HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Gun Control & RKBA (Group) » One is often asked to def...

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 02:54 AM

One is often asked to define "assault weapon". Here's my definition.

Last edited Sun Jan 6, 2013, 04:09 PM - Edit history (2)

Any semi-automatic weapon that fires a rimless, semi-rimmed, or rebated rim centerfire cartridge that has a bullet of less then 6.5mm in diameter or a metal based case length of less then 50.8mm or caseless ammunition of any dimension or any rimless, semi-rimmedd or rebated Polymer-cased centerfire cartridge of any dimension.

The appearance of the gun has nothing to do with the above definition. The gun could look like a hunting rifle or it could look like something out of a Hollywood war movie. The gun could have a bayonet lug, grenade launcher, flash suppressor, pistol grip or folding stock and it might not be an assault weapon as defined by above. Or it could. It all depends on the action of the gun and the cartridge it fires.

Such a definition keeps things simple. All one has to do is first determine if the gun is a semi-automatic, see if the cartridge it is loaded with is a centerfire round and then measure the cartridge. No fuss. No muss.

If one has an issue with including semi-automatic handguns in the above, then one could refine it further by saying an assault weapon is a semi-automatic firearm that has a barrel length of 16" or longer and fires a rimless, semi-rimmed, or rebated rim centerfire cartridge that has a bullet of less then 6.5mm in diameter or a case length of less then 50.8mm.

A semi-automatic, or self-loading, firearm is a weapon that performs all steps necessary to prepare the weapon to fire again after firing—assuming cartridges remain in the weapon's feed device or magazine.

A centerfire cartridge is a cartridge with a primer located in the center of the cartridge case head.

"The rimmed cartridge is the oldest of the types and has a rim that is significantly larger in diameter than the base of the cartridge. "

"On a rimless case, the rim is the same diameter as the base of the case; it is known as an extractor groove."

"On a semi-rimmed case the rim projects slightly beyond the base of the case, though not as much as a rimmed cartridge."

"Rebated rim cartridges have a rim that is significantly smaller in diameter than the base of the case, serving only for extraction."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rim_%28firearms%29

Rimmed cartridges do not have an extractor groove.

According to the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute (SAAMI), a cartridge is "a single round of ammunition consisting of the case, primer and propellant with or without one or more projectiles." Only the projectile portion is the bullet.

The case length of a 7.62x39mm cartridge is about 38.7mm



Polymer-cased ammunition (or PCA) is the concept applied to define the alternative to use polymer-based casings instead of metal-based (brass, aluminium or steel mainly) in the manufacturing of ammunition.

Caseless ammunition is a type of small arms ammunition that eliminates the cartridge case that typically holds the primer, propellant, and projectile together as a unit.



63 replies, 6128 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 63 replies Author Time Post
Reply One is often asked to define "assault weapon". Here's my definition. (Original post)
Kaleva Dec 2012 OP
msongs Dec 2012 #1
NYC_SKP Dec 2012 #2
realgreen Dec 2012 #3
atreides1 Dec 2012 #4
Kaleva Dec 2012 #5
aristocles Dec 2012 #51
Riftaxe Dec 2012 #6
Kaleva Dec 2012 #8
Riftaxe Dec 2012 #9
Kaleva Dec 2012 #12
Riftaxe Dec 2012 #13
Kaleva Dec 2012 #16
Riftaxe Dec 2012 #18
Kaleva Dec 2012 #19
Riftaxe Dec 2012 #11
Riftaxe Dec 2012 #7
Kaleva Dec 2012 #10
Riftaxe Dec 2012 #15
napoleon_in_rags Dec 2012 #14
Riftaxe Dec 2012 #17
napoleon_in_rags Dec 2012 #20
Puha Ekapi Dec 2012 #21
JustABozoOnThisBus Dec 2012 #48
Tuesday Afternoon Dec 2012 #22
ManiacJoe Dec 2012 #24
Tuesday Afternoon Dec 2012 #25
ManiacJoe Dec 2012 #26
Tuesday Afternoon Dec 2012 #27
ManiacJoe Dec 2012 #28
Kaleva Dec 2012 #34
Angleae Dec 2012 #23
Kaleva Dec 2012 #35
Angleae Dec 2012 #47
doc03 Dec 2012 #29
Kaleva Dec 2012 #33
doc03 Dec 2012 #44
Kaleva Dec 2012 #45
krispos42 Dec 2012 #30
Kaleva Dec 2012 #32
krispos42 Dec 2012 #39
Kaleva Dec 2012 #42
krispos42 Dec 2012 #43
Statist Dec 2012 #31
Kaleva Dec 2012 #36
ManiacJoe Dec 2012 #37
Kaleva Dec 2012 #38
Puha Ekapi Dec 2012 #40
Kaleva Dec 2012 #41
Kaleva Dec 2012 #46
lastlib Dec 2012 #49
iiibbb Dec 2012 #50
Kaleva Dec 2012 #52
iiibbb Dec 2012 #53
Kaleva Dec 2012 #54
iiibbb Dec 2012 #55
Puha Ekapi Dec 2012 #56
Kaleva Dec 2012 #57
Puha Ekapi Dec 2012 #58
Kaleva Dec 2012 #59
Puha Ekapi Dec 2012 #60
Kaleva Dec 2012 #61
Puha Ekapi Dec 2012 #62
Kaleva Dec 2012 #63

Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 02:58 AM

1. any gun is an assault weapon = intimidate or make a person fearful of harm, which is the

definition of assault, vs battery which is to cause actual physical harm, something a gun owner does when you are shot be him or her

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msongs (Reply #1)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 03:03 AM

2. By that definition, all men and women are murderers.

Because they might murder.

Let's not water down definitions to the point of absurdity, it won't help our cause one iota.

TIA and happy festivities!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 03:15 AM

3. A gun made for assaulting

 

I think the definition should be obvious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 03:47 AM

4. Interesting

But what is the legal definition of an "assault weapon"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to atreides1 (Reply #4)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 03:57 AM

5. It's whatever Congress and the states decides it to be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to atreides1 (Reply #4)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:01 PM

51. There is no legal definition of "assault weapon"

 

There are legal definitions of "assault rifle" at the state and federal levels, in the courts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 04:14 AM

6. So you bring back caseless ammo

big deal, welcome to 40 year old technology.

I suspect your next crusade will be to scrub every encyclopedia of the recipe for gun cotton...good luck don quixote. Of course that made more sense, when public education provided adequate instruction in chemistry.


On edit: Now you will change the definition to include my repro brown bess more then likely.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Riftaxe (Reply #6)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 04:30 AM

8. Caseless ammo has it's drawbacks.

Drawbacks serious enough to have prevented it from ever becoming popular in the past 40 years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Reply #8)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 04:40 AM

9. Hardly, the biggest drawback was the expense

and it was more accurate then gyro anyways. If you make it cheaper then cased, you lose in the end.

You might also notice that it gets around all the requires for magazine capacity....

Mankind has been making weapons for a long time, and the desire to remove weapons from the poor has always been a high priority for those with a bent against liberty.

Just stop playing around, say you have no evidence to support eliminating firearms for all but the wealthy solves anything and take an honest stance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Riftaxe (Reply #9)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 04:50 AM

12. It has several problems besides expense

Being heat sensitive, problems with sealing and fragility being the main three.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Reply #12)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 04:58 AM

13. production is no longer a problem

we are not dealing with ancient systems, lord. even 35 years ago we had PLC's.

While you were sleeping, chemistry has advanced from gunking up the barrel, so exactly what "technology limiting" factor are you proposing?

Heat sensitivity is easily solved, piezoelectric triggering mechanism?

Electricity a problem, electronically amp the charge to where it takes a bolt of lighting.

Denseness a problem, many ways around that, etc....

People are no longer club bearing primitives in sub saharan africa 400k years ago

Just explain why you want to disarm people and they might listen, and they might reject your arguments or they might not, depends on how much they trust *you* to provide for them.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Riftaxe (Reply #13)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 05:18 AM

16. Still easy to control. Either outlaw caseless ammo for civilians or heavily regulate it.

I might modify my proposal to include caseless cartridges. I do appreciate your input.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Reply #16)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 05:26 AM

18. It has been a fun back and forth

although i lost the problem you were proposing to fix, it was glaringly missing from the OP

Much more concerned with the cylon problem, people under 30 that affix more then a pound of metal to themselves...as individuals they tend to annoy me. We should get together and figure out how to name them cylons so we can restrict them from offending me!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Riftaxe (Reply #18)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 05:40 AM

19. I learn a great deal in these exchanges.

One thing I really do like about GC/RKBA is that there are many like you who have a great deal of knowledge on the subject. It doesn't do me much good to go and argue on this issue in real life without first having my ideas peer reviewed so to speak. I'd rather feel like a fool here then when talking to someone face to face!

Have a Merry Christmas!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Reply #8)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 04:48 AM

11. Face it, in the end, people want to be protected

from people like you, even if they have to rely upon themselves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 04:29 AM

7. This of course will lead to smaller

and more concealable weapons with the same or superior fire rates?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Riftaxe (Reply #7)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 04:44 AM

10. Well, .22 caliber firearms shooting rimfire cartridges would not be regulated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Reply #10)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 05:05 AM

15. Darn, i made money when my .22 in '86 made the grade



It slaughtered many a tin can, it was only made for killing tin cans.

I suppose, if paranoid enough it could look scarey....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 05:00 AM

14. "a bullet of less then 6.5mm in diameter"

So the 7.62mm by 39 ammo you show a pic of at the end of the post doesn't apply. (AK-47 ammo)

Due to mystical reasons, this probably would be just fine. All these shooters seem to use AR-15s, with 5.56 mm ammo. I've tried to figure that out for awhile. The best I can come up with is the guy who said the AR is the "Ferrari" of assault weapons basically had it right: Its the high performance gun which breaks down quite often and spends a lot of time in the shop.

I'm not a gun guy, but the one's I talk to praise the AK-47 not for its accuracy or speed, but for its unwavering reliability. That makes it basically the Volvo of assault rifles. An for whatever reason, people who go on these shooting sprees seem drawn to the "Ferrari" of assault rifles more often than the "Volvo" of assault rifles. So your definition seems to have some merit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to napoleon_in_rags (Reply #14)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 05:19 AM

17. So...notch cased ammo comes in

or poly sided ammo, etc.

Sometimes it is hard not to to take the entire debate as an engineering challenge. My personal experience (while biased), is that engineers are always smarter then the lawyers when challenged.

Now if they took every day as seriously as that, we would not desperately need a consumer safety bureau!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Riftaxe (Reply #17)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 05:47 AM

20. We always have the capacity to cause damage.

As Ani DiFranco says, "Every tool is a weapon if you hold it right." All across this country, there are scientists, engineers who could do mass damage if they chose to. But every day they don't, they enjoy a compassionate and enlightened perspective which would rather touch people's minds and hearts than hurt them. Since the Newtown shooting, I have been depressed as hell, many people have. My approach has been the psychological angle: I believe people are good, we have the power to wake up, and when some of us get in a really dark place, we need to stand up as a society and bring them in and support them before they get sucked into that black hole of murder from where there is no return.

I took a philosophy class once, but only for a few days. The prof said "Love is that which increases possibilities, hate is that which decreases them". I didn't catch the rest, but that always stuck with me. I choose peace and love because I choose to multiply possibilities of experience: when we are willing to love and respect each other, the future is unlimited. But with hate and the abuse of every power given us, the totalitarian future that unfolds to protect us has such a singular quality and direction. I choose multiple possibilities of a future of freedoms and responsibility, not a future of necessary suppression. Why? Because every scientist can agree: its just more interesting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 10:24 AM

21. The day after that ammunition...

...restriction goes into effect, AR's in 6.6x51mm hit the shelves. Problem solved.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Puha Ekapi (Reply #21)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 09:19 AM

48. ARs in .260 Remington are available now

Last edited Thu Dec 27, 2012, 02:06 PM - Edit history (1)

I think that's just 6.5x51mm.

edited to fix a number, doh.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 06:19 PM

22. The word "assault" as used in gun terminology needs to be thrown out. Guns should be

classified by what type of gun and what kind of ammo they use. We need to get very specific in our definitions.

Our laws will depend on it and we should, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tuesday Afternoon (Reply #22)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 06:52 PM

24. Actually the original use of "assault" is exactly as you wish.

"Assault rifles" and "battle rifles" are defined by the size and weight of the rifle and by the size and power of the ammo they fire.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ManiacJoe (Reply #24)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 10:31 PM

25. Then I stand by my original statement. We should Revert Back to defining guns by the size and weight

and the power of the ammo. The term "assault" just muddies the waters and is a misnomer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tuesday Afternoon (Reply #25)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 10:55 PM

26. I think you misunderstood my post.

There is a real definition of "assault rifle" (light carbine, usually firing a 5.56mm round (.223) or 7.63x39 round).
And a real definition of "battle rifle" (heavy full size rifle, usually firing a 7.62x51 round (.308) or .30-06 or 7.62x54r).

"Assault weapon" was the purposely chosen name of the fake classification to confuse people with "assault rifle".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ManiacJoe (Reply #26)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 11:04 PM

27. and That is exactly why we need to quit using it. any weapon can be offensive or defensive -

anyone can do battle with any type of rifle or weapon.

It is confusing enough just learning the jargon as it is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tuesday Afternoon (Reply #27)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 11:07 PM

28. Yes, we should quit using the term "assault weapon".


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tuesday Afternoon (Reply #22)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 04:24 AM

34. I'm offering a possible specific defination of the term.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 06:20 PM

23. Per your definition, .22 LR is an "assault weapon"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angleae (Reply #23)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 04:26 AM

35. No. .22LR is a rimfire cartridge.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Reply #35)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 07:43 AM

47. Damnit, I knew I missed something.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Tue Dec 25, 2012, 11:37 PM

29. Don't understand your definition being smaller than 6.5mm and 50.8 mm.

If it shoots a bullet 7.62mm it is leagal? By using you definition all they have to do is make 6.6 mm bullet or a shell with a length of 51mm and you have a legal gun even more deadly than your definition. An AK 47 is probably the most popular assault weapon in the world and it would be legal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #29)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 04:22 AM

33. A 7.62X54R would be legal but a 7.62X39mm would not be (unless one has a license)

The semi-auto AKs and the SKSs shoot the 7.62X39mm cartridges.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Reply #33)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 09:36 PM

44. What is your logic there? A 7.62x54 won't kill anybody or what? I think

all semi-autos except a .22 or .17 rimfire should be licensed like a full auto.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #44)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 10:06 PM

45. The 7.62X54R is a very powerful round.

The average bad guy or homeowner interested in home defense doesn't need a round capable of easily hitting targets 500 yards away (depending on the skill of the shooter and the accuracy of the gun the cartridge is fired from).

Guns, bolt action or semi-auto, that fire that round generally are heavier and less easier to handle. The two Mosin-Nagant M91/30s I have are heavy guns at 8.8 lbs. and have long 29" barrels. The Mosin-Nagant M44 Carbine which I had lost in a house fire had a much shorter barrel but was still heavy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 12:43 AM

30. Easy work-around

Make your .223 out of a .308 case (51mm long). Keep the cartridge deliberabely loaded below maximum to match the velocity of the .223 Remington.



Alternately, rechamber your .223 Rem in 6.8 SPC, 7.62 Soviet, or .30 Carbine.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #30)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 04:17 AM

32. I don't have an issue with that

I'm constantly revising my thoughts as I get input. Include a minimum barrel length (20" or 21"?) to what I proposed and someone does what you suggest, they'll still have what one may call a "battle rifle" instead of an "assault rifle".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Reply #32)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 09:40 AM

39. You could do that.

It would not change the fundamental fact that a semi-automatic rifle that fires a moderately-powerful cartridge can fire an awful lot of rounds in a very short period of time.



The simplist thing to do is not to try to define "assault weapon"; it's to come out and say that semi-automatic long guns should no longer be sold.

The market would then be satisfied with tactical lever-action and slide-action rifles.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #39)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 03:13 PM

42. I believe the vast majority of people who wish to own a gun for self/home defense...

would find that a revolver and/or a lever action or slide action carbine to be more then adequate for such a task.

After reading here about lever actions and doing much more reading at other sites, I think the .38/357 lever action carbine would be the best choice. I could pair it with a .38/357 DA revolver if desired and use the cheaper .38 special ammo to target practice with for both and then load both with the more powerful .357 magnum ammo for more serious business. I don't recall shooting at anything while hunting beyond 50 yards and walking around outside earlier after tying up my three legged dog so he can do his duty, any gun for home/self defense that can accurately shoot beyond that range would be excessive except when standing in the front yard there is a narrow view to the north where a gun that can accurately shoot at a range of 150-200 yards may be of some use. But I know those people who live in that neighborhood and I don't foresee being involved in a shootout with them at any time in the future. Even if I did, I have a couple of Mosin-Nagants. But the ammo for them is at my former father-in-laws so in the meantime, I'd have to do a bayonet charge and it'd be the slowest such charge in history as I can no longer run and it's only on my good days that I can even walk fast.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Reply #42)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 03:33 PM

43. The .357 from a rifle is perfectly acceptable in terms of power.

It is far more powerful from a rifle than from a handgun. Winchester's 158-grain jacketed hollow point from a rifle develops 1,175 foot-pounds of energy; the same cartridge fired from a revolver makes 535 ft-lbs.

I think very few people, in a home-defense situation, would feel the .357 Mag from a rifle was underpowered. The problem is, of course, that people don't want to have to work a lever in a crisis.

The .357 Mag, and its parent .38 Special, is rimmed for use in revolvers, which does not work particularly well in detachable stick magazines. I think that's why you haven't seen many AR-15s chambered in such a cartridge. There are plenty of "fat and slow" cartridges available for the AR-15 platform, but I don't recall ever reading anything about a .357 upper

Lever action guns almost universally use tubular magazines, where the ammunition is placed inside nose-to-tail. This makes for a design that does not reload particularly fast, but it does solve the problem of the rimmed cartridges. This is a historical affliction; originally lever-actions were chambered to match revolver cartridges so the user would only have to carry one type of cartridge, and the detachable magazine had not been developed.

If situations do come about that semi-automatic rifles are no longer sold, I think you will see lever-action and slide-action guns designed for stick magazines and firing modern rimless cartridges. 10mm Auto, .357 Sig, .30 Carbine, .38 Super, even .223 Remington, 7.62 Soviet, and 6.8mm SPC are candidate cartridges, as I explained in the other post I made that, IIRC , you bookmarked.

A lever-action that uses AR-15 magazines and AR-15 handguards and AR-15 telescoping buttstocks, and that have a Picatinney rail on top for mounting reflex or red-dot sights... that might well be the future.


Even if such a ban failed on the national level, I would not be surprised to see California, New York, New Jersey, or Massachusetts pass their own laws on this issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 02:28 AM

31. EVERY Gun is an ASSAULT WEAPON!

 

They are all INSTRUMENTS OF DEATH, PERIOD. Therefore ALL guns should be banned! Guns NEED to be monopolized by the STATE!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 05:58 AM

36. Steps to determine if a firearm is an assault weapon

1. If the firearm is a semi-automatic, proceed to step 2.

2. If the barrel of the firearm is less then 20" long, proceed to step 3.

3. Examine the ammunition the firearm is designed to fire or is currently loaded with or has been modified to fire. Proceed to step 4 if any of the following conditions are met:

a. The ammunition is a center fire rimless, semi-rimmed or rebated rim cartridge with a bullet diameter of less then 6.5mm

or

b. The center fire cartridge case is less then then 50.8mm long

or

c. the ammunition is a caseless cartridge of any dimension

or

d. the cartridge is a Polymer-cased ammunition of any dimension

4. The gun in question is an assault rifle which requires a special license to purchase, sell, or posses.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 06:08 AM

37. What is the point of the meaningless classification?

In the real world, there is no such thing as an "assault weapon". What is the point of creating an artificial class of weapons?

How does your definition differ from "any semi-auto version of any assault rifle"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ManiacJoe (Reply #37)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 08:41 AM

38. Mine is an attempt to get away from the "It looks scary!" definition commonly used.

A semi-automatic used primarily for hunting is functionally no different then a semi-auto based on a military assault rifle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Reply #38)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:44 AM

40. But I think you are missing...

...an important point: As soon as, or even before, the ammunition restrictions go into effect, manufacturers will tool up and produce rifles chambered for ammunition that falls just outside the outlawed or restricted specifications. Your only choice in that case is to essentially outlaw ALL centerfire ammunition, including many that are very popular hunting rounds. And that's about as likely as discovering a new species of duck living on the rings of Saturn.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Puha Ekapi (Reply #40)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 02:38 PM

41. I don't see how one can simply retool a semi-auto handgun to get around the restrictions

Or at least to produce a semi-auto handgun that is of any practical use.

Semi-auto handguns are more of a problem then semi-auto carbines which themselves are more of a problem then semi-auto rifles.

As you may have noted, I'm not calling for a ban. In another post, I advocated that anyone who wishes to purchase and/or posses a gun or guns affected by what I propose to go thru the same procedures many states require a person who wishes to obtain a CCW/CPL permit has to go thru.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:04 PM

46. The NY firemen's killer was armed with a .223 Bushmaster

"But his intent was unmistakable when he left his flaming home carrying a pump-action shotgun, a .38-caliber revolver and a .223-caliber semiautomatic Bushmaster rifle with flash suppression, the same make and caliber weapon used in the elementary school massacre in Newtown, Conn., that killed 26....The assault rifle was believed to be the weapon that struck down the firefighters."

http://news.yahoo.com/ny-firemens-killer-mapped-plan-slayings-071946537.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:44 PM

49. If it points at you and a bullet comes out, it's an assault weapon.

All you need to know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Original post)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 04:56 PM

50. So a 9mm semi-auto pistol constitutes an "assault weapon"

 

Um,

Appreciate that you want to standardize, but I think magazine capacity would have to be a co-factor. It has more to do with it than bullet size. Also guns without detachable magazines should be exempt. I have a single shot rifle that shoots .223; it is not an assault weapon by any stretch.


Also from a rifle perspective, there would be a work-around out fairly quickly that would perform no different than what you've categorized today.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to iiibbb (Reply #50)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 06:51 PM

52. If you read the first paragraph of the OP

"Any semi-automatic weapon that fires a rimless, semi-rimmed, or rebated rim centerfire cartridge that has a bullet of less then 6.5mm in diameter or a metal based case length of less then 50.8mm or caseless ammunition of any dimension or Polymer-cased ammunition of any dimension."

Your comment:

" I have a single shot rifle that shoots .223; it is not an assault weapon by any stretch."

I am unaware of any single shot rifle that is a semi-automatic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Reply #52)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 08:07 PM

53. Thanks

 

I was so focused on cartrige that I missed that part.

At any rate, they would just make a semi-auto that had a bullet just outside of the size.

Assuming I'd even go along with this definition, I'd make the determination based on detachable magazines of a certain capacity

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to iiibbb (Reply #53)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 08:24 PM

54. There are already many semi-auto rifles available that do that

I'm not calling for a ban on anything. Just a requirement that anyone who wishs to purchase, sell, or posses such a weapon go thru the same procedures many states require CPL permit holders go through.

I think a big problem with the old AWB was that it was more focused on certain features and the general appearence of the gun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Reply #54)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 09:03 PM

55. iI see

 

I think that and any girst-time gun owner should be pretty thorough. Subsequent purchases probably no need for as intense a check like current system.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Reply #54)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 09:40 PM

56. With your proposed licensing...

...would you like it to be on a Shall Issue basis, or on a local May Issue basis? In other words, if a person is fully qualified, them the permit MUST be issued, rather than a qualified person being denied based on the whim or personal bias of a local official?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Puha Ekapi (Reply #56)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 09:45 PM

57. It'd be shall issue on a federal level but...

as with current guns laws, states and localities do often impose greater restrictions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Reply #57)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 09:52 PM

58. In "May Issue" states...

...permits can be denied simply because the local sheriff doesn't like guns in the hands of citizens, or that you haven't contributed enough to his campaign, or for no reason at all, even though the applicant is squeaky clean and fully qualified. In those states, it is often the wealthy and well connected who get permits, while the average Joe is denied. Is this how your idea would work?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Puha Ekapi (Reply #58)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 10:04 PM

59. My idea has nothing to do with state or local regulations

While I live in a "Shall Issue" state, Even though my record is squeky clean and I feel I'm qualified, I'm too poor to purchase a handgun right now. My economic situation prevents me from exercising my RKBA. Do you have any ideas about what can be done to remedy this situation? Why should gun ownership be restricted to the more well off?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Reply #59)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 10:54 PM

60. I'm not sure....

...if you misunderstood me, or are being evasive. I hope it is just a misunderstanding. My question is, under your proposal, can a local official deny a permit simply because he does not want to issue one to an individual who is fully qualified, as often happens in May Issue states, or does the permit HAVE to be issued if the individual seeking the permit is qualified. My question was not about the affordability of the firearm itself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Puha Ekapi (Reply #60)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 11:17 PM

61. I've already answered your question

My proposal has nothing to do with state and local regulations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaleva (Reply #61)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 11:19 PM

62. Ok, then...

...let me ask how you would "like" to see it handled on a state and local level. "Shall", or "May" issue?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Puha Ekapi (Reply #62)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 11:25 PM

63. It doesn't matter to me either way.

There are so many good options as to what guns to buy that even a complete ban on semi-automatics wouldn't bother me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread