Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 9/25/2002 7:59:52 AM EDT
Hello all,

Since I live in Finland I don't know that much about the assault weapons ban in US. As far as I know you cannot get hi-cap mags, bayo lugs, flash hiders, suppressors etc. The big question is why? I doubt that there's any right answers but what caused this ban in the first place?

In Finland you can get a sound suppressor for your rifle from a local outdoor equipment store without any permits. Suppressors are considered as an major improvement in sport shooting and hunting. No more pissed off people complaining about the noises coming from the shooting range and no more deaf dogs after a hunting trip.

Where's the idea in banning flash hiders and bayo lugs then? Who the fuck uses a bayonet if you have a friggin AR in your hand? Maybe I'm just a stupid European but US laws sound insane to me.

Any comments appreciated

Regards,
Petri
Link Posted: 9/25/2002 8:03:29 AM EDT
youre not a stupid European, and yes, our laws are insane.
Link Posted: 9/25/2002 8:13:17 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TheFlyingFinn:
...
As far as I know you cannot get hi-cap mags, bayo lugs, flash hiders, suppressors etc. The big question is why?
...
Where's the idea in banning flash hiders and bayo lugs then? Who the fuck uses a bayonet if you have a friggin AR in your hand?


Most of us are asking the same question. Be glad that Finland hasn't sunken to the depths of stupidity and intellectual dishonesty that our legislators have. But be on guard too!
Link Posted: 9/25/2002 8:14:17 AM EDT
Here's the deal: Since Sept. 1994, we have been unable to own magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, unless they were made before that date ("pre-ban"). Also, we have been unable to own semi-auto rifles with detachable magazines that have more than one of a set of features (pistol grip, bayo lug, flash hider, grenade launcher, folding or collapsible stock), again unless it was made and had these features before Sept 94.
There is a related restriction on semi-auto pistols and shotguns.

These laws were passed because people are easy to frighten and fool. Real thought is too much like hard work. Opportunistic politicians capitalized on some high-profile mass shootings in the late 80's and pushed this issue of gun control in an effort to get the easily frightened and led to the polls. Over time, however, polling data and election results have proved that restricting legal gun ownership is not the election winner they thought it is. Even so, old habits die hard, and some politicians still think that a good way to identify themselves as a true progressive, liberal socialist is to call for more gun control laws.

Thankfully, it seems like recent events have pushed gun control off the national agenda, but further restrictive legislation could still be sneaked in.
Link Posted: 9/25/2002 8:24:05 AM EDT
ooohhhhhh!! ooohhh!! hey! where can i get a grenade launcher, bayonet, and flash hider for my Browning A5 in 12 Gauge? don't they make a kit for this?

[/stupidity]

Link Posted: 9/25/2002 8:37:19 AM EDT
It seems there are people in the United States that feel that guns create criminals. They feel that if all guns were removed (By Law) from civilian access than there would never be a criminal act commited with a gun. Of course we all know that criminals don't follow the law, that's what makes them criminals. In that great wisdom of the gun control politicians, laws have been passed that require honest people, law abiding people, to turn in their legally obtained firearms within a certain amount of time or they will become criminals! It would appear that these elected politicians have no feelings towards our Constitutional rights and would prefer to make us all criminals just to advance their political career. The US Constitution was written to protect the rights of the individual but because we are individuals it is easier for them to violate our rights. I would, just once, love to see a politician be publicly humiliated and then removed from office for having a law passed that violated a persons Constitutional rights. But I guess they would just move to Kalifornia.
Link Posted: 9/25/2002 8:56:26 AM EDT
It all started when a demented kid with a cheap pistol shot Pres. Reagan. One round fired in particular missed and hit an aide named Brady. This was a tragic event and was followed up with other (more) tragic shootings over the next few years which the Brady's and other like minded activists took as an opportunity to begin disarming the populus (note: civilians weren't armed in public at this point).

They (the Bradians) weren't quite strong enough to completely disarm us, but were able to get federal laws passed that limit certain types of firearms. Which by the way had nothing to do with the shootings they were trying to avoid.

