Sensible Gun Safety

[jhu72]

C&S, good to hear from you. Pretty sure Mr. Sturgeon legally purchased his weapon, then killed his co-workers. They should have been armed while banking, I guess. Or at least wearing flak vests. Just careless of them, right? Ts & Ps.

It is good to be back on a limited basis. My question to you still stands. Is there a solution? I'm reminded of that old adage that everybody complains about the weather but nobody does anything about it. If a person is so mentally screwed up they are willing to go down in a hail of bullets the weapon being used is not the biggest issue that society has to deal with.

cradle, I was wondering when you would weigh in.

Hope you and your family are doing well.

On this, yes, it's NOT difficult to define the weapons to be banned (other than at licensed gun ranges), as we've done it (ban of assault weapons) before and it was effective.

This country does NOT have greater issues of mental health, we have hugely greater access to weapons that kill many victims very quickly. Easily Legally purchased, easily stolen. Way, way too many.

This argument has been repeated again and again, but if you want to choose to ignore it, fine.

You first have to define what an assault weapon is. Until that is accomplished your simply cherry picking some weapons while ignoring others. I'm not ignoring anything MD. I'm only asking the same question...what is the solution? There is only one solution, ban and confiscation of ALL of these weapons by every citizen. If that is the road you want to go down then fine by me. As a matter of fact I'm more than happy to put you in charge of the process. You up to the challenge?

Again, it was done previously and it worked.

I'm adding a wrinkle that wasn't included before, the safe keeping and use of these weapons, including those still privately owned, at a well regulated gun range.

Banning sale of the weapons is the first and easiest piece. Definition can be expansive enough to cover anything close, size of magazine, speed of delivery of bullets, etc, as well as with specific examples. Second piece is a buyback program. Third piece is a confiscation and fine regime with scofflaws. Note, again, that a viable alternative is legal registration and safekeeping and use at well regulated gun range.

And then there are other common sense gun laws, safe storage, trigger locks, red flag, background checks, concealed and open carry restricted to limited set of public, with training and specific need.

I can only state my own opinion on this issue. I'm a huge 2nd amendment guy. I'm also a huge advocate as to going forward that to buy whatever you folks think an assault weapon is that a tighter set of guidelines should apply. That means 50 states figuring out those guidelines is a states issue. You can't outright ban them. The reason you can't I have pointed out here numerous times. If you ban purchase and ownership of all AR-15 type weapons defining that as an assault weapon .. you have to ban the purchase and ownership of an M1 Garand, a semi automatic assault rifle. I ask the same question one more time... how do you define what an assault weapon is?

Do you have an issue with the prior legal definition in the prior national ban?
Are you saying that it needs to be updated or expanded?
Or do you just think it wasn't inclusive enough back then?

Is the "M1 Garand, a semi-automatic assault rifle" used for "assault"?
Is it needed for anything else?
I know it's been around since 1936 and was for many decades the weapon of choice for military "battle" purposes, but, given its weight, it ain't an ideal hunting rifle...so, keep it at the well regulated gun range.

I have no issue with banning sale for any other purpose.

That said, if a good case can be made that the M1 is only semi-automatic, has far less capacity and stopping power than an AR-15, and is regularly used for varmint hunting, I'm also ok with drawing the "assault" weapon ban definition more narrowly. Indeed, most discussions of this topic differentiate between an "assault" weapon and a "battle" rifle based on those factors.

But I'm also ok with regulating the M1 and its ilk to be required to safely stored, etc, used only for hunting with a hunting license, if that's where the line is drawn...but I don't really think it's a needed weapon given better alternatives for hunting purposes and its potential ill use otherwise. Again, gun range.

BTW, gun ranges would be a good business opportunity...

... he is playing the favorite game of the gun lobby. The majority of guns manufactured today are semi-auto which are conflated with "assault weapon". I am sure a definition can be made to identify the problematic makes and models. It is as simple as enumeration and keeping the list up to date. Of course this will run into problems with the current SCOTUS. The problem is artificially constrained.

[PizzaSnake]

Don't think the measure of success in mass shootings is whether the cops eliminate or the shooter gets neutralized. The object is to avoid the shooting in the first place

We live in a country where firearms are ubiquitous, easy to acquire and, thus, too often easily available to people who have a grudge or any other kind of problem. The idea that making it harder to acquire one somehow makes it to difficult for law-abiding citizens to acquire and own one does not seem to be worth it currently.

Why to some this is perfectly acceptable is also quite mystifying.

You must be an un-American woke disarmer.

A bank, with armed guards, high-tech security systems, and cameras everywhere, couldn't stop a mass shooter/disgruntled ex-employee from killing five people and wounding nine or ten others. But the GOP response to this sort of stuff is to suggest arming teachers or putting police in American schools as a reasonable solution for kids being gunned down while simply trying to learn?? For concert-goers? For folks at Walmart and the movies and church?

Look at YA's response to this for the current brain fever. An unfettered Second Amendment is so central to the perverted outlook these folks have, that the rest of us just have to accept the murders of dozens and dozens and dozens of children, congregants, college kids, movie-goers and shoppers as the price of -- ready? -- freedom.

Freedumb. Fixed it.

[cradleandshoot]

C&S, good to hear from you. Pretty sure Mr. Sturgeon legally purchased his weapon, then killed his co-workers. They should have been armed while banking, I guess. Or at least wearing flak vests. Just careless of them, right? Ts & Ps.

It is good to be back on a limited basis. My question to you still stands. Is there a solution? I'm reminded of that old adage that everybody complains about the weather but nobody does anything about it. If a person is so mentally screwed up they are willing to go down in a hail of bullets the weapon being used is not the biggest issue that society has to deal with.

cradle, I was wondering when you would weigh in.

Hope you and your family are doing well.

On this, yes, it's NOT difficult to define the weapons to be banned (other than at licensed gun ranges), as we've done it (ban of assault weapons) before and it was effective.

This country does NOT have greater issues of mental health, we have hugely greater access to weapons that kill many victims very quickly. Easily Legally purchased, easily stolen. Way, way too many.

This argument has been repeated again and again, but if you want to choose to ignore it, fine.

You first have to define what an assault weapon is. Until that is accomplished your simply cherry picking some weapons while ignoring others. I'm not ignoring anything MD. I'm only asking the same question...what is the solution? There is only one solution, ban and confiscation of ALL of these weapons by every citizen. If that is the road you want to go down then fine by me. As a matter of fact I'm more than happy to put you in charge of the process. You up to the challenge?

Again, it was done previously and it worked.

I'm adding a wrinkle that wasn't included before, the safe keeping and use of these weapons, including those still privately owned, at a well regulated gun range.

Banning sale of the weapons is the first and easiest piece. Definition can be expansive enough to cover anything close, size of magazine, speed of delivery of bullets, etc, as well as with specific examples. Second piece is a buyback program. Third piece is a confiscation and fine regime with scofflaws. Note, again, that a viable alternative is legal registration and safekeeping and use at well regulated gun range.

And then there are other common sense gun laws, safe storage, trigger locks, red flag, background checks, concealed and open carry restricted to limited set of public, with training and specific need.

I can only state my own opinion on this issue. I'm a huge 2nd amendment guy. I'm also a huge advocate as to going forward that to buy whatever you folks think an assault weapon is that a tighter set of guidelines should apply. That means 50 states figuring out those guidelines is a states issue. You can't outright ban them. The reason you can't I have pointed out here numerous times. If you ban purchase and ownership of all AR-15 type weapons defining that as an assault weapon .. you have to ban the purchase and ownership of an M1 Garand, a semi automatic assault rifle. I ask the same question one more time... how do you define what an assault weapon is?

Do you have an issue with the prior legal definition in the prior national ban?
Are you saying that it needs to be updated or expanded?
Or do you just think it wasn't inclusive enough back then?

Is the "M1 Garand, a semi-automatic assault rifle" used for "assault"?
Is it needed for anything else?
I know it's been around since 1936 and was for many decades the weapon of choice for military "battle" purposes, but, given its weight, it ain't an ideal hunting rifle...so, keep it at the well regulated gun range.

I have no issue with banning sale for any other purpose.

That said, if a good case can be made that the M1 is only semi-automatic, has far less capacity and stopping power than an AR-15, and is regularly used for varmint hunting, I'm also ok with drawing the "assault" weapon ban definition more narrowly. Indeed, most discussions of this topic differentiate between an "assault" weapon and a "battle" rifle based on those factors.

But I'm also ok with regulating the M1 and its ilk to be required to safely stored, etc, used only for hunting with a hunting license, if that's where the line is drawn...but I don't really think it's a needed weapon given better alternatives for hunting purposes and its potential ill use otherwise. Again, gun range.

BTW, gun ranges would be a good business opportunity...

Your last sentence is the one part of your post I agree with.
Encouraging people and establishing responsibly run rifle ranges for all of these gun owners who legally own these weapons and can non judgementally go and shoot them to their hearts content is really none of your business MD

To bust your balls MD.. you make this so very easy... What the heck is a " battle rifle" ? Are you making this turd up or what? So MD... what is an assault rifle??? I want YOUR opinion in your words...tell me what an assault weapon is.

[cradleandshoot]

C&S, good to hear from you. Pretty sure Mr. Sturgeon legally purchased his weapon, then killed his co-workers. They should have been armed while banking, I guess. Or at least wearing flak vests. Just careless of them, right? Ts & Ps.

It is good to be back on a limited basis. My question to you still stands. Is there a solution? I'm reminded of that old adage that everybody complains about the weather but nobody does anything about it. If a person is so mentally screwed up they are willing to go down in a hail of bullets the weapon being used is not the biggest issue that society has to deal with.

cradle, I was wondering when you would weigh in.

Hope you and your family are doing well.

On this, yes, it's NOT difficult to define the weapons to be banned (other than at licensed gun ranges), as we've done it (ban of assault weapons) before and it was effective.

This country does NOT have greater issues of mental health, we have hugely greater access to weapons that kill many victims very quickly. Easily Legally purchased, easily stolen. Way, way too many.

This argument has been repeated again and again, but if you want to choose to ignore it, fine.

You first have to define what an assault weapon is. Until that is accomplished your simply cherry picking some weapons while ignoring others. I'm not ignoring anything MD. I'm only asking the same question...what is the solution? There is only one solution, ban and confiscation of ALL of these weapons by every citizen. If that is the road you want to go down then fine by me. As a matter of fact I'm more than happy to put you in charge of the process. You up to the challenge?

Again, it was done previously and it worked.

I'm adding a wrinkle that wasn't included before, the safe keeping and use of these weapons, including those still privately owned, at a well regulated gun range.

Banning sale of the weapons is the first and easiest piece. Definition can be expansive enough to cover anything close, size of magazine, speed of delivery of bullets, etc, as well as with specific examples. Second piece is a buyback program. Third piece is a confiscation and fine regime with scofflaws. Note, again, that a viable alternative is legal registration and safekeeping and use at well regulated gun range.

And then there are other common sense gun laws, safe storage, trigger locks, red flag, background checks, concealed and open carry restricted to limited set of public, with training and specific need.

I can only state my own opinion on this issue. I'm a huge 2nd amendment guy. I'm also a huge advocate as to going forward that to buy whatever you folks think an assault weapon is that a tighter set of guidelines should apply. That means 50 states figuring out those guidelines is a states issue. You can't outright ban them. The reason you can't I have pointed out here numerous times. If you ban purchase and ownership of all AR-15 type weapons defining that as an assault weapon .. you have to ban the purchase and ownership of an M1 Garand, a semi automatic assault rifle. I ask the same question one more time... how do you define what an assault weapon is?

Do you have an issue with the prior legal definition in the prior national ban?
Are you saying that it needs to be updated or expanded?
Or do you just think it wasn't inclusive enough back then?

Is the "M1 Garand, a semi-automatic assault rifle" used for "assault"?
Is it needed for anything else?
I know it's been around since 1936 and was for many decades the weapon of choice for military "battle" purposes, but, given its weight, it ain't an ideal hunting rifle...so, keep it at the well regulated gun range.

I have no issue with banning sale for any other purpose.

That said, if a good case can be made that the M1 is only semi-automatic, has far less capacity and stopping power than an AR-15, and is regularly used for varmint hunting, I'm also ok with drawing the "assault" weapon ban definition more narrowly. Indeed, most discussions of this topic differentiate between an "assault" weapon and a "battle" rifle based on those factors.

But I'm also ok with regulating the M1 and its ilk to be required to safely stored, etc, used only for hunting with a hunting license, if that's where the line is drawn...but I don't really think it's a needed weapon given better alternatives for hunting purposes and its potential ill use otherwise. Again, gun range.

BTW, gun ranges would be a good business opportunity...

... he is playing the favorite game of the gun lobby. The majority of guns manufactured today are semi-auto which are conflated with "assault weapon". I am sure a definition can be made to identify the problematic makes and models. It is as simple as enumeration and keeping the list up to date. Of course this will run into problems with the current SCOTUS. The problem is artificially constrained.

No it is not a game, it is a very simple question. What is an assault weapon? I say this in context of posters on this forum that want assault weapons banned. What weapons are to be banned? Anybody out there have a rough draft on weapons that should be banned and confiscated??? It is not that difficult of a question people. Your the ones making the demands. Be specific, how about a list of weapons you all believe should be confiscated. FTR, I'm not judging, I just want to know what weapons should be banned and confiscated.

[ggait]

No it is not a game, it is a very simple question. What is an assault weapon?

What is a truck? What is an apartment building? What is a house? What is a hospital? What is a bank? What is a broker dealer? What is an investment advisor? What is a security? What is a mutual fund? What is an airplane? What is a motorcycle or bicycle or e-bike? What is a boat? What is a school? What is a doctor? What is a lawyer? What is a polling place? What is a church? What is a drug? What is a supplement? What is a radio station? What is a union?

In order to regulate anything, you have to define legally the thing to be regulated. We have thousands of definitions in the law like these. It is a common process. Pick up any existing regulatory law and read it. You know what almost all of them start with? A definitions section.

There would be nothing novel or complex to define a particular type of weapon that would be subject to a particular type of regulation. We already have plenty of definitions already for weapons -- pistol, rifle, machine gun, etc.

Defining what an "X Weapon" is for the purpose of a proposed law is a completely generic exercise. Much much simpler than defining the things listed above.

This claim (it is impossible to define!!) is literally the weakest sauce lame argument you could possibly make against regulating a particular weapon. And if an enacted definition turns out to be not quite right, then it is easy to amend the definition in light of experience of new technology developments.

I thought you were taking a break CS? Be well.

[runrussellrun]

No it is not a game, it is a very simple question. What is an assault weapon?

What is a truck? What is an apartment building? What is a house? What is a hospital? What is a bank? What is a broker dealer? What is an investment advior? What is an airplane? What is a motorcycle or bicycle or e-bike? What is a boat? What is a school? What is a doctor? What is a lawyer? What is a polling place? What is a church? What is a security? What is a drug? What is a supplement? What is a radio station?

In order to regulate anything, you have to define legally the thing to be regulated. We have thousands of definitions in the law like these. It is a common process. Pick up any existing regulatory law and read it. You know what almost all of them start with? A definitions section.

There would be nothing novel or complex to define a particular type of weapon that would be subject to a particular type of regulation. We already have plenty of definitions already for weapons -- pistol, rifle, machine gun, etc.

Defining what an "X Weapon" is for the purpose of a proposed law is a completely generic exercise. Much much simpler than defining the things listed above.

This claim (it is impossible to define!!) is literally the weakest sauce lame argument you could possibly make against regulating a particular weapon.

I thought you were taking a break CS? Be well.

So simple........yet the request, a simple one at that, which you agree, since, they are your words and the generic exercise to actually provide a "DEFINITION" section, in the first place.

BAN ASSAULT WEAPONS.......vague

BAN ALL GUNS.......is NOT vague.

assault, legally, has a certain "definition" too.

DUDE.....just follow the already existing law. the second amendment.

every zip code has a FREE to join militia, 28 day "waiting " period, until approval.

can't purchase a gun until one joins the FREE militia

much easier to start with this. SInce, it IS the law.

BAM.....federal law.....NO ONE....... may purchase a firearm of any kind, or any ammunition of any kind, unless they are registered members of their local militia. GUN registration is NOT required, just the human operating it. (give until first day of fall , after Labor Day, for people to comply. )

Biden could do it with exec. order, since the "militia" part is already part of the law. totally serious. How hard IS this to do? not at all. Register to vote , join the militia too.

but, dang it.....ID's are racist.

[OCanada]

Horse pucky

[ggait]

So simple........yet the request, a simple one at that, which you agree, since, they are your words and the generic exercise to actually provide a "DEFINITION" section, in the first place.

Dude, it is called legislation. Stop being an obstreperous know nothing.

You don't base a law on a vague undefined term. You write a law defines exactly what is/is not covered. If you can define what a truck or a boat is, you can define what an "X Weapon" is.

And many such definitions already exist since multiple jurisdictions have banned assault style weapons. Ten U.S. states have those laws/definitions. The 1994 federal law also had a definition. Canada, EU, Australia, NZ and the UK have those laws/definitions too. Look them up -- you can find them all with the google machine.

Regulating certain types of semi-auto weapons is not a definitional problem. Which you obviously know. It is a political issue.

Cheers doofus.

[PizzaSnake]

No it is not a game, it is a very simple question. What is an assault weapon?

What is a truck? What is an apartment building? What is a house? What is a hospital? What is a bank? What is a broker dealer? What is an investment advior? What is an airplane? What is a motorcycle or bicycle or e-bike? What is a boat? What is a school? What is a doctor? What is a lawyer? What is a polling place? What is a church? What is a security? What is a drug? What is a supplement? What is a radio station?

In order to regulate anything, you have to define legally the thing to be regulated. We have thousands of definitions in the law like these. It is a common process. Pick up any existing regulatory law and read it. You know what almost all of them start with? A definitions section.

There would be nothing novel or complex to define a particular type of weapon that would be subject to a particular type of regulation. We already have plenty of definitions already for weapons -- pistol, rifle, machine gun, etc.

Defining what an "X Weapon" is for the purpose of a proposed law is a completely generic exercise. Much much simpler than defining the things listed above.

This claim (it is impossible to define!!) is literally the weakest sauce lame argument you could possibly make against regulating a particular weapon.

I thought you were taking a break CS? Be well.

So simple........yet the request, a simple one at that, which you agree, since, they are your words and the generic exercise to actually provide a "DEFINITION" section, in the first place.

BAN ASSAULT WEAPONS.......vague

BAN ALL GUNS.......is NOT vague.

assault, legally, has a certain "definition" too.

DUDE.....just follow the already existing law. the second amendment.

every zip code has a FREE to join militia, 28 day "waiting " period, until approval.

can't purchase a gun until one joins the FREE militia

much easier to start with this. SInce, it IS the law.

BAM.....federal law.....NO ONE....... may purchase a firearm of any kind, or any ammunition of any kind, unless they are registered members of their local militia. GUN registration is NOT required, just the human operating it. (give until first day of fall , after Labor Day, for people to comply. )

Biden could do it with exec. order, since the "militia" part is already part of the law. totally serious. How hard IS this to do? not at all. Register to vote , join the militia too.

but, dang it.....ID's are racist.

Actually, militias are not “free to join.”

“As the fact sheets explain, the U.S. Constitution and state laws use the term “militia” to refer to all able-bodied residents between certain ages who may be called forth by the government when there is a specific need; but private individuals have no legal authority to activate themselves for militia duty outside the authority of the federal or state government. The fact sheets also explain that the Second Amendment does not protect private militia activity, pointing to decisions from the U.S. Supreme Court in 1886 and 2008 making clear that the Second Amendment “does not prevent the prohibition of private paramilitary organizations.””

https://www.law.georgetown.edu/icap/our ... rotection/

[youthathletics]

Great News....
Virginia teacher shot by a 6-year-old student files a $40 million lawsuit
https://www.npr.org/2023/04/03/11677082 ... ws-lawsuit



More good news, that may move the needle: The mom of the 6-year-old who shot his teacher is being charged with child neglect:https://www.npr.org/2023/04/11/11691931 ... rginia-mom

[cradleandshoot]

No it is not a game, it is a very simple question. What is an assault weapon?

What is a truck? What is an apartment building? What is a house? What is a hospital? What is a bank? What is a broker dealer? What is an investment advisor? What is a security? What is a mutual fund? What is an airplane? What is a motorcycle or bicycle or e-bike? What is a boat? What is a school? What is a doctor? What is a lawyer? What is a polling place? What is a church? What is a drug? What is a supplement? What is a radio station? What is a union?

In order to regulate anything, you have to define legally the thing to be regulated. We have thousands of definitions in the law like these. It is a common process. Pick up any existing regulatory law and read it. You know what almost all of them start with? A definitions section.

There would be nothing novel or complex to define a particular type of weapon that would be subject to a particular type of regulation. We already have plenty of definitions already for weapons -- pistol, rifle, machine gun, etc.

Defining what an "X Weapon" is for the purpose of a proposed law is a completely generic exercise. Much much simpler than defining the things listed above.

This claim (it is impossible to define!!) is literally the weakest sauce lame argument you could possibly make against regulating a particular weapon. And if an enacted definition turns out to be not quite right, then it is easy to amend the definition in light of experience of new technology developments.

I thought you were taking a break CS? Be well.

The discussion is not about trucks though. If the objective is wanting assault weapons banned then there will need to be clear guidelines as to what weapon is being banned. I know you think I'm trying to semantic. I'm not playing games. It doesn't matter to me if these weapons are banned and confiscated or not. The question still stands.. who defines what an assault rifle is?

[ardilla secreta]

Mayor says Louisville shooter’s rifle ‘will be back on the streets’ under state law
The mayor of Louisville has said Kentucky law would make him a criminal if he destroys the assault-style rifle used by a gunman in Monday’s killing of five bank employees in his city.

The killer’s rifle was confiscated after police shot him dead, and Kentucky law requires officers to send it to state police officials to sell at auction.

How sweet. You will soon be able to by a murder weapon for your collection. Kentucky is so cool.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... SApp_Other

[ggait]

If the objective is wanting assault weapons banned then there will need to be clear guidelines as to what weapon is being banned. I know you think I'm trying to semantic. I'm not playing games. It doesn't matter to me if these weapons are banned and confiscated or not. The question still stands.. who defines what an assault rifle is?

Dude -- there's scores of laws, domestically and internationally, that define what it is. They all are quite clear, as all legislation needs to be.

So the answer is an assault weapon is whatever the regulating statue says they are. The people who do the defining are the people that write and pass the legislation. The same as for literally every piece of legislation enacted.

For example, below NYS defines assault weapon as follows:

"Assault weapon" means

(a) a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable
magazine and has at least one of the following characteristics:

(i) a folding or telescoping stock;

(ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of
the weapon;

(iii) a thumbhole stock;

(iv) a second handgrip or a protruding grip that can be held by the
non-trigger hand;

(v) a bayonet mount;

(vi) a flash suppressor, muzzle break, muzzle compensator, or threaded
barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor, muzzle break, or
muzzle compensator;

(vii) a grenade launcher.

Is there a point you are trying to make? As noted before, creating a definition of a particular type of gun is not some mystical impossible exercise. You just say what it is.

[ggait]

And here's what the current Dem Senate bill would propose as the definition.

You may/may not agree with the definition. But the defining exercise seems to be pretty simple and manage-able.

So your point on this is what exactly? Or are you just being a troll?



“(40) The term ‘semiautomatic assault weapon’ means any of the following, regardless of country of manufacture or caliber of ammunition accepted:

“(A) A semiautomatic rifle that—

“(i) has the capacity to accept a detachable ammunition feeding device; and

“(ii) has any 1 of the following:

“(I) A pistol grip.

“(II) A forward grip.

“(III) A folding, telescoping, or detachable stock, or a stock that is otherwise foldable or adjustable in a manner that operates to reduce the length, size, or any other dimension, or otherwise enhances the concealability, of the weapon.

“(IV) A grenade launcher.

“(V) A barrel shroud.

“(VI) A threaded barrel.

“(B) A semiautomatic rifle that has a fixed ammunition feeding device with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds, except for an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.

“(C) Any part, combination of parts, component, device, attachment, or accessory that is designed or functions to accelerate the rate of fire of a semiautomatic firearm but not convert the semiautomatic firearm into a machinegun.

“(D) A semiautomatic pistol that—

“(i) has an ammunition feeding device that is not a fixed ammunition feeding device; and

“(ii) has any 1 of the following:

“(I) A threaded barrel.

“(II) A second pistol grip.

“(III) A barrel shroud.

“(IV) The capacity to accept a detachable ammunition feeding device at some location outside of the pistol grip.

“(V) A semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm.

“(VI) A manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more when unloaded.

“(VII) A buffer tube, stabilizing brace or similar component that protrudes horizontally behind the pistol grip, and is designed or redesigned to allow or facilitate a firearm to be fired from the shoulder.

“(E) A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed ammunition feeding device that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.

“(F) A semiautomatic shotgun that—

“(i) has the capacity to accept a detachable ammunition feeding device or a fixed ammunition feeding device that has the capacity to accept more than 5 rounds; and

“(ii) has any 1 of the following:

“(I) A folding, telescoping, or detachable stock.

“(II) A pistol grip or bird's head grip.

“(III) A forward grip.

“(IV) A grenade launcher.

“(G) Any shotgun with a revolving cylinder.

“(H) All of the following rifles, copies, duplicates, variants, or altered facsimiles with the capability of any such weapon thereof:

“(i) All AK types, including the following:

“(I) AK, AK47, AK47S, AK–74, AKM, AKS, ARM, MAK90, MISR, NHM90, NHM91, Rock River Arms LAR–47, SA85, SA93, Vector Arms AK–47, VEPR, WASR–10, and WUM.

“(II) IZHMASH Saiga AK.

“(III) MAADI AK47 and ARM.

“(IV) Norinco 56S, 56S2, 84S, and 86S.

“(V) Poly Technologies AK47 and AKS.

“(VI) SKS with a detachable ammunition feeding device.

“(ii) All AR types, including the following:

“(I) AR–10.

“(II) AR–15.

“(III) Alexander Arms Overmatch Plus 16.

“(IV) Armalite M15 22LR Carbine.

“(V) Armalite M15–T.

“(VI) Barrett REC7.

“(VII) Beretta AR–70.

“(VIII) Black Rain Ordnance Recon Scout.

“(IX) Bushmaster ACR.

“(X) Bushmaster Carbon 15.

“(XI) Bushmaster MOE series.

“(XII) Bushmaster XM15.

“(XIII) Chiappa Firearms MFour rifles.

“(XIV) Colt Match Target rifles.

“(XV) CORE Rifle Systems CORE15 rifles.

“(XVI) Daniel Defense M4A1 rifles.

“(XVII) Devil Dog Arms 15 Series rifles.

“(XVIII) Diamondback DB15 rifles.

“(XIX) DoubleStar AR rifles.

“(XX) DPMS Tactical rifles.

“(XXI) DSA Inc. ZM–4 Carbine.

“(XXII) Heckler & Koch MR556.

“(XXIII) High Standard HSA–15 rifles.

“(XXIV) Jesse James Nomad AR–15 rifle.

“(XXV) Knight’s Armament SR–15.

“(XXVI) Lancer L15 rifles.

“(XXVII) MGI Hydra Series rifles.

“(XXVIII) Mossberg MMR Tactical rifles.

“(XXIX) Noreen Firearms BN 36 rifle.

“(XXX) Olympic Arms.

“(XXXI) POF USA P415.

“(XXXII) Precision Firearms AR rifles.

“(XXXIII) Remington R–15 rifles.

“(XXXIV) Rhino Arms AR rifles.

“(XXXV) Rock River Arms LAR–15.

“(XXXVI) Sig Sauer SIG516 rifles and MCX rifles.

“(XXXVII) Smith & Wesson M&P15 rifles.

“(XXXVIII) Stag Arms AR rifles.

“(XXXIX) Sturm, Ruger & Co. SR556 and AR–556 rifles.

“(XL) Uselton Arms Air-Lite M–4 rifles.

“(XLI) Windham Weaponry AR rifles.

“(XLII) WMD Guns Big Beast.

“(XLIII) Yankee Hill Machine Company, Inc. YHM–15 rifles.

“(iii) Barrett M107A1.

“(iv) Barrett M82A1.

“(v) Beretta CX4 Storm.

“(vi) Calico Liberty Series.

“(vii) CETME Sporter.

“(viii) Daewoo K–1, K–2, Max 1, Max 2, AR 100, and AR 110C.

“(ix) Fabrique Nationale/FN Herstal FAL, LAR, 22 FNC, 308 Match, L1A1 Sporter, PS90, SCAR, and FS2000.

“(x) Feather Industries AT–9.

“(xi) Galil Model AR and Model ARM.

“(xii) Hi-Point Carbine.

“(xiii) HK–91, HK–93, HK–94, HK–PSG–1, and HK USC.

“(xiv) IWI TAVOR, Galil ACE rifle.

“(xv) Kel-Tec Sub-2000, SU–16, and RFB.

“(xvi) SIG AMT, SIG PE–57, Sig Sauer SG 550, Sig Sauer SG 551, and SIG MCX.

“(xvii) Springfield Armory SAR–48.

“(xviii) Steyr AUG.

“(xix) Sturm, Ruger & Co. Mini-14 Tactical Rifle M–14/20CF.

“(xx) All Thompson rifles, including the following:

“(I) Thompson M1SB.

“(II) Thompson T1100D.

“(III) Thompson T150D.

“(IV) Thompson T1B.

“(V) Thompson T1B100D.

“(VI) Thompson T1B50D.

“(VII) Thompson T1BSB.

“(VIII) Thompson T1–C.

“(IX) Thompson T1D.

“(X) Thompson T1SB.

“(XI) Thompson T5.

“(XII) Thompson T5100D.

“(XIII) Thompson TM1.

“(XIV) Thompson TM1C.

“(xxi) UMAREX UZI rifle.

“(xxii) UZI Mini Carbine, UZI Model A Carbine, and UZI Model B Carbine.

“(xxiii) Valmet M62S, M71S, and M78.

“(xxiv) Vector Arms UZI Type.

“(xxv) Weaver Arms Nighthawk.

“(xxvi) Wilkinson Arms Linda Carbine.

“(I) All of the following pistols, copies, duplicates, variants, or altered facsimiles with the capability of any such weapon thereof:

“(i) All AK types, including the following:

“(I) Centurion 39 AK pistol.

“(II) CZ Scorpion pistol.

“(III) Draco AK–47 pistol.

“(IV) HCR AK–47 pistol.

“(V) IO Inc. Hellpup AK–47 pistol.

“(VI) Krinkov pistol.

“(VII) Mini Draco AK–47 pistol.

“(VIII) PAP M92 pistol.

“(IX) Yugo Krebs Krink pistol.

“(ii) All AR types, including the following:

“(I) American Spirit AR–15 pistol.

“(II) Bushmaster Carbon 15 pistol.

“(III) Chiappa Firearms M4 Pistol GEN II.

“(IV) CORE Rifle Systems CORE15 Roscoe pistol.

“(V) Daniel Defense MK18 pistol.

“(VI) DoubleStar Corporation AR pistol.

“(VII) DPMS AR–15 pistol.

“(VIII) Jesse James Nomad AR–15 pistol.

“(IX) Olympic Arms AR–15 pistol.

“(X) Osprey Armament MK–18 pistol.

“(XI) POF USA AR pistols.

“(XII) Rock River Arms LAR 15 pistol.

“(XIII) Uselton Arms Air-Lite M–4 pistol.

“(iii) Calico pistols.

“(iv) DSA SA58 PKP FAL pistol.

“(v) Encom MP–9 and MP–45.

“(vi) Heckler & Koch model SP–89 pistol.

“(vii) Intratec AB–10, TEC–22 Scorpion, TEC–9, and TEC–DC9.

“(viii) IWI Galil Ace pistol, UZI PRO pistol.

“(ix) Kel-Tec PLR 16 pistol.

“(x) All MAC types, including the following:

“(I) MAC–10.

“(II) MAC–11.

“(III) Masterpiece Arms MPA A930 Mini Pistol, MPA460 Pistol, MPA Tactical Pistol, and MPA Mini Tactical Pistol.

“(IV) Military Armament Corp. Ingram M–11.

“(V) Velocity Arms VMAC.

“(xi) Sig Sauer P556 pistol.

“(xii) Sites Spectre.

“(xiii) All Thompson types, including the following:

“(I) Thompson TA510D.

“(II) Thompson TA5.

“(xiv) All UZI types, including Micro-UZI.

“(J) All of the following shotguns, copies, duplicates, variants, or altered facsimiles with the capability of any such weapon thereof:

“(i) DERYA Anakon MC–1980, Anakon SD12.

“(ii) Doruk Lethal shotguns.

“(iii) Franchi LAW–12 and SPAS 12.

“(iv) All IZHMASH Saiga 12 types, including the following:

“(I) IZHMASH Saiga 12.

“(II) IZHMASH Saiga 12S.

“(III) IZHMASH Saiga 12S EXP–01.

“(IV) IZHMASH Saiga 12K.

“(V) IZHMASH Saiga 12K–030.

“(VI) IZHMASH Saiga 12K–040 Taktika.

“(v) Streetsweeper.

“(vi) Striker 12.

“(K) All belt-fed semiautomatic firearms, including TNW M2HB and FN M2495.

“(L) Any combination of parts from which a firearm described in subparagraphs (A) through (K) can be assembled.

“(M) The frame or receiver of a rifle or shotgun described in subparagraph (G), (H), (J), or (K).

“(41) The term ‘large capacity ammunition feeding device’—

“(A) means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device, including any such device joined or coupled with another in any manner, that has an overall capacity of, or that can be readily restored, changed, or converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition; and

“(B) does not include an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.”.

[MDlaxfan76]

C&S, good to hear from you. Pretty sure Mr. Sturgeon legally purchased his weapon, then killed his co-workers. They should have been armed while banking, I guess. Or at least wearing flak vests. Just careless of them, right? Ts & Ps.

It is good to be back on a limited basis. My question to you still stands. Is there a solution? I'm reminded of that old adage that everybody complains about the weather but nobody does anything about it. If a person is so mentally screwed up they are willing to go down in a hail of bullets the weapon being used is not the biggest issue that society has to deal with.

cradle, I was wondering when you would weigh in.

Hope you and your family are doing well.

On this, yes, it's NOT difficult to define the weapons to be banned (other than at licensed gun ranges), as we've done it (ban of assault weapons) before and it was effective.

This country does NOT have greater issues of mental health, we have hugely greater access to weapons that kill many victims very quickly. Easily Legally purchased, easily stolen. Way, way too many.

This argument has been repeated again and again, but if you want to choose to ignore it, fine.

You first have to define what an assault weapon is. Until that is accomplished your simply cherry picking some weapons while ignoring others. I'm not ignoring anything MD. I'm only asking the same question...what is the solution? There is only one solution, ban and confiscation of ALL of these weapons by every citizen. If that is the road you want to go down then fine by me. As a matter of fact I'm more than happy to put you in charge of the process. You up to the challenge?

Again, it was done previously and it worked.

I'm adding a wrinkle that wasn't included before, the safe keeping and use of these weapons, including those still privately owned, at a well regulated gun range.

Banning sale of the weapons is the first and easiest piece. Definition can be expansive enough to cover anything close, size of magazine, speed of delivery of bullets, etc, as well as with specific examples. Second piece is a buyback program. Third piece is a confiscation and fine regime with scofflaws. Note, again, that a viable alternative is legal registration and safekeeping and use at well regulated gun range.

And then there are other common sense gun laws, safe storage, trigger locks, red flag, background checks, concealed and open carry restricted to limited set of public, with training and specific need.

I can only state my own opinion on this issue. I'm a huge 2nd amendment guy. I'm also a huge advocate as to going forward that to buy whatever you folks think an assault weapon is that a tighter set of guidelines should apply. That means 50 states figuring out those guidelines is a states issue. You can't outright ban them. The reason you can't I have pointed out here numerous times. If you ban purchase and ownership of all AR-15 type weapons defining that as an assault weapon .. you have to ban the purchase and ownership of an M1 Garand, a semi automatic assault rifle. I ask the same question one more time... how do you define what an assault weapon is?

Do you have an issue with the prior legal definition in the prior national ban?
Are you saying that it needs to be updated or expanded?
Or do you just think it wasn't inclusive enough back then?

Is the "M1 Garand, a semi-automatic assault rifle" used for "assault"?
Is it needed for anything else?
I know it's been around since 1936 and was for many decades the weapon of choice for military "battle" purposes, but, given its weight, it ain't an ideal hunting rifle...so, keep it at the well regulated gun range.

I have no issue with banning sale for any other purpose.

That said, if a good case can be made that the M1 is only semi-automatic, has far less capacity and stopping power than an AR-15, and is regularly used for varmint hunting, I'm also ok with drawing the "assault" weapon ban definition more narrowly. Indeed, most discussions of this topic differentiate between an "assault" weapon and a "battle" rifle based on those factors.

But I'm also ok with regulating the M1 and its ilk to be required to safely stored, etc, used only for hunting with a hunting license, if that's where the line is drawn...but I don't really think it's a needed weapon given better alternatives for hunting purposes and its potential ill use otherwise. Again, gun range.

BTW, gun ranges would be a good business opportunity...

Your last sentence is the one part of your post I agree with.
Encouraging people and establishing responsibly run rifle ranges for all of these gun owners who legally own these weapons and can non judgementally go and shoot them to their hearts content is really none of your business MD

To bust your balls MD.. you make this so very easy... What the heck is a " battle rifle" ? Are you making this turd up or what? So MD... what is an assault rifle??? I want YOUR opinion in your words...tell me what an assault weapon is.

Just referring to the way my google search reference the M1, relative to an assault rifle. You wanna get all twisted in knots, have at it, but legislating this would not be difficult.

Again, I'm ok with these sorts of weapons being stored and used at well regulated gun ranges; just nowhere else... though in the event of the "zombie apocalypse" or such cataclysmic need, then go get'em.

[MDlaxfan76]

Thanks ggait, for engaging with this "definition" baloney.

[cradleandshoot]

If the objective is wanting assault weapons banned then there will need to be clear guidelines as to what weapon is being banned. I know you think I'm trying to semantic. I'm not playing games. It doesn't matter to me if these weapons are banned and confiscated or not. The question still stands.. who defines what an assault rifle is?

Dude -- there's scores of laws, domestically and internationally, that define what it is. They all are quite clear, as all legislation needs to be.

So the answer is an assault weapon is whatever the regulating statue says they are. The people who do the defining are the people that write and pass the legislation. The same as for literally every piece of legislation enacted.

For example, below NYS defines assault weapon as follows:

"Assault weapon" means

(a) a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable
magazine and has at least one of the following characteristics:

(i) a folding or telescoping stock;

(ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of
the weapon;

(iii) a thumbhole stock;

(iv) a second handgrip or a protruding grip that can be held by the
non-trigger hand;

(v) a bayonet mount;

(vi) a flash suppressor, muzzle break, muzzle compensator, or threaded
barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor, muzzle break, or
muzzle compensator;

(vii) a grenade launcher.

Is there a point you are trying to make? As noted before, creating a definition of a particular type of gun is not some mystical impossible exercise. You just say what it is.

Read the SAFE Act passed and signed by Gov. Cuomo. It created more confusion and more problems than it solved. It outlawed some AR15 type weapons and allowed others if they met a confusing set of parameters. It did nothing to prevent weapons enthusiasts from purchasing the Ruger mini 14. Fact is the folks at Ruger made a lot of money selling these rifles in NYS. Explain to me counselor HOW the Ruger mini 14 differs from the standard AR-15 type weapon? I could purchase one today if I wanted to. I could not purchase many types of AR15 type weapons strictly forbidden by the SAFE Act. I appreciate the detailed list you composed above. You are the only poster who answered my very simple question. IMO the attempt to ban and or confiscate these weapons makes an interesting philosophical argument. The reality is that making this happen is an effort in futility until the 2nd amendment is modified or goes away all together.There are untold 100s of millions of these weapons already in circulation. These folks will never take a shine to ever giving them up.

[cradleandshoot]

FTR, I am not an advocate of these weapons. I had to laugh that by asking this question some folks interpreted that as my being a supporter of these weapons. I would strongly discourage anyone from owning one. I do understand the fascination that draws people to these weapons. I remember back during basic training when we all learned about our M16s. One of the cadre made a very blunt observation about the evolution of the 5.56 round. It was designed to kill a human being in a very lethal manner. The bottom line is that it is a weapon of war. It does what it was designed to do. Five years ago my opinion would have been different than today. I have become as frustrated as anyone in this forum about this round and this weapon becoming the first choice of mentally unstable people that want to kill as many people as quickly as possible. If banning them is the solution I'm all on board. How you go about doing that in a country that reveres and loves these weapons is a very tall mountain to climb. Maybe even someday you folks will take just as serious a position about illegal weapons that are so prevalent all over our country and kill people every damn day.
Thanks to all of you for trying to enlighten me.

[cradleandshoot]

Thanks ggait, for engaging with this "definition" baloney.

The " definition" baloney is a big deal MD. Look no further than the SAFE Act signed in to law by Gov. Cuomo. His goal was to ban the sale of these weapons in NYS. Why was that so MD?? Because they could not define what an assault weapon is. An interesting sidenote to the SAFE Act, many local sheriff's in upstate NY and the southern tier basically refuse to enforce it.

[MDlaxfan76]

Thanks ggait, for engaging with this "definition" baloney.

The " definition" baloney is a big deal MD. Look no further than the SAFE Act signed in to law by Gov. Cuomo. His goal was to ban the sale of these weapons in NYS. Why was that so MD?? Because they could not define what an assault weapon is. An interesting sidenote to the SAFE Act, many local sheriff's in upstate NY and the southern tier basically refuse to enforce it.

Read ggaits posts.