I’m doing really bad with google. And no, I don’t want to covert my pistol into a ‘machine gun’. :rolleyes:
Uncle Beer? You out there?
I’ve got an article in front of me from the Denver Post that really belongs on the editorial page instead of page one. It talks about a bill in Wyoming about allowing hunters to carry automatic weapons. The author does not seem to know the first thing about weapons or hunting and needs a little education.
Full auto was made pretty much illegal in what 1934? I know you can get a special permit for them, but AFAIK they are very few and far between. And no hunter would use a full auto weapon to hunt.
It also seems to want to prevent bow hunters from carrying a firearm. Though I guess if you are just a hiker in National Forest, its ok.
I’m not a hunter, but if I was a bow hunter, I sure as heck would want to have a side arm. If you don’t get the animal all the way down, I think it’s the humane way to go.
The whole thing smells of donky doo and I’m trying to get some more info.
Oh – Wyoming Senate File 79 is all I have about it
This may be IMHO, or end up in the PIT but first I was looking for info that ‘outlawed’ machine guns, and when.
I heard this factoid recently: Only one legally-owned machine gun has been used in a crime (since the NFA’34). It was used by an off-duty policeman. True?
It doesn’t seem that the article is available online yet. Rich Tosches, with the Denver Post is the author.
I’m not in any way a ‘gun nut’ I’m pretty much middle of the road politically. I own some guns and do know a bit about them.
However… This was the opening paragraph of his column.
Remember, this is the front page of a major metro newspaper.
He does go on to say….
So, I will give him a buy on that. He said it was confusing. But the article was completely slanted that hunters want to use automatic weapons.
Automatic weapons, are strictly controlled. Silencers are a big no no. The legislator that is trying to push this bill (their name is Mr/Ms. Case [not sure yet. I need to do a bit more research]) is hunting nothing but votes. Or he/she is a complete imbecile.
:fumes:
Mr. Tosches (the post reporter) made it sound that hunters want to use machine guns and silencers. :rolleyes: Automatic weapons are already controled, and you best not be caught with a silencer. Anywhere.
If you wan’t to give your opinion, fine. But boy oh boy was that a bunch of HS. Save it for the editorial page. But first, do an hour of reseach. Your more likely to put some actual news out that way.
It sounds like a bill was tried to be passed that it is illegal to hunt with machine guns (except they don’t know what a machine gun is and they are already regulated.).
And bow hunters can’t carry a gun.
I expect more from my neighbors to the north.
It’s probably time for IMHO if a mod would give a bump.
That is some serious and ignorant news reporting. I firmly believe that all gun activists should shoot a few rounds at a range just to know what they are talking about. It would be fun and harmless to everyone.
I grew up around guns (my father was a dealer and we had three shooting ranges on our large land). My wife did not and although she isn’t that liberal or reactive, she still subscribes to the “guns are mystical and evil myth.” I got her to shoot a round once (with a .22) and the mental block was so strong that she claimed mental damage.
To me, it would be the same about arguing against certain types of drill presses without ever stepping foot at the door of a machine shop.
You are permitted to legally own a silencer. You are also permitted to legally use a silencer. You will be made the justice system’s bitch if you use it in the commission of a crime, though. The use of a silencer is pretty much limited to the range, just as it is for all intents and purposes with automatic weapons.
Depends on the state. Yes, the Feds will issues a permit if you jump through all the hoops, but one of the hoops includes complying with applicable state laws. You’ll normally need your Federal application signed off by your local chief law enforcement officer. And some states prohibit “sound supressors”. There’s a chart here http://www.vectorarms.com/myweb2/other/law.htm that lists the states and whether or not sound supressors and automatic weapons are legal. Sixteen states prohibit supressors while thirteen prohibit automatic weapons.I do find it interesting that only eleven states prohibit both.
National Firearms Act of 1934 established Federal regulation of NFA-classed firearms and accessories, including short-barreled shotguns, fully automatic firearms, silencers/suppressors, “destructive devices” (I’ll leave that as an exercise for the reader to figure out), and pretty much any other firearm or accessory that the BATF deemed to fall under its purview. It did not, however, ban the possession of said objects, except insofar as it placed permission for ownership under the discression of county officials (typically the sheriff or magistrate). One does have to fill out the paperwork and purchase the “stamp”, but possession isn’t illegal. The National Gun Control Act of 1968 (which, BTW, was strongly supported by the National Rifle Association) essentially eliminated importaton for civilian purchase of weapons controlled by NFA34, and the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986 essentially banned new sales of fully automatic weapons (though privately owned firearms manufactured before that time can still be transferred, local and state laws permitting.) Although I’m not familiar with the process, there are clearly some waivers for people involved in the entertainment and personal security industries, as well, of course, for law enforcement.
There is a significant amount of what Samual Clemens would have refer to as “damned lies” regarding firearms among the general population, and this is exploited by gun control advocates, many of which I am convinced know better. Fully automatic firearms have essentially no purpose in hunting; a law prohibiting such is, well, kind of like forbidding tricycles on the interstate. As someone has pointed out, the number of crimes commited with legally owned NFA-regulated firearms can be counted on the fingers of one hand, and the use of fully automatic weapons isn’t much greater; I daresay that assault rifles and submachineguns see far more action on the silver screen than they ever do in real life crime. Silencers (which may or may not be manufactured and owned by civilians, depending again on local regs) have little place in crime; they’re rarely either as compact or as quiet as those on television (which are generally just empty cans taped or glued onto the end of the gun) would have you believe. Silencers are used and actually required for hunting in some European nations, rightly for their noise-attenuation characteristics. And of course, plastic stocks, pistol grips, bayonet lugs, and the like to absolutely nothing to make a firearm more lethal. But it sells well to a public that knows only what they see in rap videos and Schwartznegger movies. Don’t even get me started on the KTW armor piercing “cop killer” bullets that have never been available for civilian sale and have never, to my knowledge, been used in any shooting involving a police officer.
