What Will A Post-Ban Rifle/Shotgun Arsenal Look Like?

Courtesy Chris Dumm for The Truth About Guns

Something wicked this way comes. We all know some kind of new gun control is likely to happen, and it may be a political catastrophe. If we’re lucky, we might escape the coming anti-gun apocalypse by the skin of our teeth and the resolve of pro-gun stalwarts in the House of Representatives . . .

But if ARs and normal-capacity handgun magazines are banned or become non-transferable relics, which remaining long guns will be the most useful and effective for home and personal defense? What will we be buying in five years, or at least until/unless any pending AWB is repealed or overturned? This isn’t the time to surrender, but it’s time for some serious contingency planning: any field commander must have a plan for how to respond if the enemy turns his flank.

Feinstein, Biden, Schumer and Obama seem to have modern sporting rifles and normal-capacity magazines in their crosshairs at the moment. For the sake of argument, this article assumes that they’ll be outlawed. Not subject to a ‘manufacturing and new sales’ ban, not ‘subject to NFA registration’ or ‘may be possessed but not transferred.’ I mean gone. Prohibited. Contraband. Vanished. I pray it never comes to this, but we need to think about it.

Note: Please don’t fill the comment section with plans for boating accidents and buried weapon caches in the New Mexico mountains: nothing you say on the Internet is ever anonymous and nothing is ever erased. If those be your plans, please don’t advertise them here and please don’t provide the government with free evidence against you.

For myself, I respect our imperfect system of government so I plan to do my fighting in the legislature and in the press and at the ballot box. You’re free to choose otherwise, but I don’t plan on going to prison for the sake of a lump of metal and plastic.

Plan For The Worst, And Purchase Accordingly

Some low-capacity autoloaders, or those with internal magazines like the M1 Garands and SKS might make it through unscathed. If you have one (or can find one) that’s great, but I wouldn’t count on any modern rifle with a detachable box magazine getting out alive. There will be a few named exceptions like the Remington 740 series and the (hunting-style) Browning Automatic Rifle, which have never been made in great numbers and for which high-capacity magazines are either rare or nonexistent. I don’t think the straight wooden stocks of the M1A and Mini-14 will put them on the right side of any new law as it did in 1994, however.

In the world of rifles and shotguns, this leaves us with single-shots and manually-operated repeaters: Bolt-actions, lever-actions and pumps.

Bolt-Action Rifles

Courtesy Chris Dumm for The Truth About Guns

Bolt-actions aren’t terribly relevant for home or personal defense unless you live in a really wide-open neighborhood, like central Wyoming. And where all the bad guys advertise their intentions from hundreds of yards away. And then hold really still.

If your only choice is a bolt-action rifle, choose one with as short a barrel and as large a magazine capacity as you can find. Lee-Enfields or Swiss Schmitt-Rubin carbines would be the best options among these poor choices, but their slow rate of fire and overpowered cartridges will put you at a serious disadvantage compared to other long guns.

I don’t suggest that bolt-action rifles will have no value in a TEOTWAWKI scenario, but that’s not what we’re talking about here so we’ll move on.

Pump-Action Rifles

Courtesy Taurus USA

Pump-action rifles are very quick to operate, just like their smoothbore shotgun cousins, but they’ve never been very popular and they’ve never been manufactured in great numbers. They’re likely to become even more scarce in this current political climate, so if you’ve got your eye on a Taurus Thunderbolt like this one you’d best pull the trigger right quick.

Box-fed pump actions like Remington Model 760s are made in a range of powerful rifle calibers, but they only hold 4 or 5 rounds. I used to have a lightweight 760 in .35 Whelen, which handled very quickly but kicked like the elephant rifle it almost was.  Tube-feeders like this 14+1 round Thunderbolt in .45 Long Colt can actually exceed an M1 Garand or SKS in their ability to sling lead downrange wholesale-style. Fortunately they’re not all quite as long as the one pictured here.

Lever-Action Rifles

In the absence of semi-automatic rifles, lever-action rifles and carbines offer perhaps the best combination of handling, speed, firepower, and ready availability for defensive uses. Those in rifle calibers are good; those in pistol calibers are even better.

.30-30 lever guns are light, compact, powerful, accurate and affordable to shoot. With a few carefully-chosen accessories like the XS Lever Rail shown here, you can turn one into a Cowboy Assault Rifle like Ryan did. Just let’s don’t call it that, lest Dianne Feinstein soil her dainties and try to ban them, too.

Pistol-caliber lever guns, when you can find them, are even better than rifle-caliber models: they’re smaller and lighter, with less recoil and more magazine capacity.

At realistic defensive ranges from the muzzle out to 50 yards, their pistol cartridges get the job done on medium-sized targets: the big .44 Magnum and .45 Long Colt knock down game like the hammer of Thor himself, and even the smaller .357 Magnum punches almost as hard as a .30-30.

In your author’s humble opinion, these pistol-caliber lever guns are the most practical manually-operated defensive and survival carbines available. They have one significant drawback, however, in that they’re scarce as hen’s teeth right now. Marlin used to dominate this market segment, but production has been interrupted since their assimilation by The Freedom Group.

Rossi makes a slightly lower-priced alternative to the all-but deceased Marlin, and Henry makes their breathtakingly lovely brass-framed Big Boy, but you’ve got to keep your eyes open and move quickly when you find one in stock. At the time of writing, there were no Rossi or Marlin pistol-caliber carbines to be found anywhere, and only a few Henrys. The Henry factory in Bayonne, NJ was clobbered by Hurricane Sandy, and they’re just now getting their production line sorted out again. (Click here for their press release.)  That’s actually pretty remarkable, considering that many parts of Sandy-battered NY and NJ are still wastelands.

Note: the Henry Big Boy is accurate and stunningly gorgeous, but you can only load it by removing the magazine tube plunger and dropping in rounds one by one. This makes it rather less practical for defensive uses, but if you kept one short-loaded in the gun safe those 8 or 9 rounds would probably see you through any home DGU without the need to reload. 8 or 9 rounds isn’t much compared to an AR, but it’s as much as any maneuverable shotgun can hold.

Semi-Automatic Shotguns

Shotguns in general have several defensive advantages over rifles and carbines:

  • They’re available everywhere: Wal-Mart, Dick’s, Big 5, etc
  • Pump guns are cheaper than remaindered Steven King paperbacks. $250 and a few boxes of buckshot will set you up right.
  • They’re cheap to shoot: practice ammo costs only 20 cents a round.
  • They’re extremely reliable (especially pumps) and they’re all simple to use.
  • Any center-mass buckshot hit is likely to cause instant incapacitation, and rapid death.
  • Use of smaller #4 buckshot will minimize overpenetration through drywall and doors without sacrificing stopping power.

Hunting-style semi-automatic shotguns will probably survive any impending AWB, and they have much to recommend them as long as they’ve got a useful magazine capacity of 4+1 or 5+1 rounds. If a hunting shotgun is all you can find, buy a spare 18″ or 20″ barrel to make it more maneuverable. Preferably with interchangeable choke tubes.

Shotguns are fantastic for home defense, and semi-autos are even better. But not their price: you won’t touch a good one for less than 3x the price of a solid pump. Benelli, FN, Remington and Mossberg autoloaders are the industry standards but none of them are cheap.

Pump-Action Shotguns

Courtesy Chris Dumm for The Truth About Guns

For years considered the ne plus ultra of defensive civilian and police firepower, the pump-action shotgun’s reputation for terminally decisive combat power is well-deserved. I won’t hazard a guess as to which pump shotgun features might be banned in any DiFi/Obama AWB, but I’d bet that they’re all pretty safe. Except, possibly,’evil’ features like the pistol grip and magazine extension shown above.

Courtesy Chris Dumm for The Truth About GunsLuckily, all it takes is a few minutes with a screwdriver to turn a panty-soiling ‘Assault Shotgun’ into a boring-looking ‘Grandpa’s Hunting Shotgun’ like this one. Either of these shotguns will serve perfectly as the ‘big gun’ that you’ll use your handgun to fight your way to in a gunfight, and either of them is likely to decide the conflict quickly in your favor once you reach it.

A standard pump-action shotgun will have a 4+1 or 5+1 round magazine capacity if you use 2 3/4″ shells like you should, and you can cheaply increase your firepower with a buttstock shell carrier. A sidesaddle shell carrier (or magazine tube extension) is even better, but not quite as cheap.

Pump-action shotguns have such a long history with American sportsmen (and such limited use among spree killers) that they’ll probably be among the last guns to face serious restrictions. As with autoloading shotguns, make sure your defense shotgun has a manageable barrel length of 20″ or less.

Double-Barrel Shotguns

Double-barrel shotguns are also marginally viable as defensive weapons, and you probably didn’t know that the NYPD used them until 2002. They’re not useless, but they’re much less practical and rather more expensive than a decent pump shotgun.

Stoeger’s ‘Double Defense‘ shotguns have short barrels and accessory rails, which make them marginally more practical than a presentation-grade Beretta or Holland & Holland. Their automatic safeties are a PITA, however, and their lack of automatic ejectors makes your (already frequent) reloads even slower.

Other Shotguns

Single-shot shotguns are all but useless for defensive purposes, and bolt-action shotguns have but a single purpose in life: selling them for $50 at misguided gun-buyback programs. Lever-action shotguns are rare, expensive, and much less practical than they seem at first glance. Save them for their collector value, or for cowboy action shooting.

What’s It All About, Alfie?

We shouldn’t have to be thinking about this, but we do. Dianne Feinstein and company are gleefully dancing in the blood of dead children, thrilled at the chance to trot out the gun-control schemes they’ve been working on for years while they waited for a tragedy horrific enough to justify them.

But if Feinstein wins this round, we’ll still have homes and families to protect. And we’ll  have to do our best with the long guns still available.

101 Responses to What Will A Post-Ban Rifle/Shotgun Arsenal Look Like?

  1. avatarJB says:

    Anyone hear about the reporters who got caught making fun of gun owners and the NRA on camera? I guess they didn’t realize that the camera was live already.

    http://www.easybakegunclub.com/news/2051/Reporters-ridicule-the-NRA%3B-Dont-realize-mic-is-on.html

    Pissed me off to no end.

  2. avatarRobert Farago says:

    I went into the LGS to buy an AR. Bought a Benelli M4 at a serious discount instead.

  3. avatarrossi says:

    it is too early to ask this question. We won’t know – until the dust settles after the fact – if any amendments to the bill will allow grandfathering

  4. avatarGS650G says:

    The confiscation rules are going to be very interesting. I guess we’ll have to wait to read the bill to find out what’s in it. There is the pesky problem of a Republican House and a SCOTUS which is still 5-4 in favor of gun rights so that leaves EO for BO to use.

    • avatarsancahnim says:

      My understanding based upon the Difi post earlier is there would in fact be grandfathering. Even Difi knows that confiscation would not work. I mean it could be done, but at what price. Now I am not screaming all blood in the streets civil war and such, but seriously. Chris might go and hand hi guns back, but I think there are many who won’t.
      Then again there is so much we don’t know. Hopefully this will get pushed aside by other things, and when it comes up the house can simply block it and we can move on.

  5. avatarstateisevil says:

    I still think the gun controllers are going to be sorely disappointed. The Republicans in the House have absolutely nothing to gain by voting for an AWB. Some Democrats will join them. I just don’t see it. Demand for guns just keeps increasing and if pro gun groups and constituents keep the heat on an AWB won’t be coming our way.

    • avatarJon says:

      This.

      Why do guns rights supporters keep talking like giving up more of our rights in the New Year is a foregone conclusion? I really don’t get it.

      Lean on your legislators, and let’s resolve to bury any bill coming down the pipe that infringes upon the Second Amendment.

      • avatarJon R. says:

        If they could introduce a bill right this very second, it would likely pass because of all the bloody shirt waiving happening on the news, and it seems to be all that is on peoples minds right now besides Christmas shopping.

        In November we lost the battle and now were losing the war, with the senate being mostly dems and Obama at the steering wheel for the next four years, its just a matter of time till a permanent AWB. I don’t know what you have to optimistic about, their not going to give this one up that easily, it’s too convenient, and the timing couldn’t be more perfect. Better join and support the NRA, GOA, and the SAF, or start planing on selling your guns while you can before they become illegal.

  6. avatarJosh says:

    I’ve been working under the assumption that revolvers will survive, so my hunting revolvers can do double duty in a defensive role and could be carried if necessary. I’ve also had a Remington autoloader around for years that might find itself used in a more prominent role in my household. If I had to purchase something new, I’d definitely gravitate toward a Henry lever action in .44 mag, I was glad to see that was on your list. Anything that is designed for hunting will probably be the last thing banned, and I’m fortunate to live in a state where hunting is still a very strong tradition.