Conversely in Texas we also had a mass shooting (and other incidents), but our solution was to begin allowing citizens to carry concealed weapons in public as they saw fit. So now we are all armed, but have to buy used/surplus mags for our AR-15's and can't put folding stocks on our rifles... Doesn't really compute does it?

Other states have also enacted handgun laws similar to TX, yet the federal gov't somehow misses the conventional wisdom (again).
Link Posted: 9/25/2002 9:04:52 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TheFlyingFinn:
Hello all,



Hi!


Since I live in Finland


I always liked the Finns.... I'm 1/4 Finnish you know.


I don't know that much about the assault weapons ban in US. As far as I know you cannot get hi-cap mags, bayo lugs, flash hiders,


Can still get... just can't make for civilians...


suppressors etc. The big question is why? I doubt that there's any right answers but what caused this ban in the first place?

In Finland you can get a sound suppressor for your rifle from a local outdoor equipment store without any permits. Suppressors are considered as an major improvement in sport shooting and hunting. No more pissed off people complaining about the noises coming from the shooting range and no more deaf dogs after a hunting trip.



GENIUS!!!! Pure GENIUS!!! If only everyone thought this way! We can get suppressors in some states here but not nearly that easy... there is quite a bit of paperwork, tax, and government restriction standing in our way.


Where's the idea in banning flash hiders and bayo lugs then? Who the fuck uses a bayonet if you have a friggin AR in your hand? Maybe I'm just a stupid European but US laws sound insane to me.

Any comments appreciated

Regards,
Petri



No I must say.... when it comes to firearms laws the Finn's seem to have the right idea! You're not stupid and our politicians are the insane ones...

So I have a couple questions for you....

1) How hard is it to become a Finnish citizen?

2) Any good jobs in Finland for Computer Fraud Investigators?
Link Posted: 9/25/2002 9:12:41 AM EDT
If you'd like the whole story of the US assualt rifle ban and a very complete history of all gun laws and how they came to be in the USA, suggest you get yourself a copy of this book. Up to the last chapter this book has a complete history of second ammendment issues in our country.



$20+ bucks at Amazon.com

Mike
Link Posted: 9/25/2002 11:50:31 AM EDT
Out of curiosity, what are the gun laws in Finland like? How do the people and the govt view handguns and rifles (including our much loved black rifles/AR15's)?

Link Posted: 9/25/2002 12:24:19 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/25/2002 12:50:48 PM EDT
Two things really stand out in this thread:
1) Finns are cool.
2) That chick on the book is hot.
Link Posted: 9/25/2002 2:17:14 PM EDT
apparently my stupidity wasnt stupid enough.... i figgured asking about a grenade launcher for a scattergun would have caught SOMEONEs attention....

YES i am bored
YES i have homework to do

NO im not doing it.
Link Posted: 9/26/2002 12:49:58 AM EDT
About Finnish gun laws;

In Finland a person can own a firearm(s) if the person can show a good reason why he needs a Firearm. Self-protection is not a reason. You can get a firearm license for sport shooting or hunting.

Ordinary Rifle in Finnish law is defined like this: Barrel length must be at least 16" and the overall length must be at least 840mm = 33" The firearm must use centerfire ammunition. It can be either single shot, bolt action or semi-automatic. For example LE M16A2 is considered as an ordinary rifle. The rifle can be integrally suppressed if you want or have flash hiders, muzzle threads, bayo lugs, whatever.

"Muu ase"(Class III firearm) can be a rifle(smaller than ordinary rifle), SMG, folding stock shotgun etc. For example my LE M4A1 is considered as class III firearm. You can get this class 3 license pretty easily if you're a practical shooter or you participate in military reserve training. However all class 3 firearms must be semi-automatic. Full autos are illegal.

Suppressors can be sold anywhere and they don't require any sort of permits or licenses. They can be used in every shooting application also in hunting.

About self-defense, if you use a firearm in self-defense situation, you'll be prosecuted for use of lethal force even if the drug junkie you shot in your living room was carrying a SPAS-12. So there are only very few cases where the use of lethal force has been sanctioned.

Regards,
Petri
Link Posted: 9/26/2002 3:55:40 AM EDT
Re self defense:
In Louisiana, you may use deadly force to stop someone from entering your home or automobile if they are doing so to commit a felony (i.e. steal something). We are a heavily armed populace. We don't have a big carjacking problem here nor are houses burglarized often when people are home. We don't need gun control either, thank you, unless that means a textbook double tap.
Cleophis
Link Posted: 9/26/2002 11:35:09 AM EDT
How about this boys, if you come home (in canada) to find some guy in your house just ate your dog, killed your kids and raped your wife and you kill him, guess what, unless he was trying to kill you personally- YOUR IN FOR MURDER 1!!!!
Link Posted: 9/26/2002 12:32:14 PM EDT
hmmmm, as I recall, he was trying to kill me officer, with this knife he obviously got from the kitchen. Like the sign in Carlos Marcellos office door (which you saw on the way out) said: "Three can keep a secret if two are dead."
Link Posted: 9/26/2002 1:44:15 PM EDT

... The firearm must use centerfire ammunition. It can be either single shot, bolt action or semi-automatic.

No .22 rimfires? What do the Olymic shooters use then? Or are .22s considered "Muu ase" firearms? What about lever or pump actions?

And what about handguns?
Link Posted: 9/26/2002 1:58:53 PM EDT
Rabid - come now Canada is not quite that bad.
Everyone still has the right to self defence (and ones family friends etc.)
but you had best articulate that well
Link Posted: 9/26/2002 4:02:40 PM EDT

In Louisiana, you may use deadly force to stop someone from entering your home or automobile if they are doing so to commit a felony (i.e. steal something).
In Georgia we can shoot the disgruntled handyman as he's walking down the street with his arms full of your power tools. Or we can shoot the punk that is trying to escape in his getaway car with cartons of cigarettes he stole from your convenience store in the middle of the night.
Link Posted: 9/26/2002 6:47:20 PM EDT
Even in bayou country we're not supposed to flat blast the cigarette thief. Now, if he was running backwards at you and beginning to turn with a sharpened screwdriver to attack you.... I notice that all the neosocialists whining about gun crime mostly do their handwringing from states with the strictest gunlaws, but the most crime. How can this be???
Link Posted: 9/27/2002 2:49:07 AM EDT
Mike L,

Rimfire rifles and pistols, shotguns and handguns also require a firearms license.

Rimfire rifles are considered as "ordinary rifles" (The same size restrictions) with the exception that they of course use the rimfire ammunition.

Handguns(rimfire pistols,pistols and revolvers)
Must be 130mm x 170mm at minimum in order to be legal. This certain law sucks because you cannot get these compact & carry handguns. Smaller handguns are considered as "taskuase"('pocket gun') and can be carried only by law enforcement personnel in the line of duty.

The same size restrictions that apply on "ordinary rifles" apply on shotguns as well. Of course with the exception that shotguns use shot shells.

Regards,
Petri

­
Link Posted: 9/27/2002 9:45:33 AM EDT
Hi-ya!

Great poll! I wish people would put up more polls.

Well, I'm off to pub...
Link Posted: 9/27/2002 10:49:41 AM EDT
I find the poll kinda funny.

The A.W. ban says NOTHING about silencers or barrel length.

Indeed you can have a short barrel post-ban AW with the $200 tax payment (just like a pre-ban).

The Flashider IMHO would be the best item to come back. I prefer the A1 to the telestock so that's not such a big deal. And since the ONLY reason you can't have a suppressor on a post-ban is because it acts like a flash hider. With the return of flash supressors you could have a Gem-Tech flashhider and one of their supressors to boot!!
Link Posted: 9/27/2002 4:54:32 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/28/2002 9:34:22 AM EDT
I hear you Troy,

By the way what are the chances that they let the assault weapons ban expire? Or are you doomed already?

Regards,
Petri
Link Posted: 9/28/2002 3:35:24 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/29/2002 4:18:42 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TheFlyingFinn:
By the way what are the chances that they let the assault weapons ban expire? Or are you doomed already?



I doubt seriously that the ban will sunset. As a rule, gun control laws just aren't repealed in this country. I'm not saying that's a good thing, but I think that's the way it is. Even if the republicans control Congress in 2004 I think they'll extend the ban so they don't look like they're "soft on crime" or "in bed with the gun lobby" and will thus find it easier to win elections and stay in office.

Honestly, the AW "ban" is a toothless law. It didn't really ban any guns, it just caused manufacturers to change a few minor features. I would rather have that than a law that prohibits semi-auto rifles, or military calibers, or other kind of "real" ban.

JScott
Link Posted: 9/30/2002 1:02:55 AM EDT
About self-defense, if you use a firearm in self-defense situation, you'll be prosecuted for use of lethal force even if the drug junkie you shot in your living room was carrying a SPAS-12. So there are only very few cases where the use of lethal force has been sanctioned.

END

Yes our laws are stupid but not as stupid as what I cut and pasted above. I would rather live in the USA with a post ban AR15 and be able to defend my self if needed. Rather than live where I could not defend myself.
PAT
Link Posted: 9/30/2002 11:25:08 AM EDT
As I see it, the REAL danger is that the politicians will make a new bill that will seriously amend the old ban and 'make it right.' This could be no more rifles that accept magazines of any length, etc. Who knows? I don't have a lot of faith in Bush to do anything dramatic as to fight for the ban to totally disappear. No way would he do that, in my opinion. The ban is obviously stupid like other stupid anti gun laws. Look what I had to do to build my STG. I threw away 7 perfectly good Austrian/Belgian parts and put in 7 lesser quality US parts. The idea is not about crime, it's about taking my personal property from me, even though I have never been a criminal.
Regards, John
Link Posted: 9/30/2002 11:44:11 AM EDT
Just out of curiosity, if you aren't allowed to use a gun to defend your life in Finland, under what circumstances could you use one?

And, it also occurs to me that, if someone busts into my home, armed and dangerous, then I would prefer to shoot the SOB and take my chances in court.
Link Posted: 10/1/2002 7:31:20 AM EDT
About self-defense in Finland,

The use of deadly force is sanctioned only when you can prove your life was in IMMEDIATE danger. A thief in your living room, although carrying a SPAS-12 isn't necessarily an immediate threat. When he starts blatting rounds around, it'll make him an immediate threat to your life.

The bottom line of the law is that you can use force to protect yourself. But the means of the force must equal to the threat. (I apologize my bad English, hope you can work out what I mean here) Furthermore, if a burglar is armed with a knife you cannot shoot him with a gun without going in for manslaughter. You can use similar means to stop the threat. Of course it isn't this black and white in the real world and the court uses common sense.

In a nutshell, you can protect yourself, your property and your loved ones with force. Finnish laws only try to keep the use of force in control, so that people don't start shooting each other for jumping over their fences.

Regards,
Petri
Link Posted: 10/1/2002 9:03:38 AM EDT
Louisiana Law on when you can shoot. Much more homeowner / auto owner friendly than other places:

§ 20. Justifiable homicide
A homicide is justifiable:
(1) When committed in self-defense by one who reasonably believes that he is in imminent danger of losing his life or receiving great bodily harm and that the killing is necessary to save himself from that danger.
(2) When committed for the purpose of preventing a violent or forcible felony involving danger to life or of great bodily harm by one who reasonably believes that such an offense is about to be committed and that such action is necessary for its prevention. The circumstances must be sufficient to excite the fear of a reasonable person that there would be serious danger to his own life or person if he attempted to prevent the felony without the killing.
(3) When committed against a person whom one reasonably believes to be likely to use any unlawful force against a person present in a dwelling or a place of business, or when committed against a person whom one reasonably believes is attempting to use any unlawful force against a person present in a motor vehicle as defined in R.S. 32:1(40), while committing or attempting to commit a burglary or robbery of such dwelling, business, or motor vehicle. The homicide shall be justifiable even though the person does not retreat from the encounter.
(4) When committed by a person lawfully inside a dwelling, a place of business, or a motor vehicle as defined in R.S. 32:1(40), against a person who is attempting to make an unlawful entry into the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle, or who has made an unlawful entry into the dwelling, place of business, or motor vehicle, and the person committing the homicide reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the entry or to compel the intruder to leave the premises or motor vehicle. The homicide shall be justifiable even though the person committing the homicide does not retreat from the encounter.
Top Top