While this is an important topic... All it takes is the wrong sort of person to come across a thread like this to start the train rolling for them. If $10k plus of my property suddenly became regulated/seized. I’m gonna flip poop.
Upvote 0
Are we an easy target for anti-airgun regulation?
- Thread starter FlexWagtail
- Start date
- Status
most large cities already have regulations on airguns. I grew up in a large city in AZ. We had Urban hunting area's, air guns only, and you could shoot in desginated urban hunting area's or on your own property as long as the projectile didnt leave your property. One morning I shot an annoying woodpecker that would keep me up in the mornings. A neighbor seen me and called the police. After my door was bashed in and a swat team blasted threw my home, I was arrested for Discharging a firearm in city limits. When I finaly got to court the judge dismissed the charges.
The old lady who called the police stated she heard multipule rounds go off from what apeared to be a machine gun, my old Crosman 760. When I was being arrested and hauled out of my house the police kept yelling, wheres the weapon! So even tho it was legal, i had my urban hunting license, some idiot next door over reacted to nothing. I could have been killed by the police. I think its stuff like that, that has caused the no shooting air guns in city limits. The prosacuter kept reffering to my bb gun as "an unregistered weapon" even tho that state didnt have any registration requirements
They did away with the urban hunting and fishing programs about a year or two after my incodent, but it was probably due to the development of the urban hunting area's. Also there is ALOT of gun violence, and gang/cartel activity
The old lady who called the police stated she heard multipule rounds go off from what apeared to be a machine gun, my old Crosman 760. When I was being arrested and hauled out of my house the police kept yelling, wheres the weapon! So even tho it was legal, i had my urban hunting license, some idiot next door over reacted to nothing. I could have been killed by the police. I think its stuff like that, that has caused the no shooting air guns in city limits. The prosacuter kept reffering to my bb gun as "an unregistered weapon" even tho that state didnt have any registration requirements
They did away with the urban hunting and fishing programs about a year or two after my incodent, but it was probably due to the development of the urban hunting area's. Also there is ALOT of gun violence, and gang/cartel activity
Upvote 0
I’m surprised that the lefty states (they are already atheists) don’t ban god since when most of us die they say god took him/her from us therefore if he was banned no one would die. Like today I read they want to ban all concealed weapons from sporting events that way the crazies will know where to go.
Upvote 0
Good grief, that story from Scrufhunter is a real eye opener. Living in the cities, and in neighborhoods with HOA's may appeal to some, but that is certainly not the way I wanna spend my life. I would be working my ass off to get out of there as quickly as possible.
I'd rather make 50k less per year and live somewhere that wasn't a polite version of prison.
What compels you guys to stay and pay off mortgages in a environment such as that ?
I'd rather make 50k less per year and live somewhere that wasn't a polite version of prison.
What compels you guys to stay and pay off mortgages in a environment such as that ?
Upvote 0
This topic is close to my heart - see my other thread on this forum about the IL bill to remove airguns from their firearm classification.
In my opinion, there is a lot of unjustified fear about airguns from non-shooters, because they look like a firearm, act like a firearm and have even been used as imposter firearms. It is our difficult job to hold these scared politicians and concerned citizens of some important facts:
1. The vast majority of airguns (what I define as "vast majority" are the airguns that exist in the US general population, which are typically under .25 caliber and 40fpe. We know, of course, there are exceptions amongst the airgunnerati, but they still aren't common) have only about 20% of the muzzle energy and range of the humble 22LR cartridge. This not only makes the airgun non-scary, it makes it an ideal tool for safe pest harvest and hunting in close quarters where firearms may be an undesirable option.
2. Airguns are the worst tool for folks who actually intend to do harm. A handgun and 50 rounds of ammo can easily be carried on a person, the energy for the damaging projectile is self-contained. An airgun producing the same energy would be physically huge compared to the handgun's size, and would need supporting gear like a tank or pump would be needed past the first several shots. Imagine the criminal saying, wait about 10 minutes, I need to pump my rifle up.
3. Statistics show that there are more deaths in pretty much any sport than airguns. In fact, I believe it is incumbent upon the politicians to show with actual data the incidents that they feel justify regulating airguns as a firearm. I think there will be a lot of open mouths with no real data coming out.
To be honest, I think the biggest thing that limits are success in deregulation are the idiots who shoot dogs and cats that make us look bad (same thing can be and is done with archery, by the way); and the fictional Ralphie shooting his eye out. Too bad Ralphie didn't have the polycarbonate safety glasses or parental supervision that responsible airgunners use.
