Instant criminal, just add a silly law
Ravenwood reports that some Columbus (OH) citizens became criminals last week:
Though 115 people registered, some registered more than one weapon. One person registered 45 weapons, Jones said. City officials said it’s hard to say if 115 was more or less than they expected, because no one has estimated how many assault weapons the city’s 730,000 residents own.
I’d say there are quite a few Columbus residents who have no idea they just became criminals.
November 14th, 2005 at 1:37 pm
I’d bet there are a few who know they’re now criminals and just don’t give a damn. That would be my attitude if I lived there.
November 14th, 2005 at 10:45 pm
If you ban an assault weapon, then you must overcome federal laws, because it takes a federal permit to own one. No weapon is an assault weapon unless it meets the legitimate definition which follows:
A genuine assault weapon, as opposed to a legal definition, is a hand-held, selective fire weapon, which means it’s capable of firing in either an automatic or a semiautomatic mode depending on the position of a selector switch. These kinds of weapons are heavily regulated by the National Firearms Act of 1934 and are further regulated in some states. (See machine guns.) Assault weapons are capable of FULL AUTO FIRE and the NFA has limited ownership for a long while.
Of course, allowing politicians and special interest groups to redefine what an assault weapon is allows them to control and ban weapons. That’s what Hitler did; redefine parameters to allow “legal” actions against selected classes of the citizenry.
November 14th, 2005 at 10:47 pm
Currently, under federal law, ‘assault weapon’ is not defined. The old definition was largely made up anyway.
November 14th, 2005 at 11:00 pm
Just for clarification – Up until a few years ago, the term “assault weapon” defined a military weapon. As stated in the following, it takes special permission to own such a weapon. So … the term was redefined to allow for control ……..
QUOTE: ….. as the United States Defense Department’s Defense Intelligence Agency book Small Arms Identification and Operation Guide explains, “assault rifles” are “short, compact, selective-fire weapons that fire a cartridge intermediate in power between submachinegun and rifle cartridges.” The official definition fits the historical role of the assault rifle. The assault rifle is compact, so that it can be easily carried in a battlefield, including during an assault. The assault rifle fires an intermediate power cartridge, so that the recoil can be controlled, and accuracy maintained. (Therefore, a “high-caliber assault rifle” is an oxymoron.) And an assault rifle has selective fire. By flipping a selector switch, the shooter can fire either automatically or semiautomatically. Weapons capable of fully automatic fire, including assault rifles, have been regulated heavily in the United States since the National Firearms Act of 1934. Possession of such a gun requires a $200 federal transfer tax and an FBI background check. Automatics (including assault rifles) produced after May 1986 may not be possessed at all. (The lower federal courts have disagreed about the Constitutionality of the post-1986 ban, and the Supreme Court has declined to review the issue.)
November 14th, 2005 at 11:08 pm
To drive the point home ( for any “Brady Bunch” who may read this:
While the Defense Intelligence Agency’s term of art “assault rifle” has a precise and technical meaning, the phrase “assault weapon” invented by the anti-gun lobby has no clear meaning.
No gun that is an “assault rifle” (by Defense Intelligence Agency definition) is an “assault weapon” (by Handgun Control, Inc. definition) because all “assault rifles” are automatic, and no “assault weapons” are automatic. “Assault rifles” are used by the military, whereas no “assault weapon” is used by the military. “assault rifles” are all rifles, whereas “assault weapons” are claimed to include semiautomatic rifles, semiautomatic shotguns, revolver-action shotguns, semiautomatic handguns, and semiautomatic airguns.
In truth, a “semiautomatic assault weapon” is a logical impossibility, akin to a “four-wheel tricycle.”
SOURCE: http://www.guncite.com/asw.html#IC
November 14th, 2005 at 11:11 pm
I’d like to know which federal courts said the 86 ban was unconstitutional.