When it comes to our firearms, particularly those most useful for the defense of ourselves, our families and our homes, we should not rely on the Second Amendment and the courts to defend our right to own them. Politicians are prepared to ride roughshod over those rights by any means necessary, as President Biden reminded us this week.
President Biden said in a speech on Wednesday that he's going to ban assault weapons and high capacity magazines "come hell or high water."
Biden made the comments at the House Democratic Caucus Issues Conference in Baltimore, Maryland, on Wednesday night.
"I know it may make some of you uncomfortable, but that little state above me, Delaware is one of them, has the highest rate, one of the highest rates of gun ownership. But guess what? We're going to ban assault weapons again come hell or high water and high capacity magazines. When we did it last time to reduce mass deaths," Biden said.
There's more at the link.
"Hell or high water" may cover a multitude of measures that can restrict, if not eliminate, the supply of such weapons and magazines. For a hypothetical example:
- The government issues a new assault weapons ban.
- The ban is challenged in court, but continues in force while the case is being decided.
- After multiple court decisions and a delay of several years, the ban is eventually overturned by the Supreme Court.
- On the same day that the ban is overturned, the government issues a new ban on different grounds, under different legal justifications, and the whole process begins all over again.
There are ancillary measures. Mail-order ammunition sales can be banned on "security" grounds. That means the principal source of lower-cost ammunition will be denied to purchasers, who will have to pay the marked-up prices charged by gun stores for what they want. This can double the cost of acquiring a suitable ammunition supply (which Kim du Toit discussed recently - go read). Additional taxes can be imposed on ammunition, magazines, etc., making them impossibly expensive for most people. There are other possibilities as well. All these measures might be implemented under President Biden's "come hell or high water" threat.
The message is clear. If you want a personal defensive rifle of appropriate design (usually an AR-15 or AK-47 derivative), and normal-capacity magazines for it, and enough ammunition to fill them, don't delay buying what you need. You may find them no longer available (or affordable) if you wait.
Right now, basic AR-15 rifles are available for plus-or-minus $500, plus shipping costs and sales tax. Magazines for them are in the $8-$15 range. The cheapest good-quality AK-47 clone is $620-$700, with magazines priced a little higher. You pays your money and you takes your choice - for as long as that choice is available. There's no guarantee that will continue to be the case.
Peter
15 comments:
Shall
Not
Be
Infringed
Time to start shooting these treasonous bastards!
China doesn't allow civilian ownership of firearms.
Yep, the next push will be to ban mail-order ammo...
yeah, xi said in a statement in china six months ago that "civilian ownership of guns by americans is unacceptable." he and joe can kiss my rebel ass. they have taken my pension by inflation, my job by medical mandates, now my savings via taxation, and talking about cutting social secuity. someone needs to clue them on what happens when men have nothing more to lose.
If I were running a Vegas gambling establishment, and the bet were which would go first, black semi-auto rifles and the ammunition to feed them, or the government that thinks they can ride roughshod over the Constitution to ban them, I think the EPA will be putting politicians on the Endangered Species List inside a matter of months, if not brief years.
And if you think Confederate statues disappeared fast, wait until you see what happens to even the names of those pushing for this.
They should, by all means, keep listening to their installed senile old fool. It's long past time to settle this fundamental question with finality one way of the other, and punctuate it with the skulls of the losers.
"This republic can not long endure half-slave, and half-free."
The voting on this question is going to be fascinating. And overwhelmingly likely, done at something around 3000fps.
"This republic can not long endure half-slave, and half-free."
Amen
I'm frankly a bit astonished that we haven't already seen more Rule 308 vetoes.
(And no, Frank Fedgov, I'm not planning it, and I'm not encouraging it. I'm not looking forward to it, either.
I'm dreading it...)
The reason for the $200.00 tax on NFA weapons was in 1934 that tax was 2 to 4 times, IF NOT MORE, than the value of those guns. Then they created inflation, which made being on a "list" more onerous than the tax.... there is only one cure for heavy-handed government, as has been forever - BECOME UNGOVERNABLE.
22lr and 9mm remain the cheapest ammo to stockpile, and 1k rounds of 9mm fit in a 30 Cal ammo can vs 1/2 that of 5.56. Which is a big reason why I still like 10/22 and ruger PC9 for starting/new self sufficiency or self defense gun owners and their first rifles... Ammo is cost-effective, compact, and only need two readily available and mild calibers. Recommend handguns in both calibers as well, ideally w/ similar ergos/controls. Order 1-4 however they prefer/deem highest need...
Then AR style rifles are generally most cost-effective and versatile for new shooters. 5.56 generally easier for kids and women than 7.62x39. 5.56 also a fair bit cheaper than 7.62x39 that used to be cheaper and cost about the same per round as 9mm... Point being, mid-level+ 5.56 AR15 or 7.62x39 CMMG Mutant/PSA KS47 is generally #5 on my recs, barring special case needs...
And remember the cost of ammo almost always far exceeds the cost of the gun itself over its service lifetime, and usually does w/ just the cost of building initial ammo reserves as well...
Don't forget to stock reloading supplies as well.
And Joe...come and take it.
National percentage wise, no one cares. 2nd Amendment? Pretty words on a pretty piece of paper. "Shall not be infringed"? Ha! Just like all the other so-called "Rights" (toothless restrictions on government over-reach)
When they come to your door, most will say "Yes, sir". What are >you< going to do? Shoot back when SWAT shows up? Everyone talks big.
Look what they're doing to Kyle - even though he was deemed innocent. Self-defense? For the most part, you don't have that right anymore. Maybe places like Wyoming - for a while longer.
I wish I were wrong but we just got through illegal mask mandates. Did the "right" rise up and fight back? Did your Repulsivkin "leaders" push back? Hell, they all joined in and people are still getting put upon for not wearing masks. Some places/events still mandate them. And that's minor stuff.
Anyone doing anything effective with the J6 prisoners? Do I see anyone in Congress doing anything effective? They talk a lot. Posture a bit. The courts doing anything?
It >will< be different for guns - even fewer people will complain and most of those that do will cave when push comes to shove.
I have firearms for self-protection ... but I really depend on Ol Remus advice: stay away from crowds. All the guns I may have (before the boating accident) - I could only use one at a time anyway. And if successful once ... and they really want me ... I won't make it through a second time. Neighbors will sit back and talk among themselves in the glow of blue and red flashing lights. Then go back to bed.
How many Ruby Ridges are in our future? Anyone recall any real consequences to that? Besides Waco? And that was then ...
Think the police will protect you? At the cost of their jobs?
The military? Their concern is for their buddies, not you. Some may disobey but most will shoot civilians - gladly - if ordered. Stars and Stripes flying or not.
I live in a deep red state - not for much longer though, the blues have arrived - and I'm still concerned.
That America is gone.
Uncle Joe seems right proud of that 1994 assault weapon ban.
Couple things wrong about that from his and the Democrats' perspective.
First, passage of the AWB was at least in part responsible for their loss of both houses of Congress that same year.
Second, an intensive study by the Government's own agencies found that the ban was ineffective, and had no positive results on reducing crime or making the citizens safer.
Joe's claims otherwise are simply one more case of him lying through his teeth, the one thing he seems to be quite good at.
I believe Biden is talking outta his butt. Punks like him do that a lot. Wanna be tyrants like him are big on talk, but short on action. He showed himself to be a coward during Vietnam and I highly doubt anything has changed
^^^THIS^^^
Don’t give those SOB’s any ideas!!
Post a Comment