In my opinion, there is a lot of unjustified fear about airguns from non-shooters, because they look like a firearm, act like a firearm and have even been used as imposter firearms. It is our difficult job to hold these scared politicians and concerned citizens of some important facts:
1. The vast majority of airguns (what I define as "vast majority" are the airguns that exist in the US general population, which are typically under .25 caliber and 40fpe. We know, of course, there are exceptions amongst the airgunnerati, but they still aren't common) have only about 20% of the muzzle energy and range of the humble 22LR cartridge. This not only makes the airgun non-scary, it makes it an ideal tool for safe pest harvest and hunting in close quarters where firearms may be an undesirable option.
2. Airguns are the worst tool for folks who actually intend to do harm. A handgun and 50 rounds of ammo can easily be carried on a person, the energy for the damaging projectile is self-contained. An airgun producing the same energy would be physically huge compared to the handgun's size, and would need supporting gear like a tank or pump would be needed past the first several shots. Imagine the criminal saying, wait about 10 minutes, I need to pump my rifle up.
3. Statistics show that there are more deaths in pretty much any sport than airguns. In fact, I believe it is incumbent upon the politicians to show with actual data the incidents that they feel justify regulating airguns as a firearm. I think there will be a lot of open mouths with no real data coming out.
To be honest, I think the biggest thing that limits are success in deregulation are the idiots who shoot dogs and cats that make us look bad (same thing can be and is done with archery, by the way); and the fictional Ralphie shooting his eye out. Too bad Ralphie didn't have the polycarbonate safety glasses or parental supervision that responsible airgunners use.
Upvote 0
Hey Mobilmail, I tried to follow the link in your post to read the bill but the state website doesn't list it anymore. Hope the committee did not kill it.
Along the lines of the educational points you lay out , If I had to talk to a skeptical legislator I think I'd talk up your point 2 above the others because I think its easy for a lawmaker to understand: "Nobody is committing mass murder in schools with airguns. That's because even the most powerful airguns are about the most useless tool a deranged person bent on causing harm could choose." As you state: "Imagine the criminal saying, wait about 10 minutes, I need to pump my rifle up" I might add to that conversation: "Our state has allowed legal wildlife harvest and target competitions with muzzeloading firearms and bows, both of which are exponentially more lethal that the airguns our critics are so concerned about. Please ask youself, when is the last time someone slaughtered school children with a muzzleloader or bow? There is a reason we don't need to severely regulate muzzleloaders and bows. Same goes for airguns."
You are correct that animal abusers, vandals, unsupervised kids, and the criminal rocket scientists who use look-alike and replica airguns to commit (not) armed-robberies are our hobby's worst enemies. For this reason airgunners should be willing to "work with" legislators. For instance, supporting beefed up sanctions for under-age purchase, unsupervised underage possession, or misuse allows legislators to notch a "win" on the issue while doing no actual harm to responsible participants in the hobby.
As I stated before, I don't think the "from my cold dead hands" posture is particularly effective in the case of "guns" that are not considered constitutionally protected "arms". On the other hand, NRA-freindly legislators and pro-gun voters are a natural constituency that should be brought to bear. However I think that in certain unfriendly jurisdictions, the presence of an NRA state director or organizer giving testimony on an airgun bill would inflame more than educate. It would also be a magnet for headline-making protestors. NRA is powerful in the US Congress and many state houses, but get down to the city council and county commissioner level in less gun-friendly jurisdictions and its gasoline and matches time for opponents eager to hand the organization a defeat.
Along the lines of the educational points you lay out , If I had to talk to a skeptical legislator I think I'd talk up your point 2 above the others because I think its easy for a lawmaker to understand: "Nobody is committing mass murder in schools with airguns. That's because even the most powerful airguns are about the most useless tool a deranged person bent on causing harm could choose." As you state: "Imagine the criminal saying, wait about 10 minutes, I need to pump my rifle up" I might add to that conversation: "Our state has allowed legal wildlife harvest and target competitions with muzzeloading firearms and bows, both of which are exponentially more lethal that the airguns our critics are so concerned about. Please ask youself, when is the last time someone slaughtered school children with a muzzleloader or bow? There is a reason we don't need to severely regulate muzzleloaders and bows. Same goes for airguns."
You are correct that animal abusers, vandals, unsupervised kids, and the criminal rocket scientists who use look-alike and replica airguns to commit (not) armed-robberies are our hobby's worst enemies. For this reason airgunners should be willing to "work with" legislators. For instance, supporting beefed up sanctions for under-age purchase, unsupervised underage possession, or misuse allows legislators to notch a "win" on the issue while doing no actual harm to responsible participants in the hobby.
As I stated before, I don't think the "from my cold dead hands" posture is particularly effective in the case of "guns" that are not considered constitutionally protected "arms". On the other hand, NRA-freindly legislators and pro-gun voters are a natural constituency that should be brought to bear. However I think that in certain unfriendly jurisdictions, the presence of an NRA state director or organizer giving testimony on an airgun bill would inflame more than educate. It would also be a magnet for headline-making protestors. NRA is powerful in the US Congress and many state houses, but get down to the city council and county commissioner level in less gun-friendly jurisdictions and its gasoline and matches time for opponents eager to hand the organization a defeat.
Upvote 0
Try this for the direct link to the bill (IL SB2583). I just verified this link. http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?GA=100&DocTypeID=SB&DocNum=2583&GAID=14&SessionID=91&LegID=109560
Upvote 0
Which has the popular definition used by society and the not popular original definition as used by the founding fathers of this country who came from a country that dictated a STATE Religion. Study some founding father documents then you will know the Truth of this tired and grossly misused out of original context statement by those who have no understanding of the real meaning and have perverted it to achieve their own sinister goals.
Thurmond
Upvote 0
I say the hell with these anti gun people !
the way liberals fight Trump and won’t uphold the law means we responsible gun owners can do the same !
when Liberals try to change the second amendment a federal judge can put a stop to this nonsense just like liberal judges do now against the President.
the way liberals fight Trump and won’t uphold the law means we responsible gun owners can do the same !
when Liberals try to change the second amendment a federal judge can put a stop to this nonsense just like liberal judges do now against the President.
Upvote 0
I’m fairly liberal... Independant thinker... I hate Trump... I am agnostic... I support the 2nd... Figure me out...
Upvote 0
Please cite a reference for Michigan, as I have not been able to find this information.
Thanks
Upvote 0
Str8shooter: below are citations from 2025
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2015-2016/publicact/htm/2015-PA-0024.htm) “Firearm” means any weapon which will, is designed to, or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by action of an explosive. A pneumatic gun, as defined in section 1 of 1990 PA 319, MCL 123.1101, other than a paintball gun that expels by pneumatic pressure plastic balls filled with paint for the purpose of marking the point of impact, is also considered a firearm for the purpose of this act.
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20150629/michigan-air-gun-reclassification-package-goes-into-effect
looks like my information was dated.
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2015-2016/publicact/htm/2015-PA-0024.htm) “Firearm” means any weapon which will, is designed to, or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by action of an explosive. A pneumatic gun, as defined in section 1 of 1990 PA 319, MCL 123.1101, other than a paintball gun that expels by pneumatic pressure plastic balls filled with paint for the purpose of marking the point of impact, is also considered a firearm for the purpose of this act.
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20150629/michigan-air-gun-reclassification-package-goes-into-effect
looks like my information was dated.
Upvote 0
This is the most ridiculous thing I’ve read all day... no atheist has ever blamed god for anything. I don’t believe in mad made fairy tales either... I can’t very well blame something that doesn’t exist in my mind. And I’ve never heard any atheist or agnostic blame a false god for anything. Why do conservatives always make poop up? See? I can generalize too..
Upvote 0
Another liberal here. Even a Hilary voting and a Trump disparaging one. And not much of a believer. None of which has anything to do with supporting all constitutional rights nor anything to do with enjoying shooting airguns. So let's keep this otherwise good discussion on topic. I do have concerns about looming regulation and welcome organizing to keep it at bay. And I'm all for encouraging widespread ownership of airguns so they pass an "in common use" test.
Upvote 0
That's why prices for ammo where so high when Pres. Obama was in office! FEAR! You better start buying ammo and guns now as Trump stated yesterday he is going against the Republican party and the NRA!
Upvote 0
I would think that it could be argued that airguns are in fact protected by our 2A like any human right. Why? First the 2A does not give us the right and rights are not nor should be allowed to be controlled on any level by government. Look at the wording of our 2A it states a well regulated militia and the people as far as being "armed". Nowhere does it state powder burner or self contained ammo, it simply states the right of the people to be armed.
Second Amendment
Second Amendment ExplainedA 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.
Don't be a victim of anti-gun brainwashing stay strong.
Last edited:
Upvote 0
The 2nd amendment also doesn't say neutron bombs are protected (or not protected). So do you have a personal right to a neutron bomb? You could also argue it's a gun, just the projectiles go in every direction.
Upvote 0
This is what brainwashing looks like in the beginning people. Your thinking is absurd (if you actually think this way). In others words you're being unrealistic. FYI, a citizen can legally own a canon. I am only pointing out how what you said is a misguided and misinformative way of attempting to make a point.
Upvote 0
- Status