Dismiss Notice

Welcome To CK5!

Registering is free and easy! Hope to see you on the forums soon.

Score a FREE t-shirt and membership sticker when you sign up for a Premium Membership and choose the recurring plan.

please help get rid of the stupid 1994 assault weapons ban...

Discussion in 'The Lounge' started by jekbrown, Feb 3, 2004.

  1. jekbrown

    jekbrown I am CK5 Premium Member GMOTM Winner Author

    Joined:
    May 19, 2001
    Posts:
    45,031
    Likes Received:
    366
    Location:
    Vancouver, WA, USA
    hey gang, as you prolly already know, the "assault weapons" ban of 1994 has a sunset clause in it... if it doesnt get through the congress and signed by the prez before september of this year, it will (thank god) go away. Now Gee-Dub has already said he'd sign it if it got to his desk... which means that we have to do our part to make sure that it never gets there. IMO, this bill will never leave the House of Reps... but it has a VERY good chance (esp in an election year!) of getting through the Senate. AT any rate, below is some links for contacting your senators/reps and the prez... and a nifty anti-AWB form letter that you can use to respond if you dont have the time to write one out. If you dislike stupid gun laws as much as I do, help everyone out by contacting your legislators and letting them know how you feel. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

    Call and write to your Senators and Reps. here is a link to where you can find contact info for them.

    Below is a sample letter you can use. Feel free to use it as is or to make changes as you see fit.

    [ QUOTE ]

    Dear Senator,

    I am writing to you in regards to the "Assault Weapons Ban of 1994", which is set to expire via a sunset clause in September of 2004. As one of your constituents, I am asking you to oppose any and all efforts to reauthorize this terrible law.


    The "Assault Weapons" ban simply doesn’t work like its authors expected it to, regardless of what they claim. The facts can be distorted but the truth cannot…."Assault Weapons" neither cause, nor significantly contribute to violent crime in America. It has had absolutely zero effect on reducing crime but has seriously eroded my rights as an American gun owner.


    This law specifically targets firearms that are involved in less than one percent of all crimes but are used quite extensively by hunters and sportsmen. Many people engage in competitive shooting programs, such as the Civilian Marksmanship Program, that use mainly semi-automatic firearms. They are no longer allowed to configure their rifles in the constitutionally protected manner of their choosing. This is a tremendous and terrible impact on the law-abiding citizens of the United States and should not be allowed to continue.


    Furthermore, the ban targets only cosmetic features of firearms just because they look intimidating. The truth of the matter is that the so-called "Assault Weapons" are not assault weapons at all. They are mechanically identical to semi-automatic "sporting rifles" and only look like assault weapons. True assault weapons are fully automatic weapons that differ significantly with the weapons targeted by this ban.


    The fact that this ban has had no effect on violent crime, it hinders the rights of law-abiding citizens involved in competitive shooting, and attacks weapons based solely on their appearance justifies its expiration. I implore you to vote against reauthorization or renewal of any and all parts of the "Assault Weapons" ban. Please do your part in helping lawful American gun owners see their rights restored.


    Sincerely,


    [/ QUOTE ]

    ok gang, this will only take a few mins and who knows, it may make all the difference. Left-leaning republicans who don't hear about these kinds of issues from constituants might vote for such a ban just because they don't think their people really care. Let em know otherwise and we can kill that stupid ban once and for all. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

    j
     
  2. skratch

    skratch 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2003
    Posts:
    1,646
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Gorveport, OH
    Done!

    Sent to both of my Senators.
    I don't own any firearms, but most of my friends do, and I do a lot of target shooting with them and have heard alot about this. I totally agree that the ban should not be renewed.
    I'm glad be able to do my part to help.
     
  3. Z3PR

    Z3PR Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2002
    Posts:
    19,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Everywhere
    Done, done, and done. /forums/images/graemlins/deal.gif /forums/images/graemlins/waytogo.gif (2 senitors and 1 rep.)
     
  4. landsmasher

    landsmasher 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2002
    Posts:
    4,423
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    California, The Blow Me State
    [ QUOTE ]
    …."Assault Weapons" neither cause, nor significantly contribute to violent crime in America

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Obviously, you have never seen what drug dealers and gangs use for weapons. Bank robbers have also been known to use these weapons for bank jobs and armored car hiests.

    [ QUOTE ]
    This law specifically targets firearms that are involved in less than one percent of all crimes but are used quite extensively by hunters and sportsmen.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I have never in my life seen a hunter with a fully automatic assault rifle.

    [ QUOTE ]
    Many people engage in competitive shooting programs, such as the Civilian Marksmanship Program, that use mainly semi-automatic firearms.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Semi-automatic firearms are not assault rifles and not illegal.

    [ QUOTE ]
    Furthermore, the ban targets only cosmetic features of firearms just because they look intimidating.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    That's just plain nonsense. Not true... False... Wouldn't hold up in court.

