ATF to accept public comments prior to outlawing shotguns

[special-k]

This ought to get your attention.

http://www.greeleygazette.com/press/?p=9223

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms is taking a rare step of allowing public comments prior to issuing a decision on a study that could result in outlawing certain types of shotguns currently available to citizens.

 The ATF completed a study regarding the importability of certain shotguns. The basis for a possible ban is based on a loosely defined ?Sporting Purpose? test. Using the vague definition almost all pump-action and semi-automatic shotguns could be banned as they are all capable of accepting a magazine, box or tube capable of holding more than 5 rounds. Other characteristics determined to be ?military? by the ATF can also be used as a basis for a ban.

 Ironically, many shotguns with ?military? features are currently being used in shooting competitions held by the USPSA, IDPA and IPSC. The rules could also result in obscure regulations where an individual would be unsure if he is violating them or not.

 Dudley Brown, Executive Director of Rocky Mountain Gun Owners, said if the ATF succeeds with the banning of tactical shotguns it ?will be the most dangerous interpretation of the 1968 Gun Control Act ever envisioned and will outlaw thousands of perfectly legitimate home defense shotguns.?

 The ATF is currently allowing public comments on the study until the end of the month. Those wishing to express concerns about the study can send an email to shotgunstudy@atf.gov

[Alex1992]

Yeah I got a comment shove it up your ass ATF  [img]http://www.smileydesign.n

[thatGuy]

Anyone know where a guy could get a couple of cases of Saigas cheap?

[RS762]

I know they are getting this message in some data syphon somewhere so...
FUCK THE ATF.  [img]http://www.smileydesign.n

[v0dka]

I thought this was already over and done with and that we won? 

[rah45]

I have typed this and cannot decide whether to email it to the ATF or not....

The Second Amendment of the United States has never been repealed. "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." To anyone who has even briefly studied the writings of the Founders' generation, the militia consisted of all able-bodied males in the citizenry capable of bearing arms towards the goal of defending their communities, towns, and colonies/ states. This meant that military-style firearms had to be possessed by the citizenry. Furthermore, as writings of several prominent Americans indicates, the right to bear arms was also considered an individual right, since every human possesses the gift of life, and life is worth defending. Every person, according to the writings of those men, should enjoy the ability to carry firearms to defend themselves. They did not make exceptions to cannon or certain small arms. In fact, there were some private citizens who did own such extravagant weapons such as cannon. Also, since the fledgling American government had emerged only after fighting a war against her former central government, the Second Amendment doubled as a provision for the people to be able to defend themselves against any tyrannical government force. The people then, now and in the future are not able to do such a thing without weapons technology equal to those forces. The Second Amendment was written for this sole purpose: to provide a recognized, undeniable, lawful ability of the citizenry to protect itself from harmful individuals, and enemies both foreign and domestic, including military and police forces.

With such a cultural background to the Constitutional Convention, any person who believes that the Second Amendment includes anything less than all conventional arms available to the citizenry, is either deliberately acting against the Constitution, or is incapable of viewing the Constitution in the context in which it was originally written and therefore should have no part in influencing U.S. law. Until the Second Amendment is either amended or made obsolete by another amendment to the Constitution or through a Constitutional Convention, the only options within the rule of U.S. law that legally permit the Second Amendment to be altered in any fashion, you as agents of the federal government are obligated to enforce it as written. You have taken oaths to uphold and defend the Constitution - you are NOT to revise it. We, the citizens of these united states, have never consented to give you this power, and you work for us. To support any measure of restriction of conventional arms against the American citizenry, is to willingly become an enemy of the very constitution that you swore an oath to uphold. I will say it again: you are not authorized by the U.S. Constitution to interpret or make constitutional law. You may only uphold or defend it.

Sincerely,

A Citizen of these united states.

[special-k]

I have typed this and cannot decide whether to email it to the ATF or not..........

I double-dog-dare ya'. 

[Outonowhere]

I like it and think it should be mass emailed to the bastards.

[Outonowhere]

was going to post this on facebook but thought I would do it here first.  /Rant

I thought this stupid little en devour had been moth balled but apparently not.  This from the same agency that routinely confiscates toy guns claiming they are easily convertible into evil "machine guns".  The same agency whose own "expert" doesn't even know how to properly insert an M4 mag!  What part of "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" is so damn hard for these people to understand?  When will people stop giving up their rights?  THE ONLY PERSON THAT CAN PROTECT YOUR LIFE IS YOU!

Consider this.  The militia was set up as the back up when peace officers were in over their heads.  How many people in the LA area on February 28th, 1997 were hunters or legally owned evil "military" style weapons?  What if, instead of the police scrambling to find any and every rifle they could find to take down the North Hollywood shooters they had a different approach.  What if they had an active militia that they trained with and could call upon at a moments notice?  What if one "good ole boy" with a scoped deer rifle had been able to take out or at least pin down the shooters long enough to evac some of the more serious casualties? 

Serious question time.  Departments want to prevent drug use so they create anti-drug outreach programs.  Same against bullying, gang violence and road safety.  So why the hell is it that when it come to guns its "They aren't trained as well as we are so they shouldn't have them"? (I know no-LEO competition shooters that train MORE than most LEO's out there and are damn good at it.) Why not create outreach programs that acquaint people with proper firearms handling and safe use.  Why not work with the people to create a safer society, not where there is a cop on every street corner, but where crime drops because the criminals are afraid that their victim may be carrying?  More responsible/trained gun carriers = more lives saved.  Less/NO guns carried = free run hunting ground for criminals to do their worst and deal with the consequences later.  But how many lives will they take in the mean time?

The constitution is not just some God **** piece of paper that is worthless dribble written by old men who knew nothing about what they were writing and that it doesn't apply today.  The constitution and Bill of Rights are relevant even more so today than back then.  We must all, either take the oath for the first time, or reaffirm our oaths to the defense and support of the constitution.

/end rant

[v0dka]

HEY MORONS
I was right look at the date the article was posted

Apr 18, 2011

I can't find that article that says that they ended up being more lax about imports. I swear this was already on here.