A Kalashnikov behind every blade of grass?

Ooh, this is a bit of a game changer. From RT, I quote:

Lawyers for Russian firearms producer Kalashnikov have prepared amendments to the national legislation liberalizing the purchase and ownership of firearms and introducing rules regulating gunsmithing, according to reports.

Kommersant newspaper reported on Thursday that it had managed to acquire and study the reworked draft of the Law on Weapons prepared by Kalashnikov’s legal team. The changes include an increase in the maximum quantity of guns of one type (shotguns and rifles) allowed for possession by one person from current five to ten.

It also proposes legalizing high-capacity (over 10 rounds) magazines for training and sports competitions and reducing the term of shotgun ownership required for purchasing a rifle. Currently any Russian citizen who wants to get a rifle must first own a shotgun for five years without any violations of the rules.

The bill also contains a plan to create a legislative basis for gunsmithing – currently Russian gun owners can only have firearms repaired by the manufacturer. If the bill is passed into law repairs with licensed third-party workshops would become possible.

According to Kommersant the bill has been distributed among Lower House MPs from parliamentary majority party United Russia for analysis and could be drafted in the State Duma before July 7.

Link

Russia may be about to liberalise it’s gun laws. This is an interesting turn up for the books, and one to watch.

Meanwhile in the US, Americans cling onto their guns in the face of continual threats from the leftists (communists) and the UN. I quote:

U.S. Promises “Full Implementation” of UN Gun-control Agreement

June 29 marked the end of the Third Review Conference (RevCon) of the United Nations’ Programme of Action (PoA) on Small Arms and Light Weapons. Delegates at the conference, including representatives of the United States, worked on producing updates to the global gun-control agreement.

According to the text of the latest draft of the agreement, the PoA will serve as an “international instrument to enable states to identify and trace, in a timely and reliable manner” the small arms and light weapons that are the target of the scheme.

In practice, this means that the governments of member nations (including the United States) should create a massive, all-inclusive database of all parties that manufacture, own, sell, trade, or transfer arms and ammunition.

If recent history is a reliable indicator of how such data would be used, after the catalog is complete, Congress could, hypothetically, pass a law (or the president would issue an executive order) compelling “voluntary” surrender of whatever privately-owned weapons, ammo, parts, and components (including reloading equipment) the UN deems “illicit.” If, after a statutorily set window, citizens don’t turn in these now-illicit items to their local law enforcement, then officers will be sent to remind violators of their responsibility under the law to disarm.

Link

Lis

Advertisements

Town Bypasses Constitution, US Citizens Given 60 Days to Turn in Guns Or Become Criminals

Seriously? Yes, it would seem so.

As the state promises gun rights activists they’re not coming for their guns, behind the scenes they’re pleading for it to happen. And now the feared gun grab is occurring. Residents in Deerfield, Illinois have 60 days to surrender their “assault weapons” or face fines of $1000 per day per gun.

The gun ban ordinance was passed on April 2nd with residents left with few choices of how to dispose of their valuable “assault weapons.” Upon careful reading of the ordinance, residents will be left with revolvers, .22 caliber “plinking” rifles, and double barrel shotguns to defend their homes and families from criminals who could care less about the law.

Fines for not disposing of the weapons range from $250 to $1000 per day per gun for those who choose not to comply with the city’s ordinance. While a fine may seem reasonable to some, as TFTP has reported on multiple occasions, failure to pay fines always results in police action. It is not far-fetched to predict major turmoil and arrests in the event of non-compliance.

One example of the so-called “assault weapon” is the Ruger 10/22 which can accept magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. Even though the 10/22 is not listed in the list of guns the village wants to see banned, the gun cannot legally be possessed in the village.

Residents have been instructed to either sell their guns, transfer the ownership to someone who lives outside the village, surrender their guns to Deerfield’s sheriff, or begin paying the fines.

You can read more here at The Daily Sheeple

Remember:

First they came for the AR-15s, and I didn’t own one so I said nothing… (you know how this goes).

God Bless you

Lis