    Jek,
    Before you go sending this thing in to your legislators you should study up on the actual law a bit so you don't sound like a complete idiot. Not calling you one, just saying that with a letter like this you will look like one. If you want to get rid of the assault rifle ban, at least look like you did your homework. Send in an itelligent letter.

    Personally I believe that there should be a ban on them unless they are registered and licensed to someone who is an enthusiast, hobbiest or collector. I don't really see a need for them to be sold openly at Wall Mart to any yahoo with a wallet. /forums/images/graemlins/usaflag.gif
     
  5. xflatrater

    xflatrater Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2003
    Posts:
    65
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Shamong NJ
    [ QUOTE ]
    Obviously, you have never seen what drug dealers and gangs use for weapons. Bank robbers have also been known to use these weapons for bank jobs and armored car hiests.


    [/ QUOTE ] Drug Dealers and Bank Robbers dont buy weponds in gun stores with a proper permit after being checked out by the FBI....I DO.

    [ QUOTE ]
    I have never in my life seen a hunter with a fully automatic assault rifle

    [/ QUOTE ]
    Fully Automatic weponds have never been legal in NJ where I live or most other states, thats not what the law is banning
    [ QUOTE ]
    Semi-automatic firearms are not assault rifles and not illegal

    [/ QUOTE ]
    Wrong the are banning rifles like the M1 [perhaps one of the best shooting rifle of all time] and the AR-14 sporster a higly valued collectors/shooters piece. they include rifles in the ban because of a flash supressor or bayonet mounting points [kinda like the sierra club banning trucks with tow hooks]

    This law was simply poorly written and wont solve any current problems, it just creates more trouble for the honest man that tries to do things correctly. If you were a drug dealer or bank robber you simply need to drive to mexico or fly to Russia to buy any type of arms you want...or maybe just find the russian web site and take home a nice used Flanker....hey its not on the ban list!
     
  6. jekbrown

    jekbrown I am CK5 Premium Member GMOTM Winner Author

    Joined:
    May 19, 2001
    Posts:
    45,031
    Likes Received:
    366
    Location:
    Vancouver, WA, USA
    [ QUOTE ]
    Obviously, you have never seen what drug dealers and gangs use for weapons. Bank robbers have also been known to use these weapons for bank jobs and armored car hiests.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    oh brother, quit watching so many movies. Gang members rarely walk around with full size rifles in public. Has it happened before? sure, does it happen very often? hardly. In any case, these people don't give a crap about bans/laws anyway, so I don't see the relevance. Regardless of what you have seen gangs carry, the statistics prove that the weapons banned are hardly ever used for criminal intent that results in a homicide. Easy example is the LA bankrobbers that illegal full auto AKs. How many people did they kill? zero. Fact is the guns that kill the most people tend to be cheap small caliber handguns, 25 autos, 22s, 38 snubbys, cheapo 9mm etc. If you wanted to target the weapons that are killing the most people, there you go, go after them. The weapons attacked in the AWB of '94 are a miniscule portion of the guns used in violent crime.

    [ QUOTE ]
    I have never in my life seen a hunter with a fully automatic assault rifle.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    this ban has NOTHING to do with fully automatic weapons. Those were banned in the 1930's smart guy. All the weapons banned in this law are semi automatic... wowsers, and you say I need to read the bans and do research? what a fool. Also, the sentence in question said "hunters and sportsman". Shooting is a sport, and there are competitive clases in which semi automatics are used as the norm. Additionally, the right to bear arms was not put in the Constitution so people could shoot deer... it was put in there so people could defend themselves, their property, their state and their country. For the latter 2 purposes, semi automatic rifles and handguns are entirely appropriate. In any case, there are no restrictions on use in the constitution for bearing arms... just like there isn't for free speech.

    [ QUOTE ]
    Semi-automatic firearms are not assault rifles and not illegal.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    without a class III license, tax stamps etc etc true assault rifles are not legal and havent been for decades. Almost all semi-automatic versions of assault rifles however were legal until the 1994 ban. Some still are, depends on where it was made and a lot of other cosmetic BS that makes no sense at all.

    [ QUOTE ]
    That's just plain nonsense. Not true... False... Wouldn't hold up in court.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    it is true and clearly so. want proof? explain why a bayonet lug is a feature that makes semi-automatic rifles subject to a ban under this law. In the entire history of the united states of america, there is not a SINGLE case of someone using a bayonet attached to a rifle to commit a homicide. NOT ONE. Since this is the case, tell me why exactly a bayo lug / bayo should be part of this ban law? yep, you guessed it, cause the left wing weeny idiots who wrote it said "wow, thats looks SCARY oooooohhhhh!!" and put it on the list. That part of the form letter is dead on. Learn about import AK-style weapons with pistol grips vs thumbhole stocks if you want to be taken to school even more than you already have been.

    [ QUOTE ]
    Before you go sending this thing in to your legislators you should study up on the actual law a bit so you don't sound like a complete idiot. Not calling you one, just saying that with a letter like this you will look like one.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    you mean like you just did right here?

    [ QUOTE ]
    If you want to get rid of the assault rifle ban, at least look like you did your homework. Send in an itelligent letter.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    you just proved that you dont know anything about the ban we are speaking about. The ban has nothing to do with "assault rifles"... nothing, zip, nada, zilch, zero.

    [ QUOTE ]
    Personally I believe that there should be a ban on them unless they are registered and licensed to someone who is an enthusiast, hobbiest or collector. I don't really see a need for them to be sold openly at Wall Mart to any yahoo with a wallet. /forums/images/graemlins/usaflag.gif

    [/ QUOTE ]

    People who would be against the ban are "enthusiasts"... and Walmart has never sold an assault rifle AFAIK.

    thanks for the advice on doing my homework... you haven't done any whatsoever, so it was a good example of what NOT to do. haha. owned.

    j
     
  7. R72K5

    R72K5 Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2001
    Posts:
    8,905
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    central IL
    i see no reason to allow assualt weapons into posession of anyone except military and police personnel,

    12 guages and .22's and such for hunters to use maybe, but no more than that

    unfortunately guns will always find some way into hands of criminals and ppl who should never be allowed to touch such items, but at least a ban on such except for military and other legitimate use would help in keeping more of them out of the general public

    i dont know how a true assault weapon can be considered to be a hunting gun /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

    guns such the AK series and such are assault are they not ?
    the only guns that ive ever seen be used competitively at least around here are shotguns, and those are not assault weapons.
     
  8. landsmasher

    landsmasher 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2002
    Posts:
    4,423
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    California, The Blow Me State
    Jek,,,
    What you just posted as a reply to my "assault" (no pun intended) on your letter is PERFECT! Send that in and you may get some action. All I was doing was pointing out how silly your generic letter sounds to most people.

    I'm not an authority on guns or gun law. But that generic letter sounds like it was written by a 12 year old girl. I think the things you said to me in your last post shows a better attack on the bill....

    As for my feelings towards assault rifles:

    I never said that they were sold in Wall Mart. Just that I don't want to see it. My cop friends tell me that they regularly recover machine guns from crack houses and gang holdouts. Machine guns, assault rifles, automatic rifles or pistols, what ever the hell you wanna call them, they have no usefull purpose other than to kill people. That's my stand.
     
  9. jekbrown

    jekbrown I am CK5 Premium Member GMOTM Winner Author

    Joined:
    May 19, 2001
    Posts:
    45,031
    Likes Received:
    366
    Location:
    Vancouver, WA, USA
    [ QUOTE ]
    i see no reason to allow assualt weapons into posession of anyone except military and police personnel

    [/ QUOTE ]

    to each their own, some people think freedom of speech should be limited to certain "qualified" personel. The great thing about the US and the Constitution is, we each have right to decide wether or not we want to have a gun or excersize our free speech rights. AFA the cops go, if its good for a cop to carry it should be good for a citizen... I mean, cops weapons are carried to protect themselves and the public... right?

    [ QUOTE ]
    12 guages and .22's and such for hunters to use maybe, but no more than that

    [/ QUOTE ]

    a 22 for hunting? I take it you don't hunt much...

    [ QUOTE ]
    unfortunately guns will always find some way into hands of criminals

    [/ QUOTE ]

    so in other words, no matter what the laws are, criminals will get guns... the only question is whether or not innocent people are going to be armed or not. I mean really, if you were planning on killing a bunch of people, do you really care if the gun you are using is illegal? please.

    [ QUOTE ]
    i dont know how a true assault weapon can be considered to be a hunting gun /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

    [/ QUOTE ]

    completely irrelevant. The 2nd ammendment has nothing to do with the shooting of animals. That said, some of the weapons banned under this law could certainly be used to hunting if you wanted to. Any of the imported semi-auto rifles in .308 for example have plenty of power and accuracy to be used for that purpose.

    [ QUOTE ]
    guns such the AK series and such are assault are they not?

    [/ QUOTE ]

    the true AK rifle, as issued to military units in Russia, for example, is fully automatic. Such weapons are not legal here in the US unless you have a class III license, have paid the appropriate taxes etc etc. These weapons are not listed in the ban. Some semi-auto rifles of the same type (AK series) are banned... but only if they have certain cosmetic features that the ban writers don't like... and even then only if its imported from overseas. The exact same rifle with the exact same capability, if manufactured in the US, is completely legal. Tons of manufacturers making internal AK parts here in the US that you can swap into your import AK to make it legal for use even with those "nasty" cosmetic features. Its all BS really, and even a gun-hater should be able to see it pretty clearly.

