Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
1/25/2018 7:38:29 AM
Posted: 5/24/2003 5:48:54 PM EST
From the VPC

The Gun Industry Evades the Law

Immediately after the 1994 law was enacted, the gun industry moved quickly to make slight, cosmetic design changes in their "post-ban" guns to evade the law, a tactic the industry dubbed "sporterization." Of the nine assault weapon brand/types listed by manufacturer in the law,5 six of the brand/types have been re-marketed in new, "sporterized" configurations.6 In fact, gunmakers openly boast of their ability to circumvent the assault weapons ban. Their success is described in an August 2001 Gun World magazine article about the new Vepr II assault rifle, a "sporterized" version of the AK-47:

In spite of assault rifle bans, bans on high capacity magazines, the rantings of the anti-gun media and the rifle's innate political incorrectness, the Kalashnikov [AK-47], in various forms and guises, has flourished. Today there are probably more models, accessories and parts to choose from than ever before.

Equally blunt was an article in the May 2003 issue of Gun World reviewing the LE Tactical Carbine, a post-ban, "sporterized" AR-15 clone:

Strange as it seems, despite the hit U.S. citizens took with the passage of the onerous crime bill of 1994 [which contained the federal assault weapons ban], ARs are far from dead. Stunned momentarily, they sprang back with a vengeance and seem better than ever. Purveyors abound producing post-ban ARs for civilians and pre-ban models for government and law enforcement agencies, and new companies are joining the fray.7

Just such a post-ban AR, the Bushmaster XM15 M4 A3 assault rifle, was used by the Washington, DC-area snipers to kill 10 and injure three in October 2002. The Bushmaster is the poster child for the industry's success at evading the ban. The snipers' Bushmaster is even marketed as a "Post-Ban Carbine."

Link Posted: 5/24/2003 6:27:40 PM EST
I think it is obvious that they complied with the law. Otherwise, they would be out of business.
Link Posted: 5/24/2003 7:17:03 PM EST
Every time I drive the speed limit, I'm evading the law? Every time I take a legitimate deduction on my taxes I'm avoiding taxes? Dammit, and me a Liberal, too. Basta! Enough! Pete ps- this stuff makes me so mad I want to go out and buy a Barrett, just to have one, just to piss some idiot off.
Link Posted: 5/24/2003 7:23:28 PM EST
As I've said before, if "minor cosmetic changes" are all that was required to legalize a weapon forbidden by the ban, what does that say about the ban? In other words, the only thing that separates a legal gun from an illegal gun is cosmetics. They said it, not me. That said, I have to point out how excruciatingly annoying it is to see the DC "sniper" thing brought up repeatedly by these morons. As has been repeated a gazillion times, the fact that an AR-15 style rifle was used in those killings is completely irrelevant, as just about any rifle (even "pretty" ones) would have been just as, if not more efficient. But, they have to take what they can get... this killing spree was plopped in their lap, and until something better comes along, they've got to use it. But I would love to see them challenged on this. As a side note, one of the funniest things I've ever read came from either Brady or VPC (can't remember... I think it was VPC). Around the time of the "sniper" killers' arrests, they were quoted in a news article as saying that because "assault weapons" have a military-style appearance, this somehow causes otherwise benign people to turn into maniacal killers. I wish I could find that article! --Mike
Link Posted: 5/24/2003 7:30:24 PM EST
Ahhhh... here it is. Found it on a press release at jointogether.org.
One of the most curious features about the gun is its stock, which looks like a collapsing stock. But it isn't. Why would Bushmaster produce a gun with a fixed stock that looks like a collapsing stock? "To give it the 'look' that sells," Rand said. "There's a huge market for people who want a gun that looks as close to the military version of that gun as possible and that incorporates as many of these design characteristics, whether they are just cosmetic or they actually function. We believe very strongly that the silhouette and the look of the gun that the sniper chose appeals to people who intend on using it for purposes like what the sniper used it for."
View Quote
I didn't have it exactly right, but still this is utterly hillarious. They are openly admitting the ban is primarily based on cosmetics. --Mike
Link Posted: 5/25/2003 4:39:08 AM EST
I am just glad that they realized the AWB has done more to increase the number military style rifles on the market today. I remember before the ban when most people would of thought one AR or an SKS was all the semi-auto rifles they would ever need. Plus, most poeple would of said a couple of 30rd mags was all they needed. The only thing the ban did, was create higher prices.
Link Posted: 5/25/2003 4:51:48 AM EST
I agree, I was plenty happy with one until they started beating their "ban military-style assault weapons" drum. Now, every time I hear these jacka$$es on TV I want another one!
Link Posted: 5/25/2003 10:13:08 AM EST
You mean the sale of Hi-Point Carbines is going to surge? CRC
Link Posted: 5/25/2003 10:34:23 AM EST
What this points out is that this law was written by those that know nithing about firearms. They felt that the rifle which looked "military" was the problem. They then banned certain aspects of that look. These aspects were removed in order to comply with the law. Then sales go up because the citizens that believe in their rights saw a threat and reacted to it. As to the sniper case, high cap magazines would have made no difference. In fact, a "deer rifle" would have been much more effective. A larger caliber such as a .308 or 30-06 firing a 150 gr boat tail silver tip or ballistic tip bullet would have seen a higher kill ratio. It would also have had increased range. The fact that the XM15 was used only provides ammo for the liberals that twist facts and modify data to suit their agenda. The ban was a farce and the manufacturers used that ban to expand their business. This is not skirting the law, but good business. As far as I am concerned, anything that proves the stupidity of the liberal agenda in all their attempts to ban firearms is great. Way to go Bushmaster, Armalite, Colt, and all the other manufacturers that made this possible.
Link Posted: 5/25/2003 10:39:49 AM EST
The LE tactical carbine is of course, a post ban, restricted SAAW. It may have been made after the ban, but it is the real deal.
Link Posted: 5/25/2003 5:48:24 PM EST
depend who you are. To us and fellow enthusiasts they complied, to Anti gunners they evaded. GG
Link Posted: 5/25/2003 5:56:42 PM EST
They "evaded" the spirit of the law, as the libs intended it. They complied with the letter of the law, as they are expected as good corporate citizens. I believe the intention of the libs was to ban the type of rifle. They failed because they do not understand the rifle. If they did, they wouldn't be afraid of it, and this whole mess would be a non-issue.
Top Top