Our friends at the U.N. are at it again!

[CJ]

I generally load 50 rounds of ammo a night. Anymore than that, I get bored and I won't do it.

Besides 50 rounds only takes about 20 minutes of time. I've probably got more ammo loaded now than I'll ever use, but I still like to have it.

I'll be doing 5,000rds in a few days, free beer if anyone is interested in helping.

[KBScobravert]

I'll be doing 5,000rds in a few days, free beer if anyone is interested in helping.

I may take you up on that minus beer since I will have to work afterwards. I haven't reloaded ammo in 20 years and need to start again.

[CJ]

I may take you up on that minus beer since I will have to work afterwards. I haven't reloaded ammo in 20 years and need to start again.

As long as you know what you're getting into. I need at least 4 guys.

[KBScobravert]

As long as you know what you're getting into. I need at least 4 guys.

Date and time?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2

[4bangen]

As long as you know what you're getting into. I need at least 4 guys.

what day, and where at? I'd like to learn how.

[bulldog896]

I do not fear an international treaty, nor do I foresee a legitimate outside threat to our ability to defend ourselves with firearms.

Real threats to our current way of life exist outside of our ability to own firearms. I am much more concerned about the dollar being ditched as the world reserve currency for example. That will fuck most people over more than any legislation or treaty pertaining to guns.

Ask em in Australia how that's working out for them. Or England, Japan, ect.

I'm not going to argue that the UN initiative will strip our rights or freedoms but it is one more step towards it. I'm sure if you'd asked them in '35 do you see any problem with registration and taxation on NFA they'd argued just as you do. but then they could mail order a firearm from sears. This country still has more firearm rights than most and you can credit that to the due diligence of groups like the JPFO, NRA, TSRA and the paranoia of the concerned citizenry Just sayin

Also food for thought if we were to sign and ratify a treaty with the UN any rebellion by the citizenry would be met by UN troops not just US troops in all possibility "A billion screaming chinamen" might trump your "wolverines"

[Moose242]

Ask em in Australia how that's working out for them. Or England, Japan, ect.

Ask them what?

None of them have a second amendment like ours, and for the record Japan has the lowest murder rate in the world and almost no firearms. Obviously not having any guns (for all intents and purposes) works pretty well for them.

[ThreeFingerPete]

Ask them what?

None of them have a second amendment like ours, and for the record Japan has the lowest murder rate in the world and almost no firearms. Obviously not having any guns (for all intents and purposes) works pretty well for them.

Being Japanese works pretty well for them.

[bigmuskie]

I'll be doing 5,000rds in a few days, free beer if anyone is interested in helping.

Pending the date and time, I would be interested. I'd like to learn 5.56 and .300. I remember as a kid playing with my grandfathers shot shell loader. I had no clue what it was, all I know is me and my brother had shot everywhere. My unccle said I can have it, I just need to go pick it up. Oh yeah, I work for free since I'm a newb at loading.

[bulldog896]

Ask them what?

None of them have a second amendment like ours, and for the record Japan has the lowest murder rate in the world and almost no firearms. Obviously not having any guns (for all intents and purposes) works pretty well for them.

Japans murder rate has more to do with their educational system and society's lack of tolerance for crime than it does lack of firearms

as for the rest no they did not have a second amendment but my point is these were all countries (even Japan) that had easy firearms laws that were slowly chipped away at till they were done away with

Much like the way we put a TSA in charge to confiscate every nail file and small bottle of shampoo at the airport in the name of airline safety

[YALE]

Japans murder rate has more to do with their educational system and society's lack of tolerance for crime than it does lack of firearms

as for the rest no they did not have a second amendment but my point is these were all countries (even Japan) that had easy firearms laws that were slowly chipped away at till they were done away with

Much like the way we put a TSA in charge to confiscate every nail file and small bottle of shampoo at the airport in the name of airline safety

I thought Japan had to hand over their guns after their surrender to the US.

[Moose242]

Japans murder rate has more to do with their educational system and society's lack of tolerance for crime than it does lack of firearms

as for the rest no they did not have a second amendment but my point is these were all countries (even Japan) that had easy firearms laws that were slowly chipped away at till they were done away with

Much like the way we put a TSA in charge to confiscate every nail file and small bottle of shampoo at the airport in the name of airline safety

Every point and statement you have made is wrong (aside from perhaps the importance of Japanese virtues and tradition playing a part). I have some history books you can borrow though.

[bulldog896]

Every point and statement you have made is wrong (aside from perhaps the importance of Japanese virtues and tradition playing a part). I have some history books you can borrow though.

really

which one's? Australia never had legal firearms ownership? Europe either? The TSA does not confiscate shampoo????

Tell ya what lets look at this country since it's the one in question
NFA of 34 (as a side note brought about because of prohibition gangsters)
GCA of 68 stops the mail order of firearms closes a lot of small companies due to restrictions (saturday night special laws) next major was the
86 FOPA which stopped felons from owning guns (not a bad thing) but also put a moratorium of the addition of Auto weapons to the NFA registry this also saw an importation ban on "non-sporting" arms such as H&K 91, FAL, Galil ect....
'93 brought Brady act which again is not a bad thing were it properly funded and initially asked for a "cooling off period" to stop "crimes of passion"
94 saw the Assault weapon ban which rightly went away in 04 though some states have enacted their own versions of it to keep it around

If these are not examples (some good some bad) of the removal of your rights to firearms ownership then I cannot help you. Yes the supreme court has somewhat upheld the second but to what cost. 76 DC banned handgun ownership Heller had to fight and spend how many tens of thousands of his, the NRA's, and contribution money to get back a right that is given under the second

[Moose242]

really

which one's?

as for the rest no they did not have a second amendment but my point is these were all countries (even Japan) that had easy firearms laws that were slowly chipped away

No. Post war all guns were confiscated almost instantaneously. There was no "chipping away". Even before the war guns were not prevalent in Japan in the slightest. The island nation was incredibly isolationist and only acquired Tanegashimas from the Portuguese prior to the forced opening of the country in the 1850's by the great Commodore Perry.

Ask em in Australia how that's working out for them.

They really don't care.

I'm not going to argue that the UN initiative will strip our rights or freedoms but it is one more step towards it. I'm sure if you'd asked them in '35 do you see any problem with registration and taxation on NFA they'd argued just as you do.

There were many local and state laws against fully automatic firearms prior to 1934. And need I remind you that the '34 law did not ban anything, but it did make certain firearms obtainable only by members of the gentry. It was Reagan who signed the law that banned machine guns (and the NRA told him to do so).


Regardless, my point is that the UN treaty if signed will have no bearing on our right to own firearms. It would literally take an act of congress to restrict certain firearms, and it would take an additional supreme court ruling to overturn Heller.

I fear our lawmakers when it comes to restricting gun ownership, not a treaty of nations.

[bulldog896]

No. Post war all guns were confiscated almost instantaneously. There was no "chipping away". Even before the war guns were not prevalent in Japan in the slightest. The island nation was incredibly isolationist and only acquired Tanegashimas from the Portuguese prior to the forced opening of the country in the 1850's by the great Commodore Perry.

The even Japan did not mean only Japan. yes Japan, Germany and a few others were stripped immediately if not pre war but I never gave a time constraint either. The point I was making is countries that were in the beginning tolerant to gun ownership became intolerant of it taking rights away simple fact

They really don't care.

not what I hear but YMMV

There were many local and state laws against fully automatic firearms prior to 1934. And need I remind you that the '34 law did not ban anything, but it did make certain firearms obtainable only by members of the gentry. It was Reagan who signed the law that banned machine guns (and the NRA told him to do so).

Point in fact A) I said that later and B) machine guns were not banned, the addition of machine guns past may of 86 the the NFA registry was disallowed

Regardless, my point is that the UN treaty if signed will have no bearing on our right to own firearms. It would literally take an act of congress to restrict certain firearms, and it would take an additional supreme court ruling to overturn Heller.

I fear our lawmakers when it comes to restricting gun ownership, not a treaty of nations.

And my point is that getting a majority public opinion to accept the ratification of a UN treaty will be as easy as getting them to rejoice over obamacare smoke and mirror with a little disinformation goes a long way and once ratification of a UN treaty happened the SC could easily be swayed to re-evaluate Heller under the new circumstances of said treaty and could possibly be overturned

You may not fear a treaty but then I remember in buying every glock and 10/22 mag I could find in 94 while others sat back saying "they will never get that assault weapon ban passed" I made a couple grand selling $125 "pre ban" mags not a year later