Californians: Only Weeks Left to Veto Gunmageddon!

veto gunmageddon

“Veto Gunmageddon” organizers have set up across California to collect signatures to stop the state’s massive impending gun, gun accessory and ammunition ban. (Photo: FoxNews.com)

Californians looking to stock up on shooting supplies only have four months left to purchase guns and ammo under current law before the multi-bill gun control package dubbed “Gunmageddon” goes into effect. At the same time gun control opposition is hard at work to repeal the new laws through state-level referendum taking place this November.

The primary opposition group, Veto Gunmageddon, is lead by Barry, the CEO of Commercial Network Services, who first filed paperwork to create referenda petitions that would overturn the recently-passed legislation

“Veto Gunmageddon is a group of volunteers dedicated to overturning the recent draconian gun laws passed by the California legislature and signed by Governor Jerry Brown,” said Bahrami. “We are gun owners from all over California who watched with disbelief as the California Legislature bypassed normal procedure to pass strict and clearly unconstitutional gun laws.”

“We have come together and formed “Veto Gunmageddon, Citizens of California who are Opposed to Proposition 63, Assembly Bills 1135, 1511, 1695, 857 and Senate Bills 880, 1235 and 1446.”

The bills change California’s definition of “assault weapons” to include previously-exempt rifles with a detachable magazine, even if the magazine is locked to the rifle via “bullet button.” These guns must be registered and may never be transferred, even between friends and family. Registered “assault weapons” may not even be bequeathed to others in California if the owner wills it.

The package bans the ownership of magazine parts capable of being built into mags that have a greater than 10-round capacity, and requires that they be confiscated or destroyed. Other parts of the package place background checks on ammunition purchases and require online purchases of ammo to transfer through licensed vendors. The package even limits the number of guns a person can purchase.

See Also: ‘Gunmageddon’ — Wave of Draconian Gun Bills Headed to California Governor’s Desk

Another anti-“Gunpocalypse” group, the Gun Owners of the San Fernando Valley, has detailed a description of each part of the gun control package. “Not one of these will make a single Californian any safer,” explained the GOSFV. “All will make us less free.”

Like the GOSFV, Veto Gunmageddon has been quick to point out that the previous “assault weapons” ban passed had no effect on crime and only served to criminalize gun owners, and that this new “assault weapons” ban will make it even harder to be a gun owner in California.

The petitioning group has set up polling stations across California for voters to sign the petition that would prevent the laws from going into effect.

“These laws are completely insane to almost anyone with a real knowledge of firearms, and I did not think Gov. Brown would sign them,” Bahrami told FoxNews.com. “Many California gun owners are still unaware they will be criminals soon.”

“It comes down to this: get enough signatures on paper from registered voters in an insanely short period of time and the law will go on the ballot for voters to decide,” said Bahrami. “It is a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ and majority wins. To my knowledge, the option has never been exercised to this scale before … I had to get the ball rolling.”

These laws will restrict and criminalize current and future gun owners. Guns and gun parts will have to be registered, sold out-of-state or destroyed if the petitions don’t succeed. Between Gunmageddon and the expiration of non-microstamping handguns from California’s approved handgun roster, the future of gun ownership in California looks grim.

{ 26 comments… add one }
  • Ari September 3, 2016, 10:42 am

    Please note that the actual signature turn in date is Sept 29, 2016. If Gunsamerica would be so kind as to send out a new article to their readers reflecting the error and pushing their CA residents to find a petition signing location, that would be awesome.
    Also note that the NRA, CRPA, Firearms Policy Center, and Republican Party have been hesitant at best to support the cause. This has been strictly a grass roots effort with the volunteers giving all of their time and money to help business survive.
    Some businesses will not let customers in their door without signing all of the petitions, others like the ones in Santa Barbara don’t say anything to their customers unless someone walks in wanting to sign. Even then, they aren’t asked to sign all nine.

  • Ari September 3, 2016, 10:26 am

    Gunsamerica: Thank you for the article. If you live in CA please sign all nine petitions! We need every signature that we can get. We are getting a lot of gun owners who think that if they sign our petitions that they will be put on a list. This is not true. If you have bought a firearm since 1999 you are already recorded as being a gun owner, if you have ever registered to vote you are already on a list. I’m told that if we get enough good signatures that the state won’t bother to validate every one. We need at least 365,000 signatures on all nine petitions no later than Sept 29.
    Please help us reach that goal.
    https://www.vetogunmageddon.org/
    http://www.cirrraof2016.com

  • Mike Baker September 3, 2016, 9:43 am

    The only way to have long term change in California is to subvert their laws and clear out the political system. I mourn for the golden state as I see succession on their horizon.

