Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 5/10/2004 9:26:27 AM EST
[Last Edit: 5/10/2004 9:27:10 AM EST by LoginName]
I gather that journalists and the anti-gun types have taken enough of a beating about confusing "semi-auto" firearms with full-auto firearms so now they have to find some reason to scare the sheeple into believing that there is no difference.


www.pasadenastarnews.com/Stories/0,1413,206~11851~2137911,00.html

" While the law has stemmed the flow and use of these weapons in the country, there are still loopholes. The main problem with the assault class is that they can be converted to fully automatic status, albeit with less ease than pre-ban models.

It would also make sense, then, to place a national ban on conversion kits that turn the AK-47 look-alikes into rapid-fire weapons such as those used in the 1997 North Hollywood bank robbery shootout between outgunned Los Angeles police and two hooded gunmen armed with fully automatic weapons."

Question: did the North Hollywood robbers use illeagaly converted semi-auto AKs or did they use illeagaly imported full-auto versions?
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 9:28:46 AM EST
So I guess now the story's gonna be how easy it is to buy a Lightning Link and an M16 bolt and convert those pre-ban AR's to FA, but it just doesn't work without a bayonet lug?
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 9:30:33 AM EST
We should ban spoons, and replace it with the spork (mandate a straw for those foods that are just too watery), because the presence of spoons in our society enables heroin addiction.
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 9:31:10 AM EST
Pistol grips on the weapons make for easy firing and true aim, even if the weapon is fired from the hip position. The grips are a hallmark of combat weaponry.


I have fired an M1A from the hip , and and FAL , the pistol grip make no difference.
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 9:32:57 AM EST

Originally Posted By ANGST:
Pistol grips on the weapons make for easy firing and true aim, even if the weapon is fired from the hip position. The grips are a hallmark of combat weaponry.[/i]


I have fired an M1A from the hip , and and FAL , the pistol grip make no difference.



Ignorance knows no bounds.


Link Posted: 5/10/2004 9:35:23 AM EST

Originally Posted By arowneragain:

Ignorance knows no bounds.





Boy ain't that the truth
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 9:37:05 AM EST
[Last Edit: 5/10/2004 9:39:03 AM EST by jblachly]

Originally Posted By ANGST:
Pistol grips on the weapons make for easy firing and true aim, even if the weapon is fired from the hip position. The grips are a hallmark of combat weaponry.




I'm sure almost any one of us here could give any one of the journalists or antis a real beating in competion, us with Garand, journalist with evil pistol gripped AK, AR, or FAL. I would LOVE LOVE LOVE to see Fox news do a special and make the antis and whiners look like real jackasses.

For example, have a gun nut with a bolt action Schmidt-Rubin K31 versus a liberal reporter "spray firing" from the hip with an AR15. See who can hit the most targets the fastest at 200 yards. I hope the reporter doesn't find out how to use the auto-homing bullet hose feature switch located in the pistol grip!!
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 9:42:50 AM EST
It is my understanding that the weapons used in north hollywood were illegally converted to full auto.
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 9:44:27 AM EST
Originally Posted By LoginName:
" While the law has stemmed the flow and use of these weapons in the country, there are still loopholes. The main problem with the assault class is that they can be converted to fully automatic status, albeit with less ease than pre-ban models.

It would also make sense, then, to place a national ban on conversion kits that turn the AK-47 look-alikes into rapid-fire weapons such as those used in the 1997 North Hollywood bank robbery shootout between outgunned Los Angeles police and two hooded gunmen armed with fully automatic weapons."
quote]

A national ban?

Kind of like the 1968 Gun Control Act's NFA ammendments...

The ones that define MG conversions as MGs, requiring NFA registration...

I wonder if the idiot who wrote that knows that his 'national ban' has been in place since 1986
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 9:47:15 AM EST
It would presume that since he wrote it, he did not know that. I think what he is implying is that the mere sale of F/A parts should be regulated so that only semi auto parts could be sold in this country to the public.
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 10:00:33 AM EST
Yup "conversion kits" are machineguns regulated heavily since 1934 , banned in 1986.
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 10:01:15 AM EST

Originally Posted By shotar:
I think what he is implying is that the mere sale of F/A parts should be regulated so that only semi auto parts could be sold in this country to the public.



Hmmm - when was the NFA, GCA & FOPA repealed? I need to get some cheap DIAS to install on my post-ban ARs before they are regulated. Would hate to see what kind of paperwork would have to be done to purchase one of these and especially interested to see what the prices would be on a fixed inventory of F/A parts if this regulation would pass...
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 10:01:18 AM EST
E-mail to the 'feedback' section:

One should do some research before calling for redundant legislation.

The piece you published contains this segment:

"While the law has stemmed the flow and use of these weapons in the country, there are still loopholes. The main problem with the assault class is that they can be converted to fully automatic status, albeit with less ease than pre-ban models.
It would also make sense, then, to place a national ban on conversion kits that turn the AK-47 look-alikes into rapid-fire weapons such as those used in the 1997 North Hollywood bank robbery shootout between outgunned Los Angeles police and two hooded gunmen armed with fully automatic weapons."

What you fail to note is that such a national ban has been IN PLACE since 1986, and such 'conversion kits' were tightly regulated from 1968 (with the passage of the US Gun Control Act) to 1986.

Conversion kits (defined as 'any collection of parts designed to convert a firearm into a machinegun') are considered to be machineguns by the ATF, and like all machineguns, are illegal to posess (at the Federal level) unless produced & properly registered prior to May of 1986. While it is true that this means some such kits are legally available, they cost upwards of $8,000 each and require a $200 tax and ATF approval (which involves getting fingerprinted, and having the local police sign off on the legality of the gun in question) before they may be purchased. In some states (including California), they are illegal at the state level, so the ATF will not approve the purchase. Since 1934, only one crime has been committed with a legally posessed or legally converted machinegun.

In reality, the North Hollywood bank robbery/gunfight showed the incredible stupidity of gun control. The guns used were ALLREADY banned (illegal machineguns), using body armor in a crime was a federal offense, and the individuals doing the shooting were prohibited from posessing guns (due to a prior record). Fleeing from, let alone shooting at, police is illegal, and I'd guess discharging a firearm in that community is as well. And of course, it is DEFINATELY illegal to rob a bank. Did all those laws stop anything? NO!

Similarly, double-tripple-quadruple banning things will not have any affect on crime (most criminals who commit violent crime with guns are allready ABSOLUTELY BANNED from having guns, but obtain their weapons illegaly from friends & family, or on the black market). The reason that most opponents of the 94 AW ban want to see it vanish is that it was ineffective, since criminals preferr conventional handguns and shotguns to military-style rifles, and those that want 'assault weapons' break the law to get them anyway.
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 10:11:44 AM EST
Dave, cut that out, you're making too much sense -- their poor heads might explode.
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 10:15:02 AM EST

Originally Posted By DriftPunch:
We should ban spoons, and replace it with the spork (mandate a straw for those foods that are just too watery), because the presence of spoons in our society enables heroin addiction.



How do you kill a Polish heroin addict?

Give him a plastic spoon
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 10:15:33 AM EST
To ardent antis, the fact that something is semi automatic, means it's JUST ONE SMALL STEP from a MG. The only way to stop that is to ban semi automatics.

Again, the clearly defined manufacturing difference imposed by the ATF on what constitutes a legit semi, is not material to their argument.
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 10:17:40 AM EST


Dave_A:
The reason that most opponents of the 94 AW ban want to see it vanish is that it was ineffective, since criminals preferr conventional handguns and shotguns to military-style rifles, and those that want 'assault weapons' break the law to get them anyway.




Even if it was effective I'd still want it to vanish.

Link Posted: 5/10/2004 10:22:50 AM EST

Originally Posted By Red_Beard:


Dave_A:
The reason that most opponents of the 94 AW ban want to see it vanish is that it was ineffective, since criminals preferr conventional handguns and shotguns to military-style rifles, and those that want 'assault weapons' break the law to get them anyway.




Even if it was effective I'd still want it to vanish.




same here...

But for argument's sake...
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 10:35:40 AM EST
Now, now. Let's be reasonable. Since machine guns are illegal and conversion kits are illegal and body armor during a crime is illegal and shooting at cops is illegal and even robbing banks is illegal and they still perpetrated their crime (deep breath) we need to ban the only thing that matters to the criminal:

MORE THRUSTS PER SQUEEZE!!!!

I bet if .gov took away all weapons with a hight thrust per squeeze ratio, all this sensless violence would end!!

Alpine

PS If you have no idea what I'm talking about, when the search comes back on I'll post a link.
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 10:47:38 AM EST
[Last Edit: 5/10/2004 10:54:20 AM EST by Model_One]
Did any of you write a letter to that moron? I did, just for fun, rebutting him point-by-point, politely and in a matter-of-fact manner. Probably won't change his mind (probably? sheesh) but he'll at least know he got his facts wrong.

There is a "feedback" link at the bottom of that article, why not have some sport and use it? Couldn't make things any worse...

Well, I now see above that one other person has taken a shot at this poltroon.

Why not go ahead and pile on? Couldn't hurt, and might generate an equally ridiculous response.

This guy might never admit he's wrong, but his readers might notice that he's on shaky ground.
Link Posted: 5/10/2004 10:57:50 AM EST

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
E-mail to the 'feedback' section:...



IF you get a response.. please post it... im curious.
Top Top