banning our .50 muzzleloaders???

Back in the early '80s I assisted Ronnie Barret in one of the development stages of the Barret .50.

From the patent development stages this gun was designed and promoted as a distructive device for military use.

You do not run down to your local Wally-World, Bass Pro or corner pawn shop and buy one!

The first production runs went exclusively to the Special Forces.

All overseas sales were sanctioned by the state department, in writing.

The only nonmilitary runs of the 50 were several inert replicas for movie studios.

Latter, some private sales were sanctioned with the approval of the ATF. (basically, after the full background check as per any distructive device collector)

If you own one you must have the paperwork in hand if you take it from one room to another to clean it! (OK I'm exagerating, but not much) You must have three level security for storage and it must be wired into the local law enforcement comm system.

This gun has always been under the strict control of the ATF, and the U.S. government knows where every copy of the firearm resides. The local police know where every copy of this gun resides! If you own one you have a destructive device collectors license and are subject to visits by the ATF as prescribed by the existing laws.

The laws instituted by the states are being promoted by persons frantically seeking to control another aspect of private ownership due to their lack of comprehension of the laws and their fear.

They are telling you that you cannot have something that you already can't have, unless the U.S. government has done a complete and extensive clearance check on you!

The only results of their efforts will be in the area of S&W and Desert Eagle pistols, Sharps rifles .56 Spencers and various other specialty hunting and collectors items.

knee-jerk liberal fear reactions

:imo:

 

[USMCsniper]

If I rember right, Cali stopped the sale of them, however if you already owened one, you just had to register it.

Wrong, they had to turn them in to their local PD with no refund what so ever. Yes this bill was past by the "Terminator" or "Kindergarden Cop" :nono: .

 

[Tahquamenon]

Well,

I'm quite fond of the .50BMG and my Browning BAR, Barrett and my Desert Eagle .50 AE.

I'm more fond of my right to own them.

As far as someone coming to my house to do my family and I harm with a .50 cal or a tank. I don't think it will happen. That's not why I own enjoy .50 cal weaponry in the first place.

On the other hand, I won't be defending my home and property if needed with a muzzleloader. eace:

The focus for regulation should be (and has been) on the ammunition not the caliber or weapon. There is no reason for civilian tracer, armor piercing and incendiary ammunition.

There is 30/06 tracer, incendiary and armor piercing ammo that is military use.
So .30 cal is likely to be the next if the .50BMG becomes outlawed for civilian use.

Banning the .50BMG would be yet another step towards you loosing your muzzleloader.

:m2c: :imo:

 

[Stumpkiller]

Quote:
<<<No one is going to break into my home with a tank.

SP
>>>

Why do you feel that way? Is there something in the Constitution that limits that action to Texas? We all saw the assault at Waco on TV. I saw the SLA (of Patty Hearst fame) succumb to the same burn 'em up tactic.

Yes, and I saw the Philly Police aerial bomb a barricaded neighborhood. You can't win a one-upmanship battle with even local government (which will actually be a bunch of your fellow citizens who probably feel much like you do, but are comfortable with the other benefits of society and are unwilling to burn it all for a few select rights and are in a profession charged with upholding those rights).

Maybe you can shoot down a police helicopter, but it will get to the B1B's soon enough if you are good at it. The days when you could hold off the calvary with fast ponies and good tactics are long gone.

 

[rabjr]

Wrong, they had to turn them in to their local PD with no refund what so ever. Yes this bill was past by the "Terminator" or "Kindergarden Cop" .

Funny I just saw a recent Monster Garage where Jesse shot up a failed attempt (car) with his .50cal rifle. And they made a point of saying not to worry folks, that Jesse was all legal, he bought the rifle before the ban.

 

Howdy. My apologies, but I have to rant:

While I don't see the "need" for a .50 cal "sniper" rifle, I don't see the "need" for government to assess who should own it; that is unless the government "needs" to be wary of liberty. I don't think the 50 BMGs are sensible, but this is America, and you should have 100+ of 'em if you so choose.