    [ QUOTE ]
    the only guns that ive ever seen be used competitively at least around here are shotguns, and those are not assault weapons.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    1) just because you are not aware of it doesn't mean such competitions do not exist. 2) there are indeed seveal models of shotguns banned under this law as "assault weapons".

    j
     
  10. jekbrown

    jekbrown I am CK5 Premium Member GMOTM Winner Author

    Joined:
    May 19, 2001
    Posts:
    45,031
    Likes Received:
    366
    Location:
    Vancouver, WA, USA
    [ QUOTE ]
    Jek,,,
    What you just posted as a reply to my "assault" (no pun intended) on your letter is PERFECT! Send that in and you may get some action. All I was doing was pointing out how silly your generic letter sounds to most people.

    I'm not an authority on guns or gun law. But that generic letter sounds like it was written by a 12 year old girl. I think the things you said to me in your last post shows a better attack on the bill....

    [/ QUOTE ]

    lol, maybe but 1) i got mean and nasty and 2) i dont think most politicians can read above the 12 yr old level. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif In any case, peeps can email whatever they want, i just wanted to make it easier. I cut/pasted that form letter from a post on glocktalk.com.

    [ QUOTE ]
    As for my feelings towards assault rifles:

    I never said that they were sold in Wall Mart. Just that I don't want to see it. My cop friends tell me that they regularly recover machine guns from crack houses and gang holdouts. Machine guns, assault rifles, automatic rifles or pistols, what ever the hell you wanna call them, they have no usefull purpose other than to kill people. That's my stand.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    like i always say, to each their own. I wouldn't mind at all if Walmart sold legal rifles... i mean if its ok for Joe Bob's guns... why not walmart? They would have to do the standard federal backround check just like everyone else... not like they'd be dragging your new fullauto tommy gun across the laser scanner, dropping it in the little blue plastic bags (double bagged cause its heavy!) and letting you walk out the door with it. /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

    AFA "only purpose is to kill" goes, what I think of that idea as 3 fold. First of all, i really really like the sport of target shooting and it requires a gun and has nothing to do with killing people. Second, some people like to shoot animals (I dont myself) and assuming the follow the laws pertaining to the # of animals they can shoot and have their permits and all that crap, I think they should be able to use pretty much whatever rifle they want. Third, being able to "kill people" is exactly why we have the second ammendment. It wasn't put in there for hunting, or target shooting, or collecting, or any other reason. Its there so a citizen can protect himself/proprty/family from other citizens, and so the individual can aid in the defense of his fellow citizens, his state and his country. That "protecting" may require killing the "other guy"... and if so, what better than a tool designed for that purpose. A gun is a lot like a knife... it can be used for a lot of different things and in none of them is it inherantly evil or bad. Knives are used to kill/injure people all the time and yet the idea of banning them is silly. Knives, like guns, do not have a mind of their own. Guns hardly ever kill anyone... a PERSON kills someone using a gun as a tool, which makes the gun no more evil than a car is (vehicular homicide) or a knife in a stabbing, or a bat in a beating.

    j
     
  11. civicstomper

    civicstomper 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Posts:
    283
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Rochester NY
    I dont have any weapons bigger than a crossbow, I dont hunt, and I dont like the idea of people getting killed at all. Even so, I agree with Jek's point on the gun being similar to the knife. Both of them are tools, designed to make a job easier. (protection, get food, etc.)

    Thats just me, I have never had a close friend or family member get shot or anything so maybe I wont understand. If so let me know, I have a lot to learn. Good luck /forums/images/graemlins/thumb.gif

    -pete /forums/images/graemlins/k5.gif /forums/images/graemlins/truck.gif /forums/images/graemlins/usaflag.gif
     
  12. SS66

    SS66 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2003
    Posts:
    538
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    WI, USA
    Ignore the silly Californian Jek.. He obviously doesnt know much about the subject other than what his liberal lie-ridden media has fed him. I wonder how he would feel if we put out a bill to ban Barbara Streisand /forums/images/graemlins/thinking.gif
     
  13. Stephen

    Stephen 1/2 ton status Moderator Vendor

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2000
    Posts:
    4,227
    Likes Received:
    142
    Location:
    Carbondale Colorado
    It's hard to come up with a good analogy in truck language to show how stupid some of the provisions in the bill are. It would be like arbitrarily banning certain 4wd's because they "are too effective at harming the environment". So your H2 that came with 35's would be banned because it comes with large "offroad" tires but it's entirely OK for us to slap 44's on our K5's and go play with them. By the same token, a GM 1-ton with a factory "locking" diff would be banned for being too destructive but you could buy the 1-ton without the diff and have it added later and it's OK. As long as it's not a toyota with an imported rear axle and then it's never OK to possess them because they are SOOOooo inherently bad that no one should ever have one.

    Lots of things that make no sense in this bill. And it's not like it's a harmless idiocy either, there are quite a few modifications that can be done with commonly available parts by an average do-it-yourselfer that can make you an instant felon. These are HUGE consequences for actions that really don't matter. Imagine losing your rights to own all vehicles (among other major life problems) if you committed the felony of adding swaybar disconnects to your '85 K5 not knowing that all K5's after 1984 are considered "post ban" and cannot be enhanced for offroad travel. It doesn't matter that it's the same truck as your '84 K5, you're now a felon. This is not an exaggeration, it's that simple for some guns and parts.

    Regardless, those of you that are "middle of the road" on this issue, please keep in mind that there are probably quite a few people that you know that are gun enthusiasts and don't routinely kill people, any more than we run over hondas full of pre-schoolers in our lifted burly "dangerous" four wheel drives. Some of us care a LOT about our gun hobby and gun freedoms and at the very least, give some good people the benefit of your trust and don't vote FOR anything that will infringe on our (yours too) rights. And if you're even a bit inclined, you might ask around about some more info on gun laws like this "assault weapons" ban and find out for yourself how ridiculous they are. Heck, I guarantee that if you ask a gun enthusiast to take you out to observe some shooting activities, you will find someone more than willing to show you around. A little familiarity goes a long way. They guy above talking about hunting with a shotgun and a .22 falls into this catagory. I don't have a problem with the fact that you don't hunt and don't know much about it, but there's a VERRRY big world of hunting with all kinds of guns bigger than a .22 out there. If you want to know anything about it, just ask. Believe me, anyone that cares about continuing to own and use guns will be more than happy to help you learn more. We're the good guys, we'll help you learn whatever you want because it can only help you and us.
     
  14. kombi59

    kombi59 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2002
    Posts:
    197
    Likes Received:
    0
    I personally do not like the idea of people owning them, but I keep my opinions to myself. because I and millions of other U.S citizens have served, fought and died for "the right to bear arms" so who am I or any other ass*ole to say you or I am not allowed to own them. The Glamis dunes are a real good example. they have so much area closed to off road vehicles and they still want more. if you have never been there it is amazing how much land is there and only a small area is used to ride on. It is our interest to keep as many freedoms as we can. my vote is for Assult rifles, they are fun. I'll forward my own letter though. Chad /forums/images/graemlins/usaflag.gif
     
  15. 73K5Kid

    73K5Kid 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2002
    Posts:
    583
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    chandler az
    I'm already a head of you. /forums/images/graemlins/deal.gif
     
  16. Skigirl

    Skigirl 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2001
    Posts:
    2,563
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Los Angeles, California
    [ QUOTE ]
    My cop friends tell me that they regularly recover machine guns from crack houses and gang holdouts. Machine guns, assault rifles, automatic rifles or pistols, what ever the hell you wanna call them, they have no usefull purpose other than to kill people. That's my stand.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Larry, you're right. Those kinds of guns are being confiscated all the time. My problem with that is that the gangbangers, criminals and wackos have acquired and continue to acquire these weapons, and they've been banned since 1994! So what the hell good has the law done?? Nothing that I can tell. Gun related crime hasn't dropped. Use of these types of weapons (as rare as it is compared to other handguns previously mentioned) hasn't decreased any in the criminal element. So it seems to me that the only people who can't own therse types of guns, for whatever reason they want them, are those people who are typical law abiding, safety conscious gun owners. Every gun owner I know is very responsible with safety and care of the weapon.

    Jekbrown, I would throw some statistical data in your letter too - maybe something along the line tha t this ban has had no notable effect on use of these weapons in crime - or any weapons for that matter.
     
  17. Bubba Ray Boudreaux

    Bubba Ray Boudreaux 1 ton status

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2001
    Posts:
    20,716
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Undisclosed Location
    What is an "Assault Weapon?"



    Just for the record, the writers of the material on this site do not advocate the use of the term "assault weapon" to describe the particular firearms in question. It is used throughout only for the sake of simplicity and clarity, and is done so with a great deal of sarcasm and disdain (hence the use of quote marks wherever it is used), as "assault weapon" is merely a catchy term which was conjured up by the gun control lobby to aid in its efforts to demonize these guns.



    That said, let us move on. There is a lot of confusion as to what the official definition of a "Semiautomatic Assault Weapon" (SAW). Even the authors of the law seem somewhat confused. The short and simple definition of "assault weapon" is basically a semi-automatic firearm with a military appearance. Semi-automatic means the trigger must be pulled for each shot, after which the firearm extracts the spent shell casing chambers a fresh round, readying the gun for the next shot. This is vastly different from the military assault rifles and machine pistols, which some "assault weapons" are designed to look like.

    An assault rifle has a mechanism that allows for fully automatic firing, so that as long as the trigger is squeezed, cartridges will continue to be fired in rapid succession until the supply of ammunition is exhausted. These types of firearms have been heavily regulated since 1934, and are not addressed at all in the legislation banning "assault weapons." This is a very important point, as the average person (and many gun owners too) would have a difficult time distinguishing between side by side photos of a fully automatic assault rifle and a semi-automatic look-alike.

    But despite the similar or identical appearances to military firearms, the functionality of "assault weapons" is no different than any other semi-automatic, which have been available for 100 years. And though the label "assault weapons" is relatively new, this type of firearm is not. For example, Colt began making the AR-15 Sporter, a semi-automatic version of the military M16, almost 40 years ago. The venerable M1 Garand, used by our troops in WWII (and, by the way, is significantly more powerful than more modern "assault weapons"), has been available to civilians for even longer.

