Ban timeline and procedures

Discussion of Firearm Politics & Legislation. This forum is now strictly limited to discussions directly related to firearms.

Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators

Post Reply
funyet
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 2:26 pm

Ban timeline and procedures

Post by funyet »

According to information on the Columbus City Council web site http://www.columbuscitycouncil.org/assa ... /index.htm

"...ordinance provides an exemption from the prohibition on possessing an assault weapon for those weapons lawfully owned and possessed prior to August 11, 2005, so long as the owner files a completed registration form with the License Section within 90 days of the effective date.

Today is August 17, well after August 11.

The last paragraph on the web page reads as follows: "Information and specifics on how to register assault weapons will be posted to this Web page shortly."

OK. So it's now after the effective date of the ban, yet Columbus has not provided information on how to go about complying with the law they passes. I foresee problems with proving a specific gun was owned/purchased prior to August 11, simply because many gun owners do not have or keep documentation of purchases. Such documentation is not required by law. If a procedure in place BEFORE the ban went into effect it would have been pretty easy to prove posession/ownership, i.e. I can show you the gun. But now...

Maybe I'm missing something here (I miss things a lot!). Am I misunderstanding what it says or is this simply a poorly written law. Or, is it purposely vague?
User avatar
Jim-in-Toledo
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
Posts: 1245
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 3:14 am
Location: If you can't figure it out, I'm not telling.

Re: Ban timeline and procedures

Post by Jim-in-Toledo »

funyet wrote:is this simply a poorly written law?
Nothing simple about it, they took great care (sp?) to write it as they did! (VERY poorly!) :shock: :twisted: :roll: :D
funyet wrote:is it purposely vague?
Yep! :evil: :twisted: :roll: :lol:
"An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life."
Robert Heinlein, Beyond This Horizon
I am the expert on my opinion.
And no one else's.
User avatar
Glock and dagger
Posts: 3091
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 12:57 pm
Location: Findlay

Post by Glock and dagger »

And, as far as I'm concerned, now is an excellent time for civil disobedience. Don't register your guns. Take them out of Kolumbus, and don't bring them back until this ends, or non-violent resolution has ended and violent resolution is the only way (I figure by then, we'll all know it is time).

If you register these guns, you are inadvertently admitting you have no right to own them. The only thing registration does is garners a list of subjects and lists what they own, so as to make easy for confiscation, and that is it!!!!

If you care anything about freedom, don't flush your rights away now!!!
I'm Glock and Dagger and I approved this message.

"If it deprives just one citizen of their God-given rights, it's not worth it."
-evan price

FOOTOS... the Fresh Fighter
TunnelRat
Deceased
Deceased
Posts: 9710
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:31 am
Location: Toledo

Post by TunnelRat »

Glock and dagger wrote:The only thing registration does is garners a list of subjects and lists what they own, so as to make easy for confiscation, and that is it!!!!
Concise, terse, succinct, and to the point. History has shown that registration leads to confiscation.
TunnelRat

"Applying the standard that is well established in our case law, we hold that the Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States." ~ McDonald v. Chicago

When your only tools are a hammer and sickle, every problem starts to look like too much freedom.
User avatar
Glock and dagger
Posts: 3091
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 12:57 pm
Location: Findlay

Post by Glock and dagger »

Unless you guys are wanting to know how soon the guns need to be relocated, none of us should care.
I'm Glock and Dagger and I approved this message.

"If it deprives just one citizen of their God-given rights, it's not worth it."
-evan price

FOOTOS... the Fresh Fighter
Safety Guy
Posts: 255
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 6:37 am
Location: Columbus, OH

Post by Safety Guy »

My M1 Carbine and Ruger 10/22 haved "moved away." If anyone wonders why, see the Council's definition of "barrel shroud":

http://www.columbuscitycouncil.org/assa ... 4-2005.pdf

It's on page 5.

The definition specifically exempts auto pistol slides, but nothing else. Not foreends, not handguards, etc.

Hmmm.

Now look at their PDF with pictures of "assault weapon" (sic) components:

http://www.columbuscitycouncil.org/assa ... onents.pdf

The gun in the upper left is a Micro Uzi Submachinegun! The buttplate of the folding stock is mislabeled as a "grip for non trigger hand."

I'm not taking any chances. Intentionally or not, this law was incredibly poorly worded, and I think that fact will help PRO defeat it in court when the time comes.

Karl
I WANT VERMONT! (OR "ALASKA")
That's FIRST AMENDMENT CRUSADER PIGLET!
User avatar
Glock and dagger
Posts: 3091
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 12:57 pm
Location: Findlay

Post by Glock and dagger »

What a bunch of goobers. (insert G&D flipping the bird here).
I'm Glock and Dagger and I approved this message.

"If it deprives just one citizen of their God-given rights, it's not worth it."
-evan price

FOOTOS... the Fresh Fighter
Post Reply