What do you know about the Assault Weapons Ban?

[JayS]

Since Kerry has chosen to make the AWB an issue in his campaign and after seeing so many extreme misconceptions about what the ban does and what exactly it covers, I'd like to ask everyone to briefly summarize what they know about the ban and what is your source of information.

Please! No arguments about the Second Amendment, the NRA, HCI, MMM, etc. Some spin from both sides of the issue would be fun though.

[NMDemDist2]

1. not enough, but i think it bans "machine gun" style fully auto

weapons. I have no links and nothing to back up my play here

I am really just posting to show the depth of my ignorance.

[TexasMexican]

10. You would be wrong.

"Machine Guns" have been registered and regulated since 1934.

AWB has nothing to do with machine guns.

[Sirveri]

2. Not much

except that it bans things that aren't actually assault weapons. All in all I think it's kinda dumb.

[Wonk]

3. Either you're for assault weapons on the streets of American cities, or

against them.

Features that make a weapon an "assault weapon" include large capacity magazines, fully automatic fire capability, collapsible stocks for easy concealability, and bayonet lugs.

[FeebMaster]

12. Guess again.

None of the weapons covered by the assault weapons ban are fully-automatic. And collapsible stock or not, they have to have a 16" barrel for rifles and be 26" long overall or they fall afoul of the national firearms act. 26" is hardly concealable.

[Wonk]

13. Picking nits

I'm aware that full auto weapons were covered under another bill, but some weapons that were banned (and many that weren't) under the AWB can be converted (illegally, of course) to full auto with just a file, and a collapsible stock sure doesn't make it less concealable than a fixed one.

Could you give me a good reason why gun fetishists would want collapsible stocks and bayonet lugs, other than they're simply being gun fetishists?

[TexasMexican]

14. collapsible stock and bayonet lugs

Yeah why would anyone want to have the stock on thier rifle adjustible to fit them more comfortably. :eyes:

As for a bayonet lug, I dont know it might be useful while your hunting. What if a wild javalina charges you and your gun jams well atleast you could try sticking him with the bayonet.

[FeebMaster]

15. Picking nits?

That is priceless. You make the claim that the assault weapons ban covers machine guns which it clearly doesn't now you're trying to spin it away with the old easily converted garbage and with just a file no less. Of course, as you mention, converting a weapon to full-auto would violate another law, the National Firearms Act, since civilians can't register new machine guns anymore (thanks gip).

I'm curious, if you were aware that full-auto weapons were covered by another law, why did you make the claim that they were covered by the Assault Weapons Ban?


A collapsible stock might not make a rifle less concealable, but it certainly doesn't make it more concealable either. You can have short stocks or long stocks or anything in between, so what does it really matter if you have a stock that moves? If the weapon falls under the 26" minimum it has to be registered under the National Firearms Act.


"Could you give me a good reason why gun fetishists would want collapsible stocks and bayonet lugs, other than they're simply being gun fetishists?"

Could you give me a good reason why gun grabbers would want to ban collapsible stocks and bayonet lugs, other than they're simply being gun grabbers?

[Wonk]

16. I didn't claim that they were covered by the AWB. I said full auto guns

are assault weapons.

Feel free to re-read my earlier post if you want.

[TexasMexican]

17. So what you are saying...

is that since machine guns are already restricted that we dont need the AWB?

[FeebMaster]

18. The title of this thread is

"What do you know about the Assault Weapons Ban?"

You said: "Features that make a weapon an "assault weapon" include large capacity magazines, fully automatic fire capability, collapsible stocks for easy concealability, and bayonet lugs."

Since assault weapons are defined by the Assault Weapons Ban it seems clear you were claiming that full-auto guns are covered by the AWB.

I'm still interested how you think a rifle with a collapsible stock is more concealable than a rifle with a short stock.

[Wonk]

23. Ok, so I have an odd sense of humor...

I knew when I wrote that that someone would try to argue that fully automatic weapons aren't assault weapons :evilgrin:

[FeebMaster]

24. Not as defined by federal law they aren't.

Federal law is what this thread is all about, specifically the Assault Weapons Ban, which defines assault weapons.

[immoderate]

81. Please remember muzzle flash arrestors.

We need guns that are *flashy*

--IMM

[OpSomBlood]

83. Flash suppressors actually make rifles safer to shoot.

n/t

[John BigBootay]

29. I can give you a VERY GOOD reason--

I am an antique gun collector and I am prohibited from acquiring one of the most interesting firearms used in WWII, the M-1 Carbine carried by paratroopers in such operations as Market Garden and Overlord.

This M-1 has a bayonet lug and a folding stock.

It is not, nor was it ever a full-auto battle rifle.

It may seem insignificant to you, and you may sneer at me as being a mere "fetishist," but I genuinely appreciate, love, respect and celebrate the sacrifices and risks that our WWII soldiers faced, and possessing a sample of their most useful and innovative weapons is ONE SMALL WAY that I preserve their legacy for future generations to admire.

[slackmaster]

31. I collect old military firearms too

We are in complete agreement.

It's like a numismatist expressing disdain for "plugged" coins.

[John BigBootay]

34. I also collect vintage WWII photographs--

especially press photos such as AP, ACME Reuters and Signal Corps. Got about 3 binders full. They are fascinating because they usually have a fairly lengthy caption printed on the back that tells you exactly what was happening. Good stuff. Also saving that to show my kids / grandkids some day.

[stavka]

35. ...I don't understand

why you can't own an M1A1 carbine? Is it because with the folding stock it is too short? Can't you get one with a class three license?



I guess it is interesting, but it so are old west sawed off shot guns, and I can understand why those might be illegal too.

- this is coming from a gun owner BTW

[FeebMaster]

36. He is mistaken.

The AWB doesn't affect any original M1 carbines. It would affect any modern reproductions manufactured after the cutoff date in 1994 but not the originals.

[John BigBootay]

38. Are you sure?

I have been spoken with a few collectors who have made this claim-- and I don't see them sold, at least not in public...

But I'll obviously accept it if it 's the truth...

I'll do some additional research.

[FeebMaster]

42. The AWB only affects newly manufactured weapons.

Weapons manufactured before the ban are perfectly legal to own.

It's possible that other laws might be affecting the availability of m1 carbines. As I understand it, reimporting military arms the US government has shipped overseas is more involved than importing other guns. So while there might be a million M1A1 carbines overseas in warehouses, getting them into the US legally, even though they were made here, is questionable. But it has nothing to do with the AWB.

Here's some information on it under 47.57:
http://www.atf.gov/regulations/27cfr47.pdf

[stavka]

59. ...problem is with the stock

makes it a "Short Rifle" - in Michigan and most other states

Similar to the Sawed-Off Shotgun law.

i.e. I can buy a shotgun, I can't cut it down to a 33 inch shotgun

They are also very rare. I doubt anybody could buy a real one except in SE asia

[DoNotRefill]

46. the problem lies...

in the rebuilding of M-1 carbines.

[stavka]

58. ...it's also a pretty rare piece.

Like you said it was made for the paratrooper exclusively - many were lost and the great many that were left around were shipped to the French/Vietnamese

I have never seen one outside of a museum. Unlike the standard M-1, which was actually given away in the 50's in a US sponsered marksmanship program and sent to police/corrections agencies the country over.

Your point, the M1 is no more dangerous than the M1A1 is well taken - one gun is banned, the other given away to YMCA's and the Boy Scouts is dead on - but the folding stock does make one more attractive for criminal activity and less usefull for shooting - folding stocks do cut in to the bullseye factor -

Want your kids to see an M1A1? A museum may have to be the answer. Just like a .30 Browning machine gun

[John BigBootay]

40. I AM MISTAKEN!

Sorry for the bogus info.

It appears that you cannot buy a reproduction folding stock and put it on the vintage receiver.

Well-- this only confirms one thing about the AWB for me-- it is incredibly confusing as to what is covered and why.

Well then--

I AM NOW ON THE LOOKOUT TO PURCHASE THE M1 WITH FOLDING STOCK!

[stavka]

60. ...like I said.

Good Luck - this is a very rare piece.

There were 6.25 million M1's made during WWII (according to Ian Hogg) - but I doubt more than 100,000 were made in the M1A1 configuration

[DoNotRefill]

45. folding stock, pistol grip, bayonet lug, therefore it's an AW

eom

[DoNotRefill]

44. Really, wonk? just a file?

Are you sure? Which weapons would that be? Because ANY weapon that is convertable in less than 8 hours in a machineshop is legally a machinegun, period, unless it was made BEFORE 1982.

Bayonet lugs...bayonet lugs....Oh, yeah! Those are those little things that let you mount KNIVES on the end of a RIFLE! THANK GOD THEY BANNED BAYONET LUGS!!! Think of all of those random drive-by bayonetings that such a law has PREVENTED!!!! Oh, wait. You mean there's NEVER been a random drive-by bayoneting in the US, even BEFORE the ban?!?! BUT BAYONET LUGS MUST BE EVIL!!!! After all, a rifle with a knife stuck on the end MUST be more lethal than just a rifle, right? Why, somebody with a bayonet on the end of a rifle might CUT somebody!!!!

Can you explain why "car fetishists" want a car that'll go 120 MPH when the speed limit is 70?

SINCE WHEN HAS EXERCISING A CONSTITUTIONALLY GUARANTEED CIVIL RIGHT REQUIRED A REASON?????

[HEyHEY]

4. It's really affecting my duck-hunting abilities

[slackmaster]

5. 10-year moratorium on manufacture and sale of some semi-automatic guns

The weapons that are "banned" include a group of IIRC 19 specific makes and models, plus any weapon (rifle, pistol, or shotgun) that has two or more of certain physical features.

Off the top of my head without any peaking at authoritative sources:

Rifles - Threaded muzzle, bayonet lug, pistol grip, folding or collapsible stock, or a forward vertical handgrip.

Pistols - Shrouded barrel, forward vertical grip, threaded muzzle, magazine well forward of the pistol grip.

Shotguns - Rotating cylindrical magazine, barrel shroud, pistol grip. I have very low confidence in this answer.

It also put restrictions on ammunition feeding devices (e.g. magazines) that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition. Larger mags have to be marked to indicate that they are for government or law enforcement use only.

After the ban went into effect, gun manufacturers were able to make minor revisions to just about all of the "banned" weapons to create versions that could be sold legally. Those have been available for the duration of the ban.

This is very sketchy and I'm extremely fatigued at the moment, having just returned from a vigorous weekend adventure. All I have to say about the other responses so far is that two of them confirm what I've been saying for years about propaganda that has been deliberately circulated to confuse people about the AWB.

Good night all.

[FeebMaster]

6. Awww.

We were batting 1.000 too.

[slackmaster]

7. Nobody ever listens to me

Don't worry about MY answer skewing the results.

:freak:

[jpgray]

8. I believe it involves bayonet-mounts on semi-automatic weapons or somesuch

In any case, I don't see and think 'machine guns' when it comes up. However, why anyone would need one of the guns that fall under the ban is a mystery to me.

[hansberrym]

9. Got a link to what Kerry has actually said?

You can't just throw this out w/o any link ("Since Kerry has chosen to make the AWB an issue in his campaign"). Maybe I got my head in the sand, but I was really hoping that Kerry was going to back off a bit and keep his distance from the gun grabbers.


IMO
The AWB was a gimmick to instill the idea that ordinary citizens ought not own "military type" weapons. Hence the bayonette lug ban. There just is no other plausible reason for banning bayonette lugs. They are certainly not used in the commision of crimes.

Also the ad nauseum refrain that we don't need AW for duck hunting.
As if that were a justification for banning them.

[JayS]

89. Kerry must have missed a memo or two.

http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/crime/police.html

John Kerry proposals to protect police and protect communities includes strengthening the assault weapons ban, restoring funding to COPS program, improving information sharing among law enforcement agencies, addressing prescription drug abuse, and supporting neighborhood prosecutor programs. Former Manchester Chief of Police Peter Favreau and Strafford County Attorney Janice Rundels announced their endorsement of Kerry at the event. They were joined by Beverly Bacon, Member of the Board of Directors of the New Hampshire Million Mom March and Lenore Patton, Member of the New Hampshire Million Mom March.

John Kerry stood up to the gun lobby to pass the assault weapons ban and the Brady Bill. This assault weapons law is soon set to expire under George W. Bush. We need a President who will fight to keep assault weapons off our streets and out of our communities. John Kerry has the courage to stand up to the NRA, one of the most powerful special interests in the country, which is fighting tooth and nail against reasonable gun safety protections and against renewal of the assault weapon ban. One in five law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty were killed with assault weapons. John Kerry stands with law enforcement officers, who put their lives on the line every day, in making sure they are not outgunned by criminals armed with these weapons of war. Kerry believes that we can support the right to own guns and support common sense gun safety protections. He believes that the NRA leadership is out of step with most law abiding gun owners who support reasonable measures to keep guns out of the wrong hands and weapons of war off our streets.




http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/releases/pr_2004_0514.html

Kerry has a strong record of standing up for law enforcement and the men and women who protect our communities. He led the fight in the Senate to fund efforts to add 100,000 police officers to our streets and supported the current ban on assault weapons, as well as measures to crack down on armor-piercing, “cop killer,” bullets. As a prosecutor, Kerry put away murderers and mob bosses while building a strong record of being tough on crime.

As President, John Kerry will stand by America’s police officers. He will provide $25 billion in immediate fiscal relief to states and communities - money that states and localities will be able to use for crime fighting and homeland security efforts. He will promote shared intelligence between state and local authorities and federal agencies in order to strengthen homeland security efforts and reduce crime by creating a neighborhood prosecutor program that will bring prosecutors into high-crime communities. Kerry stands with law enforcement officers and supports reauthorization of the assault weapons ban.

Kerry Worked With Law Enforcement Officials to Ban Military-Style Assault Weapons. John Kerry has strongly supported the current ban on machine guns and assault weapons—including AK-47’s and similar weapons used by terrorists in Afghanistan. Police organizations including IBPO strongly support extension of the current ban.

Kerry is a National Leader in Working to Ban “Cop Killer Bullets.” John Kerry is a national leader in promoting sensible oversight of ammunition sales which have no sporting value yet risk the lives of police officers. Kerry has strongly supported measures to crack down on armor-piecing, “cop killer” bullets.

George Bush Says He Supports Extension of Assault Weapons Ban, But Fails to Move It. The White House says that on assault weapons, President Bush “supports the current law, and he supports reauthorization of the current law.” Yet the White House has done nothing to move an extension. President Bush actually opposed efforts to include an extension of the assault weapons ban as part of a bill he strongly supported to protect gun manufacturers from liability. The Bush Administration said: “The Administration urges the Senate to pass a clean bill, in order to ensure enactment of the legislation this year. Any amendment that would delay enactment of the bill beyond this year is unacceptable.”

Continue the Assault Weapons Ban. John Kerry believes we can protect the right to bear arms and at the same time keep guns out of the hands of criminals. He stands with law enforcement officers, who put their lives on the line every day, in seeking to ensure that these officers are not outgunned by criminals armed with these weapons of war. John Kerry will renew the assault weapons ban, a measure President Bush claims to support, and will close the gun show loophole.

http://www.johnkerry.com/communities/sportsmen/common_sense.html

Worked With Law Enforcement Agencies to Ban Military Assault Weapons – John Kerry strongly supports the current ban on assault weapons and voted to restrict the manufacturing, transfer or possession of these weapons in the United States—including AK-47’s and similar weapons used by terrorists in Afghanistan. Kerry voted for the “Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act” which banned military-style assault weapons. Additionally, the ban on assault weapons was supported by virtually every national law enforcement organization in the United States.




http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=S0421103

Gun Issues
(Back to top)


2003 On the votes that the The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence considered to be the most important as of 2003, Senator Kerry voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time. These scores are cumulative for each representative's time in their current office. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence considered votes from 1988-2003 in the House and 1991-2003 in the Senate when determining these scores.

2003 Based on the results of a questionnaire the Gun Owners of America assigned Senator Kerry a 10

2002 On the votes that the The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence considered to be the most important as of 2002, Senator Kerry voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time. These scores are cumulative for each representative's time in their current office. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence considered votes from 1988-2002 in the House and 1991-2002 in the Senate when determining these scores.

2002 Based on lifetime voting records on gun issues and the results of a questionnaire sent to all Congressional candidates in 2002, the National Rifle Association assigned Senator Kerry a grade of F (with grades ranging from a high of A+ to a low of F).

2001-2002 Based on the results of a questionnaire the Gun Owners of America assigned Senator Kerry a grade of F (with grades ranging from a high of A+ to a low of F-).

1999-2000 On the votes that the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence considered to be the most important in 1999-2000 , Senator Kerry voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.

