What The Assault Weapons Ban Needs And Doesn’t Need.

Let’s say that Congress actually passes this assault weapons ban (AWB) and El Schmuck-o signs it into law.  And let’s say that a year after the bill becomes law the cops come into my house and find my Colt H-Bar, which I am allowed to have around because I owned it before the law was passed.  And let’s say I don’t have any paperwork to show when I bought it (which I don’t.)  How do I prove that I’m not breaking the assault weapons ban?  I can’t.

awb            Here’s Problem Number Two. Let’s say that after the law is passed I want to sell my H-Bar to someone else, which I can do because I legally own the gun and therefore can transfer it to anyone else who can legally own the gun. But the proposed AWB law as it now stands requires that all transfers of grandfathered assault guns be done in a dealer’s shop. Which means that, for all intents and purposes, a ‘universal’ background check system has just begun to creep in through the back door.

I’m not listing these problems because I personally care whether Americans can own these particular kinds of guns or for that matter whether they can own any guns at all. My task, as I see it, is not to advocate but to inform and the chips will fall where they may. Obviously, Gun-nut Nation will oppose any kind of bill which regulates anything having to do with guns. But the two issues I have just raised might also create serious opposition to this bill even among people who might otherwise be in favor of regulating assault-type guns.

One thing I wish the supporters of an AWB would eliminate from this bill and from their brains is all the nonsense about banning a gun because it has features like a pistol grip, a barrel shroud, a grenade or rocket launcher, or a folding stock. What makes an AR more lethal than other kinds of rifle designs is the bottom-loading, detachable magazine, which by taping two mags together gives the gun a capacity of 60 rounds or more.  As far as threaded barrels are concerned, if the harebrained scheme by harebrained Donald Trump, Jr., to pull silencers off the NFA list is dumped in the trash can where it belongs, owning a gun with a threaded barrel won’t create any real safety risk at all.

Some of the guns that are banned, such as the Hi-Point carbine, load ammunition through a magazine in the grip rather than underneath the frame. Guns like this simply aren’t assault rifles the way the term is defined in this bill, and if the bill begins to gather some traction, I hope the list of both banned and approved guns will be reviewed by someone other than a well-meaning ‘expert’ from the ATF.  In case you don’t remember, the ATF is the bunch whose mistaken belief that David Koresh and his Waco followers were building full-automatic weapons ultimately led to 75 deaths.  I don’t notice that Waco is ever mentioned in discussions or studies about mass shootings, by the way.

The United States is the only advanced country which regulates gun ownership not by how a gun is designed, but whether the gun’s owner can be trusted to use the weapon in a proper way. And despite Gun-nut Nation’s self-serving attempt to push some cock and bull about how any rifle that shoots in semi-auto mode is a ‘sporting’ weapon, the truth is that a rifle which allows the shooter to touch off 60 rounds in less than a minute is a lot of fun to shoot, which I guess meets the definition of a ‘sporting’ gun.

What’s wrong with going to a video arcade and popping off a hundred rounds in 10 seconds, complete with great graphics and realistic sounds? Oh, I forgot. Not only can you do the same thing with a real AR-15, but the gun will also protect you from ISIS or maybe even an invasion from Mars.

5 thoughts on “What The Assault Weapons Ban Needs And Doesn’t Need.

  1. So you’re saying your Colt is no registered with the State of Massachusetts. That’s a felony Mike, which means you shouldn’t own ANY guns by your own admission!

    • If this is true, should we, as law abiding citizens, report this to the Massachusetts State Police?
      Remember…”See something, say something.”
      I would hate to see this “assault rifle” used in a mass shooting, knowing I did not report it and may have saved so many lives.

  2. Seems to me the only way to be able to prove ownership by a certain date, or have a test for a transfer, is through a gun registry or bill of sale. Since some of my stuff was second hand when I acquired it (including my first shotgun, an Ithaca Mod 37 that was used when my dad bought it for me circa 1970), ownership has to be taken on faith or proved with paperwork.

    Interestingly, the Mod 37 is still sitting in my old man’s house. So who owns it? Presumably, he who has possession.

  3. The sweet spot would be a law that prevented one person from unlawfully assaulting a mass of people while still allowing one person to lawfully defend against a mob.

  4. The burden of proof would presumably be on the government to prove that the HBAR wasn’t in your possession as of the effective date of the law I’d think. Once again, people become obsessed with banning “AR-15s” or guns with cosmetic features when they should just focus on the large magazine.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.