| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
What You'll Need, Come Next January |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gregory Morris, 2/1/08 10:14:32 am |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kim du Toit gives us a list of "must own before they are banned" guns.
While I don't disagree with that at all, I'm more likely to err on the side of getting as much as you can for as cheap as you can. In the end, our new anti-gun overload is going to want to ban "assault weapons" at best, and everything semi-automatic at worst. There are definitely going to be other laws that will make it harder to acquire firearms and ammo. While there is a good chance of the already-bogus definition of "assault weapon" being expanded to include most anything that is fun to shoot, I seriously doubt they will change the definition of a firearm (i.e. - the receiver.)
Therefore, I think it would be in my best interest to purchase a handful of DPMS (or similar) AR15 receivers as well as some more-than-ten capacity magazines. That way, you can still legally build firearms which have been banned from production. Of course, that assumes that a new AWB will be similar to the old AWB. I am fairly certain a new one will look the same overall, even though it will likely be more restrictive. My reason for saying this is that there is no such thing as an "assault weapon", and therefore they can really only ban cosmetic features. Sure, if Obama has his way, anything that isn't a single-shot .22 will be banned, but I have serious doubts he could pull that off even with a Democrat-run congress.
I still agree about stocking up on ammo... heck, I'd agree to that even if Ron Paul were elected. You can never have too much ammo. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | [Comments are closed after a month.] |
| | < "Home Sweet Home" | | "Situational Awareness in Your Home" > |
|
|
|
|
