@weenis You initial statement was ‘take our guns.’ You still failed to provide evidence of this.
“By expanding the definition of “assault weapons” it makes people a criminal, unless they do certain things, to own the firearms they own today. This enforcement is up to the removal of said weapons.”
You can easily keep you guns by abiding the law or you can get rid of them if you can’t afford to obey the law which allows you the right to own said weapons. That is your decision as an American. The purpose of the 2nd amendment when it was created is different than today. We are not at war with Britain or any other nation that could realistically invade.
As for the magazines, those are straight up illegal. If you don’t turn them in, they are taken away, and you’re fined. Then the fines continue to increase with each infraction.
If the 2nd amendment makes it legal to bear arms, and you can still bear arms despite the hiccup of having to register them, you still have you guns whether there is ammo available or not.
And then, in order to register these weapons, which one must do as enforceable by might, the person registering the firearms has to pay $20 per firearm. For many, this is easily over $1000.
You have mentioned previously how much it costs to purchase guns, among other expenses, so it doesn’t sound like too many people are going to be put out. You can also choose to decrease your stockpile. Again, your choice. Just like when someone buys a $30,000 dollar car and it add to their property value. They pay the yearly registration fee of 80+ dollars plus taxes. In the context of 2016, filling out a piece of paper and having your name entered into a database and paying the fees hasn’t ended the world already. If they can’t afford the gas, they get rid of the car.
Let me say it again, YOU HAVE TO PAY MONEY TO KEEP WHAT YOU CURRENTLY HAVE TODAY OR BECOME A CRIMINAL.
No shit. Most things work that way. Ask any loan holder, commercial business, or industry.
We haven’t even started discussing the ammunition database.
Has it been proposed? Creating a database isn’t complex. You can outsource that or build your own internal software. It makes tracking information super easy.
Now, I have AKs and ARs, both of which fall under the reach of these laws, if I lived in California. I would be required to register these guns or face criminal prosecution and removal of these guns. In both the UK and Australia prior to an all out confiscation of guns, were laws like this that required registration. Failure to register was forfeiture of firearms.
Sounds like the government that initially afforded those rights then rescinded those rights. Given government has that authority because they created the laws, it makes makes total sense. Also states rights, right?
Do you really not see how this is a violation of the Second Amendment?
I see how government which is represented by the people, and in the case of Calif., which is largely Democratic given the voting history of the people along with states rights, has the authority to pass these laws.
Do you know that these laws are the same types of laws that England created and America went to ware against?
I don’t know enough about world history.