Jump to content

defaultdotxbe

Members
  • Posts

    5,911
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by defaultdotxbe

  1. Have a look at 29 and 34 in the house map (near Chicago, just to the south) They have a sliver that goes up in the suburbs, and huge "bulb" that goes south into rural areas, to ensure that the urban voters dilute the rural. I used to live in 29 and I'm sure Rep Jones doesn't care a lick about anyone south of I80
  2. Of course because Russian will never meet the conditions any attempt to remove the ban will face an uphill battle in Congress and the courts
  3. It appears the ban will apply to any ammo or firearm manufactured in Russia, regardless of what country its being imported from. But yes, all a company would have to do is set up a factory in another country and manufacture and import from there. I'm kindof hoping Barnaul does this. My AK likes their ammo lol
  4. 754,743. since IL is losing a district. But when you make that your sole metric you get what IL has already: Districts enclosing 400,000 urban democrats, and 350,000 rural conservatives
  5. After the census IL will be reduced to 17 districts, or exactly 6 counties per district Cook county's population is 5,275,541, meaning it would get 6.98 districts, almost exactly 7 Leaving 10 districts for the remaining 101 counties, or almost exactly 10 counties per Of course the division is by population not number of counties, so it wouldn't be 10 counties per district anyway. For example some of the collar counties would basically be one district each, meaning some district will enclose more than 10 counties. In fact the 55 smallest counties would compose just 1 district all together, if they were contiguous Sure, its not as simple as just circle any 10 counties and call it a district, but I'd wager you could draw a decent map using county lines, with Cook being the sole exception
  6. And at a greater carbon footprint. But that's what the environmentalists want. They don't want cleaner or more efficient fossil fuels, they want to eliminate them entirely, therefore any innovation that might cause some in the general public to say "this is good enough, we don't have to ban it now" must be stymied (same logic applies to gun control)
  7. I guess it would apply to someone who had a FOID, bought a gun, and then let the FOID expire. Or someone who moved from out of state with guns and never got a FOID.
  8. I think he means district lines should run along county lines, even if the district encloses multiple counties Of course you'd still have to squeeze 7 or 8 districts into Cook County, due to the high population
  9. I see they want to expand 2 to dilute even more rural voters Here is the current map, if you want to compare
  10. This never happens under Chevron, quite the opposite in fact. The Chevron defense essentially says the court can't find an agency misinterpreted a statute, because agency's power to interpret the statute supersedes the court's interpretation
  11. So if its deceptive to market it as a combat weapon, what does that mean for all the people who keep calling it a military-grade weapon of war?
  12. And if they had turned over a curated collection of documents containing only those relevant to the case Yahoo would be writing an article about how Remington is deliberately failing to comply with the court orders to turn over "all documents"
  13. With some clever design you don't even have to go that far. For example for e-tickets Metra uses a moving background that changes color when you tap it. That way if you try to show the conductor a screenshot or even a gif/movie you won't fool them
  14. The problem with the color coded DL background is you introduce yet another agency into doing background checks. Secretary of State would need to do a BGC to determine who is/might be prohibited in order to determine what color to use. Ummmmm, no thanks, there is NO NEED for a BGC for a DL. The only other possible way to do it is use a different color for FOID &/or CCL holders and simply declare others as “prohibited” thus instantly identifying who has what. THAT’S even worse. Not only that, but it would also seem to introduce an invasion of privacy. Anyone who you have to show your DL to will then know you're a prohibited person
  15. In an email from FPC they stated one of their lawyers couldn't think of any normal braced pistol that could pass
  16. I'd say no chance of grandfathering and anti gun illinois will enjoy squeezing you guys out of your pistols if you aren't prepared to change the barrels and make them 16"+ rifles. I read that folks in Maryland can only have an AK in pistol form. This kills that for them and the only real option available to them is to forfeit the firearm. I'm sure other places have this problem too. This doesn't affect all, or even most, AK/AR pistols, only those with the arm braces would be banned under this rule (and it would actually be the brace that gets banned, not the pistol itself)
  17. I'm not technically old enough to remember, but I have read about Terry Kath
  18. They aren't just omitting facts they are outright lying. Background checks are conducted regularly for FOID holders, reducing the length of time a card is valid for won't increase the frequency of those checks
  19. Well yes, but that's not THIS EO and rule change, it will be a subsequent one They seem to want to make the definition "its a firearm if we say its a firearm."" They don't want the bright line of "readily converted" = "over 80% complete" because they want the ATF to have to approve every component that someone might sell as an unifinished firearm
  20. Those quotes are referring to split receivers, so it means they won't be changing the classifications of something like an AR upper, or a Glock slide, which are not firearms despite housing certain fire control components The "ghost gun" section is a different part of the proposed rule change
  21. yeah, I think under the new rules what are currently considered 80% receivers will be considered completed firearms and thus require a serial and background check, and there will be some new threshold, below which they won't require anything, but its extremely vague requiring a subjective "identifiable as an unfinished firearm" test. I bet I can show 50 people a completed AK receiver and most of them wouldn't be able to identify it as a firearm
  22. I don't believe there is any requirement in the proposed rules that homemade firearms be serialized, even new ones made going forward (they are just going to make it harder to make them at home by putting a bunch of vague restrictions on 80% receivers) It also looks like they are going to require FFLs to put a serial number on any homemade guns they take into inventory, so when they get sold on they will have serial numbers
  23. This new rule on split receivers won't change any existing definitions like AR-15s or 10/22s. It's just intended to get ahead of the recent court rulings that things like an AR lower doesn't match their own rules of what's a receiver and give them more control of how they classify new firearms in the future
  24. With ragard to ARs and other common, finished, receivers its a lot of words to say they are doing the same thing they've been doing As far as "readily convertable" receivers they clarified the pretty clear ">80% finished is readily convertible" to the clear as mud "whatever we say is readily convertible"
×
×
  • Create New...