    The 1994 Ban on "Assault Weapons" makes illegal the manufacture of firearms meeting the bill's definition of "assault weapon". The bill specifically bans several firearms with particularly sinister and notorious sounding names, such as "Uzi", "Kalashnikov", and "TEC-9", which despite their military-like, futuristic (or, in some cases, hideous) appearance are functionally no different than other semi-automatics. In addition, there is a "features" test for determining if a firearm is an "assault weapon", though oddly enough, it is not based on complex ballistic testing, the power of the cartridge fired, or any other factor that has an effect on lethality. Instead, the ban defines "assault weapons" based on cosmetic and ergonomic design features that do not have any bearing on lethality.



    Rifles

    Specifically, a rifle is considered an "assault weapon" if it can accept a detachable magazine, and possesses two or more of the following features:

    * Folding or telescopic stock
    * Pistol grip protruding conspicuously beneath the stock
    * Bayonet mount
    * Flash suppressor or threaded barrel
    * Grenade launcher

    Among this list of "evil features", only one item initially stands out to the layperson as possibly making the firearm significantly more dangerous, and that is the grenade launcher. However, since grenades and the components to make them are already extremely tightly regulated as "destructive devices", grenade launchers are irrelevant. It would be a fair assumption to say that perhaps "grenade launcher" was added to the list simply to provide a certain degree of shock factor.

    Other items on the list at least have some practical purpose.

    The most amusing of these by far is the bayonet mount, which is the subject of an infinite number of wise-cracks (such as, "the ban has significantly reduced the number of drive-by bayonettings"). All joking aside, while a bayonet could be useful in either millitary combat, or a home defense situation, if anyone has EVER heard of ANY harm being committed by a criminal armed with a bayonet on an "assault weapon", please tell us about it.

    A folding or telescopic stock allows the firearm to more easily be transported and stored, and would also be useful in a home defense situation where maneuverability is important. A flash suppressor reduces the visibility of the bright flash of light that is sometimes produced by firing in the dark. This would be very important for someone defending their family against an intruder in the middle of the night, as the flash would tend to temporarily hamper the shooter's vision.

    The pistol grip, being perhaps the most "military-like" feature in appearance, in most cases is a necessity of the firearm's design due to the stock being directly in-line with the bore, as opposed to being lower than the bore as is the case with "traditional" rifles. Because the positioning of the stock in the manner does not provide for a place that the shooter can hold on to with the trigger hand, a pistol grip is used.

    None of these things have any significant impact on how deadly a particular firearm is, and each is a legitimately purposeful feature.



    Pistols

    For a pistol to be considered a “SAW,” among other things, it must have the ability to accept a detachable magazine, plus two of the following features:

    * Magazine that attaches outside of the pistol grip
    * Threaded barrel capable of accepting a barrel extender, flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer*
    * Shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the non-trigger hand without being burned
    * Manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded
    * Semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm

    *Note: "the ability to accept" a silencer does not mean these firearms are so equipped. Silencers have been as heavily regulated as machine guns since the 1934 National Firearms Act.



    Features such as the barrel shroud and "semiautomatic veriosn of an automatic firearm" were obviously written to target copies of the TEC-9 and MAC-10 and similar type pistols. Again it seems obvious that the authors of the law were targeting the “aggressive appearance” of firearms, instead of functionality or lethality.



    "High Capacity" Magazines

    Another major effect of the law is the ban on manufacture of "high capacity ammunition feeding devices," otherwise known as normal or full capacity magazines. "High capacity" is arbitrarily defined as more than 10 rounds. Citizens must either pay exorbitant prices for "pre-ban" normal capacity magazines for their firearms, or use inferior artificially limited magazines. Neither choice is appealing.





    Definitions

    Below are the definitions, as written, in the United States Code:

    Title 18, Chapter 44, Section 921 of the United States Code states:

    The term ''semiautomatic assault weapon'' means -
    (A) any of the firearms, or copies or duplicates of the firearms in any caliber, known as -
    (i) Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs (all models);
    (ii) Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil;
    (iii) Beretta Ar70 (SC-70);
    (iv) Colt AR-15;
    (v) Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, and FNC;
    (vi) SWD M-10, M-11, M-11/9, and M-12;
    (vii) Steyr AUG;
    (viii)INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9 and TEC-22; and
    (ix) revolving cylinder shotguns, such as (or similar to) the Street Sweeper and Striker 12;
    (B) a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of -
    (i) a folding or telescoping stock;
    (ii)a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
    (iii)a bayonet mount;
    (iv) a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor; and
    (v) a grenade launcher;
    (C) a semiautomatic pistol that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of -
    (i) an ammunition magazine that attaches to the pistol outside of the pistol grip;
    (ii)a threaded barrel capable of accepting a barrel extender, flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer;
    (iii)a shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel and that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the non-trigger hand without being burned;
    (iv) a manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when the pistol is unloaded; and
    (v) a semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm; and
    (D) a semiautomatic shotgun that has at least 2 of -
    (i) a folding or telescoping stock;
    (ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
    (iii)a fixed magazine capacity in excess of 5 rounds; and
    (iv) an ability to accept a detachable magazine.

