Florida’s Semi-Auto Rifle Ban Amendment Gaining Ground With Republican Donor’s Support

florida semi-automatic weapons ban gun safety now

courtesy bawnfl.org

As we reported earlier, there is a push to pass an “assault weapons” ban in Florida via a ballot initiative to amend the state constitution. This is being spearheaded by Ban Assault Weapons NOW (BAWN), a bipartisan group of gun-grabbers made up of Republican and Democrat authoritarians who want to see law-abiding Floridians disarmed.

Now their effort is gaining political ground and financial support.

Republican Party big wig donor Al Hoffman has joined the fray. After Parkland, he announced that he wouldn’t support any Republican candidate unless they back gun control. Republican officials like Rep. Brian Mast folded like a cheap suit.

Now Hoffman is throwing his money behind BAWN’s efforts.

As reported by The Atlantic;

BAWN has partnered with prominent Republican donor Al Hoffman and his gun control advocacy organization, Americans for Gun Safety Now!, which is made up almost entirely of Republicans who support an assault weapons ban. They have now formed a coalition, Do Something Florida! Under their division of labor, BAWN will handle the gathering of petition signatures needed to get on the ballot, and Americans for Gun Safety Now! will direct an education and advocacy campaign arguing the need for an assault weapons ban.

Here’s Americans for Gun Safety Now! list of Republican elected officials and major supporters.

florida semi-automatic weapons ban gun safety now

courtesy mericansforgunsafetynow.com

If you click here, you can see their press release announcing that they’re joining BAWN to go after semi-automatic firearms in Florida. They’re dead-set on getting the required signatures needed to put this on the 2020 ballot.

Gail Schwartz collecting signatures on January 19th, 2019. (Gail Schwartz Twitter Account)

Today, BAWN handed 200 petitions to the Broward County Board of Elections and launched a press conference to push their efforts. David Hogg and March for Our Lives  were there, too.

From sun-sentinel.com:

Parkland shooting survivor and voting activist David Hogg and Gail Schwartz, whose 14-year-old nephew Alex Schachter was one of the 17 people murdered at the Parkland school on Feb. 14, 2018, spoke outside of the downtown Fort Lauderdale elections office.

Also present were Debbi Hixon, whose husband Chris Hixon was the school’s athletic director, and Mitch and Annika Dworet, parents of Nicholas Dworet, 17. Hixon, the educator, and Dworet, the student, were also killed that day.

“As Americans and Floridians we can come together to say that gun violence is not going to happen in the Sunshine State,” Hogg said. “Gun violence is a preventable issue. … The fact of the matter is, if you are using an assault weapon … you are hunting someone. You are not defending yourself.”

David Hogg – TwitterBAWN isn’t alone in their quest. Members of Michael Bloomberg’s Moms Demand Action visited Tallahassee last week where close to five hundred of the red-shirted gun grabbers scoured the halls of the capital, pushing their gun control agenda.

Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action, said roughly twice as many members of the organization showed up in Tallahassee for the advocacy day today than came to Florida’s capitol for the event in 2018.

They’re throwing their weight behind BAWN’s goal too. And don’t forget that BAWN has members in Florida’s government as well. Fred Guttenburg was hired by Agriculture & Consumer Services Commissioner, Nikki Fried to be part of her transitional team as she takes over the agency that handles Florida’s concealed weapons permits.

2020 is shaping up to be a hard fight for Florida gun owners. The gun-grabbers have bipartisan support. Senate President Bill Galvano (R) wrote the gun control bill that was signed into law by Governor Rick Scott last year and he took $200,000 from Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety.

The House isn’t any better since House Speaker Jose Oliva gave Galvano’s SB 7026 a standing ovation when it passed last year and he’s doing much the same.

With President Trump on the 2020 ballot, Democrats will put every effort to get their voters to the polls. The 2018 midterms saw every ballot initiative pass the 60% threshold except for the one that would actually benefit home owners with an expansion in property tax breaks. Fasten your seat belts.

comments

  1. avatar tdiinva says:

    I doubt this one will. I am sure a lot of fun owners voted for the ones that passed.

    1. avatar rad man says:

      Apparently we’re all “hunting someone”. And here I thought my ARs were defensive weapons.

      1. avatar Ryan Casler says:

        No matter what kind of gun your own it is a defensive weapon and a hunting weapon.

        You are an American you have the right to bear arms no one has the right to take that away from you and if anybody tried to take that away from you I hope that all you Americans are like me I will not stand for it and I will never hand my guns over they will have to kill me cuz I will fight for my rights because that’s the reason why we were given our constitution Henry Constitution consists of more than just start second amendment but you take my guns away come try it because I am one American that will fight for my rights I will not sit back like a fucking retard and hand my guns over and you better not either.

        these people that are trying to do this shit to us or just as sick as the people that do mass shootings take the fucking guns away from us does not stop the criminal we are not the criminal we are the protectors of our country the Constitution and that’s what our military families have fought for in the past this for our freedoms fuck these communists motherfukers if it comes down to them trying to take our weapons we all stand up and fucking fight life or death.

        My rights and my freedom are more important to me than fucking live it and it would be to you too and the values of your family.

    2. avatar frank speak says:

      banning sales is one thing…but banning possession is a bridge too far…and invites rejection, non-compliance and ultimately….court action…..

      1. avatar RedFox1 says:

        No it’s not. It’s the same thing. It’s bad. It’s wrong. It’s shameful. And I hope to God it does not pass.

      2. avatar Ryan Casler says:

        Fuck the courts come try to take my gun or guns I don’t need no court to tell me what I can and can’t have it’s my Constitution it’s your Constitution it’s all of ours Constitution second amendment and every amendment we are the protectors of our country we are the protectors of our Constitution that our founding fathers of gaping us you stand up for your rights they try to take your guns we all come together and they’ll get the bullets first life or death we are not the criminals these people that are trying to take our guns are just as sick as the fucking people that do mass shootings and those criminals no matter what the law it will never go away but nobody will ever take my gun Court Or no Court.

        These assholes work for us we the people we pay them we do not pay them to infringe on our constitution they need to be removed they need to be put in jail anybody in this country that folds and turns in your guns if a little like that passes is no American.

  2. avatar Marcus says:

    Yea that’s a NoGo in the Gunshine state.

    1. avatar cgray says:

      Yeah(with an “h”), it will get at least 60% of the vote.

      1. avatar Gadsden says:

        Indeed. It concerned me greatly last time around where every single referendum passed. I believe there is a psychological aspect behind that, in that any referendum that comes down to a yes/no decision, people automatically are more inclined to vote yes. It’s an absolute disgraceful method of amending the states constitution. Flies in the face of the concept of a republic.

        1. avatar Big Bill says:

          IMO, it’s not an inclination to vote yes; instead, people are being pressured to vote with their hearts instead of with their heads.
          Emotion vs logic and reason. In the short term, emotions win out. Bringing up the people shot at Stoneman is nothing other than dancing in the blood of the victims, and, emotionally, it’s an extremely strong argument. Logically, it’s crap, though. It’s akin to banning cars because someone decided to run a red light and killed a toddler crossing the street with his mom. Yes, be angry with the driver for running the light, but banning cars because of that is just stupid.

  3. avatar TexTed says:

    Maybe we should all gather together and whine about the NRA and cut their funding off?

    There used to be someone to stand up to the demanding moms and bloomberg and all these others. But for some reason, gun rights activists have decided the NRA is a bigger enemy than Bloomberg, and so this is what happens.

    1. avatar Frank says:

      How about we back a org that wont stab us in the back.

      1. avatar TexTed says:

        Find me one, that has *any* influence in Congress, that has *any* lefties worried, and I’ll gladly back it.

        Until then, I am not about to watch my rights disappear just so I can stand around and say “I told you so”.

        1. avatar Sheldon says:

          Gun Owners of America.. Or GOA

    2. avatar Nanashi says:

      Where’s Marion Hammer, who is oh so proud of her acomplishments in the Florida legislature, right now?

      1. avatar Chris T in KY says:

        That is a very good question.

    3. avatar Jamie in North Dakota says:

      TexTed, now you’ve triggered the anti-NRA douche bags. They’re like leftists, when they hear reality it puts them in wheels off mode.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “TexTed, now you’ve triggered the anti-NRA douche bags. They’re like leftists, when they hear reality it puts them in wheels off mode.”

        Got it wrong, didn’t you?

        The people who are triggered are those with religious fervor-like loyalty to the NRA. People who cannot stand any criticism of their totem.

        If you, or your like, or the NRA are going to clamor that the NRA is sacrosanct because you are a supporter, then you must prove your support is based on more than myth. When people present factual failures of the NRA to meet is self-appointed standards and advertising, they are not “douche bags”, they are critical thinkers. It is totally appropriate to demand the NRA explain what it is doing for me today (history is history, the actions long ago). I do not pay for past deeds (“history is not and indicator of future performance”*). I would only pay for current performance. And making things “not so bad” isn’t performance.

        However, I acknowledge the reality that many commenters here are void of skilled rhetoric, and prefer to bolster their self-image by slandering other commenters here. So, if calling calling people of a different viewpoint “douche bags” is profitable in maintaining your self-image, well….it’s a free country.

        BTW, calling people “douche bags” falls short of actually announcing the specific opposition efforts of the NRA in the case at hand.

        * This phrase is common in all financial offerings of securities and bonds.

        1. avatar Bradford says:

          That’s saying nothing about those that get a personal payoff by authoring long running diatribes to satisfy their ego !

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “That’s saying nothing about those that get a personal payoff by authoring long running diatribes to satisfy their ego !”

          Ok. Did that fix it for ya ?

          As noted often, if your purpose here is to sling two-line insults, superficially skim the postings looking for ratification of your views there are other forums that may better suite your purpose.

          Live is more complicated that flaming people. Not every discussion can be intelligently addressed by, “You’re an idiot, so there. Shut up.”

          There is a difference between diatribes and lengthy discussion of ideas and opinions. If you don’t want that cluttering up your screen, you could visit elsewhere, or simply delete any of my postings without the bother of reading any of them.

      2. avatar Aleric says:

        Put up or shut up bytch. I keep hearing you Elmer Fudds ranting about how great the NRA is but all I see is them BEGGING for money like they always do and standing on the side lines laughing at people like you funding their limousines and champagne galas. I used to be an NRA member since the 80s and I remember them doing NOTHING during the assault weapon ban, sort of like this one………now as I said put up or shut the fck up.

        1. avatar TexTed says:

          Look in the white house, bitch.

          The NRA did that.

          Look on the Supreme Court, bitch. The NRA put Gorsuch and Kavanaugh on there.

          The NRA spent every dime they had getting Trump elected. And while Trump isn’t perfect, and neither is the NRA, they’re both a whole hell of a lot better than their opponents.

          So there — I put up, bitch. You may now shut up.

        2. avatar Wood says:

          Both of y’all go to your room.

    4. avatar frank speak says:

      pro-gun groups are now being judged by their action…or inaction….

  4. avatar Sam I Am says:

    “Maybe we should all gather together and whine about the NRA and cut their funding off?

    There used to be someone to stand up to the demanding moms and bloomberg and all these others. But for some reason, gun rights activists have decided the NRA is a bigger enemy than Bloomberg, and so this is what happens.”

    Nope. This bill did not arise overnight. NRA should have launched a campaign to specifically fund a challenge to the bill immediately after passage (until passage, the bill creates no damage to gun owners). The NRA did not get caught unawares. Where is the NRA, national and local Florida? Where is their lobbying to make this bill not as bad as it could be? Where is the NRA campaign to galvanize/intimidate the squish politicians into voting against the bill? Oh, NRA can’t be public because it would hurt negotiations? And NRA expects us to be patient while they work out something “not so bad”?

    What this situation screams out is that the voters do not matter on just a “single issue” piece of legislation. Only the donors matter. Republicrats do not get elected by the public, but through the influence of the donors. Elections have consequences, and if you don’t please the donors, you will not have a next election.

  5. avatar Swarf says:

    When this has either zero effect on crime rates— or makes them worse— I’m sure they will repeal it, yes?

    That should be written in to each gun control attempt. If the rate of X crime that the law purports to want to reduce doesn’t go down within a set period of time, that bullshit sunsets.

    1. avatar NJ2AZ says:

      hah, i’m sure if repeal were tied to stats, they’d juke them as required.

    2. avatar Hannibal says:

      They learned that lesson. The federal assault weapon ban had a sunset clause. It didn’t do anything, got democrats unelected, and ended up sunsetting because not enough politicians were willing to take punishment for keeping it going.

      Now they won’t bother with such things and would rather not have to keep defending their nonsense.

      1. avatar Geoff "Bring the EDIT button back, will ya, TTAG?" PR says:

        “It didn’t do anything, got democrats unelected, and ended up sunsetting because not enough politicians were willing to take punishment for keeping it going.”

        No, the reason it sunsetted is that Bush won the presidency. Had Gore won, the ’94 federal ban would be in place today…

        1. avatar ollie says:

          In 2004, Bush said about the AWB renewal “Send me the bill and I will sign it”. He was no friend of gun owners. The Bush”s are Maine RINOs and not real Texans. No difference between Jeb Bush and Kasich, either.

    3. avatar DesertDave says:

      Gun control has nothing to do with crime rates. It is solely THE method to subjugate and control the populace. Reality has no place in the gun control arena.

  6. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    And if someone started a ballot initiative authorizing government to forcefully hand our daughters over to rapists in prison — to appease some large group with passionate feelings — should we all jump on board?

    Or, what if someone started a ballot initiative to eliminate cyber security in Florida because China was threatening to halt all tourism to Florida unless we made it easier to hack everyone? Should we all jump on board with that?

  7. avatar Tom Edwards says:

    There are full automatic assault rifles! Then there are the Look Scary Semi-Automatics that the Left want to take away. Which has never been a Assault Rifle. Then there are the semi-automatics that look like regular rifles. Semi-Automatic you can only shoot one bullet at a time. They are legal in all of Obamas 57 States. These people see look scary and that has to go! But they say Semi-Automatics have to go! (BUNCHED All!)
    Then there Thousands of Hunters like me that have crippled hands. I can’t cock a bolt or lever action. So I hunt with a Semi- Automatic. My right hand is formed in a cup shape. It will hold a Pistol or Rifle will grip both!. But no trigger finger. Several years ago they made me a a trigger finger. The only joint that works is knuckle. With it I can shoot but not cock them. So I use Semi-Automatics to hunt. If they are ignorant enough to think semi- Automatics are dangerous then I and many more would have to quit hunting our food!

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “If they are ignorant enough to think semi- Automatics are dangerous then I and many more would have to quit hunting our food!”

      Now you are catching on.

      Hunting is an unnecessary activity in this modern world of plenty of everything. Killing of animals for fun (you can buy “food” in a store) is damaging the environment, a way of bringing on irreversible climate change (global warming, global cooling, XYZ, whatever). Nature should be left alone. There are natural prey, and natural predators. Having a non-natural predator (humans) adding to the predator population keeps nature out of balance.

      So, if you are engaged in an unnecessary activity (hunting), and you would lose out because you can’t operate a different gun, well, that’s life. That’s what all the people say. Ridin’ high in April, shot down in May.

      And so on, and so on. Puke.

      1. avatar UpInArms says:

        Given that the Green New Deal is set to eliminate farting cows in the very near future (around the same time they eliminate air travel, I think. Not really sure of the timetable), its pretty obvious we will all have to sharpen our hunting skills… or go vegan.

        But, don’t lose heart. Some of those plants can be pretty tough and elusive. Don’t put your ARs away just yet.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “its pretty obvious we will all have to sharpen our hunting skills”

          Not so fast. You will be required to have safety locks on your longbows, and smart technology on crossbows. And a capacity limit on your quiver. (ok, have it)

      2. avatar Bradford says:

        Humans are at the top of the food chain and one of the top tier predators. Read a book !

        1. avatar Wood says:

          Only because of tools. Otherwise we’re wimpy primates well below the top of the food chain.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Humans are at the top of the food chain and one of the top tier predators. Read a book !”

          So, the justification for hunting is we must exercise our predatory predilections? We must hunt because we are king of the world? We must give in to our instincts to kill something because being predators, that’s what we do?

          Really?

          Oh, wait. You may be on to something. We can draft hunters into government service to slaughter all the cows that are causing methane gas to destroy the ozone (or something), and stop global warming/cooling, or climate change forever. We sent a man to the moon. We can stop the climate of this planet from ever again changing!

          Then there is the matter of misunderstanding my comment, altogether.

    2. avatar frank speak says:

      think it’s that magazine capacity that sets them off…..

      1. avatar GC mc says:

        Go to a drum then.

  8. avatar m. says:

    “assault” rifle terminology – pulled out of a lawyer’s a**, so this ban does not apply to the real world

    1. avatar GunnyGene says:

      What makes you think the people behind this live in the “real” world?

      1. avatar GC mc says:

        They dont, but they control ours. Too much pedal pressure becomes tyranny.
        Feel free to ring the Tyranny Alarm if you see it.

    2. avatar Defens says:

      Your world, or the perspective that the POTG have. But laws include definitions sections, and in those sections they can define anything they want. In Washington, due to the initiative that just passed last November, next July every semiautomatic rifle will – by state definition – become an “assault weapon” and subject to the same infringements. Doesn’t matter it it’s a 10-22 or a Barrett 50. You can say, “But, but, but….” all you want to, but the legal definition is what counts, not the traditional definition as used by the Federal government and the ATF. The rules have changed – you have to keep up to date.

  9. avatar Jaque says:

    The lists are good. They identify the communists behind turning Florida into another state that violates the US constitution and Americans natural right to possess and bear arms. No matter how you look at it the Communists have been steadily advancing in their takeover of the US. As the invasion of New Yorkers and South Americans into Florida accelerates so does their influence into Florida’s politics and laws. The Parkland massacre occurred because of a total failure by national, state and local government. Three government entities and multiple agencies failed to prevent the killer from obtaining a gun. And then with gun in hand the police stood by as the killer did his work and then walked to Wall Mart for a meal. He was never challenged by police until picked up walking along the sidewalk.
    So to fix the mental illness problem these communists want to ban modern semiautomatic rifles from ownership by law abiding Floridians. Of course criminals will always get guns they are banned from owning. The communist laws always punish the good law abiding citizens. Nowhere do these communists want to fix the systemic problems of government. Nowhere do these communists want to improve mental health screening and school security. Broward county schools still lack adequate perimeter fencing, bullet resistant glass and doors, cameras in classrooms. In a recent trip to Florida I just visited a 3 yr old K-12 school in Broward county lacking these security features.
    So instead the communists are going to deny us our rights. Any right they deny is an act of tyranny. And while they say owners of the banned weapons are grandfatherd in we know that’s only temporary. Outright bans and confiscation comes next. As will Swat raids at 3 am to confiscate weapons using deadly force. Red Flag laws will be used against gun owners who argue with a neighbor, or at random traffic stops. It will be the beginning of Florida becoming another police state. It will also drive many wealthy gun owners and gun businesses away.
    When is enough enough? When will the communists be driven back and defeated? Only when American patriots stand up and fight the communist bastards. We fought the communists in SE Asia and know how to defeat them. They have left the swamps and moved into our cities, schools, and government. It matters little where communists are found. The solution is always the same. If Florida falls to communist gun controls it may accelerate a long overdue national resistance movement against the communists.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      The lists … identify the communists behind turning Florida into another state that violates the US constitution and Americans natural right to possess and bear arms.

      The same thought crossed my mind.

      1. avatar frank speak says:

        “communist” to you guys is a bit like “racist” to a liberal……

        1. avatar Anymouse says:

          “Authoratarians” would be more appropriate. Many on the list want to keep the gains they’ve made under the capitalist system.

  10. avatar Rick the Bear says:

    YAWN. Fixed it for you. 🤣

    Thank you, RINOs, for showing yourselves.

  11. avatar Yarbles says:

    Globalist Elite Money, Globalist Socialist outcome desired.

    Globalists OWN both parties.

    They KNOW full well that NONE of these laws will effect CRIMINAL VIOLENCE with guns.

    Let’s hold their Globalist Elite Socialist hands to the fire, Florida.

    1. avatar frank speak says:

      that’s more like it!….(and more accurate)…..

  12. avatar retmsgt says:

    So-called ballot initiatives are no more than mob rule. They bypass the elected representatives of the people, thus avoiding any discussion or modification. Are portions of the “initiative” unconstitutional? Well, that’ll take a court case to decide since there was no discussion on it in the state legislature. Will parts of the initiative turn currently law-abiding citizens into felons overnight? Again, no discussion permitted.

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “So-called ballot initiatives are no more than mob rule.”

      It is democracy in action. We all want more democracy. We live in a democracy.

      The will of the people isn’t being done through elected representatives, so the people are taking power back from the representatives. Apparently, the representatives of the people do not recognize, or are ignoring, the will of the people. What do you expect “the people” will do when their representatives fail their duties?

      Everything should be put before the people, vote taken, then the representatives should be required to only vote in accord with the people. What do you think the movement to bypass the intent electoral college is all about. It is a beautiful proposition. States (based on democratic) vote would be required to assign their electors to the candidate receiving the most votes in the popular election…asserting the will of the people. Democracy in action.

      1. avatar Kenneth says:

        If we live in a democracy, why does the US Constitution, Article 4, Section 4 say:
        “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government,”?????

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “If we live in a democracy, why does the US Constitution, Article 4, Section 4 say:
          “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government,”?????”

          Old, antiquated, outdated, unfit for fast moving, enlightened society. Besides, the representatives operate on a democratic structure – majority rules for voting legislation (“majority” meaning “greatest number of votes).

          But when representatives refuse the will of the people, what is the moral, or even constitutional, prohibition for the people to bypass unresponsive/unrepresentative representatives? Just because some issues are subject to the direct will of the people, the constitutional structure you point to is not overturned/eliminated. In the best of worlds, every adult citizen would have to vote on one piece of legislation at every level, every month. With almost every adult having access to the internet, voting could be accomplished at little cost. When the elected representatives finally decide to fulfill their obligations, there would be no need for the people to utilize direct democracy to assert their will.

      2. avatar LibertyToad says:

        The US is a Republic. A democracy supports rule mob–the majority ruling over the minority and the minority never getting a say in what transpires.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          ” the minority never getting a say in what transpires.”

          Tell me this…if the “minority” cannot muster the political influence/muscle to become the majority, whose fault is that? Simply being a member of a minority in a political issue doesn’t make the “minority” morally correct. If you look at the US Senate today, the minority rules by veto, refusal to permit the majority to prevail. Thus, minorities are not always without power, and that sometimes out-sized for the proportion of the division of power.

          But you may find these quotes from Jefferson to be illuminating:

          The only way a republican government can function, and the only way a people’s voice can be expressed to effect a practicable control of government, is through a process in which decisions are made by the majority. This is not a perfect way of controlling government, but the alternatives–decisions made by a minority, or by one person–are even worse and are the source of great evil. To be just, majority decisions must be in the best interest of all the people, not just one faction.

          “The first principle of republicanism is that the lex majoris partis is the fundamental law of every society of individuals of equal rights; to consider the will of the society enounced by the majority of a single vote as sacred as if unanimous is the first of all lessons in importance, yet the last which is thoroughly learnt. This law once disregarded, no other remains but that of force, which ends necessarily in military despotism.” –Thomas Jefferson to Alexander von Humboldt, 1817. ME 15:127

          “The will of the people… is the only legitimate foundation of any government, and to protect its free expression should be our first object.” –Thomas Jefferson to Benjamin Waring, 1801. ME 10:236

          “The measures of the fair majority… ought always to be respected.” –Thomas Jefferson to George Washington, 1792. ME 8:397

          “I subscribe to the principle, that the will of the majority honestly expressed should give law.” –Thomas Jefferson: The Anas, 1793. ME 1:332

          “All… being equally free, no one has a right to say what shall be law for the others. Our way is to put these questions to the vote, and to consider that as law for which the majority votes.” –Thomas Jefferson: Address to the Cherokee Nation, 1809. ME 16:456

          “[We acknowledge] the principle that the majority must give the law.” –Thomas Jefferson to William Carmichael, 1788. ME 7:28

          “This… [is] a country where the will of the majority is the law, and ought to be the law.” –Thomas Jefferson: Answers to de Meusnier Questions, 1786. ME 17:85

      3. avatar theguynextdoor says:

        Sam I am we do not live in a Democracy what we live in a Representative republic,, see the difference

        Republic: “A state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives…” Democracy: “A system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.”

