Assault weapons are NOT machine guns, they are not automatic.

Assault RIFLE = Fully automatic military fire arm.

"Assault WEAPON" is a new phrase that has only been around for a short time and it doesn't really mean anything except what the user wants it to. In the Assault Weapons Ban it was used to ban semi-auto rifles that looked like military guns. Lots and lots of people think that Assault Weapon means machine gun but it does not.

I know it is confusing. The people who started this phrase said they wanted it to be confusing. A lot of people are confused.


Lots of people say they support the Assault Weapons Ban because nobody needs a machine gun to hunt. The Assault Weapons Ban has nothing to do with machine guns at all.Nothing. Never has.

If you think the Assault Weapons Ban has anything to do with machine guns or rifles that are capable of fully auto fire you are exactly wrong. You have it backwards.

My apologies to the choir for my preaching. This is a really serious lie we need to try to straighten out.
Yeah, I know about the hunting and the 2nd amendment. One topic at a time please.

Semi-automatic firearms are those which fire rounds, one at a time, as fast as the shooter can pull the trigger. Such weapons have been legal to sell/purchase since the expiration of the Schumer amendment. The AK-47 rifle is an example of a semi-automatic rifle. I agree that the term "assault rifle" is not as precise as the term "semi-automatic rifle". I am not a hunter, but I have heard it said that most hunters agree that a semi-automatic rifle is not appropriate for hunting game, and that the law should allow only bolt-action rifles. As a side note, last month in Pittsburgh, three police officers were killed by a shooter who was lying in wait with a semi-automatic rifle.

:shrug:

The "single action" type of revolver requires that the hammer be cocked in order to move the next round in the cylinder into firing position. Many "old west" revolvers were single action weapons.

A double action revolver is as you say a semi automatic or autoloader. If you pull the trigger once it fires one round and moves the next round into firing position. Most revolvers used in cowboy movies were double action.

I do believe there are a few single-action revolvers still being made...? But they haven't been much more than a collector or competition gun for quite a while. I've had a dozen or so double action ones...and one single; a
Ruger .44 that I traded for a motorcycle years ago. :D

It has multiple firing chambers which are reloaded manually, as opposed to a handgun, which has a single firing chamber that automatically extracts spent cartridges and loads fresh ones.

They'll want revolvers banned.

Sadly, no sarc tag

http://ccwsaveslives.blogspot.com/

With a revolver, the shooter has to make everything happen. It's the force exerted by the shooter's finger on the trigger that cocks the hammer and rotates the cylinder. The gun doesn't do anything by itself, i.e. automatically.

Most hunters who say that about semi-autos are pretty old now.
And before the bolt rifle it was the single shot. And before that the percussion cap. And before that the flint lock. And before that the bow and arrow.

Semi autos are very good and functional hunting rifles,especially now. I hunt with one. Shot a fine buck last year with it.One shot. Hunting is mostly like that. It is usually one shot for deer regardless of the rifle.

has no reference to hunting.

Bears repeating.

http://ccwsaveslives.blogspot.com/

The AK-47 IS a machine gun, per BATFE definitions. It is a select-fire assault rifle (not an "assault weapon" under the '94 federal language).
There are a lot of similar, but semi-auto ONLY rifles. They use the Kalashnikov design, slightly modified for semi-auto only.

This rifle is not appropriate for hunting game?


Browning BAR Mk II Safari Grade, .300 WSSM

BTW, most firearms sold annually in the USA are semiautomatic, and not just handguns. Semiautomatic rifles are the most popular centerfire target rifles and defensive carbines in the United States.

Only 1 in 5 U.S. gun owners hunts. The rest of us would like to retain our gun rights, too.

With minor restrictions on accessories, there has never been an interruption in the sale of semi-automatic carbines of medium power. This type of firearm is now OWNED BY MORE PEOPLE THAN WHO HUNT. By some millions. You should check out the Remington Model R 25, a rifle based on the semi-auto AR 15, and looking a fair degree like it, except for the cammo and the MUCH MORE POWERFUL .308 round. Many gun writers now predict that the AR 15 platform (and similar ones) will be the hunting rifle of the future; the Rem Model R 25 is specifically designed for American big-game hunting.

In some places, the small medium-powered rounds of AR 15s and AK 47 clones are legal for hunting; in others, the rounds are considered too weak. That is "corrected" by re-chambering.

Going further back, Remington has also made the Model 742, a semi-automatic chambered for the quite powerful .30-06 round. It is appropriate for big-game hunting, especially if the quarry is wild hogs.

As a side note, rifles OF ALL TYPES account for less than 3% of all homicides in the U.S.; breaking out the class dubbed "assault weapons," the number goes down even more. The number of police killed by these weapons is minuscule.

An assault rifle is any select fire weapon of intermediate caliber between a sub-machine gun, and a battle rifle.

I'll break that down for you:

Select Fire, means the weapon has either fully automatic, or burst capability. Semi-Auto has two selector positions, Safe, and Fire, and fire produces one shot per pull of the trigger. Select-Fire will have a 3rd or fourth selector position, enabling Safe, Fire, and Full, or Safe, Fire, Burst (usually 3 rounds), or Safe, Fire, Burst, Full.

A sub-machine gun is a select fire weapon utilizing pistol cartridges. So, an UZI in .45, TMP, 'Tommy gun', things like that.

A battle rifle is a full sized rifle, such as a FAL, Garand, AR-10, G3, M14, etc. The caliber is key, these are all .30 caliber weapons, mostly firing .308.

An Assault Rifle normally uses .223, or 7.62x39mm, cartridges of intermediate power, between those pistol rounds, and rifle rounds.


An 'assault weapon' is, whatever Congress decides looks scary, apparently. Semi-Automatic-only weapons of all three types I listed above, have been variously classed as 'assault weapons' by the Congress.

:hide:

great album!


(apologies to Deep Purple)

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Some people got together and made up a list of guns they chose to call "assault weapons", they will change or add to that list when ever they want to.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

And technically, since that bit of law doesn't exist anymore, it has no meaning today.

More germane would be to ask how CA & NY define them, since those laws are still in effect.

What would you personally propose if you had the ability to pass any laws you wanted? I see a lot of anti-gun rhetoric hereabouts but rarely does anybody actually come up with any serious ideas that would be either effective or feasible, or both.

So long as it's not pointed at someone, I don't really give a shit what kind of gun you want to have.

The right has been lying about this thing for fifteen years, and clearly a lot of Useful Idiots on our side of the fence have bought into it as well. My interest is this; If you want to debate it, argue against it, fine, it's what we do. But for fuck's sake, stop LYING ABOUT IT. "Assault weapon" has a definition. it does not impinge on your 2nd amendment rights (you have a constitutional right to own firearms. You don't have any rights to own any specific make or feature of a firearm).

One claim from the right that IS correct is that this is probably useless legislation. It really doesn't ban much at all, doesn't prohibit the owning, selling, purchasing, or use of any of these weapons manufactured prior to the passage of the law, and it's hyperspecific nature even fails at doing what it says it's doing.

What I find funny is that the Republicans and their Nugentian Lapdogs among the Democrats both agree that it's useless legislation that will accomplish nothing and be utterly ineffective at anything... yet they both maintain that it's some sort of savage, terrifying threat to 2nd amendment rights. It's very bizarre, the juncture of ridicule and fear.

Effective at removing democrats from office. At least, that's what happened last time.

I'm not going to cross party lines on a single issue, but a lot of people will. Really wish we would drop this. Or at least pursue something more worthwhile, like stiffer penalties for straw purchases, or more funding for BATFE to run sting ops to catch staw purchasers. Things that target the transition from legal, to illegal firearms.

As an independent voter, I would have NO PROBLEM not voting for a Democrat who supports an AWB. (Although, if I agreed with 95%+ of their stances, and they agreed to not push an AWB, I MIGHT still vote for them...maybe...)

There are a lot of things that LE agencies could do to reduce violent crime, but many are still bent on gun-control for some reason. It's like throwing hard-boiled eggs at an invading army--not very effective or efficient!

Seriously, what are the characteristics of an "assault weapon", in *your* own words.
It is a fuzzy term, deliberately so

California has its own definition
New York its own

The Federal ones (previous and proposed) have changed.

Which ones do you agree with (or do not, as the case may be)?

OP, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the point of this thread to point out that any old or new assault weapons ban has not one single thing to do with fully automatic weapons? Almost daily here in the gungeon and around DU we have posts by people who have been duped, are trying to dupe or simply don't understand that 1. assault weapons are not automatic machine guns 2. automatic/machine guns have been heavily regulated since 1934 and 3. automatic weapons are almost never used in crime, in fact, there has not been a single incident of a violent crime committed with a fully automatic weapon in over 10 years.

The sources of confusion are many including but not limited to 1. people using the terms "automatic" and "semi automatic" interchangeably and 2. the MSM using stock footage of people shooting fully automatic weapons any time they are running a story about so called 'assault weapons' which are, by definition, not fully automatic.

Further, anyone who understands this issue also understands the arbitrary nature of the classification. Here is an interesting video which includes testimony before congress by the director of the BATFE who explains the difficulty of attempting to regulate this arbitrary classification of fire arms. This also gives a decent definition of the term and full explanation of the differences between so called assault weapons, assault rifles, and common semiautomatic hunting rifles.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysf8x477c30

Spot on.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

And no machine guns are not banned, never were. You could go and buy one today if you fill out the proper paper work and pay the money. It would be legal.

For instance, Washington State, that would be a very bad idea. Though, you could go to Idaho, buy the gun, and put it in storage there, that would be ok. But possession in Washington State would be jail time.

and feels it needs no significant changes? Are you OK with the 94 AWB being re-instituted as is?

I believe that legislation expired, and took its twisted definition with it,

Go ahead, push for its reinstatement....And what us bleed seats, like in 1994...

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x221713

"In the Assault Weapons Ban..."
"Lots of people say they support the Assault Weapons Ban..."
"The Assault Weapons Ban has nothing..."
"If you think the Assault Weapons Ban has..."

Naturally given the capitalization, and the lack of specific mentions of any specific legislation, I took Tim to be talking about the 1994 federal law. The one that the current administration is thinking about reinstating. The one that everyone's talking about in the gungeon. Yeah, that one.

Any more dumb fucking questions, or are we done here?

referred, Cali has what is called AWB, DC has what is called an AWB. Why in the name of fuck would you think the OP is talking about an expired, dead, never to be revived piece of legislation? Please site one time in the history of the US that a piece of repealed or expired legislation has ever been reinstated as written and by the same name...

It carries no force now. The definitions it contained are moot, and would not necessarily be used without modification in any new ban.

not the 1994 non-ban.

The one you quoted does not exist in the "law of the land" and has not existed for about 5 years.

This is a statement of fact....Refute it....if you can..."chuckle"....

And it was clearly the subject of the OP.

Finished? Good.

actual debate had absolutely fuck to do with the 1994 AWB, the most recent debate was about a totally new definition of assault weapon in HR1022.

And their is no federal definition...

Good.....WATER...WAAAAAATER....

We have made some real progress here...

How about this one?




This one?




Or this one?





All of the above are "assault weapons" according to the gun-control lobby and H.R.1022, but only the last one would have been affected at all by the 1994 Feinstein law (and then only for new production).

When most people today use the "assault weapon" meme, they are talking about banning most modern-looking centerfire rifles a la H.R.1022, not the 1994 Feinstein law, which didn't actually ban any guns.

Bill HR1022 had yet a different definition of "assault weapon".


People using Google can find a definition of "assault weapon". Tbey can also use Google to find the definition of a machine gun.


The term is arbitrary and perjorative. A useful term in terms of politics for one side, but not much more than that.

I still see people getting it wrong on this forum or in the media about once a week.

We need to come up with a FAQ for the gungeon, with points like the above as well as these that we can point to..

-What the 1934 NFA is
*full auto regulation
*short barreled shotguns
*short barreled rifles
*destructive devices
*'any other weapons'
-What the 1968 GCA is
*FFLs established
*prohibited persons list
*guns via mail
-What the 1986 FOPA is
*hughes amendment
*ammo via mail
*protection from lawsuits
-What the 1994 Brady Bill is
*NICS
-What the 1994 AWB was

Then things like-
-Where to get gun crime stats
-Where to get gun ownership stats
-Where to get gun manufacturing data (how many per year, what kind, etc)
-Where to get gun 'risk' studies
-Where to get criticism of various studies
-Where is a list of 'gun' polls
-Which states have CHL
-Which states have open carry
-Which states have college carry
-Which states have castle doctrine
-Which states regulate private sales

If we can get a ream of information together, I'd be happy to host it on a dedicated server I have.

nm

Nice way to preempt an argument.

Telling people they are wrong before they open their mouth.

I have to try that sometime.

if it is full auto or semi auto. If it looks like a machine gun or a military gun or has bling on it, it should be banned. Nobody needs a gun that looks like a military weapon. That's just a gun with bling and nobody needs it.

there are also a whole shit load of people who have been tricked. Those people are are against the AWB once they are educated as to what it is. And that is my goal. One person at a time.

Will I help all of them get it? Nope. But my tally is going up. Some of them are kind of pissed to find out they have been misled.

When you pull back the curtain and show that there has been a (deliberate by some, unintentional by others) misinformation campaign, they get very nasty.

"Assault weapons-just like armor-piercing bullets, machine guns, and plastic firearms-are a new topic. The weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons-anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun-can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons."
http://www.vpc.org/studies/awaconc.htm

Gun control proponents have never been shy about stating their ultimate goal to completely eliminate the private ownership of firearms. They have stated repeatedly it will only be accomplished incrementally and over time.

It is in Josh Sugarman's books, it's been on their websites, you don't have to look hard to find it. Now it is clear they believe their own press that only sub-human brain dead troglodytes own guns because they constantly accuse gun-owners of being paranoid of their intentions.

They have made no secret of what they really want, why are they surprised when we call them on it? There is no compromise, they just settle for one slice at a time, and they do not intend to stop until they have the whole loaf.

Funny, for years they have been gleefully telling each other how they are going to break it off in the gun-owners ass and now are upset when gun owners won't bend over and pick up the soap.

"One tenet of the National Rifle Association's faith has always been that handgun controls do little to stop criminals from obtaining handguns. For once, the NRA is right and America's leading handgun control organization is wrong. Criminals don't buy guns in gun stores. That's why they're criminals. But it isn't criminals who are killing most of the 20,000 to 22,000 people who die from handguns each year. We are."

:shrug:

So technically, it's not us who is killing those people; it's themselves.

Still, cute attempt to imply that the majority of firearm homicides are committed by regular people in fits of passion, and that therefore regular people can't be trusted with firearms. The truth is that the overwhelming majority of homicides (possibly as much as 90%) is committed by people who already have an extensive criminal history.

reputation pro-RKBA Democrats have of confronting gun-grabber unsupported assertions with rock-solid facts.

All crap one well placed shot is worth more than 100,000,000 missed when I was an infantry grunt the motto was one shot one kill


I can hold a dime @ 100 with this and I have 10 5 round mags and have taken more varmint from 10 to 250 yards than any other rifle I own







This is not for you but for the naysayers that think semi-autos are the evil guns we need to get rid of, any gun is deadly in well trained hands be it gas, blow back, bolt, lever, breach or mussel loaded.

You mean "muzzle-loaded," of course, but I had to snigger at the image of a blunderbuss being loaded with bivalve molluscs.

"Let's try the razor clamshells next!"

ha ha ha ha molluscs I love it. I was cutting out of work early and got lazy thats my story :dunce: When your out of shot or mini balls you fire any thing you got till its gone last you fire the rod then you fixbayonet and charge

Well technically, they are. :P