Hi, I just have a few quick questions about that whole lifting of the assault weapon ban. Now this is not survival equipment related and I would understand if a moderator wanted to toss this thread cause it may seem too "survivalist" and thats fine. But what is the deal with this? I live in Canada and it seems really difficult to believe that anyone would want fully automatic weapons available to the populace. The common reasoning is that a well armed citizenry will reduce crime because criminals would naturally fear a lethal response. This doesn't chalk up with me, the only crimes I can see being reduced by the proliferation of assault weapons would be home invasions. The average store hold up, bank robbery, murder or rape won't have anything to fear from assault weapons. A responsible citizen that would use his AK or UZI to stop a crime is not going to be walking down main with it strapped to his back handy dandy to stop a bank robbery. Even if he was, it wouldn't be a good idea, just end in a bloodbath. The idea that weapon bans are stupid because criminals dont care about the laws and will acquire automatics anyway leaving average people without them for no good reason is flawed as well. Right now, automatics have to be taken out of the few areas they are allowed and require all sorts of paperwork and effort to gather and smuggle and sell. Naturally this creates good demand with low supply so prices on illegal AKs for example are very high given the risks and efforts involved. The high price and lack of availability keeps some who would want to acquire such a weapon from being able to, like people who get fired or dumped, get angry and want to go on a slaughter fest. If they can't find a dealer or afford the price right away the more time passes the less likely he is to go through with it after cooling his heels for a few days. But with assault weapons sold at every gun store and show, supply is going to increase. All a prospective dealer needs to do is pull the old strawman routine, find some bum or down on his luck bastard with the proper paper work (or falsified papers) to purchase a slew of weapons for a small token price then turn around and sell those guns on the black market for a higher price but without the background check or registry. Hell, even better use the gun show loop hole and your strawman doesnt even need any paper work at all and you have a trunk full of professional HK MP5s ready and waiting to be sold to professional robbers and such.

Now dont get me wrong, Im not anti-gun, in fact most of my entertainment revolves around guns in some way. Love action flicks, love video games, love thriller books (especially Stephan Hunter books) and know a lot more about different weapons and such then most guys my age, especially in Canada. Im just for sensible laws for guns. You want to target practise with your handgun, cool. Hunt with a rifle? Go for it. Want to keep a shotgun in your house for protection? A-OK in my book. But you say you need a MAC-10? What for? Plinking? I just don't care. I can't see the benefit of having automatics on the streets just so a few guys and shoot up tin cans and old lawnmowers at the range with an AK. The risks and dangers are just too great just so a few can engage in a hobby. Riflery and accurate work with a handgun requires skill, I understand that as a sport and support it, hunting is difficult and requires strong will, but any idiot and hold down a trigger while something jumps around in his hand messing up a bench with a bunch of watermelons on it. Theres no sport, no discipline, no reason for it.

Anyway, this isn't what I really wanted to talk about, I was wondering if anyone knows exactly what is and what is not going to be allowed. Will there be size restrictions? Like say its ok to have a full sized M16 with sling and bipod and all the trimings, but is it not ok to have a selectfire Glock? What about LEO weapons and munitions like the P90 and its odd 5.7 ammo? Will most of those be going on the market as well? I know full sized UZI's will be availible but what about the mini and micro? Will there be an uper limit on RPM? Like your 600 RPM AK is cool, but your FAMAS at 900 is not? How bout High cap magazines like the Beta-C system? Legal now, but what about on a fully auto G3A3? A bipod and Beta-C on a big 7.62 like that and you essentially have a light machine gun.

I always try to come at things with an open mind, so any input on this if you agree or disagree would be cool. This really seems like something burecrats that have no real experience with the sport of shooting or home defence or law enforcement have cooked up to win over people who haven’t thought it out. I can’t imagine a cop excited by the prospect of making assault weapons available to every small time hood on the street. It doesn’t matter what the bad guys have, he is still only going to be able to carry around his Glock (or other approved pistol) on his belt and maybe a shortie shotgun in the squad car (actually L.A cops do have single fire M16s in the trunk). Dealing with some nut waving around a revolver is bad enough, imagine him with a TMP.

You have been taken in by the news media. The "Assault Weapons" ban has absolutely nothing to do with machine guns. Fully automatic weapons have been regulated in this country since 1934. The ban had to do with weapons that "look" like machine guns. The actual guns that were banned were chosen because a congressman was looking through a gun catalog and picked the ones that "looked ominous." The ban specifically dealt with cosmetic features such as bayonet lugs, flash hiders, and folding stocks, but every gun that they banned is semi-automatic.

Studies both before and after the ban showed that the "Assault Weapons" in the ban have been used in a very small percentage of crimes. However the anti-gun groups make them sound worse then they are to get public support. Their ultimate goal is to confiscate all our guns, but they realize to do that they must take them one step at a time.



Well, sizes won't change because gun and barrell lengths were never apart of the ban. Also, "selectfire" weapons will still be controlled under the National Firearms act of 1934. The only things that will change are gun cosmetics (folding stocks, bayonet lugs, flash hiders) and magazine capacities. When the ban expires we will be able to start buying all the standard capacity magazines. I say standard because that's how the magazines were originally designed, the current 10 round magazines should have been called "low-cap" instead. That includes ownership of the Beta mags as well.

If you would like more info visit http://www.awbansunset.com/ or http://www.clintongunban.com/. I have nothing to do with either site. I just think they are informative.


Robert

American's right to bear arms is not based on the need to protect oneselves from criminals, but the need to keep a corrupt government in line. Frankly, handguns aren't going to do that! Neither are assault weapons, even fully automatic ones, against a government that has a large well trained standing army with automatic weapons, bazookas, howitzers, tanks, fighter planes, attack submarines, and atomic weapons.

Although you know what? The constitution doesn't give us the right to ammunition. Maybe they should just ban ammo, and let us carry any kind of weapon we want.

And the funny thing? You could still buy fully automatic weapons (class III) after the ban, just jump through all the hoops and pay the $200 transfer tax.
Number of legally owned, fully automatic weapons that have been used in a crime?
One.
Go figure!

The press has succeeded beyond their wildest dreams in misguiding you, and I'm sure you're not alone (not by a long shot). The end of the assault weapons ban won't allow for the general sale of fully automatic weapons, those were strangled under the 1936 weapons ban. The current law in question covers SEMIautomatic weapons, and I for one will be glad to see it go. I'm one of the "few gun nuts" you're referring to who enjoys Full-Auto fire when I get the chance ( all legal, class three licencees can own FULL auto weapons as long as they keep up the exhorbitant taxes on their arms). Any infraction on the Second Amendment should be done away with, and anyone who puts forth anti-gun legislation should be tried for treason and defamation of the Constitution. It may sound harsh, but it's how I feel.

Troy

Nic:

I wish I knew where to start, but beyond the few things I will post here, please try to visit the National Rifle Association site for more complete answers and examples. If you feel the NRA will try to mislead you, please be advised that they have been picked out by some orginization that monitors lobbying groups the world over as being one of the most accurate and verifyable sources of what they say.

Swiss citizens are required to serve in their military for a certain period of years and as part of their service, they are issued and required to have their assigned weapon in their house with ammunition. Some of those weapons are squad support weapons which fall into medium heavy machine guns. Switzerland is a nice country with relatively low crime rate.

Isrealites are armed to the teeth with weapons open and concealed. Many of the weapons are FULL automatic and SELECT fire. They have a relatively low crime rate. The organization of Jewish people that has a B.B. (Sorry, I don't know how to spell it.) for its name here in America has steadfastly fought for all manner of gun control in the United States, I don't know their stand in Isreal, but I find their behavior contrary to what history should have shown them by now.

England has had more and more gun control, yet recently it seems more and more bobbies want to be armed because the respect they once had has eroded due to the nature of the criminals that are increasenly more violent in the U.K. and their crime rate is increasing but still relatively low.

Australia seems to be getting more violent criminals who are using more handguns more often than ever, yet I believe they have eliminated private ownership of even pump action long guns because of their rapid rate of fire (Am not sure, but I believe they only allow dual barrel shotguns, bolt actions, lever actions, and single shots.).

This post is a little disjointed, but what I am trying to say is that there seems to be little or no rhyme or reason to how guns are used and their supposed availability.

I think the AK is an ugly rifle, but I would want it or a Galil if I was in a real combat zone. I like the FAL FAN, the CETME, the G3, the M14, the M1 Garand, the M1 CARBINE (I have owned two of them, one an army surplus, and one a PLAINFIELD with dual actuating bars.), and the THOMPSON submachine gun. I identify with the history of these guns and appreciate the design and lines. If I had the funds, I would own at least one copy of the guns I have mentioned just to possess them, not because I expect the dogs of war at my door. For that reason, I want them available.

Your post seems to indicate that you believe possesion of this sort of arsenal makes one more likely to become physcopathic then one would be if they just owned a single shot weapon. That is simply not true.

Most of my guns are pistols and revolvers of various calibers. The primary reason (And now I am going to really blow my horn.) for owning handguns for me is to have one around the house because it gives me a secure feeling, (Especially now with knees that do not allow flight and seriously hinder the ability to fight.) and I am so good with a rifle that target shooting at the available 25 yard ranges in Milwaukee is not a challange. All the rifles I currently own are .22 caliber because it is inexpensive to shoot them. I have a light bolt action target rifle by Mossberg, a Winchester Mdl. 62A pump rifle with the external hammer, and a Savage semi-automatic rifle. The Winchester pump is a collectors item currently valued at $650.00, and because they did not use a disconnector in the trigger mechanism in the old days, I can pump out shots faster from it than my Savage semi-auto can shoot.

I want to be able to buy any type of rifle, and pistol that I want as long as I am not a threat to others. I have lived in my country since I immigrated here at age 5 and you can not believe how pissed off I am that I am looked at as a potential criminal because I carry a pocket knife. When I was younger, I used to take a bus to the target range, and no one would be upset at seeing a 14 year old kid hauling two or more rifles and an .50 caliber ammo box full of ammunition. Nowadays, if you wear a t-shirt with a gun on it, some idiot calls the cops because you "look dangerous". I am sick and tired of being classified because of my hobbies.

Bountyhunter

The sunset of the AW ban will be the first one we have gotten back. Realistically, there is no chance that NFA 34, GCA 68, or the MG ban of 89 will ever be repealed. At least we finally get to win back something. Realistically, it is a trivial matter. But it still makes me feel all warm and fuzzy.
Just for the record, I love shooting. I learned how to use a rifle at age four. I like most anything that uses powder and lead. Anything from a flintlock PA rifle to a M-240B will get my attention. My guns are used mostly for recreational shooting, with some light hunting and very light defensive purposes. They are of no danger to anyone.
If I could obtain a legal full auto AKM at a hardware store, nothing would change. I would still be the same man who just likes to shoot all kinds of guns.
What is so inherently bad about that?

The 1994 Assault ban is junk. The weapons banned were banned for cosmetic reasons. They look mean. They are all semi automatic and in most cases shoot mid range cartridges. Full autos for sale as a new manufactured weapon were stopped decades ago. Those in exhistance, at the time, were grandfathered in and have to be registered and taxed. Those in private hands are obscenely expensive. Economics 101: high demand low volume = high prices. As in two to three thousand for certian models to over twenty thousand for others. The average joe can't afford the autos.
I am a Police Officer in Michigan and at the time, and even now, knew the ban was garbage. One of the reasons it passed in the first place was because of an admendment that got attached to it. It gave federal monies to local deparments to hire more officers, 100,000 more. How many politicans would vote against such a bill? The headlines the next day would read about how they are soft on crime, don't support the Police, etc. What was not said about the money for the 100,000 officers was that it dried up after only several years (I don't remember the exact number....something around three years.) After the three years the local departments had to find the money to continue employment of those officers. There were a lot of those officers put to the curb and scrambling to find work.
I mentioned "mid range cartridge" earlier in the post. The deer hunting rifles worry me more....no I am not advocating banning them. My body armor at work has been augmented (at my own expense) with metal plates that are rated to stop some of the mid range cartridges. The plates will not stop the 30.06 / .308 / and magnums of the world. The mean looking weapons were easy targets for the politicians to attack.....dads and grandpa's hunting rifles would have sent people through the roof...and rightly so. The 1994 ban should have send people though the roof too!
Common sense gun laws (control) is bull. The second admentment was not put in the U.S. Constitution so people could put food on the table. It was put there to prevent oppressive govenment practices that they had just fought against. Eighty million plus gun owners against the current military, even if only a fraction choose to fight, reguardless of the militarys weapons would be one sided.....against the military. The Iraqis have managed what? Seven hundred kills roughly against our military after the major combat. They use the spray and pray Soviet methods of fighting. Imagine now an internal fight within the states against an oppressive government with the populace actually aiming. It would be over real fast.
A parting comment I want to make is that most of us have never been subjected to a government like Hiters, Stalins, Husseins, North Korea, etc. Many are kidding themselves if they honestly believe that ....it can never happen here. It can happen anywhere under the right set of circumstances and nothing lasts forever. Someday there probably will be a fundemental change to our government. It may be by choice of a voting populace i.e. Hiters Germany......or by the will of a small group (or person) Husseins Iraq. It will happen. When it does I, even as an "agent" of the government, know full well that without the power to resist I even as one of the "agents" will be subject to the will of the oppressive government.
This is not paranoia but historical reality.

This pisses me off this thread.

There IS NO REASON to own an assault rifle period. They have but one purpose. Please dont throw the "they are just scarey looking " argument in my face.

An idiot with a 50 cent file can make a semi auto into fully auto in 20 mins in most cases.

Try that with a single bolt action hunting rifle.

I am so tired of the "I need and collect assault rifles and its my right BS".

Want to hunt get a shotgun or hunting rifle assault weapons are for people.

I am all for the right to own guns but assault rifles? Give me a break.

Want to fire autos? Join the army.

Flip

i'm not the moderator, but please cool down. No reason for a flame war.