OK, I will say this much: Page 8 of that PDF file shows an AK-style rifle with the “parts” “labeled.”
There is a line pointing to the end of the barrel, leading to a caption that says “Flash Suppressor: Reduces the flash from the barrel of the weapon, allowing the shooter to remain concealed when shooting at night.”
The only problem is, there’s no flash suppressor on the rifle pictured. There is a small recoil compensator, which serves a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT purpose from a flash-hider (dissipating the gas from the muzzle to reduce recoil.)
It also says: “Pistol Grip: Allows the weapon to be“spray fired” from the hip. Also helps stabilize the weapon during rapid fire.”
Again with this sprayed from the hip bullshit. And how the fuck does a pistol grip allow the weapon to be spray fired from the hip, while a normal stock doesn’t? It’s possible to “spray-fire” ANY rifle from the hip.
I don’t even give a fuck what the rest of that document says, I am throwing it in my mental trash can because I am NOT trusting a single word from a document containing such total misinformation and abject pathetic ignorance of rifles.
I took your post #117 to mean nobody has provided the statistics about use of “assault weapons” in crime. It took me about 30 seconds to find the document and find such statistics listed in section 3, so I assumed this is a commonly discussed document that has already been dismissed, and I wanted to know why.
Well, page 1 & 2 describe that most of what is specified in the AWB has very little impact on crime. All except for Large Capacity Magazines (which they define as over 10 rounds). There seems to be a notable use of such magazines in pistols and rifles used in crime (by no means all but enough to merit wondering about them). They also note that there was a rather gaping loophole exempting pre-ban LCMs and that there were a metric shitload of them out there and more were imported (because they were built prior to 1994).
So, how about banning LCMs? Forget 10, how about 5 or 6 shots? Ban them all, make possessing them a crime. I cannot see the need to be able to shoot more than 6 times without reloading as necessary for any sport shooting or home defense.
Why? Are “large-capacity magazines” used in a higher percentage of crimes or something? Just because “you think” that there’s “no reason” for anyone to have more than 6 shots doesn’t mean that it should be made into federal law!
I can’t offer a specific citation (although some searching might find some) but I have heard stories from veterans about enemy soldiers taking more than 20 shots center-of-mass before going down. Who knows how many bullets you might need to put into someone? If YOUR ass was on the line, would you rather have 10 rounds in your magazine or 12? Or 15? Or 30?
But just putting aside the issue of a gunfight - which most people hope to God they never actually have to experience - why the hell should I not be able to go to a shooting range and fire off 30 rounds from one magazine? Why should the crimes of a few criminals screw ME over? And do you think that if the criminals REALLY want 30 round magazines, they’re not going to be able to get them?
In any case, life is not “Heat” with hockey-masked robbers firing full-auto M4s at cops in the streets of LA. If you read police blotters and pay attention to the news, you’ll find the vast majority of shootings are done with simple and cheap handguns like .38s and .32, .25 and .22 “saturday night specials.”
The minimal use of so called assault weapons and 30 round magazines in real-life, actual crime is absolutely NOT enough to justify banning them.
Even if it were labelling a flash suppressor, that’s a misleading description. The main purpose of a flash suppressor is to reduce the flash seen by the shooter to reduce the amount of blindness the flash induces in lower light conditions.
Not to mention, what makes you think enterprising criminals won’t just manufacture their own high-capacity magazines and make a killing selling them on the street, if they really wanted them so badly? A magazine is just some sheet metal or plastic with a spring inside; they don’t exactly require sophisticated instruments to make.
But that’s really beside the point. An argument that boils down to “I don’t see why you need X” doesn’t provide any justification for banning X. Otherwise we’d have already banned alcohol, cars capable of going faster than 70MPH, and high-capacity toasters (especially if they’re black).
This. As far as I’m conerened, Assault Weapon is just “code speak” for ummmm
big ugly scary looking uhhhhh GUN thing.
It’s a nonsense phrase, calculated to scare people. The term, as it is used, ist oo general, too vague, too stupid.
If they said Automatic Weapons, OK, I’m fine with that. If they said Machine Guns, OK. If they said Antitank Ordnance, or Thermonuclear Devices, or Claymore Mines, fine.
But “they” always pick a more nebulous and scary sounding phrase.
It looks like “it means what I meant it to mean, and I will change the meaning or expand the meaning whenever convenient for me”.
Just what the hell IS an assault rifle. If I beat someone on the top of the head with a musket, I assautled him. Is the musket then an assault weapon? How about if painted dark scary colors?
And I’ll say again - why should LAW ABIDING CITIZENS be forbidden from posessing magazines greater than 10 rounds? If you’re in a gunfight for your life against a home intruder, robber, whoever, would YOU rather have 10 shots or 15?
And…AGAIN…don’t you think criminals will get these magazines if they really want them?
Identify criminals as such when? When they’re practicing at the firing range with their illegal 30-round magazines? When they’re sitting on the steps of the local police station polishing their 30-round magazines? When they’re in handcuffs in the back of the police car after killing someone and the cops find a 30-round magazine? “Hey guys, looks like this guy’s a criminal - we found a 30-round magazine?”
Which is a fallacy. Before the 1994, and since 2004 ALL mags were “high capacity” when the design allowed for it therefore they will always be used more in crimes than their neutered cousins.
You realize, that short of the confiscation and criminalization of private property there is no feasible way to remove the MILLIONS of hi-cap mags out there. Right? And from the outside, there is no discernable difference between a 10 or a 30 round mag for an AR-15 or an AK, or any other high profile rifle. Right?
What do you mean? It’s pretty easy to tell whether an AR or AK mag holds 10, 20 or 30 rounds by looking at it. But it doesn’t matter…your general point still stands. If they make a certain kind of magazine illegal, criminals will STILL get it just like criminals still get weed, coke, heroin, crack, meth, LSD, PCP, child pornography, bootleg Miley Cyrus CDs, etc. Outlawing them won’t do jackshit to prevent those who are determined to get them from getting them.
During the last ban, new in the package standard capacity (30-40 round) magazines were flooding across the border from Canada. I had a few 40s just for the hell of it. If I could get them without half trying, criminal gangs that can find 150 grenades, 14 cartridges of dynamite, 98 fragmentation grenades and a light anti tank rocket aren’t going to have much problem coming up with some.
I’ve got 30 round mags for both my ARs and my AKs with normal and blocked followers. On the outside, one cannot tell the difference. In the end though, one holds 10, the other holds 30.
Show me the difference between a 10 round mag for a Glock 21 and a 12 round “hi capacity” (yeah those two extra bullets are going to make a huge difference) magazine.