1) Fires and intermediate powered cartridge. Examples of these cartridges are 5.56x45/.223(M16/M4), 7.62.39 (AK47, 6.8 SPC (M16/M4), 7.92 Kurtz (Stg.44), etc. Full power rounds such as 7.62x51 (.308win) and pistol rounds such as .357 magnum are not in the same class. The .30 M1 Carbine is in a middle ground since it was developed for a long arm, but it has about the same energy as the above mentioned .357 Magnum.
2) Selective fire. This mean that the gun can be set for semi-automatic or full-automatic/burst.
3) Fires form a detachable box magazine
4) I'll give them full pistol grips. The wording in the bill ("(42) Pistol Grip- The term `pistol grip' means a grip, a thumbhole stock, or any other characteristic that can function as a grip." [sic]) is so ambiguous as to effectively ban all guns except for cannon, since they need to be held some how.
It is important to note that the Stg. 44 did not have provisions for a bayonet or a flash hider. The AK47, as to most military long arms, has a bayonet lug. This mostly due to every military's conservative nature and bayonets have been relegated to mostly ceremonial roles. Assault rifles do not make good pikes. Flash hiders are mostly for the benefit of the shooter since a bright ball of fire can really hamper your night vision. The possibility of limiting your visibly to your enemy is a bonus and not something engineered into all flash hiders. Muzzle brakes important on som guns and they are lumped in with flash hider since they do redirect the flash.
Select fire, and therefore fully automatic, arms are already covered under other extremely restrictive legislation. Try to go to your local gun shop and by a machine gun and tell me how that works out for you. It is damn near impossible, unless you have a lot of money and a perfect criminal record or an FFL. Id love to have an original Thompson, but I don't have $20,300 lying around.
This bill is silly for a couple of more practical reasons. One criminals very, very rarely use rifles, in any configuration, in the commission of a crime. They are to hard to conceal vs a handgun, to cumbersome in tight spaces, and ammo is more expensive. There was no decrease in crimes involving "assault weapons" due to the bill and no similar rise after its sunset. The number was so small as to be barely significant.
What is even funnier is the inclusion of the Ruger Mini-14 in this list. The late Bill Ruger pushed for a magazine limitation and other such restrictions so that his rifles wouldn't be included on such a list. It is funny that they include the Dragunov SVD/U, but not the M1 Garand, M1A, SVT 40, G41 which have nearly identical capabilties.
Section five could be easily interpreted to effectively ban 99% of all sporting long arms.
I fail to see how any of the listed features:
`"(i) a folding or telescoping stock;"
`(ii) a threaded barrel;
`(iii) a pistol grip;
`(iv) a forward grip; or
`(v) a barrel shroud.
Make the the gun any more deadly. This a bill written by people who know nothing about guns, are scared of guns, and scared of gun owners. These people wouldn't trust them selves with guns and so how can they trust you.
I wonder how many people will loose their job if this passes? How much tax revenue will be lost?
This is a shameles attempt to get votes in an election year and I pray to God that this joke of a bill doesn't pass. Liberals seem to forget how well the passage of the '92 ban worked out for those who voted for it.
