# Pitting the NRA **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [December 11, 2009, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-nra/520881 "2009-12-11T17:48:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 16
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2009, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-nra/520881/301 "2009-12-20T17:34:18Z")
> [@enipla](#): > > Huh? A helicopter is not an airplane. An AK47 assault rifle would clearly be banned by the AWB. Though it would make no difference since it had already be banned since 1934. BUT it would be banned because an assault rifle can be fully automatic or select fire. The other bullshit would also ban it. > > All fully automatic wepons have been very highly controled since 1934. That you are 8 pages deep in a thread about gun contol and don’t already know this is quite telling. Well no, I did understand it. I just gave more credit to Senor Beef than was warranted, as I assumed that when he said that no assault rifles were banned by the AWB he was being honest and not playing some sort of game. It’s this sort of thing that lowers my opinion of gun proponents. I was wondering if it were something like an AK47 is not covered because it is full auto but something like an AK47-B (I made that up) that is semi-auto _is_ covered. And as I see by the most recent post that is exactly what he was doing. I fully understand that the AWB essentially just restricted cosmetic features and had no practical effect other than to piss off gun owners. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2009, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-nra/520881/302 "2009-12-20T17:44:52Z")
What? I wasn’t playing some sort of game, douchebag - the ban does not ban assault rifles. The language of the ban (again, don’t have time to confirm this for sure) specifically targets semi-automatic weapons. How is that playing a game? The law speciifcally targetted weapons that had an identical function to other common, acceptable semi-automatic rifles, but had other scary looking cosmetic features. How is it in any way “game playing” to say that? That’s the fundamental purpose of the law. You cannot in the same post say “I fully understand that the AWB essentially just restricted cosmetic features” and in the same post complain that I’m a liar because I said that the AWB essentially just restricted cosmetic features. Short version: How do you think this is somehow a win for you? How do you think I lied, and that “this is the sort of thing that lowers my opinion of gun proponents”? I did not lie, I did not technically tell the truth while being misleading. The point in question was that you thought that assault rifles were a subset of the greater set “assault weapons”, and I’m saying that according to the law, that isn’t true. I have conducted myself with the utmost honesty in this thread, and quite frankly, with more patience than you deserved. For you to somehow declare that I’ve engaged in shameful behavior is baseless. You are an asshole for going there. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2009, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-nra/520881/303 "2009-12-20T17:59:07Z")
> [@DanBlather](#): > > Well no, I did understand it. I just gave more credit to Senor Beef than was warranted, as I assumed that when he said that no assault rifles were banned by the AWB he was being honest and not playing some sort of game. It’s this sort of thing that lowers my opinion of gun proponents. I was wondering if it were something like an AK47 is not covered because it is full auto but something like an AK47-B (I made that up) that is semi-auto _is_ covered. > > And as I see by the most recent post that is exactly what he was doing. > > I fully understand that the AWB essentially just restricted cosmetic features and had no practical effect other than to piss off gun owners. **enipla** had his facts sort of wrong, but arguably so do I. The AWB specifically addresses only semi-automatic weapons in it’s global defintions of firearms types. It DOES mention banning all AK-type weapons by three specific manufacturers later on–but in two of the cases (Norinco and PolyTech), the manufacturers were China-based and being slapped on the wrist as part of the general brouhaha with Chinese trade in 1994, and in two of the cases (Norinco and Mitchell Arms) there was at least some indication (definite in Norinco’s case, suspected in Mitchell Arms’ case) that the companies were involved in smuggling in fully automatic weapons in violation of the 1934 and 1986 laws. It also bans several other military-use weapons by name, regardless of whether or not those military arms are semi-automatic or select-fire–interestingly it doesn’t ban the general type of AK-designed firearms, only those created by three specific manufacturers. It also bans copies of the Uzi, Galil, AR-15, AUG, and several less commonly known military rifles. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2009, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-nra/520881/304 "2009-12-20T18:03:41Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > What? I wasn’t playing some sort of game, douchebag - the ban does not ban assault rifles. The language of the ban (again, don’t have time to confirm this for sure) specifically targets semi-automatic weapons. How is that playing a game? The law speciifcally targetted weapons that had an identical function to other common, acceptable semi-automatic rifles, but had other scary looking cosmetic features. How is it in any way “game playing” to say that? That’s the fundamental purpose of the law. The law: > [@](#): > > `(30) The term `semiautomatic assault weapon’ means any of the following: > `(A) The following rifles or copies or duplicates thereof: `(i) AK, AKM, AKS, AK-47, AK-74, ARM, MAK90, Misr, NHM 90, NHM 91, SA 85, SA 93, VEPR; > `(ii) AR-10; `(iii) AR-15, Bushmaster XM15, Armalite M15, or Olympic Arms PCR; > `(iv) AR70; ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2009, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-nra/520881/305 "2009-12-20T18:11:03Z")
