Assault Weapons Ban Primer
The Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 (hereinafter AWB) is confusing.
People were led to believe that rifles like this one:
Would be banned. While rifles like this one:
Wouldn’t be. Of course, both rifles above fire 5.56MM ammo, accept magazines with a capacity of 30 (and even more) rounds. Oh, and both of the above rifles are actually not banned by the AWB. The latter rifle doesn’t look as mean. Continuing with the rifles that look evil theme, look at this one:
The above rifle is legal to own:
This one isn’t:
Alert readers will note that this is a picture of the same rifle mentioned above. What then is the difference? The first rifle was made on September 13, 1994. The second was made on September 14, 1994. Tricky, isn’t it?
The most important factor is that the AWB doesn’t ban Assault Weapons. It bans features. Okay, it doesn’t ban individual features. It bans combinations of features. From the text of the AWB:
(B) a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of-
(i) a folding or telescoping stock;
(ii)a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
(iii)a bayonet mount;
(iv) a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor; and
(v) a grenade launcher
First, grenade launchers have been regulated as destructive devices since the 1934 Gun Control Act. And drive-by bayoneting hasn’t been a problem for anyone. A rifle made on or after September 14, 1994 can have one of the above features but not two or more. Such as this one:
You wouldn’t know it to look at the picture, but the one above has a pin (which coincidentally is easy to remove) inserted into its stock that prevents it from collapsing. Mind you, you can purchase stocks that come in varieties of sizes ranging from the shortest position of a telescopic stock to longer than the telescopic stock. The AWB has just banned the ability for the same stock to change sizes. You can still purchase small stocks or large ones.
Also, that thing on the tip of the barrel isn’t a flash suppressor, it’s a muzzle break. A flash suppressor doesn’t actually suppress the flash. It causes the flash to disburse to the sides of the barrel instead of straight ahead. A gun with a flash suppressor is as easy to see fired at night as one without. What is the significance of a suppressor then? You can maintain a site picture without the flash getting in the way. Now the muzzle break is designed to keep the barrel from rising when fired. You’ll notice that you can’t tell the difference between a flash suppressor and muzzle break in this picture so I will tell you the difference. A flash suppressor has vents all the way around the circumference of it. A muzzle break only has vents on top. So, the AWB has essentially banned the placement of little holes on a small piece of metal, which doesn’t affect the fact that the gun is still a semi-automatic rifle based on a military design.
As for pistol grips, that seems to be the feature most people want. It doesn’t affect the function of the weapons it just makes it more comfortable to shoot.
People interpret the threaded barrel bit as a ban on threaded barrels when really it is a ban on threaded barrels that can accept flash suppressors. Of course, you could have a threaded barrel so long as there no suppressors available for it.
So to recap: A rifle made before September 14, 1994 can have any of the above features. A rifle made after can only have one. If you think you have it mastered, I suggest you take this little quiz. Good luck and tell me how you did. I missed one.
September 3rd, 2003 at 1:04 pm
Missed 2. Dammit.
September 3rd, 2003 at 3:26 pm
Of all the dumb ass legislation in the world er.. the US. The AWB is about as dumb as it gets.
I only got three right.
What I want to know is why do they care of I cut down a .12 gage, I mean for the guy who doesn’t shoot, nothing beats the point and shoot effectiveness of a short barrel 12.
September 3rd, 2003 at 3:32 pm
Good question. Rifles with barrels less than 16 inches and shotguns less than 18 inches require special licensing but handguns with barrels 2 inches don’t?
Got me.
September 3rd, 2003 at 4:44 pm
The length limit on long guns is pretty weird. It’s illegal to have a rifle with less than a 16″ barrel, but it’s legal to have a handgun chambered in a rifle cartridge with a barrel shorter than 16″.
Starke informed me that you can legally buy a short-barreled shotgun or rifle. You have to fill out a bunch of paperwork (about as much as if you were buying a machine gun) and pay a fee, which is $5 or so. But if you take a regular long gun and saw off the barrel, that’s illegal.
September 3rd, 2003 at 8:18 pm
To me it’s sort of like banning a car just because it Looks like it goes to fast
September 3rd, 2003 at 9:16 pm
To me it’s sort of like banning a car just because it Looks like it goes to fast
…nuff said.
September 3rd, 2003 at 10:01 pm
good post. clearly shows the problems with the AWB, and how it’s based on purposeless crap rather than useful restrictions.
September 3rd, 2003 at 11:22 pm
Actually only certain short barreled shotguns fall into the $5 tax rate, others fall into the $200 tax rate. The difference? (I’m going from memory here so excuse any errors) The $5 transfer tax applies to AOW’s. That’s Any Other Weapon which was a catch-all category to include anything they left out. So for some reason a 10 inch barreled shotgun with a pistol grip would probably fall into ther AOW category, while a 10 inch barreled shotgun with a buttstock would simply be a short barreled shotgun.
Also there is an overall length requirement. I believe it’s 25 inches. So even if you have a barrel that’s 18 inches long if the overall length is under 15 inches you’d be liabel for the $200 tax. Matter o’ fact Randy Weaver was accussed of selling a shotgun whose OAL was under the cut off by 1/4 inch – even though the barrel was 18 inches.
& the reason for the tax on short barreled shotguns at all was that they were very effective tools in the hands of merchants who didn’t care for being robbed. In fact, gun companies (Ithaca comes to mind) used to sell short barreled shotguns marketed specifically for shop owners.
It seems to me at the time there was a disproportional fear of shotguns (in WW1 the Germans, while spreading mustard gas all over Europe, complained that Americans were using shotguns, which was cruel & inhumane).
But the NFA was proposed not to quell the ganagster wars that were dying down by that time (no prohibition = less gang violence)but merely to disarm the populace. The original version not only listed machine guns, silencers & short barreled weapons, but handguns as well. After it was pointed out that a $200 tax on handguns may start a revolt they decided to drop that provision.
& a side note: you can take your shotgun & saw off the barrel legally – you just have to get permission from the BATF, register the shotgun you wish to cut & pay their $200 extortion..er, tax prior to doing any cutting.
September 14th, 2003 at 1:22 pm
The seeming randomness of the various gun regulations masks their most important effect: They set the precedent by which the government can change the rules and suddenly make you a criminal. It’s one of the basics of Totalitarianism 101.
October 15th, 2003 at 6:34 pm
The AWB is worthless and another example of a liberal attempt to control the freedoms of others under the guise of protecting the masses. I find it ironic that the hippies of the 60’s have become what they despised in their hay-day, “the man/big brother”. They need only turn to the FBI Crime Statistics that were published after the AWB went into effect to see how much impact it had on crimes involving these types of weapons. Those statistics stated a more common weapon used in murders than assault weapons were hands and feet! How can anyone logically argue that this ban is preventing a signifigant amount of crime when your “little piggies” are the weapon of choice compared to assault weapons?!
October 16th, 2003 at 5:52 am
I just stumbled on this site while checking on laws to cut my shotgun barrel. Right now it’s a good 30 inches long which is rediculous for home defense. But I couldn’t afford the 3 or 4 hundred places want for short barrelled guns. Guess I won’t be doing that for a while. Barrel shorter…urge to kill rising…..can’t stop!!!
YEAH RIGHT!
March 12th, 2004 at 4:04 am
Man,.. am i good or what?..haha..Its really to bad that i had to take this test in the first place.Come September 2004 ill really feel sorry for those that spent $800 on a pre-ban AK.
“Ill take mind over matter…anytime..unless of course, matter is well directed firepower”
May 4th, 2004 at 8:08 pm
ha i only missed one the last one unfortinuitaly (???spelling???) because i changed my mind anyway all of you are right i myself am a shotgun person that said why limit the length of a barrel much less a rifle barrel (by the way where does a rifle become a pistol) i can see a shotgun bbl becouse if it spreads too much it might (possibley not probbely) hit an innicent (i use the term loosly) bystander correct me if i ma wrong i am only 15
September 3rd, 2003 at 7:46 pm
Go read…
Say Uncle’s Assault Weapons Ban Primer. Very good stuff!…
February 3rd, 2004 at 12:02 am
Weekly Gun Links #3
Jeff Cooper’s January commentaries are online. Knoxville bloggers are invited to the first-ever Rocky Top Brigade Pistol Night February 10th. Kevin of The Smallest Minority has written his first article for the Shooter’s Carnival. His shooting backgrou…