BrunoPuntzJones
Lifer
- Feb 24, 2001
- 14,513
- 4
- 81
Pliablemoose
Lifer
- Oct 11, 1999
- 25,195
- 0
- 56
Stupid gun laws are like filling out taxes forms.
Q: What action had been taken on assault weapons prior to 1994?
A: Prior to passage of the federal assault weapons ban, the importation of certain types of assault weapons from overseas had been banned during the Reagan and George H.W. Bush Administrations. Such bans were ordered by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) under the 1968 Gun Control Act, which grants the ATF the power to prevent the importation of guns which are not "particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes."
Under the Reagan Administration, the ATF blocked the importation of certain models of shotguns that were not suitable for sporting purposes. In 1989, during the George H.W. Bush Administration, the ATF expanded this list to permanently ban the importation of 43 types of semi-automatic assault rifles that were also determined not to have a sporting purpose.
Later, in 1998, President Clinton banned the importation of 58 additional foreign-made "copycat" assault weapons in order to close a loophole in the prior import ban.
http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/faqs/?page=awb
First thing on my list will be a forward grip on my Calico pistol.
Q: What action had been taken on assault weapons prior to 1994?
A: Prior to passage of the federal assault weapons ban, the importation of certain types of assault weapons from overseas had been banned during the Reagan and George H.W. Bush Administrations. Such bans were ordered by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) under the 1968 Gun Control Act, which grants the ATF the power to prevent the importation of guns which are not "particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes."
Under the Reagan Administration, the ATF blocked the importation of certain models of shotguns that were not suitable for sporting purposes. In 1989, during the George H.W. Bush Administration, the ATF expanded this list to permanently ban the importation of 43 types of semi-automatic assault rifles that were also determined not to have a sporting purpose.
Later, in 1998, President Clinton banned the importation of 58 additional foreign-made "copycat" assault weapons in order to close a loophole in the prior import ban.
http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/faqs/?page=awb
First thing on my list will be a forward grip on my Calico pistol.
I have plenty of ammo with a pointy tip. It just depends on who makes them. I'm willing to guess that much of the ammo sold is for hunting, and thus probably has a soft tip to it so it mushrooms out. Wolf brand ammo will sell the pointy tip.
And hollowpoint, which is my favorite.Ya probably! Would be nice to have that round in a submachinegun. Its like a pellet but with gunpowder for power. Nice inventions these are! They should make a shotgun round with a full metal casing and load that sucker up with gun powder because Ive disected a 12 guage high power shell and they dont put much gunpowder in those things so Id imagine this metal one would be the sh*t!
Although I'm not sure, I'm pretty sure those already exist. (The shotgun rounds)
The .17 is made for distance and accuracy. A submachine gun would simply negate what the round was designed to do. Most of the .17 are sighted in for like 200-300 yards.
FelixDeCat
Lifer
- Aug 4, 2000
- 31,054
- 2,691
- 126
http://www.awbansunset.com/
6/2/04: Gun Owners of America says Feinstein ready to try again.
Ready for round 2?
GOA has been warning gun owners that Democrat Senator Dianne Feinstein of California would be looking for an avenue to attach her gun ban to unrelated legislation sometime this year.
According to Senate sources, Feinstein will be making her move quite soon.
While she reportedly has her eyes on a number of different bills as possible vehicles for her amendment, it seems certain that she will try to piggy-back her anti-gun language onto a legal reform bill (such as S. 2062) within the next few weeks.
GOA is urging all of us to once again let loose a barrage of phone calls, letters, faxes, and e-mails to our Senators.
You will remember that when Feinstein offered her gun ban amendment in March, it passed 52-47.
While a switch of only three Senators would be enough to kill the amendment, it seems that the easiest way to defeat Feinstein will be through a filibuster. Our side only needs 41 Senators to kill her amendment through the art of filibuster, and it would appear that we definitely have that many votes... BUT ONLY IF THE 47 SENATORS WHO VOTED RIGHT LAST TIME CONTINUE TO HOLD THE LINE! www.gunowners.com
Let's get to work!
6/1/04: Rep. Ed Schrock (R-VA) issues statement strongly opposing renewal of the AWB.
Earlier this year, a site visitor informed us that Rep. Schrock had stated on a radio talk show that he would not support any new gun control, but WOULD support a renewal of the "assault weapons" ban, and this information was subsequently posted to our Scoreboard section. Apparently, this quote was in error, as Rep. Schrock's office recently contacted us to set the record straight on his position on the renewal of the ban.
"In 1994 Congress passed a ban on semiautomatic assault weapons, which will expire this year. I was not a Member of Congress at that time. I do not support its reauthorization.
I am a strong believer in the Second Amendment. The problems with gun violence in this country lie not with lawful gun owners, rather with those individuals who choose to commit illegal acts. Guns are simply one of the tools at their disposal.
As a Congressman, I pledge to uphold the rights of Americans to bear arms, and will continue to support legislation which will do so. I will also fight to protect my constituents by supporting legislation that punishes those individuals who chose to use a gun when committing a crime or carry them illegally."
Good news indeed! We welcome clarifications to any inaccuracies found on the Scoreboard, and it was especially nice to hear directly from the congressman's office.
5/28/04: Editorial ? Assault weapons law needs teeth, from insidebayarea.com.
Most Americans -- including many senior law enforcement officials -- think assault weapons are illegal under a 1994 federal law. The truth is the federal law is toothless. The federal ban has had virtually no effect on the availability of assault weapons. The use of new assault weapons designs in crime is steadily rising.
How did this happen? Like California's first attempt at regulating assault weapons, the federal law has weak points the gun industry exploited.
California's Legislature fixed its law. Congress never fixed the federal law. Now the federal law is set to expire, or sunset, in September, but simply renewing a law that doesn't work amounts to nothing more than political symbolism. Read more.
5/28/04: Editorial ? Renewing the assault weapons ban ill-conceived, from chicagotribune.com.
The features that flagged these guns as intolerable, such as bayonet mounts and folding stocks, are features that have nothing to do with their killing power. The ban is the moral equivalent of banning red cars because they look too fast.
Some gun-control supporters acknowledge as much. Tom Diaz, a senior analyst for the Violence Policy Center, said earlier this year, "If the existing assault weapons ban expires, I personally do not believe it will make one whit of difference in terms of our objective, which is reducing death and injury and getting a particularly lethal class of firearms off the streets." The VPC now says a broader ban is needed.
Why? Because "gunmakers have easily evaded the law by making slight, cosmetic changes to banned guns and continued their sale unimpeded." But if you ban red cars and automakers increase their output of maroon ones, that's not evading the law--that's complying with the law. Read more. {registration required}
5/25/04: Gun Control Harming U.S. Troops, from newsmax.com.
Writes Farnam: "Stupid gun laws, designed from the beginning for harassment and little else, are now interfering with our war effort, and no one at BATF, indeed the whole federal system, seems to care. While our Marines die, bureaucrats and politicians dither."
He recommends a course of action.
"When the 'magazine ban,' 'assault rifle' law was enacted, it had a built-in sunset clause so it could be allowed to die a natural death after it did not perform as promised," he wrote. "Not only has it failed to perform as promised as any sort of deterrent to criminal activity, we see where it is having ill effect on national defense issues. Contact your senators and congressmen today and tell them to let it sunset."
Unless Congress reauthorizes the ban, it will expire in September 2004. Republicans in both Houses have expressed an interest in allowing the law to die, while most Democrats have pushed for a renewal of the ban.
During his 2000 presidential campaign, President Bush has said he would sign a reauthorization of the bill if it reached his desk. Gun rights advocates ? as well as a number of U.S. soldiers ? are hoping it doesn't get that far. Read more.
6/2/04: Gun Owners of America says Feinstein ready to try again.
Ready for round 2?
GOA has been warning gun owners that Democrat Senator Dianne Feinstein of California would be looking for an avenue to attach her gun ban to unrelated legislation sometime this year.
According to Senate sources, Feinstein will be making her move quite soon.
While she reportedly has her eyes on a number of different bills as possible vehicles for her amendment, it seems certain that she will try to piggy-back her anti-gun language onto a legal reform bill (such as S. 2062) within the next few weeks.
GOA is urging all of us to once again let loose a barrage of phone calls, letters, faxes, and e-mails to our Senators.
You will remember that when Feinstein offered her gun ban amendment in March, it passed 52-47.
While a switch of only three Senators would be enough to kill the amendment, it seems that the easiest way to defeat Feinstein will be through a filibuster. Our side only needs 41 Senators to kill her amendment through the art of filibuster, and it would appear that we definitely have that many votes... BUT ONLY IF THE 47 SENATORS WHO VOTED RIGHT LAST TIME CONTINUE TO HOLD THE LINE! www.gunowners.com
Let's get to work!
6/1/04: Rep. Ed Schrock (R-VA) issues statement strongly opposing renewal of the AWB.
Earlier this year, a site visitor informed us that Rep. Schrock had stated on a radio talk show that he would not support any new gun control, but WOULD support a renewal of the "assault weapons" ban, and this information was subsequently posted to our Scoreboard section. Apparently, this quote was in error, as Rep. Schrock's office recently contacted us to set the record straight on his position on the renewal of the ban.
"In 1994 Congress passed a ban on semiautomatic assault weapons, which will expire this year. I was not a Member of Congress at that time. I do not support its reauthorization.
I am a strong believer in the Second Amendment. The problems with gun violence in this country lie not with lawful gun owners, rather with those individuals who choose to commit illegal acts. Guns are simply one of the tools at their disposal.
As a Congressman, I pledge to uphold the rights of Americans to bear arms, and will continue to support legislation which will do so. I will also fight to protect my constituents by supporting legislation that punishes those individuals who chose to use a gun when committing a crime or carry them illegally."
Good news indeed! We welcome clarifications to any inaccuracies found on the Scoreboard, and it was especially nice to hear directly from the congressman's office.
5/28/04: Editorial ? Assault weapons law needs teeth, from insidebayarea.com.
Most Americans -- including many senior law enforcement officials -- think assault weapons are illegal under a 1994 federal law. The truth is the federal law is toothless. The federal ban has had virtually no effect on the availability of assault weapons. The use of new assault weapons designs in crime is steadily rising.
How did this happen? Like California's first attempt at regulating assault weapons, the federal law has weak points the gun industry exploited.
California's Legislature fixed its law. Congress never fixed the federal law. Now the federal law is set to expire, or sunset, in September, but simply renewing a law that doesn't work amounts to nothing more than political symbolism. Read more.
5/28/04: Editorial ? Renewing the assault weapons ban ill-conceived, from chicagotribune.com.
The features that flagged these guns as intolerable, such as bayonet mounts and folding stocks, are features that have nothing to do with their killing power. The ban is the moral equivalent of banning red cars because they look too fast.
Some gun-control supporters acknowledge as much. Tom Diaz, a senior analyst for the Violence Policy Center, said earlier this year, "If the existing assault weapons ban expires, I personally do not believe it will make one whit of difference in terms of our objective, which is reducing death and injury and getting a particularly lethal class of firearms off the streets." The VPC now says a broader ban is needed.
Why? Because "gunmakers have easily evaded the law by making slight, cosmetic changes to banned guns and continued their sale unimpeded." But if you ban red cars and automakers increase their output of maroon ones, that's not evading the law--that's complying with the law. Read more. {registration required}
5/25/04: Gun Control Harming U.S. Troops, from newsmax.com.
Writes Farnam: "Stupid gun laws, designed from the beginning for harassment and little else, are now interfering with our war effort, and no one at BATF, indeed the whole federal system, seems to care. While our Marines die, bureaucrats and politicians dither."
He recommends a course of action.
"When the 'magazine ban,' 'assault rifle' law was enacted, it had a built-in sunset clause so it could be allowed to die a natural death after it did not perform as promised," he wrote. "Not only has it failed to perform as promised as any sort of deterrent to criminal activity, we see where it is having ill effect on national defense issues. Contact your senators and congressmen today and tell them to let it sunset."
Unless Congress reauthorizes the ban, it will expire in September 2004. Republicans in both Houses have expressed an interest in allowing the law to die, while most Democrats have pushed for a renewal of the ban.
During his 2000 presidential campaign, President Bush has said he would sign a reauthorization of the bill if it reached his desk. Gun rights advocates ? as well as a number of U.S. soldiers ? are hoping it doesn't get that far. Read more.
bradruth
Lifer
- Aug 9, 2002
- 13,479
- 2
- 81
Originally posted by: FallenHero
Ahhh. I'm not up to date on my shotgun knowledge, mainly because I'm not a hunter.
I haven't gone hunting in a few years and when I did it was deer hunting, so I used a rifle instead of a shotgun. I really only know the basics, but we carry Remington 870s (12 gauge) with buckshot & slugs in the patrol cars (as well as beanbag rounds in some cases).
The real steel ball tip is only avail to law enforcement. You can get in on auction arms.com though.
So is the AR-15 and the M4 Carbine the same riffle? They look exactly the same. I'd imagine the M4 is made by Colt and the AR-15 is made by a different company. I have always thought they were the same gun but different companies.
I believe Colt also makes the AR15 but there are many other companies that take up these arms as well such as Bushmaster or Stoner.
Yup, .17 HMR. It's a fun little round, a little louder than a .22 but a lot more hitting power down range.
It's really designed for very small game (varmints), it does wonders on squirrels & the like. Very fast & very accurate, & reasonably cheap to shoot.
The rifles are quite cheap too, well under $200 for a pretty decent little setup (gun, scope, case, etc.).
I had one, gave it to my brother. Bolt action, 5+1, a lot of fun to shoot.
Viper GTS
I don't know if I'd call them "beautiful" but they can be damn nice.
Some of them are damn ugly too. But, the AR/M series is not in that category IMHO.
Pliablemoose
Lifer
- Oct 11, 1999
- 25,195
- 0
- 56
I've always thought the AR was ugly, but it's about as logical as calling a hammer ugly, they're both tools.
I also get a kick out of pickup threads, I perceive them as tools too.
Nice Johnnie. I have an M4 myself, but haven't fired it for awhile. Sucks living on a military base because have to keep it in the damn armory, not allowed to keep it in base housing. Yours is much cleaner than mine however, great rifle!
Just to clear up the 5.56 ammo confusion.
http://www.thegunzone.com/556faq.html#m195
You can legally obtain mil-ammo at auction arms.com
http://www.thegunzone.com/556faq.html#m195
You can legally obtain mil-ammo at auction arms.com
Do they happen to make any pistols that fire that .17 hornady or whatever ammo? Im a bit tired of my 12 guage single shot and since I am a bit worried to be shootin an AK out here by D.C. I think I need to get my self something small and fun or just a kick ass rifle.
If you just want something small and fun to shoot get .22 LR. .17 HMR serves a specific purpose, if you don't have a need for it it's excessively expensive to use for fun.
Viper GTS
BrunoPuntzJones
Lifer
- Feb 24, 2001
- 14,513
- 4
- 81
Tarus makes a line of revolvers chambered for it. Don't know of any automatics. Think the case isn't rimmed, so no way for an auto to extract.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter