Assault Weapons Ban Sunsets
Burncycle
Join Date: 2002-11-24 Member: 9759Members, NS1 Playtester
Join Date: 2002-11-24 Member: 9759Members, NS1 Playtester
in Discussions
<div class="IPBDescription">Monday</div> <a href='http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/09/12/gun.ban.ap/index.html' target='_blank'>http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/09/12/gun.ban.ap/index.html</a>
It's about time.
Laws like this irritate me... and you'd be surprised how many people are misinformed about what the law actually bans.
They think the incidents where robbers went on a shooting spree with an AK-47 can't happen anymore because the AK-47's have been banned right? Wrong... the only thing that was banned was features on the weapon. For instance, the bayonet lug. Which (quite frankly) is irrelivant to the criminals intentions anyway.
It leads me to believe that the ban itself was nothing more than the government trying to appease the people by making it look like they're doing "something" (even if it's ineffective).
It's about time.
Laws like this irritate me... and you'd be surprised how many people are misinformed about what the law actually bans.
They think the incidents where robbers went on a shooting spree with an AK-47 can't happen anymore because the AK-47's have been banned right? Wrong... the only thing that was banned was features on the weapon. For instance, the bayonet lug. Which (quite frankly) is irrelivant to the criminals intentions anyway.
It leads me to believe that the ban itself was nothing more than the government trying to appease the people by making it look like they're doing "something" (even if it's ineffective).
Comments
Nor will a law prevent criminals from getting guns. They're criminals. They'll work around it. If you're going to rob a bank or something, you might as well get an illegal firearm.
So yeah, making laws (particularly dumb and useless ones) won't make any difference to the crims, but could potentially make a difference to a hobbyist or whatever.
Things won't get any better until we reform the institutions that create violent gun-toting madmen out to get money, and stop selling guns to the ones who still exist at gun shows and whatnot.
As of sept 13th (Today) it's over. Wewt. Hopefully it will STAY gone a while.
Things like this meaningless law is what forces me to believe that those trying to ban guns are doing it out of blind fear and/or thier own sense of needing some control over thier fellows, rather than any true concern for anyone.
On the other hand, I now have to worry that the guy who's going to shoot me with an AK-74 is now going to have both a grenade launcher mount <i>and</i> a bayonet mount. Just because, you know, those criminals like to fix bayonets and perform massed infantry charges.
On the other hand, I now have to worry that the guy who's going to shoot me with an AK-74 is now going to have both a grenade launcher mount <i>and</i> a bayonet mount. Just because, you know, those criminals like to fix bayonets and perform massed infantry charges. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Don't forget, he'll also have a pistol grip, so his wrist won't get tired after shooting you.
Now we're going to face a whole slew of criminals with healthy wrists. I hope you all are happy.
</sarcasm>
I'm all about this ban expiring. It's like...leveling the playing field between criminal and victim. Imagine, your potential victim might be armed with a bigger gun than you! Don't rob a bank, you could get shot by a customer that way!
Stupid laws that don't mean anything are great. They simply prove the point that they are meant as an attack on law abiding people's rights so that a prissy uptown liberal can sleep easier knowing that he can control the populace a little better.
Nor will a law prevent criminals from getting guns. They're criminals. They'll work around it. If you're going to rob a bank or something, you might as well get an illegal firearm.
So yeah, making laws (particularly dumb and useless ones) won't make any difference to the crims, but could potentially make a difference to a hobbyist or whatever.
Things won't get any better until we reform the institutions that create violent gun-toting madmen out to get money, and stop selling guns to the ones who still exist at gun shows and whatnot. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why would as well get an illegal firearm? As I see it, it's kinda easy to get a friend to buy a firearm.. Most other nations doesnt suffer as much from gun related crimes, and dont have the same kind of gangwars
And please tell how it wouldnt matter not to ban them? An average criminal would get them how?
*Kisses* AR-15 and AK-47
Admiral Yamamoto: "You cannot invade mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass." Advising Japan's military leaders of the futility of an invasion of the mainland United States because of the widespread availability of guns. It has been theorized that this was a major contributing factor in Japan's decision not to land on North America early in the war when they had vastly superior military strength. This delay gave our industrial infrastructure time to gear up for the conflict and was decisive in our later victory.
Guns help overthrow oppressive governments.
However, this will mean an even more easier accessbility of higher powered weaponry.
If the gun shops start selling AK47s, who's to say that a person with no criminal background suddenly buys one and kills a bunch of people?
See, the Assault Weapons Ban really is an attack on my freedom to carry a weapon. I don't entirely trust any government or company with protecting my rights, so I have my gun of my choosing which says that if I believe the government is far too oppressive, then I will revolt.
In this day and age, of course, revolting against a government with just automatic weapons would be quite difficult. However, it's impossible to overthrow any government with rocks and a lot of hope; you need lead carrying hope right to their foreheads.
I'm not planning on revolting against the US government by any degree. As I said, it's a matter of trust, something which I won't give all of. I also want to be able to have the right to defend myself. The assault weapons ban actually did very little anyways, besides being a "feel good" law.
Get your facts straight.
No, the ban didn't impact your ability to go down to the store and buy an AK-47
The only thing it impacted was the attachments you could legally have, like a bayonet lug, grenade launcher, and so forth.
So it doesn't make it any easier or harder now that the ban is expired.
The truth is, this law came into effect due to SEVERAL shootings in California all regarding assault rifles. Ever since the ban, there has been a severe drop in assault rifle crimes in California(I don't know about other states). Anyways, this law should really be reinstated, there is no need for an assault rifle for civilians, end of discussion.
Guns help overthrow oppressive governments.
However, this will mean an even more easier accessbility of higher powered weaponry.
If the gun shops start selling AK47s, who's to say that a person with no criminal background suddenly buys one and kills a bunch of people? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Gun shops already sell AK-47s, and if they didnt...I could still go out and buy a rifle that fires 7.62 ammunition. The ban wasn't even against the firearms themselves, just parts of them. Such as a bayonete lug, the parts to attach (real) grenade launchers...not that 37mm flare crap, high capacity magazines, et cetera.
You could buy an AR-15 after the ban, but it would cost an **** load of money, and you'd get a rigged magazine that only holds 5 rounds. So technically, those guns have been legal all this time, just rare. And what the hell difference does a bayonette lug make? If i've got an AK, not like im going to do a rolling charge and shank some guy, when I can just gun him down.
Also, children...this ban passing isnt making full automatic firearms legal unless you've got the Class 3 liscense for them. The only thing that was banned were the aesthetics that made these high powered rifles into Assault Rifles. No matter what accessories are on the SKS or AK-47, a person pointing that gun at you...and pulling the trigger is still going to kill you...considering both pre and post ban AK-47s and SKS rifles fired the same ammunition.
(I'm aware that ALL assault rifles were banned by this, but the SKS and AK-47 were my examples.)
Having this ban lifted just makes gun enthusiasts such as my father and I happy, because we dont have to pay a rediculous amount of money for a gun that has been cut up.
I could come up with some well reasoned argument, but americans killing other americans doesnt affect me here in the UK, were guns are banned. So keep on shootin boys. YEEE HAAAAA *bang* *bang*
The Assault Weapon ban essentially states,
If you have a semiauto firearm that has the capability to accept a high capacity detachable magazine, it will be considered an assault weapon if it has 2 or more of the following:
1. a pistol grip (Easier use, like us short people and for comfort).
2. a flash suppressor (They double as a compensator for excessive recoil 90% of the time, too).
3. a collapsing or folding stock (So I'm short, I really am! I'm 5'4'', and I can't use a full rifle, so kill me)
4. a bayonet lug (Hit an run bayonet drive by's anyone?)
5. a grenade launcher (For what nades'? Serisouly, explosives are a whole nother' law)
So let's look at the AR15 for example, before 1994 the guns could typically be found in all kinds of configurations but generally the gun had features such as a pistol grip, flash suppressor, and bayonet lug. Since there are 2 or more of the evil features, it's considered an "assault weapon" in that particular configuration.
Enter the "assault weapon" criteria and the manufacturers said to themselves, "hey, if I can get the rifle's configuration down to just one of the evil features it will not be considered an assault weapon and be legal for sale."
So for the AR15, the one evil feature it kept was the pistol grip while the rest of the stuff had to go.
Essentially the same gun, just not as many features as the guns built before the law.
And what's more, the AW ban didn't actually ban the guns it considered "assault weapons" because those guns were grandfathered and remained legal to own and transfer. The guns were never taken off the street, period, they have been out there for the past 10 years.
It's just that the AW ban created two classes of weapons, guns that were made before 1994 that are known as "prebans" and are entitled to keeping all the evil features and then the guns after 1994 known as "postbans" which have to have features removed until they get down to less than 2 evil features.
Real fast pictures for you,
Post 94 "legal" and by letter/definition of the law NOT an assault weapon, just one evil feature which is the pistol grip.
<a href='http://home.bak.rr.com/varmintcong/14.5in/AR15500A1.jpg' target='_blank'>http://home.bak.rr.com/varmintcong/14.5in/AR15500A1.jpg</a>
And a "pre94" "assault weapon" with enough evil features to be considered such, ofcourse it's possible for somebody to stick said evil features on a post94 gun but they would be breaking the law if they did so(same basic gun so parts are interchangable). Count the evil features, more than 2 means "assault weapon".
<a href='http://tinypic.com/3v5ft' target='_blank'>http://tinypic.com/3v5ft</a>
Now is it easy to see how ineffective the stupid AW ban is? I mean really, the same damn gun for all intents and purposes. Shoots the same cartridge, is roughly the exact same in terms of absolute capability(slight advantage to preban configs but VERY slight, collapsing stock slightly shorter or more compact, and flash suppressors offering only a SLIGHT advantage in very limited situations). In terms of 'doom&gloom' killing power, both are equal, fire at equal rates based upon how fast a person can pull the trigger because these ARE semiauto firearms.
And the media has to go around making it seem like full auto firearms will be flooding the streets.... NO WONDER PEOPLE ASSUME THE WORST.
Other night on NBC the national news showed a short clip while mentioning the AW ban sunset, they showed a shot of a streetsweeper being loaded as if to imply the gun will be legal after the sunset. Not true, the Streetsweeper has the honor of being one of the only guns to be DOUBLE BANNED. It was listed as a destructive device quite a while back and is regulated by the same regulations that govern transfers of full auto firearms, the National Firearms Act of 1934. The Streetsweeper was then once again banned by name in the AW ban of 1994. The idiots writing the law can't even remember what they've banned so I guess they are covering their bases.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Like a said, any guns that were around before the ban HAVE ALWAYS BEEN HERE. They haven't been taken off the streets or disbanded, and our lives are just fine! The ban really did nothing, because crime using these rifles in ALL violent crimes is less than 1%.
I could come up with some well reasoned argument, but americans killing other americans doesnt affect me here in the UK, were guns are banned. So keep on shootin boys. YEEE HAAAAA *bang* *bang* <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Comparing the U.K. and the U.S. is insane. Your population is a fraction of ours, our governments are different, our societies are different, our uses for firearms are different. I own an SAR-1, M-48, M-44, Ruger 10/22, and the only thiongs I kill with them are paper! Majority of crimes using handguns are from the scum of our nations, not Mom and Pop White Collar Population.
<!--emo&::asrifle::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/asrifle.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='asrifle.gif' /><!--endemo--> ((0)) Bullzeye! <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
You always could. Just with out a bayonette lug and a collapsable stock.
/OWNAGE OF THE DEMOCRATS (the ones crying about the gun laws anyway.)
/OWNAGE OF THE DEMOCRATS (the ones crying about the gun laws anyway.) <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, Pistols are used something like that of 88% of gun crimes, shotguns and hunting rifles make up 2nd most, and anytying else is under 1%.
You always could. Just with out a bayonette lug and a collapsable stock. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm aware, just...what's the fun in buying an overpriced chopped up gun?
At one point, before I was born and whilst this was legal-ish(and my father was still a Class 3 liscense owner), owned a beautifully modded to hell and back again M-16, full automatic. Of course that's all gone now. <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
*edit* M-16, not AR-15.
This isn't the end though, Feinstein is going to try and push new leglislation that will update the ban. Seriously, there is no need for Assault Rifles in your modern day life. Don't use the second amendment on me either because that amendment was meant for people 200 years ago when their were threats of Native-Americans and the British invading neither of which exist today.
The only time I find assault weapons is in the news along with the deaths of multiple victims. Sure an assault weapon is just as dangerous as a handgun but it is more deadly because it has the ability to effectively empty out more ammunition than a handgun, allowing it to kill more people in less time.
Thanks a lot, ABC news.
Well, if they already sold this crap, I don't see how this law being repealed will do that much more.
If a person's really determined, they can make a low-yield nuclear bomb with instructions from the internet, so I guess this isn't so bad.
Anyway, on a more serious note...the last time I heard an Assault Rifle being mentioned in a negative way, was the robbing of the Bank of America by those two 1337 guys. But they not only had preban-style assault rifles, they were full automatic. Which is still illegal to own now that the ban has worn off.
Plus, owning assault rifles is really cool...because...well...they kick ****. It's a lot funner to go shooting with your AR-15, SKS, AK-47, M-16, and M-14...all bought either preban or after the supply of Assault Rifles gets rolling again, so you can buy them at reasonable prices.
And so what if the magazines can now hold more than 5 rounds? One round is enough to kill you...don't see why you're complaining. Also, know this...guns dont kill people, people kill people. I could turn a rubber duck into a deadly weapon if I really wanted to kill someone.
Guns help overthrow oppressive governments.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<span style='color:red'>Stay on topic.</span>
What's an assault rifle?
Does adding a flash supressor on my gun make it more assault-worthy than one without it?
And a gun could have a flash supressor before... it just couldn't have more than two features that were listed. So everything on the list was legal, but not in pairs of more than two.
Does having a flash suppressor AND a pistol-grip make a gun more deadly than one with a pistol-grip, flash suppressor, and bayonette lug? (I say just use a knife and duct tape, but i guess some people like to be fancy)