Keep in mind that the Bill of Rights gives us no freedoms at all; it only serves to state to the government those rights we already have, God given, and even by the laws of nature if someone is atheist. Don

 

Blahman is totally right, and don't forget that great ace the gov has called marshall law. If they declare it know one but them have any rights. :m2c:

 

[jaybeach]

We definitely need to listen closely to our friends from Canada and the U.K. They have experienced what happens when the libs begin taking away just "certain" weapons. There are plenty of laws to protect our citizens if those laws are enforced, regardless of the type or caliber of weapons available. The 2nd Amendment needs to be protected at all costs; once it is compromised, the rest will be history.
:imo:

 

[Johnny Tremain]

I don't see why anyone needs an assault rifle.",

And what I think is funny is there are NO or very few Assault rifles" in the USA. The last weapon with this title was the AK-47 that went out of production in 1961.

For those that may not know, and for those socialist that may read this. A weapon gets its name from the DOD master weapons listings.

The term Assault rifle came from the fact that the AK-47 had its selector switch go from AUTO-SEMI-SAFE. It was designed for fire supression.

There are NO weapons made like that today. To enclude ANY 50 cals be them the BMG or a hawkens.

When states started banning firearms that carry more than 10 rounds, the LIBs and MEDIA called them Assault rifles.
SO now all 50 cal and above can join their banned ranks.

Mean while there has only been TWO accounts of a black powder firearm EVER being used in a felony. Both were pistols, one single shot, one revolver.

Most of the left coast has banned my M1 for they say it is a s assult rifle. Fools, it only carries 8 rounds. AND the DOD classifies it a Battle Rifle still today.

As the UN and the world strive for a one-world government. The only thing standing in their way is My flintlock, and all those gun owners thru out this great land.

They wonder why WE say FTW!!

 

[merdean]

:m2c:Way back, in the days before we had a constitution, we had a disagreement with "the government" or "the king".
People went out and assaulted government representatives. This was sometimes done with rifles. Therefore, the type of rifles most commonly refered to in this forum were ASSAULT RIFLES! Many of those rifles were used by men hiding behind trees or fences and shooting at government soldiers from distances considered "long" by said soldiers. This is what is commonly called "sniping" today. Therefore, the men using such rifles could have been called "SNIPERS" The men using said rifles considered themselves to be part of a military group. Therefore, they were "MILITARY SNIPERS . As such, the rifles currently discussed in this forum could be called
"MILITARY ASSAULT RIFLES AND MILITARY SNIPER RIFLES"! Many were of a caliber larger than .50! Are you ready to give up the RIGHT to own them?
I spent 20 years, 2 months and 23 days defending our Constituion. I will continue to do so through legal means for as long as possible.

 

Although I understand the intent, I also know how a law can get twisted once it's in place. The part of this bill that can affect the ML and antique crowd is this:

`(d) 50 Caliber Sniper Weapon- The term `50 caliber sniper weapon' means a rifle capable of firing a center-fire cartridge in 50 caliber, .50 BMG caliber, any other variant of 50 caliber, or any metric equivalent of such calibers.'.

Quite literally, a 50-90 Sharps would be banned under this definition and I can see muzzleloaders being pulled in under "any other variant of 50 caliber". I think a much narrower set of definitions is required if they are really set on limiting only this type of weapon.

 

[Bearbait2]

Mr. Slowpoke,
I didn't know that anyone was ever proven to have been guilty of such a charge? (I was kind of out of the loop at the time.) Was anyone actually charged or convicted of such a crime (pedophile) at Waco?
Best Wishes

 

[Tumblernotch]

I have downloaded and read the "Controls On Firearms" that your Home Secretary put out. What a crock! I really feel sorry for you lads over there across the Pond. As bad as it is getting here fellers, it's nothing compared to what our English cousins are goin' through. We do need to nip this in the bud. The way to do that is to quit reelecting the same pantywaist people back into office. People in my state keep re-electing liberals who would like to take every right we have just because their granddaddies voted for FDR and he's the jasper that started the whole mess to start with! Sorry Squire, I kinda spread this reply out to everybody. :yakyak: :redface:

Thank goodness my Whitworth Sniper Rifle is only .45 cal.

 

[leadball]

Hmmm...I read an article awhile back where some Democrats where thinking of dropping the Gun control platform from the party because gun control was a losing issue for them. I guess there are a few hold outs. The problem with the modern day democrat party is they think too much like western european socialists. Probably explains why they are not winning elections anymore, at least nationally.