    • MIke September 3, 2016, 11:01 pm

      “Nacht der langen messer”

  • Patriot September 2, 2016, 9:44 pm

    I hope true Americans know Hilly and Billy are by far the worst choice for president. The Democrats, in general, will do anything, legal or illegal, such as forcefully removing Republican poll watchers from voting sites in order to illegally control the voting procedure to insure Hilly has ALL the votes and Republicans have zero votes. This happened in the last Obama election. Many people very strongly feel that Hilly as president would be a terrible ordeal for the United States. She would try to be a dictator president as did Attorney General Healey in Massachusetts in order to control the American people and force them to accept the Hilly executive actions and absurd mis-interpretations of the Second Amendment and other parts of the Constitution.

    Do what is absolutely best for the United States and VOTE FOR DONALD TRUMP. Many idiot Democrats, such as Pelosi, Feinstein, Boxer, Brown, Healey, Schumer, etc. should be voted out at the earliest opportunity and their supporters Bloomberg, Soros, Katie Couric, Buffet, Holder, Obama, Harry Reid, Lynch, etc., should be ostracized. These people want to control the U.S. and change it to be as they desire.

    Give it serious thought and don’t forget, THE LIAR AND CORRUPT HILLARY IS ROTTEN TO THE CORE!!!!!

  • Chris Baker September 2, 2016, 9:33 pm

    Wasn’t it the 9th circus court that ruled that criminals didn’t have to register their firearms if registration became law, because to do so would be a violation of their 5th amendment rights against self incrimination? So if you keep your weapons and magazines you’re a criminal and you don’t have to turn them in because that would be self incrimination too wouldn’t it???

    Anyone who wants to store their “illegal” weapons can bring them to me here in Kingman and I’ll store them safely for when you move out of California like I did. Funny thing, Even in Arizona, I’m more conservative than probably 95% of the people. In my opinion, there are NO LEGAL gun laws in the U.S. except for using them to assault another person. That’s it. Anything less, such as having to ask permission is an infringement. Not being allowed to buy or own a certain type of gun or any other kind of weapon that you can carry (bear) is an infringement. Not being allowed to carry any weapon you want in any way that you want or anywhere other than a private home of another, is an infringement. The second amendment is the only permit you legally need. All other court decisions that are not in line with this are illegal. What part of “…Shall not be infringed” don’t they understand? or you folks who act like sheep too? You blindly follow illegal laws every day.

    • Rouge1 September 3, 2016, 1:12 pm

      Chris you are right. It’s funny how the courts and the left and many on the right think asking for id to vote is an infringement but nothing is an infringement to the second amendment. Getting a background check is nothing but asking permission from our incompetent corrupt government. A ccw is nothing more than begging your elites for permission to protect yourself and family.

  • George September 2, 2016, 9:13 pm

    They cheated Californians with the GMO vote and the vaccination law, what can they possibly hope for with the gun issue. Some states are akin to living in east Germany back in the day and California is number 1.

  • ProtoCulture September 2, 2016, 8:15 pm

    To those saying leave California, do you not realize just how useless and short sighted that sentiment is? Of course it would be nice to go somewhere where the gun law are more relaxed, but it’s not so easy with those with homea, jobs, and families to just pick up and go. For me, I have been a long time (and full time) California guardsman. I have been proud to serve the people of this great state despite the lack of service to its people by many of its useless politicians. I would like to continue to serve here.

    Also realize that simply giving in to these insane laws by leaving is truely not the right answer. With such an attitude, how long will it be, and how many times will l need to move as similar laws go to other states? Worse, where will you go when Hillary enacts similar laws throughout the country?

    No, I feel that what happens here must be fought tooth and nail. Leaving the state is giving in, retreating really, and allows our enemies to get stronger. It allows their illegal activities to go unopposed. It gives them sanction to bring their ideals to YOUR state. Gentlemen and ladies, we must make a stand in California, for the good of the entire Union!

    • larry September 3, 2016, 1:06 pm

      “The mark of a great general is to know when to retreat and have the courage to do it” Wellington

      • MIke September 3, 2016, 11:03 pm

        Well said.

