If threaded firearms were banned...

[308]

Previous worthless bans have targeted new production not existing firearms. Future bans will likely target detachable magazine semiautos without consideration to features.

Past AWB was different...
This is what the moronic author as written

 

[wired]

Past AWB was different...
This is what the moronic author as written

View attachment 443782

Wouldnt hold my breath waiting for that to pass but then again it is Oregon. In any case I wouldnt expect the compliance rate to be very high if it did.

 

[11Charlie]

Wouldnt hold my breath waiting for that to pass but then again it is Oregon. In any case I wouldnt expect the compliance rate to be very high if it did.

I don't know what your talking about ociffer all my guns sank when I flipped my boat drinking whiskey!

 

[etrain16]

Past AWB was different...
This is what the moronic author as written

View attachment 443782

This part right here doesn't seem to be something that could hold up in court. Mandating people giving up what they already own may work in Australia and the UK, but things are different here. I can't think of a case (maybe there is, I can't think of it) where a law was passed that mandated people had to surrender or sell what they already lawfully own. Anyone that would vote for this would have to be remarkably short-sighted as this could set a precedent to allow other folks, say gun owners, to try and pass a law to ban something maybe we don't think they should own - bicycles, cars, cell phones, you name it.

I'm thinking they would have to dump the idea of prohibiting ownership of guns you already legally own for this to have any chance of being a lawful measure. But I'm no lawyer.

My guess, if this were to pass, is there would be a lawsuit immediately filed to put it in the courts, where it could be tied up for some time - may even make it to the SCOTUS.

Still, they have a lot of work to do just to get this on the ballot. Maybe it won't even get that far. We can always hope.

 

[Boboclown]

Anyone that would vote for this would have to be remarkably short-sighted as this could set a precedent to allow other folks, say gun owners, to try and pass a law to ban something maybe we don't think they should own - bicycles, cars, cell phones, you name it.

Don't need precedent for those, there's no right guaranteeing them. However, if a ban and confiscation were made for them, and that was revoked by the supreme court then that would set precedent for anything that is protected by the constitution.

 

[etrain16]

Don't need precedent for those, there's no right guaranteeing them. However, if a ban and confiscation were made for them, and that was revoked by the supreme court then that would set precedent for anything that is protected by the constitution.

True - which could apply to forms of communication, like social media. Go after the 2nd, maybe someone will use that to go after the 1st.

 

[wired]

Section 3e takes care of that . You would be able to register the weapon to avoid confiscation. Similar schemes are already in place in California, Connecticut etc.

 

[308]

Why the hell would I want to register a weapon because some rainbow flag waving heretic drafted a bill saying I should?

 

[Heyjoe]

If threaded firearms were banned...
I'd become a felon overnight.

I'll not sell, destroy, make inoperable, nueter, turn in or register my arms. Good day to you.

 

[PDXSparky]

If threaded firearms were banned...
I'd become a felon overnight.

I'll not sell, destroy, make inoperable, nueter, turn in or register my arms. Good day to you.

Four of my favorite guns are already registered. I have multiple uppers for them and when my number comes up, I'll have a 5.56 upper for my M11. Thank you Mr. Lage.

 

[Member 34319]

Threads on thread protector.





"What threads?"

 

[Member 34319]

Threads on thread protector.





"What threads?"

Has thingy that goes up.







Damnit!

 

[Doc In UPlace]

So, I've been out of the loop for a bit on an extended assignment, please forgive the obvious question. Is this something coming up in Oregon that's got a serious chance of making it to the Governor's signing?

As you probably know, WA has an attorney general, Bob Ferguson, who has a stiffy for a State AWB. Read: career-enhancing self aggrandizement.

It is a constant source of amazement to me that some otherwise rational people keep thinking that something that did no good before will suddenly produce results.

As to what will happen, logically you'd buy no more while living in that state.

 

[Tully Mars]

What would the implications be for all of us suppressor owners?

I can't speak for all of us, but one of us will continue to cut threads on whatever he pleases..

 

[Caveman Jim]

Unfortunately the phrase innocent until proven guilty doesn't work. With the government, especially in this case, you're guilty until proven guilty.

Maybe innocent if you got a good lawyer.

And lots o money. Sen. Leyland Lee, a California politician was convicted of "GUN TRAFFICKING" and only got 5 years... Yeah, big money buys the best lawyers.

 

[Boboclown]

And lots o money. Sen. Leyland Lee, a California politician was convicted of "GUN TRAFFICKING" and only got 5 years... Yeah, big money buys the best lawyers.

Leland Yee... The guy who went "People shouldn't be allowed to own guns, but I'll sell them to criminals."

 

[Caveman Jim]

Leland Yee... The guy who went "People shouldn't be allowed to own guns, but I'll sell them to criminals."

Yeah, that's the SOB... Thanks but I blame auto correct for slipping me a micky....

 

[Caveman Jim]

This is the message out GOV seems to forget and they must be reminded!!!

THIS IS NOT FREEDOM!!!


THIS IS!!!

 

[Tornado-Technologies]

Yeah I was thinking the same.
Pinned and welded ASR mounts for me.

Unfortunately, I think you'll find the ASR mounts have external threads on them (that's how the suppressor mounts on the ASR mount), and would most likely be considered a threaded barrel even if permanently installed.