@mudfly said:

which was my primary point, I guess....(the implication that assault weapons are banned).....because they're not.....thats all....

And if its' fully auto that we're talking about.....they've always been banned and it isnt a new/political/liberal/right or left kind of thing.....

The whole assault weapon thing started with all the mass shootings(which have mostly been accomplished with semi automatic weapons) and there are no mass killings Im aware of that utilized fully automatic weapons....

The st. Valentines day massacre was possibly done with Tommy guns.

@calfoxwc said:

assault weapons are already banned, unless you go through a lot of work to

be granted a license to own one.

Another example of term redefinition by liberals.

Not in the middle east. We send them to the enemy by the truckload

@calfoxwc said:

yeah...they ruled the streets with them....(tho, technically the gangsters were civilians, if you think about it).....

Heck...I dont remember the year(in the 80's I think???) but much more recently I remember the cops had to get special legislation just to upgrade their own weapons from the standard issue 38 revolver to semi auto 9mm's and such....and the main argument was that they were being outgunned by the bad guys....(which they were)

Of course, now...thats not nearly as big of an issue....I think most PD's are armed to the teeth and then some.....(as are the bad guys)(and everyone else that wants to be)

@calfoxwc said:

the tommy guns etc were a tragic advantage to the criminals.

No civilians had them, not all that many police I think...at least not

in small towns

They used to sell them out of advertisements in magazines geared towards farmers with pest problems haha. No one at the police or military level saw the value in a full auto pistol caliber carbine. Criminals caught on quick.

No civilians had them, not all that many police I think...at least not

in small towns

@mudfly said:

And that 1989 Bush ban was for imported weapons only...which(to me) is more of a nod to big business than an actual attempt to get dangerous weapons off the street.

The domestic gun companies were definitely behind it. That is why 922r even exists today.

I really wish some of the FNC kits were still imported.

@calfoxwc said:

me too......THAT would be a blast.....(pun intended)....

Think we can thank those old school Capone type gangsters and their Tommy and sub machine guns that shut down all the fun back in the 20's and 30's.....

Although, if we ever had a civil war and anarchy,....

I'd want machine guns....@@

Though I do have an older SKS that will go full auto....at least in short bursts....with just a little skill and some practice at hip shooting. But, yeah, getting a real fully automatic machine gun(for the average guy) is virtually impossible.......(which seems reasonable to me)

And that 1989 Bush ban was for imported weapons only...which(to me) is more of a nod to big business than an actual attempt to get dangerous weapons off the street......

None the less.....glad I still have mine......

which didn't bother me much at all:

Name of firearm Preban federal legal status Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs (AKs) (all models) Imports banned in 1989* Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil Imports banned in 1989* Beretta AR-70 (SC-70) Imports banned in 1989* Colt AR-15 Legal Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN-LAR, FNC Imports banned in 1989* SWD (MAC type) M-10, M-11, M11/9, M12 Legal Steyr AUG Imports banned in 1989* INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9, TEC-22 Legal Revolving cylinder shotguns such as (or similar to) the Street Sweeper andStriker 12

Although, I still want an AR-15. But I'm confused as to 5.56 or 7.62 whatever it is...

it looks to me that the below identified semi-autos also are fully automatic...maybe,

or easily modified to be fully automatic.

Bush's 1989 ban was on the importation of foreign-made, semiautomatic assault rifles deemed not to have "a legitimate sporting use." It did not affect similar but domestically manufactured rifles.^[11]

@mudfly said:

which was my primary point, I guess....(the implication that assault weapons are banned).....because they're not.....thats all....

And if its' fully auto that we're talking about.....they've always been banned and it isnt a new/political/liberal/right or left kind of thing.....

The whole assault weapon thing started with all the mass shootings(which have mostly been accomplished with semi automatic weapons) and there are no mass killings Im aware of that utilized fully automatic weapons....

The amount of background checks and the cost would prohibit your average loon from actually getting a full auto weapon. Class III licenses are a gigantic pain in the balls to get and that doesn't include the cost of the weapon which usually floats around $10k.

I like SBRs and suppressors also have my C&R license so I am familiar with the hoops.

@calfoxwc said:

Not to politicize it....because I too believe this issue crosses political lines(Dems and Repubs both pushed for it).....but "assault weapons" were first legally defined(and banned) in 1989 by the Bush Administration.......and the ensuing 10 year ban was also written and submitted during this same administration, but didnt get voted on and signed into law until just after Clinton took office....

So, it really isnt a "liberal redefinition" as you claim...

It was something done by both sides, back in the day when people(and politicians) could actually discuss an issue for what it is and come together with a solution.....w/o it being a partisan shit pile......

Of course, anti gun civilians in gov wanted to change the meaning...

they didn't want to ban just assault rifles, they also wanted to ban all guns, including shotguns, and pistols.

So "assault weapons" became a bogus reality for liberals.

Revolvers were, and are?, used in the military. I suppose they are also "assault weapons".

Liberals thrive on vague uses and definitions of once-specific terms. Gives them more staying power in the left's culture war.

@logicisforsquares said:

which was my primary point, I guess....(the implication that assault weapons are banned).....because they're not.....thats all....

And if its' fully auto that we're talking about.....they've always been banned and it isnt a new/political/liberal/right or left kind of thing.....

The whole assault weapon thing started with all the mass shootings(which have mostly been accomplished with semi automatic weapons) and there are no mass killings Im aware of that utilized fully automatic weapons....

In any event, the political will is nowhere near what is needed to push for something like that again.

@calfoxwc said:

It has to be semi auto AND have one or more of those other attributes to be defined as an assault weapon.....lots of guns dont have magazines......single shot, chamber load, revolver, etc.....

@logicisforsquares said:

misused?....Im not so sure. Its been used as long as I can remember to describe semi auto's by most people....and more importantly, as defined by law....here is the legal description from wiki....

Assault weapon is a term used in the United States to define specific types offirearms.^[1] The definition varies among regulating jurisdictions, but usually includessemi-automatic firearms with a detachable magazine and a pistol grip, and sometimes other features such as a flash suppressor or barrel shroud.^[1][2] Some firearms are specified by name.^[3] At the time that the now-defunct Federal Assault Weapons Banpassed in 1994, the U.S. Justice Department said, "In general, assault weapons are semiautomatic firearms with a large magazine of ammunition that were designed and configured for rapid fire and combat use."^[3] The origin of the term is muddled and has been attributed to politicians, gun control groups, the media, and the firearms industry itself.^[4][5][6][1] It is sometimes conflated with the term "assault rifle," which refers toselective fire military rifles that can fire in automatic and burst mode.^[5

Fully automatic weapons....ie: machine guns......really were never really legal and have been officially outlawed since 1932, well before the term assault weapon was ever even used.....

The United States Department of Justice said, "In general, assault weapons are semiautomatic firearms with a large magazine of ammunition that were designed and configured for rapid fire and combat use."^[3] Legislative definitions do not include fully automatic weapons, which are regulated separately.

So, call em what you will....but as defined by law, and when the term "assault weapons" was coined.....semi auto's are what the laws, news and people are referring to when using the term assault weapon(at least for the last 30 years)......

which, btw, what gun that has a magazine that isn't interchangeable?

Am I missing something ???

@browns149 said:

Any "semi-automatic" combat weapon with certain features....pistol grip, folding stock, large magazine, interchangeable magazine, suppressor, etc is considered an assault weapon....

If this is true, then I also own assault weapons

That was their point. Make everything sound scary.

If this is true, then I also own assault weapons