  • larry September 2, 2016, 5:25 pm

    I moved to Commiefornia in 1984 and things were very different then. Governors Deukmejian and then Pete Wilson had their crap together for the most part and the budget was in order. Gun laws were within reason. I never thought twice about which guns, ammo, or accessories I could get. Now in 2016, the state is 25 billion in debt, 400 billion in unfunded pension liabilities, the highest state income tax rate in the nation, despite having the equivalent of the world’s 6th largest economy. What a difference 3 decades makes!! Oh, I forgot to mention the most draconian anti-gun laws in the nation. My wife and I will be out of this state in the next 2-3 years, and we’ll be taking our money with us. I’m tired of this crap in the mother of all nanny states. Great weather, but everything else sucks now. And yes, 1 out of 3 residents in the state is on food stamps.

  • Bisley September 2, 2016, 1:57 pm

    Seeing that the people who vote in California have elected the gang of Marxists and morons who came up with these unconstitutional edicts, why would anyone expect these same voters to nullify what the officials they’ve chosen have done? If these laws stand (which is very likely), it’s time for those who are sane, work regularly, and respect the Constitution, to leave the state. This conglomeration of radical leftists, illegal aliens, perverts, nuts, unionized state employees, welfare bums and the terminally stupid have taken control of the state — do you really want to work and pay to keep these people, and fund their domination over you and the destruction of your rights?

    Once, when asked what was the mark of a great general, the Duke of Wellington replied — “to know when to retreat, and dare to do it”. California has reached this point — there is no possibility of regaining control of the state, and the fruits of your labor are being used to maintain your enemies and finance your oppression. It’s time to move to a purple state where your votes can prevent this sort of thing from spreading — it’s too late to save California.

  • Kevin September 2, 2016, 11:36 am

    I suggest moving to a state within real America.

  • Robert September 2, 2016, 9:41 am

    All of these gun laws these anti-American commiefornia liberals have passed are ILLEGAL. I want to know why No one has made a citizens arrest on these dipshits or even sued them. Instead it;s always about voting for this person or that and the results are the same. Call me radical or whatever but the only way this is going to stop is to round All these liberals up and ship there anti-American butts to a middle eastern country of We The Peoples choice. If killary is elected there will be a second revolutionary war !

  • DRAINO September 1, 2016, 10:48 am

    Agreed! Getting enough people with common sense in their heads to get something done about it is a different thing. Rest assured if people don’t vote for Trump in this election, there will be a lot more infringing happening in our country.

    • Chief September 2, 2016, 9:15 am

      Yes people better vote Trump , If we lose the Supreme Court it won;t matter what the Constitution says ,they will say it is interpreted differently and we will lose our 2A rights .

  • Christian August 30, 2016, 5:18 am

    I want to tell you guys my German opinion straight this time again, because I was thinking a lot about the 2nd amendment, especially its last words “shall not be infringed”. I do believe it is necessary for a country that has a constitution (Germany has none despite what they tell you, thanks to article 146 Grundgesetz, the last article of our so called “constitution”), to defend it and cherish it at all cost, which Governor Brown obviously didn’t.

    To me it is simple: The 2nd amendment says that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall NOT be infringed. Therefore, in my personal opinion, no gun laws should exist in your country at all. For example, if you have a 30 rounds magazine and a politician says that this is too much and let’s take a bullet out, so that in the end we just have 29 rounds magazines. It isn’t a huge change indeed but, according to the 2nd amendment, it already would be an infringement because in the 2nd amendment are absolutely no limits set, also not about age. So, theoretically, even a child could wield a rocket launcher around. Yes, I know you people would maybe like to freak out on me now for this sentence but please let me assure you that I gave it serious thinking before I wanted to write this down because I know that it is a problematic topic and this news is just, in my eyes, perfect to write it down because it fits with the topic. If my opinion would maybe clash against another part of your constitution, please feel free to correct me, as I have honestly not read the other parts, besides the fact that I have read a part of the 1st amendment at least one time, which is way too less to understand it of course. So please do not think “German guy wants to explain our constitution for us.” because that is really not my intention.

    Forbidding certain guns? It is an infringement. Forbidding a certain ammo capacity? It is an infringement. Forbidding open-carry? It is an infringement. Only semi-automatic guns for civilians? It is an infringement. Background checks? It is an infringement. Need a driving license to buy a gun? It is an infringement. I could carry on like this but I think you get the point. So, I do really wonder HOW actually those Governors like Mr. Brown or Attorney Generals like Mrs. Healey from Massachusetts can actually infringe the 2nd amendment and make new gun laws, if it is in fact totally against the constitution of the USA, the very writing ALL the American laws have to obey on? I really try to follow these blogs as well as many of the comments on gunsamerica as good as I can but nowhere I found the answer to this question of mine. Why so many Americans, especially their politicians, believe that gun laws can exist, besides what is written in the 2nd amendment? I see no logic in this at all. Why so many of your people and politicians cannot understand the phrase “shall not be infringed”? Is the 2nd amendment anything worth at all or just a piece of paper you can show to others to proof your freedom, although it has no meaning anymore? And I wonder why the American people won’t freak out if some politician actually infringes the constitution with bills like that? At best, there should be a huge media storm going through your country, if a politician infringes a part of your constitution.

    Again, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. There is no limit in this sentence. As soon as you just forbid them to carry a certain type of gun, you already infringe the 2nd amendment. Simple as that, at least to me. The 2nd amendment knows no limits, regardless of gender, age, political or religious beliefs or type and function of any gun. So to me the 2nd amendment says that there shall be no gun laws at all in the USA to achieve the ultimate freedom, as it might have been intended by your fathers. But at another blog entry on this website I saw a video of Hillary Clinton where she stated, that some of the earliest laws of your country were about firearms (https://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/clinton-refuses-acknowledge-2a-individual-right/). I don’t know if she is right about that and I personally don’t like her a bit but if she is right, then I wonder why it was possible to infringe the 2nd amendment already shortly after the constitution has been finished. I think something strange is going on here.

    The only infringement which I would think is acceptable, is to forbid criminals and ex-criminals to keep and bear arms because they have already proven that they cannot be trusted. But I understand that my maybe “extreme” look on the 2nd amendment would not allow even this. So I admit that even my way might prove itself to be problematic in some ways and therefore I cannot say that my understanding of the 2nd amendment might be the best option. It is just my thinking.

    Everything I just wrote now is, as always, just my personal opinion.

    • Mahatma Muhjesbude September 2, 2016, 9:24 am

      Your opinion, Christian, should be the absolute status quo. Thanks for it. I’ve been saying the same thing and written about it in magazines and blogs and comments here on GA for years. The more people who start ‘reasoning’ as you do, and the more proactive groups like the Gunmaggedon (I just donated a hundred bucks to them) people there who start rolling and moving out, the sooner we can restore liberty and justice for all.

      The only thing I disagree with you about (your German ‘authoritative’ heritage is showing, lol!) is making permanantly banned popssession of firearms for citizens who commit a crime, especially for the arbitrary and capariciously whimsical holier-than-thou belief that they ‘can’t be trusted’. Because the reality is that virtually no one can be trusted, given the right–or wrong–circumstances.

      But when anybody–except maybe those who excempt themselves by Fiat corruption like Hillary–who breaks the far too many laws already designed for future gun prohibition and confiscation, should be imprisoned appropriately with what’s left of our due process–another problem we need to fix quickly–where they can’t do any harm or use any weapon to hurt anybody untill they are rehabilitated. There’s plenty of laws already on the books, (read a couple good books on this to wake you up fast.. Battlefield America by John Whitehead and Liberty in Eclipse by William Norman Grigg, to start with. They” point out how many crimes punishable by eternal gun prohibition that you likely committed unwittingly in your life.)

      Because creating a sub culture of ex-criminals who can never erase the stigma can easily become a prison planet major culture the way it’s going, is nothing less than an insidious way of disasrming the general population for all Totalitarian practical purposes. .the ’68 GCA making convicted criminals permanantly prohibited from having firearms was one of the all time greatest Tyranny hoaxes ever perpetrated on the American people!

      And now it perversely morphed–as originally planned–into non viiolent psuedo social ‘improprieties’ by abstract Administrative Fiat like being ‘determined’ to be ‘potentially’ ‘unsafe’, or mentally ‘unstable’ by subjective decree, etc. and more ETC. coming sooner than you shit your pants when you are sure you’re about to die….

      Wait until everybody sees the new form 4473’s coming down Hellbitch’s pike if she gets in instantly afterwerd. Hint, ANY potential emotionally, mood, or mentally altering drugs, which is just about all prescription drugs and just about all of us are on them, will prohibit you from possessing a firearm!

      The Framers and the Constitution DID NOT say ‘shall not be infringed …except if you’re an ex-criminal, or on medications’ because then you can never be trusted to be socially ‘safe’ because you can never be rehabilitated and enter society once again as a law abiding value producer.

      The founders, who understood human nature in society only too well, knew that was an absurdity and would lead to a crash and burn Totalitarian slippery slope from which there is no return.

      So it became “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED” For any reason, outside of being locked up where you can’t have ‘anything’ until you can assure society that you won’t be doing harmful crimes anymore. And if you do, the next time may be much longer or even life.

      Otherwise, remember. The reason you simply CANNOT compromise with ANY part of the 2nd/A is because ‘THEY’ can’t be Trusted at all! They use any equivocation or concession as noting less than a stepping stone to all out Totalitarianism, as evidenced rapidly in recent months.

      Think about all that again seriously, Christian.

      • Christian September 2, 2016, 12:43 pm

        Hello Mahatma,

        Thank you very much for the huge insight into your country and especially your explanation about the danger that occurs when you infringe the right of so called criminals to get their hands on guns. I never heard of the ’68 GCA before and it was interesting to learn about it. Honestly, I was positively surprised that my thoughts, which I at first believed to be extreme, are not just mine.

        As I have admitted in my first post, even I see a problem in infringing the 2nd amendment right of so called criminals, so even I wasn’t sure about my own opinion, but thank you very much for reminding me that the classification of a criminal can in fact be a step to a more totalitarian kind of government. It was something I wasn’t thinking about at first, although I should know it better, as many people in Germany become judged although they are obviously not guilty.

        I really enjoyed your post Mahatma, as it was really helpful for me! There is just one strange thing I would like to add, which I cannot understand and which I have found just after I have sent my first post. Even your Supreme Court already decided that the 2nd amendment “is not unlimited” during the case District of Columbia v. Heller (2008): https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZS.html

        Look at point 2: “Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose…..” When I read this, it really surprised me. I mean if they say this then how they were able to find any word in the 2nd amendment that says that it is not unlimited? Did they found some invisible words between the lines? And it was during a time where the famous judge Scalia was still alive, who was, from what I’ve learned so far, pro 2nd amendment. This is an interesting and also scary matter to me and I believe that the statement of the Supreme Court in this case is wrong (the opposite wrong of what Hillary thinks is wrong about the Supreme Court and the 2nd amendment).

        Thank you again for your great insight and the books you suggest to me! It is an awesome community on Gunsamerica, that’s why I like to come here every once in a while! Thanks again!

        • Chris Baker September 2, 2016, 9:46 pm

          Dear Mahatma and Christian,
          Thank you both. We may never meet in person but you are my friends forever! I’ve been saying this same thing for years and it’s nice to see some others starting to say it. This is my signature block that goes out on all my emails:
          Christian
          Constitutional Libertarian
          Ham: KK6LOP
          Matthew 22:36-40 “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.”
          2nd Amendment: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
          Requiring a permit is an infringement. Forbidding certain types of weapons is an infringement. Barring weapons from certain areas is an infringement. The Second Amendment IS my concealed carry permit.

          So you know my opinion. Even Jesus allowed self defense. He told his followers that if they didn’t have a sword to sell their cloak and buy one. When they returned and showed him the swords and asked if they should get more, he said “It is enough”. So if they wanted more that was fine. One is enough but sometimes you want more. Nobody has the right to tell you you cannot have another, or even one.

          • Christian September 3, 2016, 4:00 am

            Hello Chris!

            Thank you very much for your nice respond and for considering me as a friend, although we might never meet each other in real life. I am very honored by this. I also have always used a saying of Jesus to tell the people that we have the worldwide right to own a gun for self-defense, even in a Christian way. Many Christians in my country are against violence (so far so good) but unfortunately also against guns. If you meet someone like that you can also give him/her this verse (I tried to translate it from my German Bible now as good as possible):

            Matthew 26:52: “Then Jesus said to him: Pull your sword back into the scabbard; because all the ones who take the sword will die by the sword.”

            To me this is clear: If a bad guy is taking a sword he will die by the sword, therefore by another guy with a sword, a good guy. Only the bad guy is taking the sword first and then he has to be stopped by a good guy with a sword, or today with a gun. Simple as that to me.

            Thank you again for your encouraging words Chris! I wish you all the best!

    • kimberpross September 2, 2016, 9:45 am

      Bravo! You make a compelling argument! It is great to hear the view of an outsider to the USA and our constitution. I am regularly asking the question why the gun grabbing politicians and special interest groups target the AR15 and high capacity magazines. If you look at the USA crime statistics, and you were to build a Pareto Diagram representing the types of firearms used to commit those crimes, rifles would be one of the shortest (Least used) on the chart. AR15’s are a subset of that which I believe is responsible for less than 1% of firearms used for crime. Yet there is a firestorm with the gun grabbers on banning these and restricting ammunition for these, yet doing so by using the data, would have virtually no impact on crimes committed with firearms in the USA. So what is the OTHER agenda. Obviously our founding fathers wrote in as the second amendment to the constitution (very important) the right to bear arms and have a well regulated militia to thwart a tyrannical government. It appears the government doesn’t want the civilian militia to be as well armed as the military. The AR15 is a technological wonder on firearm designs. To deny ownership would be like denying access to the internet (Technologically) It is easy to operate, low recoil, easy to clean and accessorize and fun to shoot.

      • Christian September 2, 2016, 12:43 pm

        Hello kimberpross,

        Thank you very much for liking my post, as I was positively surprised by that! I honestly was fearing that I maybe went too far with my opinion, as I heard so often the argument that most American gun owners want “reasonable gun laws” whatever this means. But to be honest, I never saw a statistic about that and that is why I do not trust the words of your politicians in this case. Same with the German politicians that always talk about statistics here and there but nobody has been asked and nobody actually is allowed to see these statistics. It figures I think.

        Anyway, I fully support your view about the AR-15 rifle. I personally prefer Russian made ones. Therefore, if I could buy them, I would order me an AK-47, Saiga and Dragunov SVD but when we look at most shootings in the USA, and I am mostly observing the school shootings, then we can see that assault rifles have mostly not been used at all. Columbine, Virginia Tech, Roseburg and I think others as well, where assault rifles (I never see these semi-automatic things as assault rifles) have never been used. And does it matter with actually what these children get killed? No, but the fact is that they are hiding under the tables and can only wait for their death, yet these self-named democrats believe that taking the guns away from your possession would make your country safer and your children safer, which it obviously doesn’t.

        I personally would like to see the crime rates, especially theft, burglary and rape, of a state with tough gun laws, like California or Massachusetts, compared to a state with less strict gun laws, like Texas. I think studies have been made about this already but this would be a great tool in my belief to make people go away from the point that tough gun laws would make you safer and therefore dismantle Hillary’s propaganda, which is vital for your coming votes. Remember, only two months are left to make as many people as possible “converting”, as I would call it.

        And yes, kimberpross, a militia was a good idea by your fathers. I think I don’t have to tell you how defenseless you can be in Europe, yet most people here believe this stupid stuff that having a gun makes you automatically an evil person and therefore no one should have a gun, except for criminals, police and military. I am always so jealous when I see the Heckler & Koch weapons being sold in America but at the same time I, the one that lives in the manufacturing country, am not allowed to even buy at least a part of it, like the barrel or the trigger! Just some T-Shirt or cap with the H&K emblem, as if this would show the bad guys! So I do feel for your struggle against your government that wants to take you this absolute right and an important part of freedom away. Hillary scares me very much when I just see her. I just have this inside feeling if I could trust a person or not, she is unfortunately not one of them.

        And let me tell you that taking your guns away is just the first and most important step for these politicians. The internet, especially social media websites, will follow. I am also very interested into China and I have many Chinese online friends, but one told me that she cannot enter Gunsamerica because this website is blocked in China, although it is obvious that she couldn’t buy anything here anyway. Here in Germany, we officially have the freedom of speech BUT it is extremely infringed, especially by § 130 Strafgesetzbuch (criminal code). Quite any critic against the government can today be seen as demagoguery or hate speech and this § 130 is infringing the freedom of speech very much. So I tell you kimberpross, if they can get this far with your guns, many other freedoms will follow. Let us hope that it won’t go this far in your country as it already went in mine and many other EU controlled countries!

      • Keith September 2, 2016, 5:13 pm

        Kimberpross said: “The AR15 is a technological wonder on firearm designs.”

        I agree that the AR-15 is a firearm is a decently designed rifle. The only thing I do not like about the AR-15 rifle is the 5.56 x 45 round that it fires. The more powerful .300 AAC BlackOut cartridge solves this issue. Thank goodness you can buy an AR-15 that fires this round.

        • Rouge1 September 3, 2016, 1:28 pm

          Well keith there are also the 6.5 Grendel or the 458 socom in the ar 15 platform. And countless others.

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend