speaking of gun control

[mauser]

Originally posted by Airhead
The NRA also opposes a Federal background check on perspective gun buyers, mandatory logs of handgun ammo purchases and the ban of "Cop Killer" bullets.

Here's a link on the supposed "Cop Killer" bullets:
http://www.guncite.com/gcgvcopk.html

An excerpt:
Despite the facts that "KTW" ammunition had never been available to the general public and that no police officer has ever been killed by a handgun bullet penetrating their body armor, the media incorrectly reported that the Teflon coated bullets were designed to defeat the body armor that law enforcement officers were beginning to use. The myth of "Cop-killer" bullets was born.
In January of 1982, NBC Television broadcast a sensationalist prime time special titled "Cop Killer Bullets." Law enforcement officials had asked NBC not to air the program as the use of body armor by police officers was still not common knowledge and the "KTW" ammunition was virtually unheard of outside law enforcement circles. The safety of law enforcement officers took a back seat to ratings at NBC however and they not only broadcast the show, but re-broadcast it again six months later.

mauser

[Mini D]

Winchester "Black Talon" bullets were sold on the market.  They too were teflon coated and potentially body armor defeating.  Winchester pulled them off the shelves after a couple of months voluntarily.  Once again, no ammo company wants to open the pandora's box that comes with legal presidence.

MiniD

[Erlkonig]

Originally posted by Mini D
No, not considering there are more automatic weapons (and .50 cals) on the market than in 1934.

MiniD

So what?  The NFA did not ban machine guns, only taxed and regulated their manufacture and transfer.  .50 caliber rifles aren't NFA weapons anyway.

[Mini D]

Then let me put it another way for you erl... do you think there are more or less "illegal" automatic rifles in the U.S. today than in 1934?

Do you think that there are more or less drive by shootings today than in 1934?

Did violent crime drop as a result of anti-gun legislation intruduced in 1934... or did people simply start using different weapons?

Did 1934 legislation really restrict the use of automatic weapons in crime syndicates?

MiniD

[funkedup]

Originally posted by Sandman_SBM
This just in... Bush is a republican.

This just in... Republicans are socialist control freaks just like the Democrats.  

[Airhead]

Mauser, I stand corrected- the NRA opposes background checks for perspective firearms buyers, they oppose a log recording the name of purchasers of handgun ammunition and they initally opposed the restriction of "Cop Killer" bullets then later compromised on the issue and softened their stance.

[hyena426]

ya England's crime rate went to the roof after banning guns,,got the highest rate of crime for population size,,gun related went up,,because the criminals can still get plenty of guns,,,all they did was dissarm the good people from defending there homes,,thats all guns rights do

and whats makes ya mad,,is every president comes in shooting guns and going hunting before they get elected,,like cliton did,,,and after billy became president,,he started passing gun law after gun law,,they are 2 faces after they get in,,lol cant let them take simple simi's because the bans wont stop there,,,they will just go down the line faster,,,this will make it tuffer for bush to get relected again,,lol

[Erlkonig]

Originally posted by Mini D
Then let me put it another way for you erl... do you think there are more or less "illegal" automatic rifles in the U.S. today than in 1934?

Do you think that there are more or less drive by shootings today than in 1934?

Did violent crime drop as a result of anti-gun legislation intruduced in 1934... or did people simply start using different weapons?

Did 1934 legislation really restrict the use of automatic weapons in crime syndicates?

MiniD

1) Less

2) Probably more.  What that has to do with the NFA I don't know.

3) I've never seen any statistics.  Of course I would prefer that if criminals are going to commit crime, they do it with sticks and stones.  But I can settle with restricting access to automatic weapons.  That seems to be the case if what Bodhi said is true.

4) I'm sure they did not bother to register their tommy guns and sawed-off BARs.  But you don't see them around anymore, do you?  Again, the "less than 1%" would suggest they're just not worth the effort to obtain.

I was looking through that Leftist-Liberal GunCite page that mauser posted, and they have a page on machine guns .  They claim this:

In 1980, when Miami's homicide rate was at an all-time high, less than 1% of all homicides involved machine guns. (Miami was supposedly a "machine gun Mecca" and drug trafficking capital of the U.S.) Although there are no national figures to compare to, machine gun deaths were probably lower elsewhere.  Kleck cites several examples:

Of 2,200 guns recovered by Minneapolis police (1987-1989), not one was fully automatic.

A total of 420 weapons, including 375 guns, were seized during drug warrant executions and arrests by the Metropolitan Area Narcotics Squad (Will and Grundie counties in the Chicago metropolitan area, 1980-1989). None of the guns was a machine gun.

16 of 2,359 (0.7%) of the guns seized in the Detroit area (1991-1992) in connection with "the investigation of narcotics trafficking operations" were machine guns.

[Mini D]

Ah.... gotcha.  So now, illegal weapons are only those used by drug dealers.  I see how handy that statistic can be.

I'll wager that drug dealers posses a minor fraction of the illegal automatic weapons in the U.S.

I know a few people that have them, wether modified or black market purchased.  None of them sell drugs.  None of them have done drive by shootings.

However, we've had a few drive by shootings in the happy metropolis of Portland this year... seems they still kick around.... no matter what was banned.

Automatic weapons are not as available for purchase, but they're every bit as available if you are even remotely creative.  Fortunately, most criminals are not.  And fortunately, automatic weapons are seldomely a good alternative simply because they are not effective for most reasons people poses illegal weapons these days.... despite what imp might try to say.

Automatic weapons are more difficult for the law abiding citizen to get, but are readily available if you have a library card and the desire to "bend" the law.

MiniD

[ra]

The NRA also opposes a Federal background check on perspective gun buyers

Typical anti-gun misrepresentation.  The NRA pushed hard for instant background checks.  But the system the FBI came up with had an Orwellian twist to it.  If you underwent a background check and were approved, it kept a record of who you were.   There is no reason for the feds to keep record of this, except to know who is in the market for a gun.  So the NRA went against this type of record keeping.  The purpose of the background check was to keep guns away from felons and wackos, not to monitor law-abiding citizens.

ra

[Fishu]

Syzygyone,

I'd like to remind that yelling "fire" in a crowded theater is not a "speech" and therefore most definately not covered by the amendment

[Vermillion]

The most restrictive and "real" part of the Assault Weapon Ban was the limit of 10 rounds per magazine.  

Of course this only applies to new manufacture, and there are a TON of full size magazines on the market.  The ony real effect was to drive up the price of the existing magazines by about 3 times.  

One question for you AR-15 experts.  Which is the "registered" part of a pre-ban AR15, the upper or the lower receiver? I've never quite figured that out.

Personally, I think the law is more about "looks" and not about function. But this is because a law restricting the functionality of semi-automatic weapons would never have been passed, and the Democrats knew it. Totally asinine.  I hope it doesn't get renewed.

Oh, and FYI, I watched the original vote on this legislation on CSPAN.  The time limit expired on the vote and the bill did not pass, but the Democratic leadership extended the time limit for over an hour while they "worked" on a swing voter, who switched his vote at the last minute and it passed by that single vote.

[Mini D]

The lower receiver on AR-15s is the registered portion.  Basically, you just have to look for the weapon's serial number... its a dead give away.

MiniD

[lazs2]

Every bullet that comes out of my 44, even those I cast out of wheelweights will penetrate a woven vest without trauma plates.

I think that MT has got to the crux of it... the law was passed in hysteria by democratic opportunists over the action of one unstoppable nutjob.   in...... 1989!   nevermind that if he would have chosen his weapon more wisely, a fertilizer bomb or even a Peterbuilt truck or even a Honda sedan... he would have killed far more children.

The democrats have a pattern... they push through distastefull and wrong legeslation when the women and womenly men are at their most hysterical... they are like vultures waiting for disaster so that they can pretend to be compassionate and.... well.... more caring than you... superior.
lazs

[Scootter]

Originally posted by Mini D
You can still buy a pre-ban receiver and build it as you see fit (3 or more of the banned items).  Since there is no tracking of the individual components, the receiver number is the only real means of establishing a recorded build date.  If that receiver has been used to build a fully functional gun prior to 1994, you can do whatever you want with it.

I don't know what "special" arm twisting goes on with gunsmiths, but if it can't be tracked, it can't  be proven.

MiniD

In this instance the BATF will require YOU to provide proof that your receiver was built into a weapon prior to the ban. The manufactures have (I have a list if anyone is interested) a record of the date they manufactured the receiver and that it was not built into a weapon at that time. You become the manufacture with all the responsibilities that go with it when you build a weapon (ask my attorney how I sleep at night when I have built over a hundred all legal .45 autos and AR's).
What about rebuilding an old preban rifle, no problem as it was a complete assembly and has a legal birthday you can do what you want with it (I have 5 or 6 of these).

What do you lose in a post ban weapon? Not much, the flash suppresser is only a real help in low light (by the way most breaks really increase the sound of the shot to the shooter and blast back can be a problem for others next to you). I have never found a suppresser or a break to hurt or help accuracy in way. What in the world do you do with a bayonet on an AR anyway, I can see one on an M1A or even an M-14 but not a plastic two piece stocked AR. The collapsible stock kind of looses something with the long 16.5” barrel, but it is nice with a real CAR-15/16 with the short barrel. They are very hard to shoot well as you can not get a cheek weld to the weapon and forget a scope as it is even worse as it requires you head to be held even further off the stock.

What is the chance of finding a preban receiver? slim as all were snatched up and made into weapons and sold for big bucks (I know I did) but if you do and after you spend 8 or 9 bills on it, then another 5 or 6 hundred for the rest of the illegal weapon what have you got that you could not get legally and perhaps for less?
You are right the chances of getting caught are pretty slim, but not zero, and that’s the name of that tune.

can it be tracked?

Yes it can be tracked as it has a number on it and there is a record of it from manufacture to its first sale to a distributor through the resale and to the first sale to the public. Then   the Fed transfer paperwork (all states) so yes I can be tracked.