1999-2000 Based on the results of a questionnaire the Gun Owners of America assigned Senator Kerry a grade of F- (with grades ranging from a high of A+ to a low of F-).


http://www.issues2000.org/2004/John_Kerry_Gun_Control.htm

Democratic Party shouldn't be for the NRA
Q: Do you find it necessary to kill animals for photo-ops?
A: I don't think the Democratic Party should be the candidacy of the NRA. And when I was fighting to ban assault weapons in 1992 and 1993, Dean was appealing to the NRA for their endorsement, and he got it. I believe it's important for us to have somebody who is going to stand up for gun safety in America and make certain that we make our streets safe, our children safe, and not allow people to get assault weapons in America.

Source: CNN "Rock The Vote" Democratic Debate Nov 5, 2003

[OpSomBlood]

90. Dean never received an NRA endorsement.

The NRA rated Dean's governorship of Vermont an "A" for his handling of gun issues in the state. Dean never "appealed" to the NRA for anything, and they never endorsed him in any way.

And considering that the "one in five police officers" statistic has already been debunked, it worries me that Kerry is parroting VPC propaganda in his campaign.

It seems to me that studying the behaviors that lead to police homicides would be more effective than attempting to ban the weapons used in them.

[JayS]

91. It worries me too. Something about having a stellar rating...

...from the Brady Bunch does not mesh well with the "pro-gun candidate" rhetoric the Kerry campaign keeps pushing.

[TexasMexican]

11. I know that the AWB is useless

as it restricts weapons based on cosmetic features.

[Wonk]

19. I predict that by tomorrow night this thread will have 100+ replies

and more than half of them will be by the "usual suspects" who regularly hang out in the gungeon.

How many other boards has this thread been posted to already, I wonder, in an effort to prove that Dems like Kerry and those who support him are "gun grabbers" and true 2nd amendment believing single issue voters should vote for Bush?

[TexasMexican]

20. not voting for Bush, but I wish the other members of my party...

would get with the program and inform themselves on the issues.

It seems like we all want our fellow democrats to be informed on all the issues, except for one and that issue would be gun control.

It seems like the people who support gun control dont want people to be honestly informed of the truth of these laws but instead just want them to think "guns are bad, laws against guns are good," and I as an educated man find that completely asinine.

[PVnRT]

25. Face it

To many people in the Democratic Party, if you are not gung-ho about gun control, you don't belong. God forbid fall into that category here, that also makes you a freeper, even if you're a socialist on everything else. It's sad, really.

[TexasMexican]

26. Black Panthers

Yeah its really sad, I suppose in this day and age they would call the Black Panthers freepers just because they believed in thier right to keep and bear arms.

[DoNotRefill]

47. Actually, it's a small but highly vocal minority....

Down here, if you try to run as a Democrat on a gun control platform, you'll lose in the primary. The Party around here dies NOT support gun control. Why? Because it's a total loser. You might as well be pushing total communism.

[FeebMaster]

21. I predict that by noon tomorrow

this thread will be down in the dungeon after being filled with claims that the AWB bans machine guns. There will probably be a smattering of crying about the NRA as well and perhaps a few implications that anyone who isn't for the AWB and gun control in general is a Republican troll trying to make various Democrats look bad.

[UNIXcock]

22. ... repukes enacted the AWB in 1994

... And dang it if the swing voters and moderate Democrats voted * because of their firm, single issue commitment to the Second Amendment.

... I say we leave well enough alone and let the AWB sunset as it was designed. Don’t use gun control as a platform, it’s not popular.

... As for easily converting guns to full-auto; yeah sure many are easy. But then again, a felon is not allowed to posses them in the first place.

… If I choose to use a firearm to defend my family, I will. I think all freedom loving, law abiding citizens should have that right secured.

[Trajan]

73. Ha ...

The Gungeon ....

I like it ...

Yep Wonk: the same cabal of gun 'aficiandos' who insist that nearly ALL Democrats cant WAIT to get their hands on a nice assault weapon ...

(Insert Inane comment about how assault weapons are no different from pea shooters here) ...

Yea; .... liberals .... progressives .... Democrats ... ALL wannabe gun aficiandos too .... and have LOTS of guns to stare at ...

Hey ? .. even been hunting in Burbank ? ..

[JayS]

76. See post 68. n/t

n/t

[JayS]

75. Well...

...the Brady Bunch gives Kerry a score of 100%. What does that tell you?

[Az-K9]

27. The AWB is a failure.

Criminals by their very nature won't obey any gun law.

[kiahzero]

37. That, my friend, is the dumbest argument of all.

Criminals, by their very nature, do not necessarily obey ANY law (except the laws of physics and such; pretty hard to break, those are). If we were to accept your argument, we should do away with all laws, since they will only inevitably be broken by criminals.

[JayS]

105. The laws need to be purposely tailored to directly attack...

...the criminal element. For too long we have squandered limited resources on targeting everyone and getting compliance only from those that are inclined to obey the law. I'm ready for a change but I fear it will never come from the Democratic Party.

[JayS]

28. Well, this has been interesting so far. The machine gun...

...statements keep popping up; where is this misinformation coming from?

[Wonk]

54. was posted intentionally because of the vagueness of your original post.

You didn't specifically refer to the AWB bill scheduled to sunset on Sept 13 2004, or even link to any comments from Kerry about it. Would you care to argue that full auto weapons, such as the mini-Uzi pictured below, aren't assault weapons, or that they aren't banned? :P

[FeebMaster]

55. But the AWB scheduled to sunset on Sept 13, 2004

is what legally defines assault weapons.

