TexasCHLforum.com

Just curious ... Looking for opinions from rational, experienced members.

Would an assault weapons ban reinstatement be retroactive ???

As in confiscation? If you believe the Rep from NY, that is exactly what the Left wanted to do.

Almost definitely not... I don't think we'll see it pass to begin with, but if it does, it would be almost guaranteed to not be retroactive.

Law school version:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/ex_post_facto" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Star Trek version:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto_law" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Not all laws with retroactive effects have been held to be unconstitutional. One current U.S. law that has a retroactive effect is the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006. .....

jmra wrote:As in confiscation? If you believe the Rep from NY, that is exactly what the Left wanted to do.

IF they could get it passed, I believe it would be. Do they have the votes? We'll see.

All my guns fell out of my boat .... retroactively ...

Fast, thoughtful responses. This site is the greatest.

RPB wrote:All my guns fell out of my boat .... retroactively ...

Funny same thing happened to mine. Must be contagious. Humm, guess I better get a boat.

texanjoker wrote:

jmra wrote:As in confiscation? If you believe the Rep from NY, that is exactly what the Left wanted to do.

IF they could get it passed, I believe it would be. Do they have the votes? We'll see.

Even Harry Reid said they didn't have the votes to pass any legislation on a ban, and he wouldn't ask his Democratic Representatives to die on the sword by voting for it when it had no chance to get thru the Senate.

talltex wrote:

texanjoker wrote:

jmra wrote:As in confiscation? If you believe the Rep from NY, that is exactly what the Left wanted to do.

IF they could get it passed, I believe it would be. Do they have the votes? We'll see.

Even Harry Reid said they didn't have the votes to pass any legislation on a ban, and he wouldn't ask his Democratic Representatives to die on the sword by voting for it when it had no chance to get thru the Senate.

I don't think it will pass, but if somehow it did I can't imagine that confiscation wouldn't be on the table. If not confiscation, then registration which is simply the first step.

Scott in Houston wrote:Almost definitely not... I don't think we'll see it pass to begin with, but if it does, it would be almost guaranteed to not be retroactive.

It is inevitable to some degree.

Retroactive application will be certain too.

They ignore the constitution so why would retroactivity not be part of the package?? What makes you so certain? I am curious what you are basing your thought on given the rabid actions and words of the antis.

Anygunanywhere

talltex wrote:

texanjoker wrote:

jmra wrote:As in confiscation? If you believe the Rep from NY, that is exactly what the Left wanted to do.

IF they could get it passed, I believe it would be. Do they have the votes? We'll see.

Even Harry Reid said they didn't have the votes to pass any legislation on a ban, and he wouldn't ask his Democratic Representatives to die on the sword by voting for it when it had no chance to get thru the Senate.

I wouldn't put it past Harry Reid to say one thing and do another. After all, since when do politicians mean what they say?

anygunanywhere wrote:

Scott in Houston wrote:Almost definitely not... I don't think we'll see it pass to begin with, but if it does, it would be almost guaranteed to not be retroactive.

It is inevitable to some degree.

Retroactive application will be certain too.

They ignore the constitution so why would retroactivity not be part of the package?? What makes you so certain? I am curious what you are basing your thought on given the rabid actions and words of the antis.

Anygunanywhere

There are just too many in both parties that are against any ban on rifles that look scary...
If, and it's a big "if", if... they were to get it to pass, a retroactive clause (as in making it NOT retroactive) would have to be part of the bill to give it even a hint of a chance.

The numbers just aren't there for this bill to work. I am not basing it on the fact that there is any type of integrity in Congress, because that's obviously not the case, but just that there are too many people who are scared of the consequences of supporting a ban... especially one that would have a retro-active component.

Scott in Houston wrote: There are just too many in both parties that are against any ban on rifles that look scary...
If, and it's a big "if", if... they were to get it to pass, a retroactive clause (as in making it NOT retroactive) would have to be part of the bill to give it even a hint of a chance.

The numbers just aren't there for this bill to work. I am not basing it on the fact that there is any type of integrity in Congress, because that's obviously not the case, but just that there are too many people who are scared of the consequences of supporting a ban... especially one that would have a retro-active component.

You have much more faith in "ifs" not happening than I do.

I personally think that there is much more insidious planning and plotting going on behind the scenes than we can see.

I predict that the gun community will get blindsided.

Call me jaded.

Anygunanywhere

Any retroactive ban will result in a civil war. I think registration will result in widespread disobedience of the law. We are very close to a tipping point now, just with talk of additional regulations. You have to remember, the Clinton "assault weapon" ban was passed in 1994 and expired 10 years later. In the meantime, CHL swept the land. Millions of people now carry concealed legally all over the country. The atmosphere is different. People will not take kindly to having their access to weapons restricted. I expect you will see lawsuits in New York very soon. People will work within the system until they feel that is no longer possible, but one thing is certain. Americans will not give up their guns without a fierce fight. One can only pray that the politicians wake up before it gets bloody.