Wrong version, here was original: > [@](#): > > (30) The term `semiautomatic assault weapon' means-- `(A) any of the firearms, or copies or duplicates of the firearms in any caliber, known as– > `(i) Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs (all models) ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2009, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-nra/520881/306 "2009-12-20T19:15:31Z")
And again, it’s definitional–the AWB bans specific arms and lookalikes, but doesn’t generally say anything about fully automatic or select-fire arms except in banning a list that is essentially a list of weapons in current use by NATO militaries and a few of the dozens of AK-pattern manufacturers. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2009, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-nra/520881/307 "2009-12-20T21:31:14Z")
> [@DanBlather](#): > > The law: First of all - even if I’m wrong here, then you should tell me I’m incorrect. You shouldn’t say that I’m lying or making shit up or playing games, because there’s no evidence of that. Secondly, you’re still wrong. I will need to look more into the law to tell you exactly why, but the reason I know you’re wrong is that plenty of people legally owned actual assault rifles from 1994 to 2004. I know some, I’ve fired some - they keep all the evil features, bayonette lugs, threaded barrels, etc. - and yet they didn’t run afoul of the AWB. My guess at this point is that there were imported semi-auto AK type weapons which were simply named “AK” or “AK47” and they were attempting to ban those. The fact that they are defining the term “semi-automatic assault weapon” supports this idea, since it specifically says semi-automatic. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2009, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-nra/520881/308 "2009-12-20T22:12:11Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > My guess at this point is that there were imported semi-auto AK type weapons which were simply named “AK” or “AK47” and they were attempting to ban those. The fact that they are defining the term “semi-automatic assault weapon” supports this idea, since it specifically says semi-automatic. As I said upthread, at least two of the three manufacturers specifically named (Norinco and Mitchell Arms) were implicated in smuggling of fully automatic AK-pattern weapons already illegal under the 1934 and 1986 laws–I don’t know if Mitchell was ever charged, but Norinco was heavily investigated in 1993-1994 and busted severely in 1996 for arms smuggling (something like 2000+ “Type 56” AK-47 copies with select-fire etc.). Norinco and PolyTech were both also blocked from importing most arms legally by the trade rules established in 1993 when China got “Most Favored Nation” status anyway, so the 1994 AWB didn’t really add anything new there. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2009, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-nra/520881/309 "2009-12-20T22:13:27Z")
I recognize “MAK90” as specific variety of imported Chinese semi-auto AK pattern rifle. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2009, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-nra/520881/310 "2009-12-20T22:37:07Z")
Well, that’s nice. Must be the Christmas spirit… ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2009, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-nra/520881/311 "2009-12-20T23:05:56Z")
> [@Zeriel](#): > > And again, it’s definitional–the AWB bans specific arms and lookalikes, but doesn’t generally say anything about fully automatic or select-fire arms except in banning a list that is essentially a list of weapons in current use by NATO militaries and a few of the dozens of AK-pattern manufacturers. IANAL, but it looks like they are defining “semi-automatic assault rifle” to include any of the Avtomat Kalashnikovs models. That would presumably include the select-fire models as well. And **Senor** , I still don’t get what you are trying to maintain when you say the AWB does not ban any assault rifles. Is it that you believe by definition “assault rifle” only applies to full or select-fire automatics? Would you preclude an AK47 as an assault rifle if it were modified after market as semi-automatic? I assume that there were a number of select-fire assault rifles that were made into semi-automatics either by the manufacturer or after-market but identical in all other ways. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2009, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-nra/520881/312 "2009-12-20T23:07:44Z")
I’m saying the AWB didn’t ban assault rifles because assault rifles were still perfectly legal to own (provided you went through the proper procedure) even through the AWB years. If the AWB banned assault rifles, that would not have been the case. And yes, an AK-47 that has been modified for semi-auto only is not an assault rifle, since select-fire capability is one of the basic requirements of an assault rifle. ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2009, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-nra/520881/313 "2009-12-20T23:29:06Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > I’m saying the AWB didn’t ban assault rifles because assault rifles were still perfectly legal to own (provided you went through the proper procedure) even through the AWB years. If the AWB banned assault rifles, that would not have been the case. The ban was on importation (and manufacture?) and a number of guns whose importation would be banned under the AWB were grandfathered in, so it was legal to own them despite the AWB. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2009, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-nra/520881/314 "2009-12-20T23:37:41Z")
> [@DanBlather](#): > > IANAL, but it looks like they are defining “semi-automatic assault rifle” to include any of the Avtomat Kalashnikovs models. That would presumably include the select-fire models as well. Well, I think there’s room for reasonable non-disingenuous disagreement–if only because the definition in the bill that’s published on THOMAS only mentions AK-series weapons by three specific manufacturers, and there are a lot more AK manufacturers/importers than just PolyTech, Norinco, and Mitchell Arms. I’d have to do more research to find out specifics, but AK-pattern semi-automatic rifles have had at least a dozen different domestic manufacturers since the 1994 bans–the one AK-pattern rifle I’ve fired is an Global Trades/Armory USA manufactured in 1999, for example, and is essentially the standard AK-47 action with all of the AWB-banned items (bayonet lug, etc) stripped off (actually, since you can have exactly one of the “banned” features, I think the one I fired DID have a flash suppressor). ---