The mini-uzi you have pictured is certainly not banned and whether it is actually fully automatic or not has nothing at all to do with the assault weapons ban since machine guns and short barreled rifles are regulated by the NFA. In theory, if someone wanted to build a new semi-auto mini-uzi with a 16" barrel and 26" overall length to avoid the NFA restrictions, they would have to build it in compliance with the AWB by removing enough offending features to make it post ban compliant.

[Hammie]

30. AWB

Is justly notorious as the first outright federal ban of personal firearms. It was a successful attempt to establish a precedent for Federally prohibiting the possession of firearms. Nowhere in the constitution is there any authority for prohibiting personal possession of firearms by congress. Earlier congresses were well aware of this and took pains to limit their regulation of firearms to the tax code and regulation of interstate transfers. The 18th amendment to the constitution is ample evidence that original understanding that prohibiting possession was not a power that congress had under the constitution and that to obtain that power congress required a constitutional amendment.

Basically it prohibits the manufacture of certain firearms. For rifles, it limits one to three of the evil features: Self-loading action, detachable magazine, pistol grip, collapsible stock, bayonet lug, flash-suppressor, and threaded barrel. Even an individual who adds a fourth evil feature him self can be prosecuted under this law, even though the firearm in question has no connection whatsoever with interstate commerce. In this sense it is a child of the unconstitutional Federal drug laws that ban possession of marijuana, even if the marijuana is grown purely for consumption within a particular state (e.g. California's medical marijuana).

The AWB deserves to expire. It is an atrocious law in that it serves no social purpose (has no effect on crime or criminals) and continues the erosion of the constitution that we all depend on to protect our rights.

[FeebMaster]

33. The AWB was predated

by the Firearms Owners' Protection Act of 1986 which banned the future civilian production of machine guns and unlike the hilarious failure that is the AWB, the FOPA actually accomplishes what it set out to do. Gun grabbers back then had a clue about what they were doing. They just don't make them like they used to.

[Hammie]

49. I am aware of the FOPA but not it's particulars

Isn't it true that the civilian machine gun ban takes the form of prohibiting the BATF from issuing tax stamps for machine guns manufactured after a certain date? In which case it would still be a tax law, rather than an out and out criminalization. The end result is the same, but it is less offensive to the constitution (ignoring the 2nd ammendment per thread guidelines). Also, if I'm not mistaken the original Federal machine gun "ban" only actually prohibited the interstate transfer of machine guns on which the tax had not been paid.

[FeebMaster]

52. It may be tax law

but no one cares about the tax part anymore, just the regulation part. No one cars about ICC issues either. The feds are going to arrest you whether or not you leave the state with your machine gun and whether or not you are involved in commerce. The end result of the Hughes Amendment is that the civilian supply of machine guns is frozen.

I don't really see how it is less offensive to the constitution than an outright ban. As I understand it, when they originally banned various drugs, they did it by requiring that people who sell them get a tax stamp and then just never issued any tax stamps and this was later shot down as unconstitutional.

On edit:

Also, when the NFA was originally passed, that $200 tax was outrageously high. Most of the weapons it affected cost well under $200 at the time. The NFA was never about taxes really, that's just how they did things back then when they pretended to care about the constitution when finding ways to violate it without actually violatinng it.

[stavka]

32. The Assault Weapons Ban

Prohibits further production and importation of “Assault Style Weapons” that meet any two of the following list –

Folding Stock
Pistol Grip
Bayonet Lug
Threaded Muzzle or Flash Suppressor
Grenade Launcher

It specifically targets 19 weapons for further manufacture for the civilian market
• Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs (all models);
• Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil;
• Beretta Ar70 (SC-70);
• Colt AR-15;
• Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, and FNC;
• SWD M-10; M-11; M-11/9, and M-12;
• Steyr AUG;
• INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9, AND TEC-22;
• revolving cylinder shotguns such as (or similar to) the Street Sweeper and Striker 12.

It does not prohibit possession of said weapons, nor the assembly of them from pre-ban parts. As I understand this, if the main spring existed in 1994, you can build an UZI around it.

It also bans further production of magazines that contain more than 10 rounds for civilian use. This has had a large impact on the pistol industry, where 12-15 round magazines were pretty much standards in the 9mm category, and remain so for police.

In reality there are so many guns out there it has had no real impact on anything but prices. The monthly gun show in my area is filled with assault weapons and extended capacity magazines, especially for the AK-47 family, 3rd world and eastern bloc countries cranked those out by the millions.

Many manufactures simply changed some feature on guns to make them not fit the earlier versions of the bill, hence the specific mentioning of certain gun types.

Example the Chinese Norinco Mack-90 sporting rifle, is really a semi automatic AK-47 with a thumbhole stock and a five round magazine, and lacks the bayonet lug. Buy a different stock and a 30 round magazine and you might as well be in Baghdad.

SO in short the ban didn’t do much to keep assault weapons off the street, except for the real cheap or the real lazy.

Many states and municipalities have passed more restrictive legislation, prohibiting possession for instance.

[Frangible]

39. What do I know?

I know it made buying a legal full-capacity magazine for my Glock expensive and annoying (it isn't drop free).

I know it bans cosmetic features on rifles that were rarely used in crime and was completely ineffective at reducing crime.

At least the nation has been made safe from the scourge of drive-by bayonetings, though?

[FeebMaster]

43. Not really.

At least the nation has been made safe from the scourge of drive-by bayonetings, though?

You can just buy a pre-ban rifle with a bayonet lug and participate in all the drive-by bayonetings you want.

[DoNotRefill]

48. Or, just duct-tape....

the f*cker onto the end of the barrel real good, and yer "good to go".

[FeebMaster]

53. Or a stick.

You could get better range with a long stick instead of a rifle.

