, and he has fully operational version of all the above, plus machine guns, grenades and all the non-NFA stuff.

Or go down to World of Tanks down in Texas sometime. Those aren't decommissioned, most are fully functional.

The simple fact is that to own heavy weaponry you just have to be rich enough to afford the price tag, including the legal costs.

I'll be honest, I don't know what corporations have, but WWII stuff isn't what I'm talking about. That's 80yr old tech. Modern stuff is tough to get as I understand it.

 

[dakatl]

so then zesty who do you think should be 'allowed' to have firearms ?

 

[dakatl]

so then zesty who do you think should be 'allowed' to have firearms ?