Can anyone also indicate me the reasons (to me incomprehensible ones...)that antigun support for each of those features?
|
The reason these features were chosen had nothing to do with what these characteristics do but instead they looked at "Military Style Weapons" and defined a Military weapon based on the presence of these features!
The problem for lawmakers is how to write a law that describes what a Military style Assault rifle is or was. They looked at examples and these were the general characteristics that they considered to be found on the weapons that they wanted to eliminate. Lucky for us here in the USA that it is still quite possible to make an AR-15 without the flash supressor, bayonet lug, grenade launcher, and a telescoping stock such that new AR-15s can still be made and sold.
Now, the law itself is stupid as a flash supressor really doesn't affect it's usefullness as a military weapon, I don't hear of many people killed by bayonets these days, if I could afford to buy a grenade launcher I can afford to buy a pre-ban to mount it on PLUS a grenade launcher and grenades are NFA registered items so requiring a rifle not to accept a grenade launcher is rather mute, and finally the folding stock makes the weapon more portable but doesn't affect it's lethality in the least.
Oh well, stupid people wrote this bill and more stupid people let it pass. A post ban is just as deadly as a pre-ban in the wrong hands and if this country would PUNISH THE CRIMINALS doing crimes the government wouldn't need to write laws intent on making weapons less effective for criminals to use. This is another of those LIBERAL American laws trying to prevent a crime by altering the means with which the CRIMINAL will do the crime!
ABSOLUTELY STUPID IN MY OPINION!
Edited to fix some of my Typos...