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Sam I am we do not live in a Democracy what we live in a Representative republic”

          Nowhere in the founding documents is there any proscription regarding the will of the people be expressed directly. Indeed, one can easily find justification for ballot measures in the constitutionally protected right “to petition government for the redress of grievances.

          Being there is no internally documented/described definition of “petition”, ballot measures are the purest form of dealing with governmental injustice. If the public creates a petition, and the next procedural step in petitioning government is to have the petition put to a vote of the people, then you have people acting as intended under the constitution. Representatives or not, when the “majority” vote carries the mantle of law, then you have democracy. The fact that “the people” can put a measure before the vote of the people does nothing to eliminate or disturb the representative part of “Representative republic”.

          If the powers of government derive rightfully from the people being governed, then the people have the power to establish formal procedures for petitioning government. Ballot measures are a disciplinary action against the elected representatives, reminding them of the reasons they are elected representatives, and that they are not isolated/insulated creatures of government, but employees of “the people”.

  13. avatar CZJay says:

    Looks like NY is going to be exporting more people down to Florida. Farewell, Gunshine state.

    Don’t see many Republicans standing against all those women who be taking away everyone’s rights. I guess women are going to run everything in the near future, which is why the Democrat party is running so many females. Maybe it’s because of some kind of mentality that exists in the home of a Republican male who is married to a Democrat female.

  14. avatar HP says:

    “Just move to a free state. You people that stay in slave states are suckers”

    It’s amazing how quickly and poorly statements like this, oft repeated here, have aged.

    1. avatar Roh-Dog says:

      Yep.
      And remember citizens of other states were ready to give up comfort and safety to stand with their fellow Countrymen at Lexington?
      Remember when our Forefathers slaughtered each other on both sides of a terrible schism in; Antietam, Bull Run, Gettysburg, etc.?
      Remember when the Burkian philosophy motivated actions; Operation Overlord, The Pacific, Vietnam, etc.?
      Remember the Alamo?

    2. avatar frank speak says:

      I used to say that…but now you’re afraid to look over your shoulder!….

  15. avatar Jay in Floridaduh says:

    Just what we need. A full listing of the state’s RHINOs.
    Now here is me bending over so they can all kiss my butt. I will not give up any more of my rights to anyone. Be it today or even tomorrow. Vote or no vote. Dammed North Easterners go home already. F$#& them all.

    1. avatar Roh-Dog says:

      As an indentured servant of the (failed) State of Connecticut let me give you a bit of advice:
      Fight back.
      Give these clowns no quarter. Get them to give up their plans, in public, in front of cameras.
      They are unhinged tools of something bigger.

  16. avatar Leighton Cavendish says:

    2,000 abortions each day and they are worried about gun deaths???
    I am pro population control…so pro-choice… AND …pro-2A…

    1. avatar Jay in Floridaduh says:

      Thats libitards for you. Keeping their priorities straight. A few gangbangers a year killing each. Occasionally a few civilian innocents killed. Yet millions of unborn. They don’t count a wit to them.

  17. avatar jwm says:

    Pelosi a Jew? Clinton a Jew? Gore? Biden? AOC?

  18. avatar Cary says:

    The main reason these things are seeing light of day is just look at the picture, with all the anti-gunners marching and protesting. WHERE do we see the pro-gun groups doing this. I attended two rallies this year and then there was the small one over in Pittsburgh. A few of us send in mailers and call our elected officials. The majority don’t. Until we see widespread opposition to this nonsense, the powers that be are going to continue steamrolling right over our rights. And the brainwashed idiots they are spoon-feeding this to are so intelligent they don’t even realize they are marching against their OWN rights.
    I hear daily “that will never happen, this won’t pass, etc”. But it IS happening and it IS picking up momentum across the country..

    1. avatar frank speak says:

      yep!…”never”is rapidly becoming reality……

    2. avatar John says:

      The reason gun owners aren’t protesting is because the government isn’t paying our bills and we have to work to pay our own and it don’t leave time to,protest

  19. avatar Wood says:

    How does this square with preemption? Can a voter initiative have standing against the state to make laws about firearms?

    How about a voter initiative for term limits on the FL legislature? Until we have that we’ll “enjoy” a solid majority of RINOs.

  20. avatar The SGM says:

    Those people have been in the sun too long, their ability to classify, name recognize the purpose of an item, judge and think for themselves has been jeopardized. The organization, Ban Assault Weapons NOW, shows how ridiculous they are; assault weapons, those which fire bullets continuously with the press of the trigger, have been outlawed since I believe 1934. Assault weapons are not for sale in the US, so if they want to ban them let them but leave our semi-automatic weapons alone for they fire one shot with each pull of the trigger.

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      Don’t you watch the news?

      “Assault weapons” are in the eye of the donor class. “Assault weapons” are whatever gets the legislation passed. You don’t need to be accurate (as to the definition of “Assault weapons”) if you are morally correct.

      “Assault weapons” is not a classification, but a political theme. Words mean what we say they mean, nothing more, nothing less.

      1. avatar J Gibbons says:

        In the case of this ballot initiative, you don’t need to be accurate if you are morally incorrect either. Any law that seeks to subjugate the law abiding while doing nothing to affect the lawless is morally incorrect. Mob rule, or democracy, does not equate to morality. Quite often, the rule of the mob is quite the opposite.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Mob rule, or democracy, does not equate to morality. ”

          Neither does “the law”.

          If “morality” (defined by the definer) were actually the foundation for people and governments, we would have a most different world around us.

    2. avatar frank speak says:

      so you’re willing to sacrifice one group of gun-owners for another?…seen that before….

  21. avatar Alan says:

    Putting it in plain, alibet slightly crude English, if the voters of Florida swallow this line of crap, they well and truly deserve the screwing that they will surely get.

    1. avatar Jay in No longer the "GunShine" State. says:

      Its not us natives that are screwing up this state.
      Its all the imports.
      Whether from South America or North Eastern US of A.
      They bring the same crap that killed off their homelands here.
      Insanity……….doing the same thing here they did there. Expecting a different result??
      They are doing it to us here too.
      Some might call it progress. I call it changing my paradise into a shitbox.
      They left the shitboxes they made. Just to recreate them here.
      If you think I dislike all North Easterners and most So Americans. You would be correct.
      At least the South Americans are looking for a better life. For the most part.
      The NorthEasterners are just looking for a tax shelter. And to [email protected]$k up down here too.
      Topics like this one just plain get to me and make me very angry.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “Its not us natives that are screwing up this state.
        Its all the imports.”

        Maybe a good strategy is to import enough outsiders from the North so that the reasonable people in Florida can invade the North with residents, become the majority, and change the political scene back to what is was in Florida.

        Well, there is that weather thing. Which calls into question whether the matter is one of principle, or one of principle in temperate zones.

      2. avatar PMinFl says:

        Jay, come on man give me a break, I FLED the Northeast to get away from those people. I know just how bad it can get and I could no longer stand to live there. If the people around Ft Lauderdale are so left leaning then YOU should move north, I suggest nearer TAMPA.

        1. avatar Wood says:

          Sea level rise is gonna take care of both locations.

    2. avatar Buff cousin Elroy says:

      What a stupid comment.

      1. avatar frank speak says:

        not too many floridians planning on moving north!…..

      2. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “What a stupid comment.”

        How so?

        The majority rules. If the majority wants to limit their natural, civil and human rights and powers, that is what they are entitled to. And the consequences.

        1. avatar strych9 says:

          “If the majority wants to limit their natural, civil and human rights and powers, that is what they are entitled to.”

          Actually they are not entitled to do this and our system of government is designed to prevent it. But we got away from the way things are supposed to be done long ago and few remember the “old ways” never mind still live by them.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Actually they are not entitled to do this and our system of government is designed to prevent it. ”

          The majority rules under every element of our governmental systems. It may take super majorities, but the fact remains…the most votes win the contest. Well, unless the minority is Demoncrats. Then the minority controls. But all voting is decided by majority.

          To win local elections, you need to collect the most votes, sometimes an actual majority. To win state elections, you need to collect the most votes, unless pluralities are permitted. To win federal elections, you need to collect the most votes. To win contests in congress, you need the most votes. To select Electors, you need the most votes. In each case the most votes win.

  22. avatar DDay says:

    fred guttenberg is listed on that republican list, he is absolutely not a republican. long before the shooting he was a far left democrat. He has a long history of leftism cataloged on his twitter account.

  23. avatar Darkman says:

    Constitutional Carry bill just moved out of the senate judiciary committee in Iowa. Next step Senate committee and floor vote. Passage looks good then on to house side where the support is also good. Shows we are winning in Iowa at least. Keep up the fight Florida.

  24. avatar GunnyGene says:

    The most fundamental question: Can you hold what you’ve got? Whether it’s property or political power.

  25. avatar TheUnspoken says:

    But Florida has Republicans dominating their state house, Senate, and the governor, so that means we will be able to pass endless pro gun legislation, right, campus carry, open carry, constitutional carry, etc etc, right?

    Florida Republicans are moderate Democrats now, actual Democrats are socialist progressives, and limited government, pro rights people are bigoted evil racist terrorists with scary weapons.

    Really the Republicans need to clean house, and hold their own people to their supposed platform. Unless, of course, they aren’t actually for gun rights.

    We have the anti side lining up their plans, dreams, as vision, and a strategy to achieve it. We will fight that goal, hopefully we will prevail, but they will continue to fight. Even if they accomplish the BAWN plan, they will move on to whatever is next.

    But really, FL Republicans, conservatives, NRA, GOA, whoever… What is our pro-gun agenda for Florida? Just trying to stop an assault weapon ban? Or do we actually want something, with a plan to get it? At best we seek to achieve the status quo, or maybe with a couple of not-so-bad encroachments.

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “Florida Republicans are moderate Democrats now, actual Democrats are socialist progressives, and limited government, pro rights people are bigoted evil racist terrorists with scary weapons.”

      A cogent description of politics today, if ever there was one.

      “But really, FL Republicans, conservatives, NRA, GOA, whoever… What is our pro-gun agenda for Florida? Just trying to stop an assault weapon ban?”

      Careful. You will trigger the pro-NRA fanatics into “wheels off mode”.

      1. avatar Sian says:

        We should be pushing hard for Permitless Carry, Open Carry, Campus Carry, and abolition of gunfree zones.

        Instead we’re about to get more bans rammed down our throats, by the leftists emboldened by Scott’s cowardice.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “We should be pushing hard for Permitless Carry, Open Carry, Campus Carry, and abolition of gunfree zones.”

          Pay attention to the donor class. That will tell you where this is all going.

    2. avatar frank speak says:

      always backing up…is not a good plan…..

    3. avatar Don Banker says:

      ANY ENCROACHMENT, ON CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, IS A BAD THING. As, far as the “people” being able to punish their ELECTED representative, for them not adhering to their sworn oaths, most states have no process for the citizens to initiative impeachment proceedings or to have them removed form office, PRIOR to the end of their elected terms.

  26. avatar Fudds McKenzie says:

    YAWN

  27. avatar strych9 says:

    Hogg still looks like he needs a sandwich, personal trainer and maybe a shot of insulin.

    1. avatar frank speak says:

      or just a good kick in the ass….certainly seems deserving!….

  28. avatar Matt W says:

    I guess all of us with AR guns who refuse to turn them in will be thrown in prison. Really? That will be millions of good, honest people taken out of the workforce and being “taken care of” in our wonderful prison system. Economic collapse to soon follow. In my case and many coworkers of mine, our patients will suffer immensely.

    1. avatar J Gibbons says:

      Sadly, the communists coming to disarm you don’t care about your patients. They care about themselves being in power and you being oppressed because you have the audacity to believe something different.

    2. avatar strych9 says:

      “That will be millions of good, honest people taken out of the workforce…”

      That’s a not a bug in the system. It’s a feature of the system.

    3. avatar frank speak says:

      actually, neither is likely to happen….there’ll be the occasional “example”….but ownership will simply be driven underground….as we’ve seen in other states…this all has the ring of “prohibition” about it….

  29. avatar Burner says:

    Try banning Florida man instead lolol

  30. avatar Aaron Walker says:

    This should be frightening to everyone that still supports OUR U.S. Constitutional Bill of Rights….These “so called Gun Grabbers” are nothing more than New Age Marxists and Communists working under the banner of Liberalism/Globalism…These folks ALL represent the “The New World Order.” THEY are help the Globalist power base strip-mine the Bill of Rights with legislation designed to deliberately under the 2nd Amendment in order to “Criminalize” those that DON’T comply ! “Red Flag /STOP/ ERPOs orders are obviously designed to rob a U.S. citizen of THEIR 2nd Amendment rights of Rebellion (self-defense), to be labelled a criminal without formal charges, to have assets and private property seized without a crime occurring—until a secret Goverment court designs one, violations of the 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, etc…These people are now PRC MAO Z’s New Red Guard…Can anyone see the writing on the wall !!! These people are ALL Commie @$$-HOLES !!! Where’s McCarthyism when you need it !!!

    1. avatar frank speak says:

      you left out the 1st…already starting to see inroads there……

  31. avatar 2aguy says:

    According to Scalia in his dissent in Friedman v Highland Park, which he wrote after his majority opinion in D.C. v Heller….these rifles are specifically protected by the 2nd Amendment….and the AR-15 rifle is named in this opinion as being protected by the 2nd Amendment……

    Friedman v. Highland Park:

    https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-133_7l48.pdf

    That analysis misreads Heller. The question under Heller is not whether citizens have adequate alternatives available for self-defense.

    Rather, Heller asks whether the law bans types of firearms commonly used for a lawful purpose—regardless of whether alternatives exist. 554 U. S., at 627–629. And Heller draws a distinction between such firearms and weapons specially adapted to unlawful uses and not in common use, such as sawed-off shotguns. Id., at 624–625.

    The City’s ban is thus highly suspect because it broadly prohibits common semiautomatic firearms used for lawful purposes.

    Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles. See 784 F. 3d, at 415, n. 3. The overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting. See ibid. Under our precedents, that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons. See McDonald, 561 U. S., at 767–768; Heller, supra, at 628–629.

    1. avatar frank speak says:

      this issue HAS GOT to make it to the SCOTUS sooner or later…..

      1. avatar frank speak says:

        …..even my congressman (D) owns and shoots one….and doesn’t seem to be inclined to give it up….by the way,..this nonsense in Pittsburgh appears to be coming to a head soon…now they want to amend their proposals to only ban certain guns…as if that makes any difference…

    2. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “And Heller draws a distinction between such firearms and weapons specially adapted to unlawful uses and not in common use, such as sawed-off shotguns.”

      I do not understand, at all, how the circular reasoning about weapons not in common use can stand any legal scrutiny, at all. This love affair with “precedent, history and tradition” is as bogus as a three dollar bill.

      Case: Public doesn’t like firearms used by gangsters. Legislation bans private ownership of sawed off shotguns. Not regulates, bans. Eighty five, or so, years later, the SC declares it is constitutional to ban firearms not in common use because firearms not in common use due to an unconstitutional prohibition of private ownership of sawed off shotguns.

      Thus, the government (SC) determines that if a piece of unconstitutional national legislation exists for some period of time, later courts can rely on that unconstitutionality as precedent to uphold the unconstitutional act. Sawed off shotguns are not in common use because the government (endorsed by the SC) made it illegal to have sawed off shotguns.

      Don’t think for a moment the SC is about justice, protecting the people from government infringement of constitutional rights. It is as politically driven as any other government body.

      1. avatar frank speak says:

        except they are regulated…not banned…and even that is being called into question these days…

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “except they are regulated…not banned…and even that is being called into question these days…”

          I understand, but the distinction is irrelevant – banned, or regulated, the result is sawed off shotguns are not in common use. The purpose of using an unconstitutional restriction to prove that restrictions are unconstitutional is reasoning only lawyer would present as sensical. (yeah, that is a real word)

  32. avatar NORDNEG says:

    Republicans need to get control of their people, too many R I N Os , I can’t believe they can’t weed these people out.

    1. avatar frank speak says:

      they’re perfectly willing to throw us under the bus to keep their jobs…never been more evident…

    2. avatar RMS1911 says:

      Republicans are rinos you are confusing them with constitutionalist.

  33. avatar MAGA says:

    Fuck ballot initiatives. Do not comply. They cannot arrest ALL of you. Watch the ban pass and then see a single digit number of “assault weapons” turned in, while the rest of the gun owners refuse.

    There will also be several county sheriffs who refuse to enforce the ban.

    Better yet, propose a ballot initiative that bans ballot initiatives. They fly in the face of separation of powers.

    If you’re a city slicker who thinks you can get any of my guns with a simple ballot initiative, fuck you!

    1. avatar Rv6driver says:

      Spot on!!!

    2. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “Better yet, propose a ballot initiative that bans ballot initiatives. They fly in the face of separation of powers.”

      In what way?

    3. avatar frank speak says:

      right now they just want to get these restrictions on the books…irregardless of how difficult or impractical enforcement may be….

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “irregardless”

        One of my favorite words. Grew up with that, and “unthaw”.

  34. avatar Timothy Toroian says:

    There about 825,000 abortions every year in the U.S. How about the “Never Again” people who are misusing the term, looking into that number. And it is time for the NRA to take some states to federal regarding Article 1, section 9, clause 3 of the Constitution.

  35. avatar Truckman says:

    I do not think this will stand up in court if it makes it to ballot because there a lot of Armalite rifles being used in woods for hunting white tailed deer and Hogs the AR is not the name of rifle nor does it stand for assault rifle it is the first letters of the original makers of rifle

    1. avatar frank speak says:

      hunting is on the decline…most state game commissions are being forced to accept these people in the field just to maintain revenue….

  36. avatar RedFox1 says:

    How does one start a pro constitutional, pro gun organization?

    1. avatar frank speak says:

      lots of them already out there…seek them out…..

  37. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    Will there be a carve out for white men who speak Spanish because they have a million dollar machine gun collection as a residence of the state Florida?

    https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2018/03/robert-farago/nra-lobbyist-marion-hammer-gets-the-proverbial-knives-out-for-miguel-fernandez/

    1. avatar Chris T in KY says:

      Will the semi-auto rifle armed guards currently protecting school children be forced to use “strong words” instead of a rifle to stop the next school shooter in the state Florida?

      “Should an armed intruder ever get onto the campus of Manatee School for the Arts in Palmetto, they will not have fair fight on their hands. They, according to Principal Bill Jones, will be met with swift, overwhelming and deadly force by guards carrying semi-automatic rifles.”

      https://www.bradenton.com/news/local/article225203920.html

      1. avatar frank speak says:

        assuming they show up….

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “assuming they show up…”

          Doubt they would show if they think the attacker can launch stronger words, louder, faster, and without reloading.

    2. avatar frank speak says:

      was it ever thus?…..they’ve always been ok with a select few….just not the masses….

      1. avatar frank speak says:

        …and, no..i’m not a millionaire.. (I wish!)….just took advantage of the eighties……

  38. avatar Rv6driver says:

    Whatever…. At this point it’s better they come right out with a semiauto ban. The faster it happens the better.

    This will drawl lines in the sand. There will be a shit storm, mass non compliance and the sheriff departments won’t enforce it.

    Florida is one of the most heavily armed states and there is zero way they can enforce these laws.

    Keep in mind… Just talk of this will literally sell millions more AR’s. That being said you have to wonder if gun companies are somehow behind it….

  39. avatar frank speak says:

    the gun-grabbers are in it for the long haul…the manufacturers only for the short hit…..

  40. avatar Southerner says:

    Florida’s first attempt at banning the assault weapons of the time:

    In 1893, “…the Florida legislature enacted a new gun control law. It required a license to carry or possess ‘‘a … Winchester rifle or other repeating rifle.’’

    This law was passed after Ida B. Wells’ famous 1892 article saying “… a Winchester rifle should have a place of honor in every black home, and it should be used for the protection which the law refuses to give.”

    Interesting article that focuses on the racist historical roots gun control laws.

    The Racist Influence on Gun Control Laws
    David Kopel

    https://www.theepochtimes.com/the-racist-influence-on-gun-control-laws_2787186.html

    1. avatar frank speak says:

      in the south anyway…and only for those who could afford one……

    2. avatar Sam I Am says:

      Gun control is a lot like Planned Parenthood. Starts out as something bad (erase the black population), is then converted to “good” (infanticide) purposes. But Demoncrats claim non-believers aren’t allowed such latitude. And the opponents of the Left are genetically disposed to being incapable of making “bad” things anything but “bad”.

  41. avatar SoBe says:

    It’s all bullshit! My M400 is not an assault rifle!
    Every time I hear or read any one but much more so a supposed person knowledgeable with firearms and/or supposed pro 2A person, yes even here on TTAG, refer to any type of non selective fire MSR or even my antique SKS of 1945 Samozaryadny Karabin sistemy Simonova, aka, Самозарядный Карабин системы Симонова, as an assault weapon I cringe!
    By BAWN definition, even my Ruger 10/22 is an assault weapon.
    Next, my father’s S&W 357 is an assault weapon since it is ready to fire the next round once the previous round was fired, thus technically semiautomatic, thus by extrapolation “automatic,” thus an assault weapon.
    As they pry my stiff fingers off my non-assault firearms, the only consolation will be that they will be stripped the Fuds of their alleged inviolable firearms at the same time.
    As much as the 20th century is well worth forgetting, history will condemn those who fail to learn it’s lessons. Social Democrats sounds too scarily like National Socialists.
    I cannot believe my family risked our lives to escape a communist country to arrive in the Soviet United States of America!
    My father and grandparents are rolling in their graves for the this generation’s desecration of their sacrifices.

    1. avatar SoBe says:

      And I will be rolling in mine for lack of an edit button!

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “And I will be rolling in mine for lack of an edit button!”

        Seeing an EDIT function now. How ’bout your display?

    2. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “Next, my father’s S&W 357 is an assault weapon since it is ready to fire the next round once the previous round was fired, thus technically semiautomatic, thus by extrapolation “automatic,” thus an assault weapon.”

      Under some definitions, anything that has an ammunition capacity exceeding five rounds is an assault weapon.

  42. avatar Casey tackett says:

    First off someone needs to file a lawsuit to have the ballet read correctly. They are not assault weapons. Those are already banned. Secondly this Tampa man will never ever vote for this, in fact I will put my money where my mouth is to educate and inform. There are probably millions of these style weapons in the state of florida and because of one incident where local and federal authorities besides to ignore 37 times to do their job from that crazy kid, we are going to assault all of the other millions of gun owners. No only no but hell no. Law abiding citizens are already following the laws so leave them alone. Go after something that truly causes death in this state, drunk drivers, cigarettes, opioids, medical malpractices. Something that kills thousands a year not 30 a year.

  43. avatar TsgtTommy Castillo says:

    Hopefully Floridas Sheriff’s will not back the illegal gun laws or will they bend over for the libaturd socialist communist biatchs that they are.

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “Hopefully Floridas Sheriff’s will not back the illegal gun laws or will they bend over for the libaturd socialist communist biatchs that they are.”

      There have been a few public announcements by sheriffs that proclaim they will not obey laws they think unconstitutional. While the words sound good to gun owners, what do those refusals really mean?

      It could be that the intent of the sheriffs is to ignore “assault weapons” in routine encounters that do not involve a chargeable offense (like traffic tickets). However, if a person is arrested for whatever, and an “assault weapon” is confiscated as evidence (say, in a search after a driver has outdated tags and tries to escape a traffic stop), the details of the weapon would be logged. DAs do cruise police reports. So, while the driver with outdated tags was not arrested for having an “assault weapon”, the confiscation as part of the investigation will likely result in an illegal weapon charge.

      The same can be expected if you are involved in a self-defense event, and your firearm is taken as part of the investigation.

      Perhaps, what the sheriffs mean is that they won’t go about looking for assault weapons, like at the shooting range. But you gotta wonder how they would act when patrolling a gun show.

    2. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “…a conversion kit, a tool, an accessory, or a device used to alter the rate of fire of a firearm ….to increase the rate of fire to a faster rate than is possible for a person to fire such semiautomatic firearm unassisted by a kit, a tool, an accessory, or a device.”

      Aren’t these the magic words that outlaw any trigger replacement designed to make the pull lighter, thus making it possible to increase the rate of fire minimally?

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email