    Exemptions to the law:
    Title 18, Chapter 44, section 922 states:
    (1) It shall be unlawful for a person to manufacture, transfer, or possess a semiautomatic assault weapon.
    (2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession or transfer of any semiautomatic assault weapon otherwise lawfully possessed under Federal law on the date of the enactment of this subsection.
    (3) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to -
    (A) any of the firearms, or replicas or duplicates of the firearms, specified in Appendix A to this section, as such firearms were manufactured on October 1, 1993;
    (B) any firearm that -
    (i) is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action;
    (ii) has been rendered permanently inoperable; or
    (iii) is an antique firearm;
    (C) any semiautomatic rifle that cannot accept a detachable magazine that holds more than 5 rounds of ammunition; or
    (D) any semiautomatic shotgun that cannot hold more than 5 rounds of ammunition in a fixed or detachable magazine.
    The fact that a firearm is not listed in Appendix A shall not be construed to mean that paragraph (1) applies to such firearm. No firearm exempted by this subsection may be deleted from Appendix A so long as this subsection is in effect

    APPENDIX A CENTERFIRE RIFLES - AUTOLOADERS
    Browning BAR Mark II Safari Semi-Auto Rifle Browning BAR Mark II Safari Magnum Rifle Browning High-Power Rifle Heckler & Koch Model 300 Rifle Iver Johnson M-1 Carbine Iver Johnson 50th Anniversary M-1 Carbine Marlin Model 9 Camp Carbine Marlin Model 45 Carbine Remington Nylon 66 Auto-Loading Rifle Remington Model 7400 Auto Rifle Remington Model 7400 Rifle Remington Model 7400 Special Purpose Auto Rifle Ruger Mini-14 Autoloading Rifle (w/o folding stock) Ruger Mini Thirty Rifle

    Large Capacity Magazines
    Title 18, Chapter 44, Section 921;
    (31) The term ''large capacity ammunition feeding device'' -
    A) means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device manufactured after the date of enactment of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 that has a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition; but
    B) does not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.

    The United States Code also describes other types of firearms:
    Title 18, Chapter 44, Section 921;
    The term ''shotgun'' means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and designed or redesigned and made or remade to use the energy of an explosive to fire through a smooth bore either a number of ball shot or a single projectile for each single pull of the trigger. The term ''short-barreled shotgun'' means a shotgun having one or more barrels less than eighteen inches in length and any weapon made from a shotgun (whether by alteration, modification or otherwise) if such a weapon as modified has an overall length of less than twenty-six inches.
    The term ''rifle'' means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and designed or redesigned and made or remade to use the energy of an explosive to fire only a single projectile through a rifled bore for each single pull of the trigger.
    The term ''short-barreled rifle'' means a rifle having one or more barrels less than sixteen inches in length and any weapon made from a rifle (whether by alteration, modification, or otherwise) if such weapon, as modified, has an overall length of less than twenty-six inches.
    The term ''antique firearm'' means -
    (A) any firearm (including any firearm with a matchlock, flintlock, percussion cap, or similar type of ignition system) manufactured in or before 1898; or
    (B) any replica of any firearm described in subparagraph (A) if such replica -
    (i) is not designed or redesigned for using rimfire or conventional centerfire fixed ammunition, or
    (ii)uses rimfire or conventional centerfire fixed ammunition which is no longer manufactured in the United States and which is not readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade; or
    (C) any muzzle loading rifle, muzzle loading shotgun, or muzzle loading pistol, which is designed to use black powder, or a black powder substitute, and which cannot use fixed ammunition. For purposes of this subparagraph, the term ''antique firearm'' shall not include any weapon which incorporates a firearm frame or receiver, any firearm which is converted into a muzzle loading weapon, or any muzzle loading weapon which can be readily converted to fire fixed ammunition by replacing the barrel, bolt, breechblock, or any combination thereof.
    The term ''semiautomatic rifle'' means any repeating rifle which utilizes a portion of the energy of a firing cartridge to extract the fired cartridge case and chamber the next round, and which requires a separate pull of the trigger to fire each cartridge.

    The term ''handgun'' means -
    (A) a firearm which has a short stock and is designed to be held and fired by the use of a single hand; and
    (B) any combination of parts from which a firearm described in subparagraph (A) can be assembled. Exemptions as defined in Title 18, Chapter 44, Section 922
    (v) (1) It shall be unlawful for a person to manufacture, transfer, or possess a semiautomatic assault weapon.
    (2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession or transfer of any semiautomatic assault weapon otherwise lawfully possessed under Federal law on the date of the enactment of this subsection.
    (3) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to -
    (A) any of the firearms, or replicas or duplicates of the firearms, specified in Appendix A to this section, as such firearms were manufactured on October 1, 1993;
    (B) any firearm that -
    (i) is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action;
    (ii) has been rendered permanently inoperable; or
    (iii) is an antique firearm;
    (C) any semiautomatic rifle that cannot accept a detachable magazine that holds more than 5 rounds of ammunition; or
    (D) any semiautomatic shotgun that cannot hold more than 5 rounds of ammunition in a fixed or detachable magazine.
    The fact that a firearm is not listed in Appendix A shall not be construed to mean that paragraph (1) applies to such firearm. No firearm exempted by this subsection may be deleted from Appendix A so long as this subsection is in effect.
    (4) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to -
    (A) the manufacture for, transfer to, or possession by the United States or a department or agency of the United States or a State or a department, agency, or political subdivision of a State, or a transfer to or possession by a law enforcement officer employed by such an entity for purposes of law enforcement (whether on or off duty);
    (B) the transfer to a licensee under title I of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 for purposes of establishing and maintaining an on-site physical protection system and security organization required by Federal law, or possession by an employee or contractor of such licensee on-site for such purposes or off-site for purposes of licensee-authorized training or transportation of nuclear materials;
    (C) the possession, by an individual who is retired from service with a law enforcement agency and is not otherwise prohibited from receiving a firearm, of a semiautomatic assault weapon transferred to the individual by the agency upon such retirement; or
    (D) the manufacture, transfer, or possession of a semiautomatic assault weapon by a licensed manufacturer or licensed importer for the purposes of testing or experimentation authorized by the Secretary.
    (w) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), it shall be unlawful for a person to transfer or possess a large capacity ammunition feeding device.
    (2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession or transfer of any large capacity ammunition feeding device otherwise lawfully possessed on or before the date of the enactment of this subsection.

    The Law
     
  18. 84_Chevy_K10

    84_Chevy_K10 Banned

    Joined:
    May 30, 2001
    Posts:
    17,669
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    IL, USA
    I just wrote all the Illinois congressman, including the democraps.
     
  19. tomseviltwin

    tomseviltwin 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2001
    Posts:
    2,065
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Utah
    The problem with the "assault weapons ban" besides the blatant disregard of the phrase "Shall not be infringed." is that it bans weapons for solely cosmetic reasons. A Berretta 92b with a ten shot magazine is not an assault weapon, when the same Berretta with a 15 shot magazine is. A Ruger mini 14 can have a muzzle brake, or a pistol grip, or a high capacity magazine, but if it has all three, it is an assault weapon\, ect. The law is silly.

    If a similar law banned race cars. A honda civic would be banned if it had a spoiler or perhaps a fart muffler.

    I feel some comfort in the likelihood that the reauthorization will not make it through the house, so the Senate can go [jeep] itself. Both of my republican Senators are liberal idiots (hatch and Bennett), but my Rep is pretty conservative. Thanks Jek for the heads up. /forums/images/graemlins/thumb.gif

    [ QUOTE ]
    I have never in my life seen a hunter with a fully automatic assault rifle.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I've heard talk of similar laws that would ban bolt action guns because they are "sniper rifles." It is easy to twist the definition of things to make them sound more "evil" than they are. The second ammendment makes no referance to hunting anyway so what's your point?
     
  20. TX Mudder

    TX Mudder 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2000
    Posts:
    2,514
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Houston
    [ QUOTE ]
    Semi-automatic firearms are not assault rifles and not illegal.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    This is the main reason why the Assault Weapon Ban passed in 1994. The general public is ignorant of what was being banned. On the news, they showed full auto weapons firing when discussing the AWB, which targets semiautos.

    I didn't read the whoel post so some of this may have already been stated:
    Fully automatic weapons are regukated by the NFA act. It is a pain to get the proper signatures required to buy a full automatic, or NFA, firearm. THey are also obscenely expensive, as in 10,000ish. This puts them out of the reach of the vast majority of citizens. No one who wants to use a fully automatic weapon in a crime is going to go through these steps. The assault weapon ban of 1994 has nothing to do with fulyl automical weapons at all.

    The AWB bans certain features of firearms. For example, because of this stupid law I can't buy new 15 round magazines for my Glock, which I use for personal defense.

    [ QUOTE ]
    Semi-automatic firearms are not assault rifles and not illegal

    [/ QUOTE ]
    Again, this is absolutely incorrect. By definition, ONLY semiautomatic weapons can be assault weapons. Full automatic weapons are NFA firearms, and they are not regulated in the slightest by the assault weapon ban.


    My take on gun control:
    Criminals do not buy guns legally. They either steal them or buy them from someone else who stole them. They do not care about the AWB or the NFA act because it doesn't apply to them. The only ones affected are law abiding citizens.
     

Share This Page