    My backup plan is to purchase a dredger and scour the lakes where all these boating accidents keep happening. I bet I could stockpile an arsenal that way based on the comments I keep hearing from people.

  7. avatarCoyote Gray says:

    Yah,

    I would be hard pressed to believe that AR’s are going to be banned completely and subject to some sort of confiscation doctrine. No more sales…likely…no transferring…probably…but confiscation…unaffordable. This country can’t fund the gun laws on the books now. And you think they are going to be able to track, sort, and then actively go after millions of guns?

  8. avatarEd Warden says:

    I still believe that an AWB will be here, we have to many COWARDS IN BOTH HOUSES AND IN STATE AND LOCAL GOVTS TO STOP THIS UNCONSTITUTIONAL ASSAULT ON THE 2A. Those that refuse to stand up for their rights should not have them to begin with. Those that say they will not go to jail for a piece of metal and plastic are crazy. That’s not the point, the point is stand up for the constitution and don’t give in.

  9. avatarSwarf says:

    I sure do love my marlin lever in .357.

    I can’t see confiscation working without massive bloodshed. And besides, who’s going to do it; the cops? The National guard? Maybe i’m being naive and our fellow citizens will turn on us at the snap of a finger, but most of the people in those orginazations believe strongly in a citizens’ right to bear arms.

    Hell, they’re all citizens, too. Who’s going to take away their guns?

    • avatarRalph says:

      “I can hire one-half of the working class to kill the other half.”

      If Jay Gould could do it, so can the government. There will be no shortage of traitors who will be very happy to take away your guns — and you, too — for a few pieces of silver.

      • avatarSwarf says:

        Yeah, I guess so.

        I guess I can see creating a “them” to go after. Appeal to people’s base emotions.

        Hell, there are probably plenty of folks right here on this board who would be more than happy to take away my guns because I am socially liberal.

      • avatarRay says:

        Yeah, but Jay Gould couldn’t really do that.

    • avatarRon says:

      Hi Swarf,
      “…………..who’s going to do it;the cops? The national guard?………Our fellow citizens…………..”
      Answere: None of the above.

      The future is the United Nations and the United Nations Security Council is their muscle.
      But it won’t happen in the near future, all of the pieces are not yet in place.

      • avatarRyan says:

        This. If there ever were to be full confiscation, it would take the UN. That would certainly lead to massive bloodshed. Some police in liberal cities where guns are already restricted might do it. Me, nor no one I work with in our area would. Ignoring that I’m as big of a 2A supporter as anyone else here, if I wasn’t, it’d be suicide to go door to door. If you start to see blue helmets, watch out.

    • avatarsancahnim says:

      I am going to save up for a Henry big boy. those guns are simply stunning, practicality or not, this would be a just because…

  10. avatarNate says:

    I hope my scary, stock 10/22 makes the cut. If there is a magazine ban, I hope it is more sensible one than AWB 94. Like nothing with more than 50 rounds or something… (sorry to all you 31+ rounders)

  11. avatarDrewN says:

    I can’t (well, I can, but I’m not going to) imagine a scenario where the ban would include Garands and carbines. They wouldn’t mess with the CMP surely? M1A’s might be thrown under the bus, but at least there’s a chance of just making them fixed mag and using stripper clips. As for Mini’s, maybe Bill Ruger’s shameless rolling over in ’94 will help Ruger’s cause somehow. As far as 10/22′s go, might as well ban freaking water, they have to be about the most widely owned firearms ever.

    • avatarFred says:

      Garands and Carbines are already banned here in the Republik of New Jersey. Who says they can’t?

      I always wanted a pistol caliber lever gun, tho I want one with a ‘standard’ loading gate on the side. Think about it as a defensive weapon; you can fire two shots, keep it trained downrange, and thumb in two more rounds. You can always be ‘topped up’. I always think about that with magazine fed weapons. I could get off a half dozen rounds from my 30-30 faster than someone with two rounds left in his AR-15 magazine. And if his spare ammo is loose in his pocket, as we say in Jersey, FAH-GET-ABOUT-IT.

  12. avatarAragorn says:

    I am not going to play guessing games when no one outside of the POTUS and Congress know what they plan to put on the table come Jan 2013. Throw in what some call News coverage in the US & things only get worse. Never in the history of the US have the news agencies been more of a one side or the other clusterf##k.

    As for a new AWB the handwriting was on the wall years ago and available to anyone that could stop for a minute and look.

  13. avatargoofball says:

    It hasn’t been discussed much, but the most likely effect of an AWB would IMHO be a halt in innovation on the commercial market. Grips, stocks, suppressors, optics, lights, bipods, magazines, etc. would all become subject to regulation. The Picatinny and Weaver rails would immediately make a gun “suspect”.

    The Heller decision will make it very difficult for the gun control lobby to totally ban or confiscate guns. Barring that level of control, they will attempt to make it very difficult to “upgrade” guns in any way. They do not want the public to have the same weapons as LE and military, so they will do everything they can to prevent it.

    Take California, for example. Accessories are regulated, and new gun models that are introduced elsewhere in the country are unavailable in California. Change the grips or the frame color or something else, and you instantly have a new model of gun that is not available to Californians without a lengthy approval process — a process that is designed to keep guns out of California.

    If a new AWB passes, that is the future that we face in the rest of the US.

  14. avatarGreg Camp says:

    Please don’t surrender to the rhetoric of the control freaks. An arsenal, properly speaking, is a government facility for the storage and repair of weapons.

    I’ve actually never felt the burning desire for an evil black rifle. Sure, I want one, and I certainly am opposed to any bans and even any restrictions on one, but I have a thing for old guns. If money is rattling around in my pocket, I’m more likely to get a Colt Single Action Army than an AR-15. (NB: I don’t want any new restrictions!)

    But I’ve read that the effect of the first Assault Weapons Ban was an increase in the popularity of .45s and pocket guns. If a ten round magazine is all you can buy, go with either the biggest rounds commonly available or the smallest gun that shoots 9mm or the like.

  15. avatarsurlycmd says:

    The question has been asked but I didn’t see an answer. What about creating a trust for your proposed banned weapons? Would a trust allow a person to legally transfer banned firearms to another person if they were listed as a member of the trust?

  16. avatarjwm says:

    I live in California, so what is this modern sporting rifle and concealed carry that you speak of? This was a point that I made numerous times during the run up to the election. What happens in California effects the rest of the nation. If you wish to protect your gun rights in Texas or Kansas you need to get proactive and protect the gun rights of California.

    Something that I’ve stated here before also. 99.99% percent of civilian self defense scenarios can be resolved with an old school police combo of the short shotgun and the .38 revolver.

    Having said all that I don’t believe the AWB is going anywhere. The federal courts and the supreme court have been ruling in our favor of late and any ban on guns in common usage is going to be a hard sell.

    • avatarsancahnim says:

      Well I have to ask, now the Leland Yee is pushing SB249 again what say you?
      My understanding is they are asking for things like in home safe storage inspection, yearly fees, lord knows what else, besides the bullet button ban, which had no grandfather clause and no buy back.

  17. avatarAharon says:

    Joe, great piece! Thanks.

    Agree 1,000% that people and myself included need to be careful of what we post and the searches we do on the Internet since everything digital in the modern police-nanny state is forever and could be used against us as unfair as that might be. Big brother and big sister are watching and recording even if just passively for now. It’s not just the Internet but also allegedly includes vacuuming up phone calls and emails and dumping the contents into government super computers for storage.

    I’ve suspected for a long time that sooner or later something would change with government cracking down on tactical-style products and semi-auto gun ownership rights for private citizens.

    My plans are to find a Marlin lever-action in .357/.38 and to do minimal accessorizing it into a ‘scout rifle’ that I can use for defense and survival hunting. One of the many reasons that I have chosen double-action revolvers the Ruger SP101 4” barrel in .357 and the Ruger LCR 2” barrel .357 snubbie was to match them up with the Marlin lever-action .357. I’ve written .357 yet my focus has been on accumulating various types of .38 special and .38 P+ ammo. The SP101 is my home go-to gun for an emergency. Personally, I find the handgun more practical for me than a long AR or shotgun to maneuver in the tight confines of a home with the awareness that there are neighbor homes near me so an AR is out of the question.

    Winchester offers what might be the fastest pump shotgun with their Super X Pump Defender. A similar version is available in a combo package that offers either a 28’ or 26” field barrel and an 18” camp or home defense barrel for about $400 (SXP Camp/Field Combo).

    • avatarAharon says:

      Err sorry, Chris that was a great piece.

      • avatarChris Dumm says:

        No sweat! Let’s reschedule for next Thusday or Friday?

        • avatarAlexander says:

          LearnAboutGuns,I think the anecdotal saurmmy is fantastic. Do you know if your saurmmy is more or less comprehensive than the monthly saurmmy produced by the NRA in its magazines?Regarding your view on education, I am Libertarian and feel education is possibly the most important issue out there. I find it amazing that the democratic party is beholden to a union that is arguably rotting the country from the core. It is incredible that Democrats are generally so complicit regarding support for a teachers union that fosters poor academic environments and results. A solid example of the road to hell being paved with good intentions. Therefore, unlike you, I have had a leaning toward the Republican party with its support for vouchers and resistance to unions generally.I believe handing education checks back to parents each year to spend where they choose (be it public, private, public across town) would quickly foster growth of the best schools with the best culture and teachers. Poor schools would wither away and bad teachers would not be hired by discriminating peers at quality schools. The best schools would reap the financial benefit to allow growth for construction, quality hiring, etc.At the same time I believe it is unfortunate that in the current system there is a 1st and 2nd class system of education. It is not legitimate to expect that everyone should go to college. Respect for trades and quality eduction in that area should also be widely available. The current system disenfranchises a large portion of students who are not offered a quality education outside the college track. ProChoice, ProPot, ProGun, ProLiberty

  18. avatarArmchair Command'oh says:

    Since 2003, the gun grabbers have offered the same “improved” AWB year after year, only to have it die at some point in the process. If you want an idea of what Feinstein’s bill will look like, you just need to look at their past failed attempts. I have flagged the new language that is particularly important. At the end, I’ll explain why.

    “A semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine, and that has–
    (i) a folding or telescoping stock;
    (ii) a threaded barrel;
    (iii) a pistol grip;
    (iv) a forward grip; or
    (v) a barrel shroud.” <————–

    "A semiautomatic pistol that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine, and has–
    (i) a second pistol grip;
    (ii) a threaded barrel;
    (iii) a barrel shroud; or
    (iv) the capacity to accept a detachable magazine at a location outside of the pistol grip."

    "A semiautomatic shotgun that has–
    (i) a folding or telescoping stock;
    (ii) a pistol grip;
    (iii) the ability to accept a detachable magazine; or
    (iv) a fixed magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds"

    "BARREL SHROUD- The term ‘barrel shroud’ means a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel of a firearm so that the shroud protects the user of the firearm from heat generated by the barrel, but does not include a slide that encloses the barrel, and does not include an extension of the stock along the bottom of the barrel which does not encircle or substantially encircle the barrel."

    This "Barrel Shroud" language knocks out any gun that has a separate forend and buttstock. We couldn't even use one of those ridiculous looking CA compliant stocks. Nothing other than a major redesign is going to save an AR, AK, or other modern sporting rifle. Even a 10/22 Takedown would fail this test! Good bye innovation in the design of new firearms. The real kicker is how they deal with the M1A, M1 Garand, M1 carbine, Mini-14, etc., which would otherwise comply with the above. They include a new classification:

    "A semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General. In making the determination, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any Federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event."

    Given that just about every firearm was originally designed for military or law enforcement use, that pretty much knocks out every other centerfire semi-auto out there. The key here is that it lets the ATF rule that a particular gun is an assault weapon on an ad hoc basis. What's more, they can skip the rule making process all together by just procuring the gun in question, thus triggering the automatic presumption (e.g. the DEA buys a 10/22 to silently to take out dogs before their next raid. 10/22 is now an assault weapon until the ATF decides to pass a rule saying otherwise).

    As an attorney, I must admit that Feinstein's staff did a good job drafting a bill that allows them to ban just about every semi-auto long gun they want. As a gun owner, I'm horrified.

    Source of the Bill's text: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/108/hr2038/text

    • avataruncommon_sense says:

      Note the wording of this language in Feinstein’s proposed “Assault Weapons” ban which defines forbidden firearms:
      “A semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm …”

      This language will make the bill null and void since it directly contradicts the 1939 Miller Supreme Court ruling that 2nd Amendment protection applies to firearms in common use in the military. That language will also contradict the 2008 Heller ruling that affirmed a right of citizens to have firearms in common use. Then we have the whole ex-post facto prohibition in the U.S. Constitution itself. And any attempts to implement executive orders or similar would be a de-facto ban and violate Miller and Heller as well.

      I don’t see how the feds can fly an assault weapon ban.

    • avatarGSL45 says:

      Oh, you mean a barrel shroud is not the “shoulder thing that goes up?”

      Just trying to inject some humor into an otherwise depressing analysis of the proposed law.

      As goofball posted above, an AW ban would put a stop to a lot of future development in firearms technology. It’s very likely that companies would not be able to justify development costs if it cannot be recouped through the lucrative civilian sales market. A blanket ban on all arms with no “sporting purpose” is just the provision to get that done.

      Of course, Feinstein has been and will continue to claim that she does not want to take your guns away, and she will have the list of over 900 existing firearms to back up that statement. As technically accurate that statement may be, it’s misleading at best. In typical Democrat fashion (there “is” no inappropriate relationship”) Feinstein relies upon a turn of phrase construed in a hyper-literal manner to deceptively mask her true intentions.

      Horrifying, indeed.

    • avatarRoberto says:

      Armchair Command’oh is right on point about this language. The U.S. military/federal procurement standard for inclusion under the ban seems to create a sliding scale ban that can be manipulated.

      Even if this Feinstein Bill language is watered down considerably on theoritical passage through the House of Representative – through whatever unholy alliance I cannot anticipate -it still seems like it could leave quite a bit of room for liberal interpretation by certian Agencies, particularly if guided by Executive Orders or Presidential Directives.

    • avatarYli says:

      As an individual who is from an eihtnc/religious group which predominantly votes and supports Democrats (I’m Jewish), I can’t understand why you’re still a registered Democrat and have expressed remorse that Democrats are completely uninterested in protecting your 2nd amendment rights. They don’t care about your rights and seem to have a generally negative view of the Constitution and the freedom of the people to chose, both well and poorly, the way they want to live their lives. I’ve also read a number of your “random tangents”, and though I enjoyed most of the ones I read, I found one particularly out of step with the others. You support well-funded public schools, but you are against unions. It s late and I’m too tired to write about this issue in detail, but I will provide you with these questions to contemplate: what major industries in American are both heavily unionized and globally competitive? Automotive manufacturing? Steel? Textiles? Education? The teachers’ unions are more interested in preserving their near monopoly in primary and secondary education and the results are evident. The US public school system lags behind most of the developed world and some parts of the non-developed world. Vouchers anyone?You seem like a nice thoughtful individual who has obviously decided to deviate from your peers in some very significant ways. Why not go all the way and become a Republican (albeit a libertarian one like myself) and leave the Democratic party to the socialists, unionists, terror apologists, and class/race baiters?

      • avatarRobt. says:

        First of all, the NEA is the poorest excuse for a Union that ever existed. Secondly, a majority of union members (at least in construction & manufacturing) are 2A folks and rethinking the Democrat BS. Many are actually republicans, either stealth or openly. A great friend of mine says: vote your paycheck and lobby your interests and hobbies. I vote the ISSUES. Dad was a republican, (more independent now) but I wen my own way, but always vote for freedom. Hard to vote for those DemoNIcrats these days… Yuk

  19. avatarIn Memphis says:

    My AR is on layaway with only a couple hundred more to go. A week before I pay it off Im going to order a Remington 870 and maybe just for the hell of it a Remington 1911R1. Wish I could have it paid off now but ban or no ban, I still have bills to pay.

  20. avatarIn Memphis says:

    Random off topic thought, if the AWB happens… how much does it cost to hire a lawyer with cahoonies big enough to go to SCOTUS? I mean there has to be enough of us that we can pitch in even $1 each, even wihout NRA backing. Im sure that we wouldnt all have to be present.

    We the People vs. The United States government (edit to add a lower case g, its not worthy of the big one lol)

    Am I being unrealistic?

  21. avatarSlappy says:

    Wednesday I traded in my Mini-14 on a CZ 527 carbine in .223. I contacted CZ USA and they confirmed that the rifle will gladly eat 5.56, so all the LC brass I picked up at the range with the intent to reload will not go to waste.

    Like others, I’m hoping my Garand does not get caught in the wide net!!

    Also, hoping that semi-auto hand guns don’t get classified as “assault weapons” or “military-style” weapons!!

  22. avatarDanC says:

    If the M1A doesn’t get an exemption (which I’m pretty sure it will), I think the Garand is a no-brainer here. It’s reliable, and accurate to distance.

    Yes, the 30-06 is intimidating with its Any Game in North America (TM) reputation (personally I prefer something bigger for Elk/Moose as an ethical matter).

    But, if you top it with a light, quick-opening bullet — e.g., 125 gr Nosler Ballistic Tip — the .30-06 is relatively light recoiling, and every bit as much a one-shot stopper as a 9 pellet load of 00 buck. With fewer over-penetration issues (14-15 inches in gel, vs the buck shot which goes 16-18). And if you’re really concerned about a “high-powered” rifle bullet indoors — top it with the 110 gr Hornady V-Max., which barely gives 10 inches penetration in gel.

    Plus, if an M1A-included ban comes to pass, you’ll see Springfield and 6 others making Garand clones in every caliber under the sun.

    • avatarPer says:

      Hey Leroy you don’t want to see eye to eye on every thing that I do or you would fall into the nut case category. For what ever it is worth I toaltly respect you even though you are an lawyer. For nine years of my life I was a rent collector in the black ghetto’s of Houston Texas and never once do I recollect one of my tenants refer to themselves as an Afro American, they did refer themselves to a lot of other things but not that. As far as victim goes I do have three bullet holes in me and one bullet residing next to my spine, the result of an attempted robbery. I was pronounced DOA at the hospital, but refused to succumb because their was just too many girls left that I hadn’t introduced my self to. I am reasonably handy with a gun, have owned a lot and shot a lot including some two legged snakes. The only thing that could have saved me from those two Honky hoods would have been a Taurus judge loaded with # 4 shot from waist high into the face until it was dry firing, they were only 6 feet away. A kevlar vest would have helped but they hadn’t been invented yet. All this debate about bullet size and penetration is kind of like Law, a lot of hot air. One of the three grazed my heart on the way to my lung and another went on a safari through my intestinal tract and I still managed to drive my self to the hospital 5 miles away with no blood to speak of left in me, so much for 38 specials. The judge is the only self defense weapon I want and I have gotten quite proficient firing it under my left arm three times with only a slight glance over my shoulder. I have yet to miss at 30 feet. I do reasonably well hitting the target while falling, but it does hurt cause I am old and stiff and not in the fun way. You seem like a fun dude to BS with, please come back anytime. You can’t hurt my feelings I don’t have any.

    • avatarShinta says:

      white folks here, and pleased to see the resonpses from law biding black american gun owners. (and to the gent from “new hamster” “howdy neighbor” from vermont.) i’m a conservative, and the author of this site and i may disagree on many points, but i firmly agree with the right of ANY law abiding citizen to own and carry a gun “for all lawful purposes”, as my former massachusetts non-resident pistol permit read. i’m particularly pleased with the circumstances of the “mcdonald vs. chicago” supreme court decision, and that a black plaintiff and judge were instrumental in the case and its conclusion, though i’d have been happier if the other four judges voting for gun rights had followed justice thomas’ thinking in his written opinion.

  23. avatarSmaj says:

    “…I don’t plan on going to prison for the sake of a lump of metal and plastic.” Tomorrow they take away your 2nd Amendment rights. The day after that it will be your 1st Amendment rights. This is all about the statists amassing unrestrained power. Enjoy the rest of your life on your knees.

    • I read up on the Heller decision. Among the rights that the left wing of the Supreme Court believed were collective: guns, powers reserved in the tenth amendment, and the all important freedom of speech.

      • avatarEwa says:

        Ari is way off. Gun rights acitvist are handicapping themselves by treating gun owning democrats as pariahs. By doing so, they are slamming the door of opportunity in their own faces, by cultivating relationships and and providing support we can encourage them to take on this fight. The old methods of appealing to the republican in everyone will not work anymore,this isn’t the 1990 s. If the democrats remove gun control from their platform it will be because of gun owning democrats, not because they woke up one day and suddenly recognized the moral authority of the republicans. I feel that people who share this attitude are the second biggest threat to my gun rights, behind the gun control advocates themselves. the national gun rights organizations are failing my generation by failing to capitalize on having an inside man in the democratic party or making arguments that non- republicans can relate to. Too often acitvist that get media attention act as if they think they are preaching to the choir. Democrat gun owners don’t speak up because they don’t have anyone backing them up.With proper support a solid movement can be born and nurtured, but then again, I’m sure they will sacrifice everything they believe in for this single issue, right? We have been fighting gun control for over forty years and I don’t want to fight for another forty. Is this a battle we want to pass on to our children?

  24. avatarRoss says:

    As Winston Churchill said Never, Never, Never give up. We as gun owners must be prepared to fight this on every level, if you’re not writing to your law makers right now, get off your ass and start today.

  25. avatartdiinva says:

    You are not going to be in a prolonged firefight in any sceanrio I can imagine. If I can’t disuade the attacker(s) with my Remington 11-87, a 308 bolt gun and a 1911 with multiple mags God does not want me to live.

    All you are doing is stoking a panic that will soak up all lever guns and revolvers just ARs.

  26. avatarEATENG says:

    Good article. In addition to prepping for the worst case scenario, please do not neglect to remind our representatives that gun right supporters are still around and in numbers aplenty.

  27. avatarJoe says:

    That is a pretty good pre-ban arsenal as well. An AR is not really a necessity. In a SHTF scenario you could use the right gun for the job to eliminate your adversary and take his AR. But yes, we should all be able to own one if desired.

    • avatarJon R. says:

      Neither is a Glock with 17 round magazines by that logic… are we turning into a bunch of Elmer Fudd’s? SHTF the AR-15 is my first choice, not grandpa’s .270 Winchester bolt gun. You can’t honestly believe you can effectively hold off 3 or more motivated attackers with anything less than a semi auto with at least 15 rounds, which is not a unreasonable scenario. Wyatt Earp I ain’t, and would never want to rely on a pump shotgun and a revolver if given a choice. I need a AR-15 and a 9mm pistol with 15+ rounds for my personal defense more than any of those firearms pictured, thank you very much.

      • avatarSaul Feldstein says:

        While your desire to remain uninfringed is laudable and correct, anybody who can’t defend themselves against 3 attackers with a 1911 or a pump shotgun probably deserves to be overwhelmed.

        I would feel comfortable against 3 attackers with a S&W Model 66.

        • avatarJon R. says:

          I’m just trying to be realistic of the capabilities of those firearms, and of myself. IMHO, in a dynamic situation with multiple motivated attackers, maybe one or more armed as well, a revolver, 1911, and SOME pump shotguns can leave a lot to be desired. It’s not a unrealistic scenario either, maybe rare, but in a riot situation, or in the aftermath of a hurricane with mass looting and lawlessness, there is a reasonable need for AR and AK style weapons for civilian self defense. Don’t get me wrong, I like revolvers, 1911′s, and pump shot guns, they just wouldn’t be my personal preferences in a dynamic defensive situation, and I would personally feel out gunned in a multiple (possibly armed) attacker situation armed with only the weapons pictured above.

      • avatartdiinva says:

        The only folks I can see coming at me where I would need an AR are a bunch Serbs I pissed off about fourteen years ago. They haven’t come looking for me yet. Funny thing is that all the Serbs I met have been pretty professional about it and don’t hold a grudge.

        So who is it you pissed off? The Zetas or the Sinolas?

        • avatarJon R. says:

          Well, if drug a group of cartel hit men did come for me, I would need more than a AR-15 and a Glock. What I saying is that AR-15′s… NOT M16′s or M4A1′s, are reasonable self defense weapons for many people and serve a purpose, and the fact that some “pro-gun” and “pro 2nd amendment” types are saying that you are willing to give them up is ridiculous. More and more of you guys are starting to sound like you have given up, and are turning into a bunch of OFWG hunters that only care about your shotguns and hunting rifles. It’s disturbing…

        • avatartdiinva says:

          I have no problem with semiautomatics but if you think that any conceivable DGU that you are going to be in is going to be a movie style firefight then you are living in a fantasy world. I don’t care what you’re packing if it’s not over in five rounds you’re probably dead. The threat we face as a private citizen is going to bug out after the first couple of shots if he engages at all if he sees your gun. One wonders if you ever bother reading the DGU of the day postings.

          And if I am going to use a semi it’s going to be an M-1A and not a one step above a 22wmr weapon like an AR-15.

        • avatarJon R. says:

          I’m not the paranoid type, but I accept the fact really bad situations can arrise. I own a AR-15, its unloaded and locked up, I’m not even close to considering it as day to day home defense weapon. But like I said, in the after math of a disaster, natural or other wise, that results in the police not being able to do a damn thing to help me, I would need a semi auto rifle that is accessible. I don’t think I am being delusional in the least, I’m trying to be realistic in the effectiveness of the weapons I have available to stop a threat, and my ability to use them to defend myself in a variety of realistic situations. When I hear a bump in the night I ain’t going for my AR, that’s a totally unreasonable response. But I personally don’t want to rely on a 5 shot .38 revolver for day to day protection either, I shouldn’t need more than that for 95% of DGU, I am more than aware of that. But to say that every single DGU is only going to require 5 shots, so I should just plan for that is naive. Every DGU situation is totally different, you never know whats going to happen or what it’s gonna be like. I’m not advocating 50 round mags in every handgun as being reasonable, I’m saying 10 rounds ain’t always going to be enough. I acknowledge I am not the best shot in world, and god forbid I would have to defend mine or my family’s life with a gun, it will probably take at least 2 or 3 shots fired to just hit a moving target at close range. Then even if I hit the threat, does that naturalize it? Will I be cornered and have to lay down suppressive fire to escape the threat, and after doing that will I still have ammo left to defend myself? Does he have a friend who is armed coming for me?As a CHL holder I’ve had to think about these possibilities, and I came to the conclusion that 10 rounds isn’t always going to be enough to save my life, but I admit your YMMV and you may come to a different conclusion, and I totally respect that.

          btw, I’d prefer a M1-A too, but I can’t afford to buy one, or stockpile and shoot .308 on the regular. .223 is cheap and plentiful, and is the only reason I own an AR-15.

        • avatarRon says:

          Hi Jon,
          I have never known of any time in the history of gunfights when having too much ammo was a bad thing or having too little was not.
          I’ll bet none of the others have either.

        • avatarRon says:

          I forgot, about that AR15 thing.
          I used one back in the day for self defense.
          I used it because those who gave it to me told me I would.
          Besides they supplied all the ammo.
          By a strange coincidence it replaced a gun that chambered the .308 cartridge.
          I used it many times against multiple attackers who for some reason wanted me dead. They didn’t care much for my friends either.
          I don’t know if it was the best gun for the job. The people who gave it to me seem to think so.
          It did seem to do the job.
          I’m here now, typing ( keyboarding?) this.

  28. avatarSaul Feldstein says:

    Joe’s post above mine is correct, ARs and Glocks will be like firewood if TSHTF. Every cop car has a trunk full of them, and the ammo for them.

    In a post ban world the venerable SKS, Mossberg 500 and any decent .357 wheelgun or 1911 are top of my list for decent zombie killers that pass govt AWB approval.

  29. avatarRon says:

    I would be satisfied with the arsenal at the top of the page for defense of me and mine if need be.
    While not the most ideal for defense of liberty, any could be used to procure something that is.

  30. avatarLance says:

    If you must have a none semi auto rifle for defense the Marlin or Winchester 30-30 is my pic has some ok capacity 5rds and is fast to operate. And it worked for Cops and security from the 1890s-1950s.

    Im tired of the doom and gloom the NRA president on NRA news said they will oppose any DIFI or Obama gun ban. The House is in pro-gun hands we can beat this. Its so sick that many spend time buying rather than fighting this we can win RF and Nick drop the sky is falling routine.

    • avatarSD3 says:

      Sky is not falling, but this *is* the time to talk about it. Frankly, the further progressives over-reach, the more likely it will fail. But this is no time for pie-in-the-sky faith in our rhino, douchbag, conservatives.

  31. avatarOldLawman says:

    Mine will look just the way it does now, as I will not turn any in. I may not be able to purchase any more, but will never give any up.
    And neither should you.

    • avatarRobert says:

      That’s Right!

      If enough of us have this kind of attitude, and do everything we can,
      WE WILL WIN! The feds are quickly going bankrupt, and we need to
      have strong state laws in place that will allow our localities to function
      when this happens. Elect Freedom-Supporting Sheriffs and state and
      local politicians, and HOLD THEM TO IT!

  32. avatarSteve says:

    This article is well written, concise, informative, and very useful.

    I hate it. It smacks of capitulation to tyranny. It implies compliance is nominal.

    I will NOT obey.

  33. avatarSD3 says:

    Ruger gunsight scout is looking pretty good now.

  34. avatarDavid-p says:

    Confiscation of those already owned is out. Difi has already said that her ban would be proactive not retroactive. When you have the most gun hating, control freak liberal stating that she can’t confiscate don’t think it hasn’t crossed her mind, she just can’t get it done, at least not when she can’t find a way to pay for social security. “We can’t pay you so you can buy food after decades of work, but we can pay for a door to door collection agency”. Old people vote and it wouldn’t turn out well for difi’s group

  35. avatarDavid-p says:

    Confiscation of those already owned is out. Difi has already said that her ban would be proactive not retroactive. When you have the most gun hating, control freak liberal stating that she can’t confiscate don’t think it hasn’t crossed her mind, she just can’t get it done, at least not when she can’t find a way to pay for social security. “We can’t pay you so you can buy food after decades of work, but we can pay for a door to door collection agency”. Old people vote and it wouldn’t turn out well for difi’s group.

  36. avatarRay says:

    Yet another reason for Ruger to make 10 rd mags for the 77/357. And bring back the PC9 and 40 carbine. For a model that didn’t sell well the PC’s are almost impossible to find now. Also, Mossberg needs to put sights on the MVP. Sales would increase, particularly in this scenario.

  37. avatarStephen says:

    I like that my 1894C holds 9 and can be loaded without taking the gun out of action. Just slip one in when you have a moment. That is still not as good as a high-cap mag but possibly the next best thing.

  38. avatarLoïc says:

    I don’t like to be that guy but it’s actually “nec plus ultra”

  39. avatarbaygus says:

    In a world where what can make the difference to a politician’s voting record comes down to the power of one..

