Posted on 07/28/2004 4:56:40 PM PDT by French-American Republican
It's 10 rounds on the rifle magazine and 19 named rifles. (Or copies or duplicates of them). Magazine ban is not restricted to centerfire either. Haven't been able to get the 25 (or 50) round magazines for my 10/22 (.22 caliber semi-auto rifle from Ruger) in years, and they tend to not last long.
You've gotten some good replies on the weapon specifics already.
You should know that the ban was not popular at all when it initially passed. The only way it made it through the House of Reps was the Sunset provision, ending it after 10 years. The idea being that it would provide an opportunity to see if it did any good.
The Democrats have already paid a heavy price once for pushing the AWB. It's passage is credited with ending the careers of many of the Dems who voted for it in the '94 house races, the Republicans took control of congress then, for the first time in 40 years.
You'll notice that the only Dems really squeeling for it are in 'very' safe Dem states or districts.
Yes, the replies have been very informative. Part of me was expecting this thread to sink like a stone since answering someone's questions isn't exactly the most entertaining thing to do. I'm appreciative.
Is there any chance of a renewal of the ban this year?
To those who encourage me to buy an arm, I'm considering doing so if only on principle, since I live in a neighborhood not threatened by criminals. Problem is getting registered and buying the weapon costs a bit so I might have to wait a while.
For what it's worth - I'm looking at my 10 year old copy of the law now - the definition of an assault weapon with repect to a rifle merely requires a detachable magazine (assuming all other criterea are met) - no mention of magazine capacity is given with respect to the definition of the semi-auto rifle as an assault weapon.
While I'm glad this thing is going to expire, I must admit that, until it came along, I had allowed a youthful interest in firearms to fall into disuse. I probably never would have learned what I have with respect to firearms (or acquired my current "inventory") if this rancid law and the equally rancid Clinton had not been.
Like I said, the Law of Unintended Consequences...
You were born on U.S. soil. That makes you a citizen. What registration are you talking about? Most FFLs in most states just need a driver's license to make sure you are a resident of the state where you are making the purchase. A few states like CA, NY, NJ and Illinois may put you through hoops for something like a firearms owner ID.
You can pick up a used .22LR rifle for a decent price at many gun shops. .22LR is very cheap to shoot and you can enjoy many hours becoming a marksman with little impact on your budget.
By getting registered I meant getting a permit. Sorry, got myself mixed up in there.
-------------------
I read his question as asking what was considered an assault weapon under the Clinton ban ("What exactly did the assault weapons ban of Clinton do? What weapons count as assault weapons?"). Under the clinton ban, there are so many factors that are involved that even the BATF has a hard time determining whether something is an assault weapon (you can have up to X foreign parts as long as it is under Y percent, but it can't have a pig-sticker or detachable mag if X condition. It's actually more confusing than most computer programming LOL.
As for what makes an assault weapon in real (non-clinton) terms, I agree with you entirely. Things like fire rate selectors classify them.
soap box, ballot box, ammo box... The ballot box and soap box don't appear to be working too well though :)
--------------
All neighborhoods are under the threat of crime, it's just a matter of degrees. The area I live in wasn't prone to crime just two years ago, but has gone down hill quite a bit as of late. A couple weeks ago I went down to the corner store to get a pack of cigarettes and talk to someone who works there. I got there about 5 minutes after the armed robbery just as the cops were ariving. I also missed a bank robbery about 3 months ago by a matter of minutes. With that hit rate, there are now decent odds of having to deal with a violent crime, in a neighborhood that was peaceful just recently.
If you do get a firearm, take some training (might even be required in FL), and take it to the range enough times so that you feel comfortable with it. Most gun shops will be happy to help you figure out the laws and hoops you need to jump through. A lot of shops that have an indoor range will even let you test out firearms before you buy them. The one I frequent had S&W day last week and I got to try out that new S&W .500. Now THAT is a manly round. I thought the Desert Eagle 50cal was a hand cannon, but this thing made the Desert Eagle seem like a .38.
You may want to join the NRA and UNDERSTAND that firearms, are an inert piece of steel, wood and plastic. I own four shotguns, three rifles, and five handguns. Most of these firearms have been in my family for over 100 years.
You can do target practice with a .22 at a paper target. Shoot Trap or Skeet (those 3-1/2 inch clay birds), go hunting with a shotgun for pheasant, duck or quail. Punch paper with a .22 pistol, revolver. And finally, work on final self defense skills with a .380, 9mm, .357, or 45 ACP.
Being prepared is not a bad idea when the bad guys kick in your door.
Join the NRA, read the articles and the message from the editorial in the American Rifleman; and the NRA's President's message. You will learn a lot.
1. "Assault weapons" are not machine guns. The ban was mostly about semi-automatic rifles that had certain "evil" or "military-looking" features such as a pistol grip, a detachable magazine that can hold more than 10 rounds, and a bayonet lug. In practice what this meant for the AR-15 (a semi-automatic only version of the M-16) is that AR-15 rifles made after the ban could not have a bayonet lug (attachment for a bayonet). Manufacturers were able to follow the letter of the law and still make the AR-15 with a pistol grip style stock and an owner of a new AR-15 could legally (according to the Federal law) still attach a "high capacity" (more than 10 rounds magazine) if the magazine was made before the ban. Some manufacturers follow the letter of the law and make semi-auto rifles that look like the AK-47. The gun control crowd does not like this, so they want to "strengthen" the ban and ban all semi-automatic rifles and handguns. They want to frighten people into thinking there are millions of machine guns "on the streets," when the real goal is to ban all semi-auto firearms. There is nothing wrong with the common people having full-auto rifles, as you noticed in Switzerland, but that is another topic!
2. I think you have noticed that the gun control crowd especially wants to ban firearms that have usefulness for a militia and for personal self-defense.
3. Once politicians ban one class of weapons, they immediately try to ban the next class of weapons, and so on. If they ban semi-auto guns, next they will ban bolt-action (manually operated) rifles and revolvers. Kerry wants to ban just about any firearm anyone owns, but he poses for pictures holding a $10,000 shotgun and says he is one of the regular people.
4. Many states allow for concealed carry, while some ban it for everyone except for politicians, movie stars, etc. See www.packing.org for details about the laws for each state.
5. Republican politicians are usually more friendly toward concealed carry and other firearm issues, while most prominent Democrat politicians favor more restrictions to an outright ban on everything. The general direction is strongly for the Democrat party leadership to seek to ban all firearms, although some Democrat politicians are more moderate about this (especially in the South). A Democrat who sincerely supports the Second Amendment would never be allowed to have any position of leadership in the Democratic Party. The Republican Party has a more mixed record. The official line is to keep the current bans but not to enact any more gun control, while some Republican politicians really do support the Second Amendment and want to get rid of the current bans while other Republican politicians (especially in the Northeast) would be happy to ban everything and would never allow concealed carry.
6. I encourage you to take a gun safety course if you decide to own a gun. Buying a gun is a personal thing -- what might work for you might not be a good choice for another person. Some guns will fit well in your hands and you will be able to aim them well, while other guns will feel awkward in your hands. You should try out a type of gun before you buy one. There are some ranges that will rent you a handgun so you might be able to try different makes of gun. If you have friends who own guns I am sure they would be happy to let you try their guns, especially after you have taken a gun safety course. Probably the best thing to do after you take the gun safety course is to get a .22 caliber revolver and practice, practice, practice. When you are comfortable with that, then it would be the time to try out larger-caliber guns for self-defense. Once you have developed good habits and skills with a .22 caliber revolver, you will be ready to try a more demanding gun, and you will do better than the person who bought the "biggest, baddest" gun as his first gun. Always use common sense and you will be safe!
Gun grabbers are increasingly trying to separate the right to keep and bear arms from its constitutional underpinnings. To everyone but liberals and gun grabbers the word militia implies a body organized for military use. The Supreme Court Miller decision of 1939 held that the militia was 'A body of citizens enrolled for military discipline.' And further that ordinarily when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time."
To begin with, only the national government was represented at the trial. With nobody arguing to the contrary, the court followed standard court procedure and assumed that the law was constitutional until proven otherwise. If both sides were present, the outcome may have been much different.
However, since only one party showed up, the case will stand in the court records as is. As to the militia, Mr. Justice McReynolds related the beliefs of the Founding Fathers when commenting historically about the Second Amendment. He stated that, ". . .The common view was that adequate defense of country and laws could be secured through the militia- civilians primarily, soldiers on occasion.
"The significance attributed to the term Militia appears from the debates in the Convention, the history and legislation of Colonies and States, and the writings of approved commentators. These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense.
It is clear that the firearms that are most suited for modern-day militia use are those semi automatic military pattern weapons that the yellow press calls "assault weapons". Since nations such as the Swiss trust their citizenry with true selective fire assault rifles, it seems to me that this country ought to be at least able to trust its law-abiding citizenry with the semi automatic version.
Self-defense is a vital corollary benefit of the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. But its primary constitutional reason for being is for service in the well-regulated militia which is necessary to the security of a free state. WE must be prepared to maintain that security against even our own forces that are responding to the orders of a tyrannical government, and the only viable way to counter a standing army's qualitative advantage is with a huge quantitative one. Don't let the gun grabbers and their politician allies separate us from the constitutional reason for the right to keep and bear arms. Miltary pattern weapons are precisly the weapons that should be MOST constitutionally protected. Even defenders of the right often neglect the constitutional aspect of it, and concentrate on their near non-existent use in crime.
These "assault weapons" bans go directly to limiting the military utility of the ordinary type of small arm issued to individuals engaged in modern day military (or Militia) activity.
And should you enc ounter the straw man argument concerning heavy machine guns, howitzers, mortars, tanks, nuclear weapons, napalm, flamethrowers, et al, these are crew served weapons that are not issued to individuals. Every individual soldier, to include medical personnel, have individual small arms available for their use and protection, that weapon today typically being a selective fire assault rifle and /or a semi auto pistol.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.