[TexasMexican]

57. OMG Someone all the ATF

DoNotRefill is giving information to potential terrorists on how to circumvent the AWB.

And we need laws against duct tape to keep it out of the hands of potential terrorists.

[JayS]

88. Ah, the many uses of duct-tape. :) n/t

n/t

[StayOutTheBushes]

41. They shoot thousands of GIANT bullets in a semi-automatic

fashion which is much deadlier than a machine gun!!!!

[Hammie]

50. Unintended consequences

The 10 round magazine limit reversed the engineering trend in handguns from seeing how many rounds could be stuffed into a full sized handgun to how small a handgun could be built around 10 rounds. It also drove the handgun preferences to more powerfull rounds. With an artificial 10 round limit, there is no capacity penalty to pay by selecting a more powerful round. Previously the trend was to lots of relatively low powered 9mm.

[stavka]

56. ...an interesting point.

Michigan changed it's concealed weapons law recently, and several of my friends have permits - and I might, though it's low on the action item list because of the cost and I can't carry at work, or even to work IN PART BECAUSE OF A REGENTAL ORDINANCE I SUPPORTED AND BROUGHT TO THE TABLE.

My friends have all chosen 10mm or .40cal over 9mm. I don't think either is much deadlier for cops in vests, but certainly a more deadly bullet for everybody else.

I'm pretty convinced my 9mm will kill people though.

[JayS]

51. It sounds like there are lots of misconceptions about this...

...ban. It is even part of the campaign.


http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/crime/police.html

John Kerry stood up to the gun lobby to pass the assault weapons ban and the Brady Bill. This assault weapons law is soon set to expire under George W. Bush. We need a President who will fight to keep assault weapons off our streets and out of our communities. John Kerry has the courage to stand up to the NRA, one of the most powerful special interests in the country, which is fighting tooth and nail against reasonable gun safety protections and against renewal of the assault weapon ban. One in five law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty were killed with assault weapons. John Kerry stands with law enforcement officers, who put their lives on the line every day, in making sure they are not outgunned by criminals armed with these weapons of war. Kerry believes that we can support the right to own guns and support common sense gun safety protections. He believes that the NRA leadership is out of step with most law abiding gun owners who support reasonable measures to keep guns out of the wrong hands and weapons of war off our streets.




http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/crime/police.html

John Kerry proposals to protect police and protect communities includes strengthening the assault weapons ban, restoring funding to COPS program, improving information sharing among law enforcement agencies, addressing prescription drug abuse, and supporting neighborhood prosecutor programs. Former Manchester Chief of Police Peter Favreau and Strafford County Attorney Janice Rundels announced their endorsement of Kerry at the event. They were joined by Beverly Bacon, Member of the Board of Directors of the New Hampshire Million Mom March and Lenore Patton, Member of the New Hampshire Million Mom March.

[JayS]

61. This issue has "Gored" us before. It would be helpful to...

...decide if this is worth the risk of gaining the White House in 2004 or having a repeat of 1994 in 2006.

The bill number for the renewal is S. 2948. It will be posted in Thomas soon.

[stavka]

62. Are there really Democrats who

Are there really democrats out there that would not vote for Kerry if this was not renewed?

Republicans have been very skilled at making the Democrats to be anti-gun, while agree many are, it's a silly thing to hang your hat on when it isn't a huge issue for most.

[Trajan]

65. Now THERE is a breath of fresh air ....

In the squalid gas-filled torture chambers of J/PS ..

Wha ? ... this ISNT in the Justice/Public Safety forum ? ...

Anyways: ... nice to see a clear head in here ...

You would think that Democrats are ripping up for their 'Party Cards' IF we dont suddenly become the party of 'MANY shots faster and harder' ....

You would ALSO think: according to the screed posted by the infinitely right wing gun-hugging pretenders who inhabit J/PS, that there are BILLIONS of GOPers who are DYING to become Democrats, .. if only we would embrace the fringe philosophies of Right Wing gun-strutting Blowhards ....

YOu have wisely seen through the bluster ....

[OpSomBlood]

66. Wow, you really seem angry.

Perhaps you should just take a deep breath and accept that pro-gun Democrats really do exist, and that we're not "pretenders."

Gun control is a loser issue and always has been. The AWB is the single biggest reason the Dems lost Congress in 1994.

[Trajan]

67. HA .....

Dont make me laugh ...

This is a fraudulent argument, and you know it ...

[JayS]

68. For many it is not so much about the renewal of the AWB...

...as it is an indicator of what sort of legislation the candidate will support. For those with even a minimum understanding of the issue it shows that the candidate is willing to pass "feel good" legislation in an attempt to bolster his/her support, to let ideology trump the truth. This leads many to question a candidate's strength on crime and by extention strength on national security.

[Trajan]

63. Take this shit ...

to J/PS ....

[OpSomBlood]

64. No, I think it's relevant here.

Because over in J/PS, we are always debating about whether or not the general public (who seems to largely support the AWB) really understand what the law deals with.

Judging by the number of "machine gun" posts here, one would think that they don't.

[JayS]

69. Well, since "this shit" is relevant to the upcoming elections...

...it deserves to be up here where the majority will see it. And it is certainly more important than the latest Bush joke or "caption this photo" thread.

[stavka]

70. I agree

Gun Control is a political hot button.

I don't understand why, but it is.

I think it is a trap that the Democrats nationally have fallen into, one of many obviously, but one that has the least real impact I can think of - you'd be shocked how many people never vote Dem because "those guys will take away all our guns".

I would think ready access to weapons would be fairly appealing to the readical left, but then again I've never had my 12 your son shot dead in Detroit school yard.

[JayS]

71. Here, for the more politically astute, you can just wave the...

...famous photo of the "Fab Four" around to get a "recoil" reaction from someone; for others, just showing how the Brady Bunch rates a candidate will have a similar effect.

[Trajan]

72. Bah ...

Relevant ? ...

Bush is DESTROYING our place and moment in the world ...

and YOU cant get yer hand off yer own crank ....

Your need for phallic 'power' pales in comparison to the needs of the nation as a whole ....

Give us a fucking break: the AWB is far from a primary issue: it is a minimal issue at best ... held aloft by stark raving lunatics who think only ONE thing matters: their pile of well oiled guns and how they can marvel at them ...

Guess what ? ... WE DONT marvel at your obsessive need to pet yer peter .... we recognize it as the neurosis that it manifests ...

The AWB issue, in the general population, ranks VERY low as an issue of importance ...

Your obsession does not change this fact ....

[JayS]

77. See post 68. n/t

n/t

[TexasMexican]

80. "Bush is DESTROYING our place and moment in the world ..."

and all some democrats care about is renewing the AWB instead of winning the election come November.

[slackmaster]

74. It's relevant because it demonstrates a high level of ignorance

There's something deeply wrong with taking a firm stand on something you don't really understand. I think it's very unfortunate that a large portion of people who favor the AWB have major misconceptions about it - typically that it's keeping the streets from being flooded with fully automatic weapons.

People who oppose the ban do so primarily on libertarian and common-sense grounds. Its expiration, if it happens this September as scheduled, will not put anyone at greater risk; nor would the enactment of any similar law make anyone safer. Democrats could gain some votes without sacrificing the moral high ground by simply dropping the issue.

[OpSomBlood]

78. Democrats dropping the AWB would render the NRA useless politically.

Like I said, it's a loser issue. Always will be.

[stavka]

79. You summed that up well.......

Also - I don't buy a gage of feeling might be gleaned by looking at where a candidate stands on this issue. Dean, coming from a rather rural state said something pretty lame on the issue of gun control in general. Why? - He's from a State filled with hunters and gun freaks.

No offense to gun freaks or hunters

[AudreyT]

82. every semi-auto rifle with a pistol grip, collapsable stock, flash supress

should be illegal. That makes the gun so much more deadly to a police officer. Allowing criminals to hide their weapons underneath clothes easily and being able to fire from the hip very quickly, and getting away without the cop seeing that flash.

[FeebMaster]

84. I can't even tell which posts are jokes or not anymore.

All these Assault Weapons are machine guns posts have scrambled my brain. :(

[AudreyT]

92. did I say anywhere in my post that semi-autos were mgs?

no, I said taht the features that add to concealibilty of semi-auto rifles should be banned. I also gave a pretty good reason. SO try reading before you post.

[FeebMaster]

94. I didn't mean your post was about machine guns.

I meant all the other posts about machine guns have scrambled my brain so I couldn't tell if your post was a joke or not. Since it apparently isn't, I'll be more than happy to address it.

Could you explain to me, please, how a rifle with a collapsible stock is more concealable than a rifle with a short stock? A rifle has to maintain a minimum length of 26" regardless of whether or not it has a collapsible stock on it otherwise it has to be registered under the National Firearms Act.

How does a rifle with a pistol grip become more deadly to a police officer than a rifle without a pistol grip?

Why would anyone fire from the hip when firing from the shoulder and using the sights is so much easier and far more accurate?

You are aware that the Assault Weapons Ban doesn't ban weapons with the features you mentioned, right? It bans from civilian manufacture semi-auto rifles with the ability to accept a detachable magazine and more than one of the following features collapsible stock, pistol grip, flash suppressor or threaded barrel, bayonet lug, or grenade launcher. It doesn't ban ones that were manufactured before the AWB was passed you can still buy and sell them perfectly legally like any other gun. The weapons after the ban are functionally the same with enough of the listed features removed (usually a bayonet lug and flash suppressor) so that they aren't covered by the AWB.

[OpSomBlood]

85. Have you ever tried to "hide" a 32-inch rifle under your clothes?

Just stop and think about it for a second.

And as for "hip-firing"...the pistol grip is absolutely not designed for that purpose. That's like saying that the sling makes it easier to fire the rifle with your toes. Firing a rifle from the hip is inaccurate and dangerous, and whether or not there is a pistol grip on the rifle doesn't change that.

And the flash suppressor isn't designed to hide the flash from the person you're shooting at...it is designed to keep the flash from blinding the shooter. It is a safety feature.

[JayS]

86. "Firing a rifle from the hip is inaccurate and dangerous"

But it works so well on TV! Are you saying the TV lies? :)

[AudreyT]

93. stop lying to cover your ass

you sure as hell can hide an ar 15 with a collapsible stock under a long coat. And the pistol grip WAS absolutely designed for out of position firing. As a combat weapon that didn't have to be in 1 particular postion to be fired had an advantage in combat. The flash supressor is designed to hide the flash from the person you are shooting at,.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_suppressor">Flash suppressor

Flash suppressors are used on military rifles to reduce the likelihood and accuracy of any return fire. They work by allowing the propellant gases to cool before dissipating.

[JayS]

96. I'm not sure why that definition always seems to turn up in...

...online dictionaries. Maybe they get their information from the Brady Bunch? :)

Flash suppressors do not “suppress the flash” in the sense that most people would understand that phrase. They do not keep the flash from being seen, say, at night as a sniper shoots down from a hill. Even if the sniper were using a flash suppressor, spectators would still be able to see the flash of the weapon and thus locate the sniper. No, what a flash suppressor does is redirect the flash to the sides of the barrel instead of the top. The flash suppressor prevents the shooter from being blinded by the flash each time she shoots. This allows her to aim better by preventing that temporary blindness all of us experience when we suddenly look at a bright light.