    Cheap boltie from a private sale, cheap scope from a mass manufacturer.

  40. avatarRussell says:

    It is not a hunk of plastic and metal. It is the only thing that stands between freedom and oppression. Imagine if the colonists had abided by an assault weapons ban that was proposed in 1775.

    Give me liberty or give me death.

  41. avatarRoberto says:

    This whole article is very on point and is one of the best, sober eyed looks at the implications from a potential semi-auto gun ban. Well done.

    ‘Contingency planning’ is a great way to frame the ongoing discussion, and something valuable to keep in mind when making purchases.

    While its reassuring that the lever-action, bolt-action, pump-action, and revolver classes should survive a Semi-Auto Ban, the scope of such a Ban is still a concern to any owner of modern firearms designed in the last century.

    There are alot of good comments here and a blending of several insights may reveal what the Administration and others have in mind: Perhaps a combination of semi-auto restrictive legislation, that may be watered-down on passage by Congress, but is then open to liberal interpretation by the Executive branch on enforcement.

    Whether through Executive Order, Presidential Directive, or Agency Rulemaking, it will be the Executive implementation of whatever version of a Bill that passes both houses of Congress that will really be where the rubber meets the road on de-facto Semi-Auto gun Bans.

    And it is the intersection of whatever first comes out of Congress before being liberally construed by the Executive, that will likely be where the future of a functional semi-auto ban may lie.

    While its debatable how likely a full-on-Feinstein level semi-auto ban is to make it through the Senate; it seems like it would be a pitched battle for that to pass the Republican House of Representatives. That is where lobby groups may have the best hopes of stopping the ban, or at least amending it to allow for some reasonable ownership of modern design firearms.

    In theory, with the GOP controling the House, the likelihood of a robust semi-auto ban passing seems unlikely initially… unless there is a cave in of political will.

    However, as the recent ‘compromise’ on taxes ( aka “Cave In” http://njtoday.net/2013/01/02/gop-caves-on-tax-hike/ ) shows, there may be more propensity for key segments of the GOP to cave in on big Semi-Auto Ban legislation than first expected.

    There are 200 Democrats in the House and 233 Republicans currently. While there is no doubt that a fair number of those Democrats may be moderates who are not ordinarily anti-gun, many of them may be be forced to Toe the Party Line if some Feinstein-esque Semi-Auto Ban emerges from the Senate. In fact, many Pro-Gun Democrats may already be turning. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/18/us/politics/pro-gun-democrats-signal-openness-to-limits.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

    In theory, if all 200 House Democrats voted for a Semi-Auto w/Detachable Magazine and “High-Capacity” Magazine Ban – then it might only take 18 Republicans Caving in for them to get the 218 House Votes needed to pass.

    18 is not very many votes. While there may be certain House procedural rules or practices that may require more than 18 votes from the majority party, if House Speaker Boehner is politically pressured, it could theoretically be brought to a floor vote. Even if there are 10 or 15 Pro-Gun Democrat holdouts, they may still only need 30 or so Republican Defectors to get the votes needed to pass some version of a semi-auto ban, which no doubt would be framed as a “Assault Weapons Ban” by most media.

    There may well be more than 30 House Republicans who are politically vulnerable enough to cave in on something called an “Assault Weapons Ban”. After all, 85 House Republicans just voted for a tax increase. http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/275101-senate-fiscal-cliff-deal-in-trouble-in-house

    Now, Im not here to debate about the merits or demerits of a tax increase on individuals earning over $400,000 a year. I don’t make anywhere near that much money, nor do most folks I know. But what is significant about the tax increase framed as the so-called Fiscal Cliff Deal, is that it shows what the media has called a “willingness to compromise” by House GOP leadership. Some compromises are an inevitable aspect of politics. But in the wake of the Connecticut tragedy, there will be considerable political pressure to compromise on gun control and pass some version of a broad based Semi-Auto and Magazine Ban.

    If 85 House Republicans were willing to compromise on increasing taxes, what else will they compromise on?

  42. avatarRobert K. Tompsett says:

    Where is it written, or is it even written, that I can not have a gun rack in the back window of my truck, 1950′s & 60′s style? (with a rifle or shot gun on it).

    A gun rack for the living room wall was always a popular high school wood shop project.

  43. avatarDenny says:

    Re; AWB and Gun Confiscation

    Politely said… The Gov does not need to send the N.G. and Cops out for our guns. They should hire 11 mil Illegals to do the weapons confiscation. One bullet at at time method, it would be the same end result, and self deportations would instantly begin, anchor babies and all. Illegal Immigration problem solved.

  44. avatarJohn says:

    My plan for several months has been to get a Marlin 1894C or Winchester 1873 in 357 Magnum as soon as a new one becomes available. Right now that looks like late 2013! I figure it would be the perfect companion for my Dan Wesson 357 with 6″ barrel which I have had for longer than I can remember. Until then, I will defend the homestead with my son’s new FNAR 308 while he is in Special Forces training.

  45. avatardavid mcdonald says:

    Those sobs could start a civil war. over my dead body. 1 shot ,1 kill when you can shoot.

  46. avatarRobert says:

    I Like this article! It seems to me that this is simply a thought exercise to maximize one’s arsenal. I am hoping to get a couple lever-guns, (C.A.R!) in common calibers that my Dad already has, for reloading and ammo sharing. The only thing we all find distasteful is the thought of turning in our guns, and no one wants that, but we also do not need to telegraph our moves like saying “I’ll bury them” or “I had a boating accident and barely swam back to shore, all was lost!”

    What will really happen is that everyone should play “musical chairs” and switch places, bugging IN at someone else’s place and not filing a change of address :D

    I do not see a reasonable gun seizure scenario of any kind, it is a logistical NIGHTMARE, and besides, Who would be willing to go after guns? NRA’s “Cold Dead Hands” slogan is embedded in the American mind, of both friend and foe of the gun. One possible thing I see is federal prisons being emptied, (that bankrupt state of our govt. again) and prisoners being put under contract to grab guns, and any other dirty work they need. 5 years then FREEDOM! They also get to pillage and plunder, and keep a percentage of weapons/gold/silver etc. Hope I’m wrong, but you never know…

  47. Pingback: Best Guns to Buy for the Post Gun Ban Apocalypse | PATRIOTS AND PAULIES (Politics & News)

  48. avatarDave says:

    Anti-gun people are scum

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.