**Author:** ![JXJohns](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jxjohns/32/469_2.png) [@JXJohns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JXJohns)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2009, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-nra/520881/315 "2009-12-21T02:54:11Z")
> [@DanBlather](#): > > The ban was on importation (and manufacture?) and a number of guns whose importation would be banned under the AWB were grandfathered in, so it was legal to own them despite the AWB. Absolutely correct. The only thing affected was the importation and sale of “new” AW’s. All current inventory was fair game. ---
**Author:** ![Argent\_Towers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e8c25b/32.png) [@Argent\_Towers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Argent_Towers)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2009, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-nra/520881/316 "2009-12-21T02:58:50Z")
And I hate that import ban, and the _Republicans_ who created it. That specific restriction actually has nothing to do with anti-gun ignorance and everything to do with stupid American “protectionist” commerce laws. I want to be able to buy SIG AMTs from Switzerland and Israeli-made select-fire Galil rifles and cheap Yugoslavian, Romanian or Bulgarian semi-auto AKs that are not cobbled together by American companies like Century Arms using this or that number of federally mandated American-made parts because of an idiotic restriction. That import ban should be overturned. ---
**Author:** ![JXJohns](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jxjohns/32/469_2.png) [@JXJohns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JXJohns)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2009, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-nra/520881/317 "2009-12-21T02:59:24Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > I’m saying the AWB didn’t ban assault rifles because assault rifles were still perfectly legal to own (provided you went through the proper procedure) even through the AWB years. If the AWB banned assault rifles, that would not have been the case. > > And yes, an AK-47 that has been modified for semi-auto only is not an assault rifle, since select-fire capability is one of the basic requirements of an assault rifle. If a gun is full auto and converted to semi auto only, the ATFE still considers it a full auto gun regardless. One cannot take a gun off of the NFA registry by converting it to semi only. The technical definition changes from assault rifle to assault weapon (assuming it had the correct combination of evil features to make it an AW,) but not in the eyes of the ATFE. Once a machine gun, always a machine gun. ---
**Author:** ![Argent\_Towers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e8c25b/32.png) [@Argent\_Towers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Argent_Towers)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2009, 3:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-nra/520881/318 "2009-12-21T03:08:29Z")
Which is another absolutely asinine restriction that makes no - NO - sense whatsoever. Did you know that AK-47s which have been converted to semi-auto only are completely legal to own in FRANCE? That’s right, France. France actually has better gun laws than the United States when it comes to this issue. In Switzerland, you can buy a SIG 550 surplus army rifle (one of the best rifles on the planet) that has been converted to semi-auto for a song. Switzerland, the country of chalets and skiing and common fucking sense. Only in the good ol’ gun-loving USA will you find such idiots. The European gun laws _overall_ are more restrictive than those in the US, but in certain specific ways like having some goddamn common sense, they are ahead of us. ---
**Author:** ![JXJohns](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jxjohns/32/469_2.png) [@JXJohns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JXJohns)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2009, 3:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-nra/520881/319 "2009-12-21T03:08:52Z")
> [@DanBlather](#): > > IANAL, but it looks like they are defining “semi-automatic assault rifle” to include any of the Avtomat Kalashnikovs models. That would presumably include the select-fire models as well. This is incorrect. Any select fire AK’s would be considered machine guns and NEVER semi auto guns. As such, NOT affected by the AW ban. In 1994 the importation of ANY full auto or select fire AK was already banned. > [@](#): > > And **Senor** , I still don’t get what you are trying to maintain when you say the AWB does not ban any assault rifles. Is it that you believe by definition “assault rifle” only applies to full or select-fire automatics? Would you preclude an AK47 as an assault rifle if it were modified after market as semi-automatic? By definition, it would no longer be an Assault Rifle, but an AW instead. The key feature changing being the select fire or full auto capability. > [@](#): > > I assume that there were a number of select-fire assault rifles that were made into semi-automatics either by the manufacturer or after-market but identical in all other ways. If so, these would have been illegally imported and converted. Many “parts kits” have been imported that contained full auto parts. The receivers, the part that has a serial number on it and is tracked, had to be torch cut three times to pass import inspections. These were never brought into the country as whole guns. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2009, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-nra/520881/320 "2009-12-21T14:43:03Z")
Er… I was of the understanding that the AWB didn’t cover assault rifles because they were already governed by the National Firearms Act. No? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-nra/520881.md?page=15) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-nra/520881.md?page=17)