Wiki states that it’s a:
The gunman used a Cobray M-11/9,[20][21][22] a semi-automatic pistol variant of the MAC-11 with an extended high-capacity magazine.
Wiki also says that the MAC-11 is:
a sub-compact version of the Model 10 (MAC-10)
Ah, okay, so that seems like someone took the variant created in response to the assault weapons ban to get around restrictions, and tried to make it closer to the original version, at least so far as to clumsily tape a silencer and add an extended magazine.
So, it is a weird Frankenstein monster of a pistol that sort of went full circle. I now understand the confused messaging on the gun’s description.
It is a Cobray M11.
Never fully auto. A cheap-ass copy of the Mac.
Yep.
With regards to the OP, our police system is embarrassingly bad and I’m not sure what the solution is. Qualified immunity and those strong civil service protections need to go. Very stiff penalties for tampering with cameras and intimidation of witnesses need to be implemented. That would be a start.
Anyways these police murdering people and police brutality incidents are far too common and are literally sickening and I feel terrible for the suffering that that man and his family went and are going through.
Are these guns common? I’m not a gun guy, but I don’t recall ever hearing of them until now. Then today, there’s a report that Kenosha police confiscated two guns from someone. One of them appeared to be that same Mac-11.
It seemed like they were really popular in the 80s, or at least they were shown frequently in movies, TV shows, video games, and so on. I haven’t seen anything about them in the media for a long time and seeing that photo almost brought back nostalgia.
But I’m not a “gun guy” either so who knows, maybe they’re all over the place and just not portrayed like they were.
The gun used in Monterey Park was not a Mac 11, but a cheap rip-off copy.
For a while, some special force etc used the lower Mac11 type gun , with select fire. It was quickly made obsolete. You might see it on film or TV. The upper gun is quite uncommon, looks like a AR clone, but way, way cut down into a pistol by the manufacturer . Bad idea.
But…to remind you, the original reason for you bringing this up was as a criticism of the media, when what we’ve found is:
1.) The reporters were just quoting what the Sheriff said.
2.) It’s not indisputably a handgun. A term like “assault pistol” may well be the most accurate, depending on exactly how the term is defined in California (these things can be slightly differently-defined between different law enforcement agencies).
Do you appreciate now that this RW talking point is ill-founded, if this is one of the prime examples they reach for?
It is not a RW talking point- it is antigun propaganda, designed to make that stupid paces of shit gun sound more dangerous.
I’d far rather than a Glock any day. But a Glock is s standard police sidearm, so you won’t hear a LEO calling it “an assault pistol”, despite the fact you can get 50 (fifty) round magazines from the manufacturer. More accurate, more reliable, more concealable
So you’re going to ignore the actual points put to you, and just assert that you’re right?
It’s not an assault pistol, as the law enforcement agency has said, and as defined in California law, because DrDeth sez so.
And no recognition that if this is a go-to example of media exaggeration, it shows how few good examples actually exist, because this one is very far from unequivocal.
And here you’re guilty of the very fallacy that you’re accusing others of.
The definition of assault weapon, category 1-3, is fairly straightforward based on characteristics like magazine capacity and rate of fire. It doesn’t mean “badass”. It’s not a measure of how good a weapon is.
And yeah, maybe if someone commits murder or a mass shooting with an upgraded glock, the police may call it an assault pistol by the way they define such weapons.
California lists “Military Armament Corp. Ingram M-11” in 30510(b)(3)(d), which as one of the “pistols” listed under the heading of “assault weapons”. In the rifle section it mentions "The following MAC types: (A) RPB Industries Inc. sM10 and sM11. (B) SWD Incorporated M11.
I don’t know enough about specific gun models to know if any of those cover the “assault pistol” in question. Though, it does go on to say
(e) This section is declaratory of existing law and a clarification of the law and the Legislature’s intent which bans the weapons enumerated in this section, the weapons included in the list promulgated by the Attorney General pursuant to former Section 12276.5, as it read in Section 3 of Chapter 954 of the Statutes of 1991, and any other models that are only variations of those weapons with minor differences, regardless of the manufacturer. The Legislature has defined assault weapons as the types, series, and models listed in this section because it was the most effective way to identify and restrict a specific class of semiautomatic weapons.
Also, I think the gun would be defined as an assault weapon in section 30515 as well
(a) Notwithstanding Section 30510, “assault weapon” also means any of the following:
–(4) A semiautomatic pistol that does not have a fixed magazine but has any one of the following:
----(A) A threaded barrel, capable of accepting a flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer.
Moderating:
Ok, I’ve not followed this thread too closely. Let’s please drop the discussion of guns in a thread about a death that involved no gun in the actual killing of the victim.
Please start a new thread if you wish to discuss this further, in whatever forum you deem appropriate. Thanks.
Bumped.
On that note: