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
No. I wish. It requires insertion from the front and rocking it back to lock, like an AK. One disadvantage of the platform is it doesn’t have the aftermarket like AR’s do.
Ok. Bummer. But still. I hear good things about it. I’ve never owned one, nor even fired one. Maybe that should be my next gun…
So, if it’s like an AK magazine, does that make it military-grade?
I just found out from Tamara that the rifle on the left has the extendable version of the ACE Skeletal Stock, making it not compliant with the Assault Weapons Ban.
I object when I hear people talk about how my AR-15’s are “military-grade” rifles.
They are MUCH better built than that! :)
I was never a big fan of the AR platform (now I own four), and back in the day the Mini used to be a lower cost alternative to the AR. That’s all changed; way more good AR variants are on the market at low prices. I still prefer some things about the Mini – M1 style safety, for example. The Mini 30 is much nicer to shoot than the AK, IMHO.
It’s nice to have such a surfeit of good choices.
The protruding grip for the non trigger hand would cause the others to be banned. They also want them banned for, “a shroud attached to the barrel, or that partially or completely covers it, allowing the bearer to hold the firearm with the non-trigger hand without being burned…” The want to make it illegal to make the gun safer.
Worse, now that the Marines are changing to Magpul magazines, does that make them weapons of war?