 

[flaming canvas]

I think I know what they're talking about. At a recent gun show I attended, you could buy a rifle, like the one I saw in "Navy Seals", that the team sniper used. Now I believe in the 2nd Amendment rights, but why would anyone need a gun like that? :imo:

Need? Need has nothing to do with it whatsoever. Want is sufficient.

As Ben Franklin said "If we do not hang together we shall surely hang separately" . That's not necessarily the exact quote, but it is correct in spirit.

 

[flaming canvas]

Gentlemen, May I offer a brief lesson in Constitutional Law? The founding fathers gave us a federal government of limited and specifically enumerated powers. Let me emphasize this by stating it differently--regardless of whether we think a given proposal is good social policy or will make the world a better place or whatever, Congress has no power to make it law unless the constitution authorizes Congress to pass such legislation. Got that?
Now, go to your copy of the constitution (you do keep one handy, don't you) and look at the section on the national legislature--Article I. Note carefully the enumeration of the things Congress has power to do: Section 8. Read it a couple of times and then tell us where there is any grant of power to legislate what guns a citizen may possess?

If at first you don't secede, try try again.

Unfortunately, there is the "Necessary and Proper" clause that is used to get around that little detail. Clearly this particular bit of legisilation doesn't qualify on either account, but those who would be our masters use it to justify their continual encroachments on our liberties. The Anti-Federalists anticipated this abuse and forced the inclusion of the Bill of Rights in the Constitution before it could be ratified. The First and Second Amendments were specifically to allow the people to be the ultimate check on the runaway government that would inevitably emerge.

 

[PAlongrifle]

Mr. Slowpoke,
I didn't know that anyone was ever proven to have been guilty of such a charge? (I was kind of out of the loop at the time.) Was anyone actually charged or convicted of such a crime (pedophile) at Waco?
Best Wishes

Ah, Waco; the Democrat's idea of a church BBQ.

Nice little game the Feds played over there... kill the suspects along with those you are trying to save and then there is no need for a messy trial. These charges were made before, but the local law enforcement said that they never had enough evidence to even bring them in for questioning.

Anyone wanting more info on Waco, I highly suggest "Waco: The Rules of Engagement".

On another golden oldie from the Clinton years, remember that under Reno (pre-9/11) the list of possible terrorists included "religious fanatics". "Religious fanatics" included people who attend some sort of service on a consistant and frequent basis. I know lots of people who attend daily Mass... I guess that is frequent, eh?

 

[Stumpkiller]

Mean while there has only been TWO accounts of a black powder firearm EVER being used in a felony. Both were pistols, one single shot, one revolver.

Ooo! Ooo! I can name them both: John Wilkes Booth used a single shot to shoot President Lincoln in the back of the head, and Jack McCall used a revolver to shoot Wild Bill Hickock, also in the back of the head.

Hard to believe those were the only two felonies with blackpowder pistols. :hmm:

As Ben Franklin said "If we do not hang together we shall surely hang separately" . That's not necessarily the exact quote, but it is correct in spirit.

But who was it that said: "Moderation in all things."

 

[BLAHMAN]

Mr. Slowpoke,
I didn't know that anyone was ever proven to have been guilty of such a charge? (I was kind of out of the loop at the time.) Was anyone actually charged or convicted of such a crime (pedophile) at Waco?
Best Wishes

Ah, Waco; the Democrat's idea of a church BBQ.

Nice little game the Feds played over there... kill the suspects along with those you are trying to save and then there is no need for a messy trial. These charges were made before, but the local law enforcement said that they never had enough evidence to even bring them in for questioning.

Anyone wanting more info on Waco, I highly suggest "Waco: The Rules of Engagement".

On another golden oldie from the Clinton years, remember that under Reno (pre-9/11) the list of possible terrorists included "religious fanatics". "Religious fanatics" included people who attend some sort of service on a consistant and frequent basis. I know lots of people who attend daily Mass... I guess that is frequent, eh?

Yikes! :: You mean I could burn in my house just fer goin' ta church? Dang! I better tell the wife I gotta sleep in real late on Sundays!

 

[scott k]

Lets not forget that the same people who made up the assault weapons ban classified a Rugar 10-22 as a assault weapon. :shocking: Their still trying for any kind of ban that can get through.
Chip away chip away.
:imo:I have as much use for a 10-22 as a 50 bmg. But thats just me.
Lehigh..