This article “dissects”, so to speak, the proposed assault weapons ban that is in place. The ban was first introduced on February 13th, by Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) from there it went immediately to the House Committee. It’s most recent travels have taken it to the sub-committee of Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. This “scary-looking weapons ban” is viewed by many as unconstitutional and hampering to the citizens who want to purchase firearms. Here’s the basic rundown:
The ban is very similar, if not exact, to the ban passed in ’94. It’s a re-authorization assault ban for 10 years, and it includes an array of firearms. Accessories have been added to the ban list including high-capacity magazines, semi-automatic features, barrel-shroud, threaded barrel, detachable magazines, and folding/telescoping stocks. The ban only serves for importation and manufacturing of these firearms and accessories. Those already in the country, and owned by others can stay. There will be no domestic recalling of these guns. So what’s the point? If they don’t want people owning these “scary guns”, then why aren’t they doing a recall? Stopping the manufacturing and imports of these guns does nothing to the people that have them already. Let’s take a closer look at all the fuss:
SEMI-AUTOMATIC: Means the weapon automatically chambers the next round, and the shooter has to just pull the trigger for each individual shot. Granted, fully automatic weapons pop out ammo just by squeezing the trigger, but I know a lot of people that can empty a clip lightning fast; it’s a losing proposition.
DETACHABLE MAG: Means you can drop a magazine, and slide another in. Big deal…
BARREL SHROUD: Dissipates heat from the barrel. This makes a weapon more deadly how?
TELESCOPING/FOLDING STOCK: Makes the gun more comfortable to shoot; don’t see how this is more deadly.
THREADED BARREL: Basically used for a silencer. Silencers are already illegal, so what’s the big deal. Besides, it doesn’t make the gun more deadly, just quieter.
HIGH-CAPACITY MAGAZINE: Holds more rounds. This actually has a sporting purpose too. Do you really want to try to go after a bear with only 7 or 8 rounds? Keeping in mind that a common gun used in hunting is the Ruger 10/22, one that would be banned under this new proposition. What’s the difference if someone gets hit with 6 rounds from a 10 round capacity magazine, or 15 from an extended capacity? They’re dead either way.
I’m not understanding what all the fuss is about. They want to get the semi-automatics out because of “firing speed”, yet there are people that can rack a manual slide, or bolt on a shot gun almost as fast as an automatic. Most of the accessories make the gun either nicer to look at, more comfortable, and none of them make the gun more or less deadly. My proposal: If you truly want to start controlling stuff better, go after the ammo. Make the ammo harder to get, or non-existent. Can’t fire a gun without bullets now, can you? Thanks for reading.