Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
The Futility Of An “Assault Weapons Ban,” In One Photo
Here is a photo of three AR-15 rifles owned by my friend Tamara, the Handgun Editor at Shooting Illustrated. Two of them would be considered “Assault Weapons” under the terms of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, one is fully compliant and not considered to be an “assault weapon.”
Which is which, and why?
This is the problem with trying to make a law about things we don’t like: laws require rules, and not liking the idea of an “assault weapon” in civilian hands is a feeling, not a rule. People can march in the streets and rant about the NRA all they want but, at the end of the day, when laws have to be written, they must be written around regulations, not emotions.
Published in Guns
The one in the middle appears to have a non-collapsible stock, so it is not an “assault rifle” per the 1994 ban.
The one in the middle appears to have a non-collapsible stock, so it is not an “assault rifle” per the 1994 ban. Am I right?
And darned if I know how my comment got posted twice . . .
That is one of the reasons. There are two more…
The one on the left also has a non-collapsible stock, but it is not AWB compliant.
The one in the middle appears to lack a bayonet stud too.
The middle and right ones have secondary grips on the barrel. Is that it?
The one on the right does not have the dust cover closed, which is really just a reason for your friend to KNOCK ‘EM OUT! GIMME TWUNNY-FI PUSHUPS!
But the whole point is that they once they establish the unconstitutional principle that they can ban one or two indicia of assaultness, then ban them all: pistol grips, detachable magazines, threaded barrels, etc.
May I use the photo on Facebook, please?
That’s reason #2… one more.
Nope.
Please do.
It is a new Ricochet “feature.” It has recently happened to me several times, and to some others.
Collapsible stock? Or nature of the flash suppressor?
Flash suppressor missing on the middle one.
Ding! The middle one has a standard A2 muzzle brake, not a flash suppressor.
Well, none of them had grenade launchers, so I knew that couldn’t be it.
This is the quintessential example of most of what is wrong with the way the Left views the world. They cannot get past what things look like, and how they make them feel.
Those things aren’t meaningless, feelings are important. But, as you astutely point out, they are meaningless when it comes to making rules, and setting policies.
Lefties are entertaining, with their marching and those drum circles and stuff. And sometimes they are downright adorable. (The rioting, probably not so much.)
But they should be kept away from the decision making, the law writing. Otherwise we will wind up with things like “hate crimes”, and affirmative action, and Headstart, and “assault” weapons. (This list could get long, so I’ll stop.)
I also voted for the middle one, because I could tell it was less killy, and I would be less dead if I were shot with it.
It just gave me that feeling.
The one on the right has a green sling. Total giveaway.
Why is it futile? The aim of the left is to confiscate guns, maybe relegating them to highly regulated shooting clubs for the upper classes.
“Gun guy” expertise is invaluable. First, knowing that Americans are out there with armories supplementing my pipsqueak Springfield XD is simply a guarantee of freedom. Second, that “gun guy” expertise puts liberals on their back foot in nearly every debate and helps create the band of brothers (and sisters) camaraderie that allows 2nd Amendment activists to prevail.
But none of this matters to leftists. The assault weapons ban is just one political step towards the day when “regulated” can be stripped of its original meaning and “militia” can be read as the “National Guard.”
It’s not unlike the 20-week abortion ban. I don’t support it because I hope to establish 20-weeks one day longer than I can help establish 19-weeks.
A Planned Parenthood physician could show me photos of 20-week old fetuses at very different states of development and claim the 20-week ban has no basis in ontogeny. She’d be right. It’s all murder to me. And for leftists guns are all murder to them.
This is not a knock on gun culture. Or a knock on condescending, dismissive attacks on the ignorance of liberal gun grabbers. It’s all essential to winning this political battle. But it is a political battle. Nearly every battle the left has won has been a triumph over The Constitution, common sense and practical reality.
Gunsplaining!
And none had chainsaw bayonets either which USA Today evidently thinks is a real thing.
I’m embarrassed that my AR-pattern collection does not include any underslung 12ga shotguns as they showed. It would seem handy for my 3 gun competitions though with a 10 round magazine tube, I’m looking at a 7-8′ long rifle; might as well just switch to a pike or something.
But in all seriousness, the complete lack of knowledge among gun control devotees is seen not as ignorance but as a point of pride. Tragically, I don’t feel this is any less than many of the other regulations I see come out of national or state legislatures on other technical issues.
If you can ban one you can ban them all.
Right. The danger in Kevin’s argument is that the GC crowd will say all three should be banned. Instead of “2 of these criteria” it will be “any of these criteria”.
I posted this pic on social media a few years ago when friends from the Albany, NY, area were visiting. Left to right, a Mini-14, a Mini-30, an AK (SGL-21), and an AR (S/W M and P 15). IIRC, my friends can purchase the Minis but not the AK or AR. I each case, the rifles function identically (the Mini-30 operation is a bit simpler than the AK), same barrel lengths, same magazine capacity (the Mini-30 has a 20 round magazine in the pic) same ballistics. Assault weapons bans are just the nose under the tent to a total ban, aided by most people’s profound ignorance.
I agree that the picture(s) posted here demonstrate the inherent nonsense of the gun-banners’ arguments, but for the gun-ban advocates, these pics are just evidence that they need to strengthen and broaden the ban. The bottom line is that both side uses the appearance of the gun to bolster their own position, because the essential nature of the gun hasn’t changed, nor has their essential principles.
Does the mini 14 use the same STANAG magazine? I guess I can just google it.
What do all three of these .223/5.56 rifles have in common?
They are not large enough caliber to hunt deer in Virginia. From Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fish regulations “Center fire rifles used for deer or bear must be .23 caliber or larger.”