Kerouac32

I think that's a good idea. If S&W, Glock, Springfield Armory, Beretta, Ruger, etc. got on board it would make a big statement.

I completely agree, the proposed bill is very far-reaching and dangerous, especially in its vague language. I also agree that it would be very difficult for them to pass it but honestly, anymore nothing surprises me. These legislators have far too much emotion on this issue and not much, if any, logic.

Found it, thanks.

Oh okay, how many are in consideration today?

I really think it will stay at 15. The bill I'm really worried about is the one about in-home inspections. Knowing this state that is a very slippery slope.

Ruger 10/22 HK USP .40 used lever action 30-30 HK P7 (I'd give it to my dad)

Damn, didn't realize. Came across this page and it had today's date on it.

Here's an excerpt: "By current law, Barrett cannot be an accomplice with any lawbreaker, therefore, cannot and will not service or sell to New York government agencies. Barrett also applies this stance to the individual elected official who, as a matter of public record, has voted for or created regulation that violates the constitutional rights of their citizens. This is an expansion of our 2002 ban against the California government due to their second amendment infringements, and shall apply to any future violators." The whole article is here: http://epictactical.com/barrett-joins-larue-and-others

This is perfect.

Exactly. It's an uphill battle.

It's a great point and can't be understated. Parents are too often lazy and the government loves laziness.

The Fourth Amendment states: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." Lyman Trumble, speaking about the amendment and its relation to the states said, "There is no change in that respect so far as the States are concerned, and the Federal Government cannot interfere with the States so long as they do not deprive some person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law." Proposed bill A3676 sponsored by Assem. Jiminez states: "No handgun purchase permit or firearms purchaser identification card shall be issued: (10) To any person who has not had an on-site inspection and evaluation of the household where the firearm will be situate, the purpose of which is to ensure the person is qualified to purchase the firearm as required by subsection c. of this section." I know historically "search and seizure" is referring to arrests but has there been any recent cases that may tie in and bolster our fight against these proposed bills in regards to the Fourth Amendment? And, I can't even begin to imagine the vague language that will be used to define a person that is unqualified after the inspection.

I've shopped around in there before and yes it seemed like things were a little pricey.

Hey all, just wanted to let you know. They got 42 Windam Weaponry SR 556's in this morning. As of 1430 they were down to 15. Give em a call, they'll take full payment over the phone. They're going for $1200 plus NICS. Their phone number is 856-251-9099.

http://m.cbsnews.com/storysynopsis.rbml?&pageType=sundaymorning&catid=57566014&feed_id=35&nb_splitPage=3 I think this is the most chilling part: "This is our country. We live in it, and we have a right to the kind of country we want. We would not allow the French or the United Nations to rule us, and neither should we allow people who died over two centuries ago and knew nothing of our country as it exists today." Honestly it's a bit interesting he mentioned the UN who I'm pretty sure the president is alright with handing over rights to.