[stavka]

100. ...now that's not REALLY true

It does limit the flash from a viewer's (i.e. target) standpoint, and lengthens the barrel typically.

This "Blinding light" argument is sort of silly don't you think - otherwise most militaries since about 1930 would be remiss if their small arms didn't universally have flash suppressors.

[JayS]

102. Your earlier post had the phrase "designed to hide the flash"...

...not limit the flash. I am sure that the flash would be less brilliant to the target, but not invisible.

In a dark environment the flash can be very bright, at least bright enough to mess up your night vision temporarily. Early militaries did have a problem with flash blindness, a problem solved by the invention of the flash suppressor.

[DoNotRefill]

101. If you can conceal an AR-15 with a collapsable stock under your coat...

why wouldn't you be able to do the same with a M-4 carbine? You're talking a couple of inches difference, max, on a 30+ inch rifle.

And flash supressors are to hide the flash of the MUZZLE FROM THE SHOOTER, not people shooting at the shooter. It's to allow faster reacquisition of a target by the shooters, not to hide the flash from others.

[NickB79]

103. How many inches does a collapsible stock remove from an AR's length?

What, about 3 whole inches? So, instead of a 29" gun, you have a 26" one, and that in some way makes it so much more lethal? Cut a piece of 2x4 26" long, and another one 29" long, and tell me how much difference you find when held under a trenchcoat.

As for "out of position firing", how accurately do you think anyone can fire as such? Out of position means you don't have the gun against your shoulder to absorb the recoil, or have the sights lined up well on target. In a fully automatic weapon you might be able to compensate for lack of precision with "spray and pray", but now with a semi-auto. Virtually all the military weapons issued in WWI, WWII, and Korea were stock-gripped weapons, not pistol-gripped, and they seemed to be perfectly functional.

I have tried firing both pistol-gripped and conventionally-gripped rifles from the hip. I can tell you that I actually prefer the conventionally-gripped ones, as they are more comfortable to fire and more controllable under recoil. Both methods of firing gave HORRIBLE accuracy at anything past a few dozen yards compared to firing from the shoulder. Whoever came up with the "easier to fire from the hip or out of position" argument obviously has never tried it.

[JayS]

104. "Whoever came up with the "easier to fire from the hip..."

I think that would be the Brady Bunch that thought that up...after watching a bunch of old Prohibition era gangster movies. :)

[JayS]

87. Kick n/t

n/t

[stavka]

95. It's about control as a political issue for 2004

I have great story that relates to the old ?hunting weapons? vs ?assault weapons? that borders on seatbelt enforcement myth.

Locally a police officer, who is still recovering in hospital BTW had been shot FIVE times by a legally purchased semi-auto AK-47. (through a class II vest) A second officer was hit twice by the same weapon. Bad, but seven shots, maybe less ? hate to say it but some rounds from the first officer may have passed through him hitting the second.

Both will live and be able to return to gainful employment, why? Because the shooter was using a military weapon rather than a hunting weapon. (Shots went clear through, rather than doing massive tissue damage) An accidental refute of the notion that ?hunting weapons? somehow differ in lethality from those covered by the AWB.

The AWB is something that hurts Democrats if they try to fight the NRA or Republicans.

If it made a wit?s difference I be fighting for it, but it doesn?t. It is a tool to dive the urban population, who is subject to stupid, stupid gun violence ? from the minority that hopes to rule us.

To make it an issue is like using an erasure to wipe out probably as many as a million swing votes nation wide. (Gun owner swing votes understand the AWB for better than 90% who pick it up supporting it as a positive to their campaign)

Let sleeping dogs??

The Democrats gave the Republicans gun owners far easier and with far less fan fair than they gave up the Christian religion

[WLKjr]

97. If I am not mistaken

it was to outlaw anything that was a automatic (something that shoots more than one bullet in a few seconds). If you want to shoot 10 bullets a second, join the Amred Forces. You don't need a AK-47 or M-16 to deer hunt. It's simple.

[stavka]

98. ...then you are VERY mistaken

That's not what the AWB did.

I agree you don't need (I hope) an AK-47 or M-16 to hunt deer, but a smi automatic 30-06 is even deadlier.

The AWB has become a political wedge.

If you are just out and out anti-gun - fine, it should be renewed and then some, but it's window dressing for the Rep's to get votes

[FeebMaster]

99. You are mistaken.

Fully-automatic weapons or machine guns have been heavily regulated since 1934.

The AWB bans from civilian manufacture semi-automatic weapons that can accept a detachable magazine and more than one of the following features: pistol grip, collapsible stock, grenade launcher, threaded barrel or flash suppressor, or a bayonet lug (for rifles, the list for pistols is a little different). It does not ban weapons with these features from possession or sale. The ban is completely ineffective since manufacturers just removed enough of the listed features so the weapon wouldn't qualify as an assault weapon.

The AWB also bans from civilian manufacture magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. Which, for many weapons, has drastically increased the prices of available magazines since the supply is artificially frozen.


You don't need a AK-47 or M-16 to deer hunt.

You might not need one, but an AK-47 is perfectly acceptable for deer hunting. I don't know if there are any legitimate M-16s that are semi-automatic only. All of the ones that are full-auto are regulated by the National Firearms Act of 1934. You're probably thinking of the AR-15, most of which are semi-automatic. Any that were converted to full-auto before 1986 are regulated by the NFA just like any other machine gun. The semi-auto ones, in their usual caliber at least, aren't particularly suited for deer hunting, I suppose, but they have other uses.


"It's simple."

Yes it is.

[JayS]

106. Kick