I don’t know what a “Godfather-style silencer” is like, but I know the one .308 chambered rifle that I’ve seen had a can that must have been 24" long and 6" in diameter. That’s an awful lot of bulk and mass (not to mention what it must do to the balance of the rifle) for a hunter to carry around for no good purpose. Surefire makes what are probably the most compact and effective rifle silencers on the market today, and you can see the size of their cans.
There have been occasions when proportedly pro-firearm strawman bills or amemdments have been proposed soley for the purpose of generating outrage against gun owners (and while I’ve never seen the contrary in legislative circles, there are perennial rumors among gun rights activists about some bill that is going to forbid firearms ownership or somesuch).
I’m barely a gun owner myself (though I’ve shot everything from a .22LR target pistol to a .50 BMG rifle in turn), but I find within myself a great deal of umbrage toward people who would ignorantly impose bans on firearm ownership or any other Constitutioanlly-recognized right for the sake of “doing something!” while accomplishing nothing at all. And hypocrites who lie deliberately for the sake of perpetuating their political agenda earn nothing from me but a sneer. “Reasonable gun control” starts with education, not knee-jerk reactionism and fear-baiting.
It sounds like that silencers can be legally owned. Sort of like the hoops you jump through for a full auto.
I will try to provide a link to the article on Monday.
I got my feathers in a bit of a ruffle because he first stated ‘machine gun’ and went on to talk about ‘automatics’. I don’t believe he has any idea of what he is talking about, but is anti-gun, and is pretending to write news when it was really an editorial.
My best friend of 30 years is not a gun owner, and could probably be considered ‘anti-gun’ (I hate these labels).
I just hate it when people spread their addenda through misinformation. Or just plain ignorance.
:hrrumphhh:
Wouldn’t a silencer screw up a long range shot? Do snipers use a silencer? I don’t think so. The bullet gets there before the sound anyway.
Maybe the hunters are worried that the deer will find his position and press a civil suit?
[sub]sorry, but I can only deal with these types of people with comedy, I just can’t believe they’re serious[/sub]
Oh, and bow hunters can’t carry a side arm? ‘scussee me?’
<snip>CHEYENNE, Wyo. (AP) – Wyoming hunters could carry automatic weapons and guns equipped with silencers in the field under proposed legislation that would also allow archery hunters to carry firearms.<snip>
[sub]shhhhh. i think that if your have a federal licence to own an automatic, you can carry it on federaly owed land. that would be in the ‘field’. national forest.[/sub]Or am I wrong?
<snip>Sen. Cale Case, R-Lander, is the primary sponsor of the bill. He says he’s heard from many archery hunters who want to carry firearms for defense against grizzly bears.
Case’s bill, Senate File 79, wouldn’t allow anyone to hunt with automatic or silenced weapons. But it would remove the current prohibition against possessing such weapons in the state’s game fields and forests.<snip>
<snip>Case said Wyoming’s game laws shouldn’t penalize hunters for possessing automatic weapons or silenced guns when they’re otherwise legal.<snip>
You put your right foot in,
You put your right foot out;
You put your right foot in,
And you shake it all about.
You do the Hokey-Pokey,
And you turn yourself around.
That’s what it’s all about!
I’m still a bit confused, but I think the legislator Senator Cale Case (R)Wy. Isn’t doing anything wrong. Completely unnecessary perhaps, but not wrong.
Mr. Rich Tosches however – quote again (front page, not the editorial section)
. We are still in GQ, so I won’t tell you what I think of this statement.
Generally speaking, yes, although the Surefire people claim that their cans actually improve accuracy. I’ve never handled one so I can’t confirm or deny, but the primary purpose of their assault rifle/submachinegun silencers isn’t to “silence” the gun–an impossible task with a supersonic bullet–but to attentuate the muzzle blast so that it can be used indoors without causing permanent hearing loss.
Bow season is often considered a better time of year to hunt elk and deer. As such, the concern is some people would seek a bow permit, and actually do the hunting with a firearm. Since the Rocky Mountains are large, catching someone in the act might be tough. Therefore, the wildlife department is attempting to cut the problem off early by banning the procession of a handgun while on a bow license. I think Colorado has the same law, but I’m not sure.
Of course you have a point about putting down a wounded animal in the most humane way possible. There may also be good reasons to have a firearm in bear country. I’m not arguing one way or the other, I really don’t think it makes too much difference, but there is at least a reason behind the law.
You know, if you go to the web site for the State of Wyoming, you can actually look up current legislation. Senate bills are called files and there is, indeed, a Senate File 79. (Not that it actually says what the newspaper doofus claims that it said, but it does “mention” automatic firearms and silencers.)
Here is the journal digest (synopsis), which is not much shorter than the whole bill.
Oh, for the .pdf impaired: the bill changes the language but leaves in place the actual prohibition against using either automated weapons or silencers; it then deletes an older provision that prohibited bow hunters from carrying firearms.