Hi-Point Firearms Forums banner
1 - 20 of 33 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
No they in fact are expanding the carbine line , since they opened the new hydrocoating dept. Lot of different coated carbines coming up
Unfortunately "Hi-Point carbine" is specifically called out in Sec2.a.40.H.xii of HR1808, classifying them as "semiautomatic assault weapon", in the latest proposed assault weapons ban :(

Of course this really doesn't make any sense since the similar in purpose and configuration Ruger PC9 and PC40 are also specifically called out, but on the list of firearms that are to be excluded from the ban, although there is some confusion on this since some of the models are really fitted out more like PDWs and assault rifles than carbines.
 

·
Premium Member
JHP
Joined
·
9,167 Posts
Unfortunately "Hi-Point carbine" is specifically called out in Sec2.a.40.H.xii of HR1808, classifying them as "semiautomatic assault weapon", in the latest proposed assault weapons ban :(

Of course this really doesn't make any sense since the similar in purpose and configuration Ruger PC9 and PC40 are also specifically called out, but on the list of firearms that are to be excluded from the ban, although there is some confusion on this since some of the models are really fitted out more like PDWs and assault rifles than carbines.
The DemoNcrats are hating on inexpensive firearms (SNS) due to the masses being able to afford them for personal protection.

They can't have that.

Rerun
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
29,259 Posts
Unfortunately "Hi-Point carbine" is specifically called out in Sec2.a.40.H.xii of HR1808, classifying them as "semiautomatic assault weapon", in the latest proposed assault weapons ban :(

Of course this really doesn't make any sense since the similar in purpose and configuration Ruger PC9 and PC40 are also specifically called out, but on the list of firearms that are to be excluded from the ban, although there is some confusion on this since some of the models are really fitted out more like PDWs and assault rifles than carbines.
Call your Senators and tell them to vote no on any Senate version.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
 

·
Resident PITA
Joined
·
16,244 Posts
They've been listed by name on every ban attempt since Columbine. Nothing new here,
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
36,857 Posts
Funny thing is, Tom Deebs specifically didn’t chase higher capacity specifically to try to avoid being on those lists.
That’s what happens when you try to play along with their games.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
29,259 Posts
Funny thing is, Tom Deebs specifically didn’t chase higher capacity specifically to try to avoid being on those lists.
That’s what happens when you try to play along with their games.
There is no appeasing gun prohibitionists. They want you disarmed. It doesn't matter if it's 100 rounds or 1. It doesn't matter if it's a .50 cal or "gel-blaster" literal toy. The gun prohibitionists want it all banned. Thinking that they can be mollified if you throw them a bone just plays into their "long game" incrementalism.

So, again, call your Senators and tell them to vote no on any Senate version of a gun prohibition or restriction.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,930 Posts
Six Senators are leaving at the end of this year.
Patrick Leahy D-VT
Richard Burr R-NC
Pat Toomey R-PA
Richard Shelby R-AL*
Roy Blunt R-MO
Rob Portman R-OH
*did not vote for last gun control bill in Senate.

So the Dems need 10-11 additional votes in the Senate to pass a Senate version of this AWB bill; (60+ filibuster proof). 4 to 5 of these might come from the above list, so they just need another 5-7 votes from the Republicans to get a filibuster proof passage; unless the Republicans choose not to filibuster then they only need a simple majority? This is a key timeframe, call and contact your Senators to vote against the AWB. I don't have any great confidence that the 50 Republican members will vote en-bloc especially as 4 of the 5 who are leaving at the end of this term, have already voted for the previous gun control bill along with a few others.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,898 Posts
I'll all but guarentee the Toomey will vote in favor. Turncoat bastich
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,930 Posts
Yep. Like I said; the Dems only need 5-7 votes plus those 4 RINOs to get 60+ votes if all D Senators votes in favor plus the 2 Independents. My State's senators are both Ds (Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkeley), and one has had a house in NY with his wife :rolleyes:
I'll all but guarentee the Toomey will vote in favor. Turncoat bastich

Edit. For the House bill; five (5) Democrats voted against the bill but two (2) RINOS voted in favor, thus passing it by that margin. If these two RINOS voted against.. it would have been 215v215 and dead. 🤬🤬🤬
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Funny thing is, Tom Deebs specifically didn’t chase higher capacity specifically to try to avoid being on those lists.
That’s what happens when you try to play along with their games.
I have read that the original design of the 995 did take into account the 1994 ban, and has me wondering if the things were still sold in the "monkey gun" stock, would it be considered just another carbine/rifle, and not an "assault weapon", just because of the way it looks?

As I noted, the Ruger PC's are getting a pass, which I'm guessing is because Ruger presented the "plain" versions they sell to represent the things, and not the ones with the accessory/optic rails, cage foregrips, and folding stocks.
 

·
Resident PITA
Joined
·
16,244 Posts
I have read that the original design of the 995 did take into account the 1994 ban, and has me wondering if the things were still sold in the "monkey gun" stock, would it be considered just another carbine/rifle, and not an "assault weapon", just because of the way it looks?
It being on ban lists has nothing to do with its looks. It has to do with what guns were used in the Columbine Shooting.

 

·
AK = Automatic Killer!?!
Joined
·
3,244 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,898 Posts
It being on ban lists has nothing to do with its looks. It has to do with what guns were used in the Columbine Shooting.

If you're right (and I think you are) why not include pump and semi-auto shotguns as WMD? Of course, IIRC, both shotguns were already illegal modifications, but when did that ever matter?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rabidwookie

·
Resident PITA
Joined
·
16,244 Posts
If you're right (and I think you are) why not include pump and semi-auto shotguns as WMD? Of course, IIRC, both shotguns were already illegal modifications, but when did that ever matter?
Because they're classified as "hunting" and those would garnish serious (impossible to beat) opposition. And looking at the length/configurations of the shottys used I'd say they're already on a list.
 

·
Resident PITA
Joined
·
16,244 Posts
If you look at the list for HR1808, you'll see the majority of what they decided to include this time around were never used in a mass shooting.
And yet, there it is. It could be a list of slingshots and trebuchets and for some odd reason the 995 will be included.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rabidwookie

·
Registered
Joined
·
300 Posts
The ATF has come out publicly and in print that there is NO SUCH THING as an "Assault" anything - weapon, rifle, pistol!

It is a term coined by the anti-gun proponents to rouse emotions among the public. It is a POLITICAL term.

The "black, mean looking guns" are what they're talking about (as we all know), but in their take all the guns away, they'll keep expanding their lists until they don't think there are any more in the hands of the citizens and then we'll see their socialist democrat totalitarian regime kick in - (think Soviet Gulafs, Hitler's concentration camps, etc.) and all who oppose, or even speak out against them will be "re-educated" or disposed of. Fortunately the millions of weapons in the hands of the public make it almost impossible for them to attain their goal, and as long as there's a patriot or six left standing, it won't be over!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rabidwookie

·
Administrator
Joined
·
29,259 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,094 Posts
This bill was never intended to pass.
Its purpose is 1) Democrat political adds in select races where a wedge issue might help in a local election. 2) Republicans will use it everywhere for fund raising from single-issue voters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rabidwookie
1 - 20 of 33 Posts
Top