Gun control loons getting loonier

[Slander and/or Libel]

This is getting kind of silly, and proving the point I was trying to make in the first place. Unabashed gun nuts will claim that anything is a gun grab, even an executive order putting financial pressure on an autocratic regime invading another country. Insane.

The EO is clear. The inclusion of arms manufacturers is conspicuous. I've explained why these Russian firearms are not closely-related (if at all) to the Russian defense industry or to the tribulations in Ukraine.

You're not doing your side any favors.

They didn't ban any guns though.  They put specific Russian corporations including arms manufacturers on the OFAC list. 

Doesn't matter. The gubmint is always, and by definition, coming to take muh guns!

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Having read EO 13660 and EO 13661, could you please just point out the parts of them that you think amount to gun bans?

It's as plain as day in Section 1 (a)(ii)(B). Furthermore, this is not my opinion. Russian-manufactured firearms are no longer permitted for import.

Yet equivalent firearms, including firearms made to the exact same specifications, that are made elsewhere are still available. Also those already imported are freely available.  As has already been said, only a gun nut could think this was an anti-gun measure instead of an anti-Putin measure.  It makes as much sense as thinking that EO 13651, banning the import of jadeite and rubies from Burma, is an anti-gemstone measure instead of an anti-Burmese junta measure.

[Slander and/or Libel]

Very likely the administration examined the limited options they had available to exert economic pressure on Russia, and saw that the arms sector was one of its few viable choices.

[AggregateDemand]

Yet equivalent firearms, including firearms made to the exact same specifications, that are made elsewhere are still available. Also those already imported are freely available.  As has already been said, only a gun nut could think this was an anti-gun measure instead of an anti-Putin measure.  It makes as much sense as thinking that EO 13651, banning the import of jadeite and rubies from Burma, is an anti-gemstone measure instead of an anti-Burmese junta measure.

The administration has already defined EO 13661 Section 1(a)(ii)(B) for us. It's the escalation of an otherwise reasonable anti-Russian-defense policy, haphazardly inserted into an executive order about freezing the US commercial enterprises of Russian Federation government officials.

PS-civilian-guns-are-banned-too is not a fabrication invented by gun nuts. It's in black and white. The existence of AK-pattern rifles in other countries does not change the nature or the intent of the regulation. The fat, bald accountant still buys a BMW to impress women, though it is merely an ineffective, narcissistic excess. Do you think the same impulses exist in politics? *laff*

Arguing that President Obama has motives beyond gun ban is like arguing that Republicans enact ineffective tax cuts for reasons other than their ideological affinity for tax cuts. Sure. Let's try to carry the river water back to the mountains so we can reclassify them as an everglade. That's a good use of time.

I'm merely trying to save you guys from the indignity of your endeavor.

[Slander and/or Libel]

Arguing that President Obama has motives beyond gun ban is like arguing that Republicans enact ineffective tax cuts for reasons other than their ideological affinity for tax cuts.

Thank you for proving that you're not worth talking to.

[Free Bird]

You don't HAVE to own an Xbox One but you do anyway because you can. Should they be illegal because you don't need one to live? Same with with assault weapons, which I view are important to have in the event that protection is needed from tyranny.

[AggregateDemand]

Thank you for proving that you're not worth talking to.

As far as I'm concerned, the last post was my first argument based heavily upon conjecture about Obama's intent. From the beginning, you've argued that you know why Obama banned popular Russian civilian rifles; therefore, the ban didn't actually occur, and gun nuts are just making it all up.

Put yourself in my shoes, and contemplate the incredible good humor necessary to quote executive orders, as if they would have persuaded you. If you want to argue that you know intent, you must discredit other theories within a logical framework: If Obama knew the Russian gun-ban wouldn't eliminate AK-pattern rifles, how can you assume malice?

I responded to TF by questioning the assumption of fiduciary responsibility and reasonable person. See how it works?

[Slander and/or Libel]

As far as I'm concerned, the last post was my first argument based heavily upon conjecture about Obama's intent. From the beginning, you've argued that you know why Obama banned popular Russian civilian rifles; therefore, the ban didn't actually occur, and gun nuts are just making it all up.

Put yourself in my shoes, and contemplate the incredible good humor necessary to quote executive orders, as if they would have persuaded you. If you want to argue that you know intent, you must discredit other theories within a logical framework: If Obama knew the Russian gun-ban wouldn't eliminate AK-pattern rifles, how can you assume malice?

1) You're mischaracterizing basically everything I said.
2) As I bolded above, you keep talking about Obama having banned popular Russian guns. This is false. Obviously so. He's signed an executive order banning the import of guns made by one particular manufacturer from Russia. You keep talking as though it's broader than that, and it hurts what little credibility you had left.

[AggregateDemand]

Obama used the Russia/Ukraine crisis to ban the importation of Russian AK-pattern receivers and parts so........

This is what I said, which was correct then and is still correct now. Russian guns are banned, but not any particular design of Russian gun.

Furthermore, your argument is 1) I never said Russian guns are not banned, but 2) Russian guns are not banned.

[7,052,770]

I heard that Obama paid Putin to invade Ukraine to that he'd have an excuse to BAN GUNS! IT'S A CONSPIRACY!

[bedstuy]

If you're an American consumer, you can still own these Russian guns, you can buy and sell them on the secondary market, ergo, they are not banned.  Business dealings with certain Russian corporations are being regulated by OFAC and in this case you can't do business with a major Russian arms company. 

Why?  It seems like there are a few obvious reasons.  The US imposed economic sanctions on Russia and this company is supplying arms to combatants.  Seems like reason enough.  On top of that, these guns are apparently a significant Russian export to the US and thus one of the few ways that non-banking related sanctions can have teeth.  So, right there, we don't want to be supporting a major Russian arms corporation, while that corporation is complicit in the events in Ukraine. 

Gun nuts want to turn everything into either a conspiracy or a pity party about their toys.  These people are such babies.  We're supposed to structure US foreign policy around their stupid hobby of collecting toys.  Can't gun nuts just collect pogs or something?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Why do people want to buy AK-47s anyway?

There is almost no one in the US who has any use for them, and by that I include criminals. An AK-47 obviously isn't the best weapon for hunting, and it's tough to imagine a scenario where a normal person needs one for self defense. And as stated even for crime they're not too useful. There's a ton of guns that can be used for drive-by shootings far more effectively, an assassin probably would have an easier time using a standard hunting rifle (which have far better accuracy at long distances), and it's clearly not the most effective weapon to use when robbing a bank or holding up a liquor store. The only person I could see who would have any interest in buying one would be collectors, but if I were a collector I'd seek out one used in some actual conflict they were iconic in than one built in 2013 in some shady Russian factory.

AK-47s are popular weapons because their durability and relatively cheapness and ease to use and low learning curve makes them ideal for guerilla warfare, but this is about the US...so basically the only people interested in them are the clowns who delude themselves that they're going to be part of some glorious proletariat revolution (well actually no since I don't see many teenage neckbeards seeking out AK-47s) or believe you'll need when the black helicopters come swarming in with the jackbooted stormtroopers to take away your freedoms...so basically you aren't worth taking seriously on ANYTHING.

[Slander and/or Libel]

Obama used the Russia/Ukraine crisis to ban the importation of Russian AK-pattern receivers and parts so........

This is what I said, which was correct then and is still correct now. Russian guns are banned, but not any particular design of Russian gun.

Furthermore, your argument is 1) I never said Russian guns are not banned, but 2) Russian guns are not banned.

Wrong.

[AggregateDemand]

Wrong.

The problem is that you don't understand the difference between Russian arms, meaning firearms built in Russia, and AK-pattern weapons, which happen to have been designed in Russia. In your mind, the expression "Russian AK-pattern" is redundant.

If you can't delineate between basic firearm concepts, why do you try to offer an opinion?

[Slander and/or Libel]

Why indeed? You're going to go ahead and inform me what's on my mind, so I guess I've got nothing to say myself.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Looks like Rostec will be selling Kalashnikov to an oligarch so far not targeted by the sanctions in hopes of evading the sanctions.

https://news.yahoo.com/russian-state-arms-maker-sell-plant-bypass-western-195534833.html

They'd already agreed last year to sell Andrei Bokarev 49% of the company over two years as way of raising funds for the troubled company  and in hopes that private ownership would be able to introduce efficiencies that weren't going to happen so long as it was a wholly state-owned firm.

http://www.ibtimes.com/why-kremlin-selling-its-stake-ak-47-maker-debt-management-problems-kalashnikov-producer-1410150

Since the first article says they'll be selling the 75% they still own, so I guess the deal had been only half completed.  I doubt it'll work tho.  Bokarev has likely not been targeted so far because he's been primarily been involved in the Russian rail industry, and his main company CJSC Transmashholding, doesn't sell much to the West.  There wasn't any reason to make him a primary sanctions target until now, but now there will be every reason to do so, in hopes of causing other oligarchs of being wary of trying to help Putin evade sanctions.

[dead0man]

Mom's Demand Action want more people murdered in grocery stores.  link

[Maistre]

Why do people want to buy AK-47s anyway?

There is almost no one in the US who has any use for them, and by that I include criminals. An AK-47 obviously isn't the best weapon for hunting, and it's tough to imagine a scenario where a normal person needs one for self defense. And as stated even for crime they're not too useful. There's a ton of guns that can be used for drive-by shootings far more effectively, an assassin probably would have an easier time using a standard hunting rifle (which have far better accuracy at long distances), and it's clearly not the most effective weapon to use when robbing a bank or holding up a liquor store. The only person I could see who would have any interest in buying one would be collectors, but if I were a collector I'd seek out one used in some actual conflict they were iconic in than one built in 2013 in some shady Russian factory.

AK-47s are popular weapons because their durability and relatively cheapness and ease to use and low learning curve makes them ideal for guerilla warfare, but this is about the US...so basically the only people interested in them are the clowns who delude themselves that they're going to be part of some glorious proletariat revolution (well actually no since I don't see many teenage neckbeards seeking out AK-47s) or believe you'll need when the black helicopters come swarming in with the jackbooted stormtroopers to take away your freedoms...so basically you aren't worth taking seriously on ANYTHING.

Collectors?

They do exist you know.

Some people even enjoy shooting them on the range.

Edit: Ah, never mind, you mentioned collectors.