Assault rifles are back! Big time!

[ileus]

http://www.citizen-times.com/article/20120115/NEWS/301150043/Boyle-Assault-rifles-come-roaring-back?odyssey=mod%7Cnewswell%7Ctext%7CFrontpage%7Cp

How do I know this? Walmart is selling them.

You know if the nation’s largest retailer stocks three different models now, they must be a hot item.

It’s safe to say that assault rifles — semi-automatic military-style rifles with magazine clips that typically hold 30 rounds — have come full circle in America.

One worker I talked to summed up my feelings on assault rifles pretty well, saying, “I’m deeply ambivalent about them.”


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Get a brain morans...

Anyone here believe a wal-mart worker used the word "ambivalent" ???

[SteveW]

1. Given unemployment, some Walmart employees are becoming distinguished. nt

[ileus]

2. or maybe they're part of the "words with friends" trend.

[burf]

9. Most of the people I know that work at Walmart

would tell the reporter they didn't give a shit one way or the other. That's pretty close to ambivilance, ain't it?

[SteveW]

14. True. If they had said "whatever," then they would be marked. nt

[Mojorabbit]

63. We have DU members who work at Walmart. nt

[Hoyt]

3. Just the same old obsessed people buying another one to add to the cache.

Years from now, they'll sell them to someone without a background check -- and there you go.

[TheWraith]

4. Funny, then, how polls show many are new gun owners.

Including many Democrats buying guns.

But hey, given that your entire schtick is based on steadfastly ignoring the facts, who cares?

[ileus]

6. Or they'll pass them down to the kids, or grandchildren...

[Atypical Liberal]

10. Whoever is buying them, they are buying A LOT of them.

The AR platform is now the most popular center-fire rifle in the country.

Even Remington and Ruger, two brands that have shied away from "military" styled firearms, now have AR offerings.

And the reason is simple. The design is rugged and customizable. It is easy to have a single "lower" (the portion of the firearm that has the trigger, hand guard and stock), and buy different "uppers" (the receiver and barrel) as the parts just snap together. In this way you can easily change calibers without having to buy a totally new firearm.

[Hoyt]

44. No chit, manufacturers pander to baser instincts/desires of gun culture.

[E6-B]

47. Did Dr. King get pandered?

He bought guns.

[Hoyt]

54. He had reason -- although no proof he carried them. Lots of people were after him.

I wish you guys would quit bringing BS like that into the debate, but I've come to expect it from those who are addicted to guns.

And, I know for sure he didn't have a few so-called "assault weapons" that you guys are so enamored with.

[ileus]

50. just like Toyota panders with the prius...or apple panders with the Ipad

That's how companies stay in business...they offer products people want.

For the firearms market the evolution of pocket 9's have been the hot game in town the past year, before that it was 380's. Hopefully we'll see the single stack subcompact 45 as the next big thing.

[Hoyt]

55. Don't think that car panders to your baser instincts. Now, if they mount guns on the hood, you'd

likely want one.

You guys are the ones attracted to the tactical looks of these lethal weapons. What's that all about?

[Atypical Liberal]

52. "base instinct"

I guess if demanding a proven, affordable, tough, versatile, easily customizable piece of equipment is pandering to "baser instincts" then so be it.

[PavePusher]

57. Note he he won't define the term, or explain how it applies to guns. n/t

[X_Digger]

56. Check the expiration date..

Your jar of moral whip is smelling something awful..

[rl6214]

35. Just the same old obsessed person whining about it on the internet

peddling the same old shtick and BS.

Years from now, you'll still be slinging the same old crap while the rest of us continue to exercise our ever expanding freedoms.

There, fixed it for you.

[ellisonz]

39. This post reminded me of:

[Hoyt]

45. Until docs put you on Aricept and they take your guns away.

[rl6214]

61. I have all my faculties, obviously you don't

is that how you know what Aricept is? What dosage are you on?

[ileus]

51. rude death spewer toter!

[X_Digger]

5. It's.. it's.. it's full of memes! (In my best 2000 a space odyssey voice)

Let's count..

[div class='excerpt']It’s safe to say that assault rifles - 1 — semi-automatic military-style rifles with magazine clips - 2 that typically hold 30 rounds — have come full circle in America.

1. No, assault rifles aren't semi-auto.
2. Can't decide on which term is accurate? Use both!

[div class='excerpt']Assault Weapons Ban back in 1994, which made it illegal to sell - 3 19 types of semi-automatic rifles

3. Nope, it just meant that stocks and muzzle brakes had to be pinned. See the DOJ study on AR-15 sales *during* the ban for confirmation.

[div class='excerpt']The legislation expired in 2004, and since then, assault rifles have come storming back.

AR-15's never left. (Not counting this one since it's a repeat of 3.)

[div class='excerpt']On the one hand, I can’t see why anybody really needs - 4 one of these blasters. They’re not practical for hunting - 5

4. There is no Department of 'Need'. In order to justify restricting a right, the government has to provide the justification. The people don't have to demonstrate why it shouldn't be restricted.

5. Tell that to all the hunters using the R15 and R25 to hunt game.

5.5 -- Where does the second amendment mention hunting, again?

[div class='excerpt']smaller shops have been selling the heck out of them since the ban expired in 2004.

Repeating 3.

[div class='excerpt']to get them in into these military style guns - 6 — they’re trying to normalize them

6. All guns, save for a few specialized ones- owe their heritage to 'military' arms.

[div class='excerpt']that somehow these are legitimate hunting weapons, and they love to find instances where hunters use them.”

Repeating 5, 5.5.

[div class='excerpt']championing sensible solutions - 7

7. Whatever they want, slap the label 'sensible' on it, and therefore anyone who opposes it is not sensible.

[div class='excerpt']crimes involving high-clip capacity guns declined - 8 during the ban.

8. The DOJ's study on the issue begs to differ. google 'aw_final2004.pdf' to find it.

[div class='excerpt']“It’s just a matter of time - 9 before we have another one of these mass shootings involving an assault rifle,” Henigan said.

9. Bluud weel ruun on da streeetz! FBI's UCR begs to differ.

[ileus]

7. My 9yo daughter could write better facts about guns and law than this "guns kill people" writer.

[Simo 1939_1940]

46. Classic X_Digger post #497 NT

[spin]

8. As usual the article makes the assualt weapons ban look like it was a good idea...

But actually it was a total flop. That's why it expired.

The article in the OP says:

After several high-profile shooting incidents in the 1980s and ’90s, the guns became the notorious poster child for wanton violence and Second Amendment over-reaching. Congress enacted and former President Bill Clinton signed the Assault Weapons Ban back in 1994, which made it illegal to sell 19 types of semi-automatic rifles, as well as ammunition clips that held more than 10 rounds.

The article makes it sound like a person could not buy 19 different types of semi-auto rifles during the ban. These rifles were banned because of certain cosmetic features such as a bayonet mount or a flash suppressor. The firearm manufacturers merely eliminated these objectionable items and produced new models that were functionally the same as the banned models.

High capacity ammunition magazines or "clips" that held more than 10 rounds were always available during the ban. They were just more expensive. Everybody that I knew who owned a "black rifle" bought several of these accessories.

The article goes on to say:

The legislation expired in 2004, and since then, assault rifles have come storming back.

Actually the biggest failure of the assault weapons ban was that it made these weapons popular. Prior to the ban few shooters had much interest in owning such a weapon but human nature being what it is, gun owners developed an interest in owning them after the ban. And guess what...shooters found they were far more accurate and reliable than was originally thought.

And the writer makes another stupid statement when he says:

On the one hand, I can’t see why anybody really needs one of these blasters. They’re not practical for hunting, and in the wrong hands they’re powerful weapons capable of killing an awful lot of people at one time.

Bullshit. They are used for hunting.

F&S Picks the 25 Best AR-Style Rifles
Photo Gallery by Michael O. Humphries. Uploaded on May 13, 2009
An Intro to the AR-Style Rifle

Black guns often get a bum rap. They can look a bit menacing, and their configuration and controls are radically different than those found on traditional sporting firearms. But the hunter who automatically dismisses AR-style rifles as legitimate sporting guns would be doing himself a major disservice. Why? Because the AR is one of the most capable, adaptable, and appealing firearm platforms on the market today. And these characteristics are helping it gain traction in the civilian market in its semi-automatic-only form.

***snip***

Over the past 50 years manufacturers have taken advantage of the gun’s modularity to attach optics and accessories, add new operating systems, allow larger chamberings, and even create civilian-legal semi-automatic-only versions. These guns have proved capable and popular with shooters of all stripes, especially varmint hunters. And recent developments have expanded the platform to big-game hunters as well....emphasis added

This is because the qualities that make AR rifles so successful as a military design also make them highly capable as hunting firearms. Many models boast sub-MOA accuracy right out of the box, with some variants featuring performance that rivals that of custom target rifles.
http://www.fieldandstream.com/photos/gallery/hunting/2009/05/fs-picks-25-best-ar-style-rifles

It's obvious that the writer of the article has an agenda and has no intention of allowing facts to stand in its way. That is what so often disappoints me about most of the articles I read in the mainstream media about firearms.

Firearms and gun control are fairly simple subjects and a reporter doesn't have to be a rocket scientist to understand them. Any interested individual can quickly learn the facts about firearms by researching the web and surely any reporter who is worth his pay can do so also.

Other subjects are far more complicated and require far more research to even gain a basic understanding. If the mainstream media can't get its facts straight on simple subjects such as firearms or gun control, how can I believe anything they print about the ecomony or any of the other important issues facing our nation?

[ileus]

11. They tried to make it sould like there was an actual ban.

[spin]

12. That is a revision of history. There was no ban! The sad part is...

that many people who are not familiar with firearms will believe that was indeed a real ban when they see that falsehood repeated enough.

It's somewhat similar to the Republicans saying that if you raise taxes on the rich you will kill jobs as it is the rich who create the jobs. If that were true then the rich in this nation with all their tax breaks would be creating so many jobs that everyone who wanted a job would be able to pick and choose where he/she wanted to work. (I will admit that the rich have created a lot of jobs overseas by outsourcing.)

Unfortunately some people will always believe a falsehood. People who oppose firearms will continue to believe that the AWB was a great success killed by the nasty NRA and Republicans will continue to believe that raising taxes on the super rich is a terrible idea and is a socialist idea.

[Remmah2]

13. Those plastic firearms with extended magazines, flash hiders and collapsible stocks.

http://www.mossberg.com/products/default.asp?id=31
[img][/img]

[gejohnston]

15. I like ARs but

steel and walnut (or cherry) on somethings are sacred.

[ileus]

17. oh damn....that thing is real. WTF?

[friendly_iconoclast]

18. Cowboy Tactical FTW

Granted, it looks like something Jayne from Firefly would carry, but with an Aimpoint or similar sight on that it would be quite suitable
for deer or hog hunting in brushy country. And you wouldn't have to worry so much about messing up hardwood furniture.

[ileus]

23. That thing makes Hipoints look good.

[PavePusher]

25. Now you're just being nasty....

I sure didn't buy my HP 9mm because it looked pretty.

[ileus]

28. No I was talking about those ugly (but reliable) carbines.

Unless you bought the 45 their pistols aren't much more ugly than any other poly gun.

[PavePusher]

30. Jest pullin' yer leg....

I bought a HiPoint .45 pistol about 2 years ago, after my Taurus PT1911 was stolen. I was low on cash for several months and had been wanting to get one anyway.... Turned out to be the bargain of the century. Goes bang every time you pull the trigger, and the sights were only two clicks off out-of-the-box. Though I will say it has the worlds most uncomfortable trigger. The bottom is curved up too much, it makes your trigger finger start to hurt by the end of the second magazine. Some day I'll get one of the after-market ones, but it'll be a while.

Then last year I bought a 9mm carbine from a friend who was retiring from the USAF and moving to the Phillipines. Ugly as sin, but also reliable as heck.

[ellisonz]

40. "after my Taurus PT1911 was stolen."

Another statistic...

[PavePusher]

41. Yep. And after doing everything you'd want me to.

Stopped at a bar to meet a friend for what was supposed to be about a 5 minute conversation about some work issues. It's my regular weekend watering-hole and they are posted "No Guns" in accordance with Arizona legal requirements for those businesses wishing to restrict firearms. Because of this, and the fact that I am known there, respect the owners wishes, and prefer to have a good reputation with them, I left my sidearm in a locked metal case, locked to the drivers seat frame, truck locked, in a parking lot with video surveillance. During the "five minutes", the area got hit with an piece of the Arizona monsoon. Not feeling like running to my truck in the rain, I ended up staying 90 minutes, drinking two cokes and watching some sports. After the rain ended, got back out to my truck and someone had broken a window to get into it, taking loose change, radio, wallet and gun. I called the police, they arrived within 10 minutes, filled out a report and went home.

Got about half-value back on my insurance claim, window replacement was fully covered. Wallet was found in the parking lot the next day, only my squadron coin missing. Two other wallets were found as well, I learned later that several cars were hit that night. The video survaillance? Useless due to the rain and water on the camera lens.

This is what I get for obeying the laws that make Chicken Littles' feel good. Thank you very fucking much.

[ellisonz]

42. How'd they break into the locked metal case?

I'd think maybe you were targeted or that such cases are very common in AZ and they anticipated needing to defeat it. IMHO I don't know why people feel the need to carry guns...I've never felt the need and I've been in some pretty shitty neighborhoods on foot. I've been a civil process server in Honolulu and I confess, I kept a boot knife in my glove compartment. I've got some martial arts training and feel that in just about any situation where it would be more advisable to defend myself than to simply comply and decide my property isn't worth my life; I would find a way and a gun would only escalate the situation. But again, let's be clear - knives/bats/machetes/non-lethal weapons and firearms are entirely different category of weapons. Similarly, I've bought pepper spray for female friends to carry. I think having a gun on you is likely to bring greater adverse consequences than other weapons. I think if you want to carry you need to realize that you ought to be held to a very high level of responsibility. I would bet your gun has now found its way to the black market.

I think you also need to understand why many people think guns and alcohol don't mix. You ever seen a bar fight?

[ileus]

49. good for you....I'll continue to carry.

I also have martial arts experience and sometimes carry my kimber pepper blaster (for those places that don't allow firearms) I'm not going to take the #1 person safety device out of the equation to make people feel better.

[PavePusher]

59. They either ripped it free, or cut the cable holding it to the seat frame, took the cable with them.

Those things aren't bank vaults. Easier to cut the case open at leisure in another location.

Next one will be bolted to the floor.

I've got lots or martial arts training as well. The gun is for when that doesn't work, or is not appropriate. All of the weapons you mention are lethal. They are not any less dangerous than a firearm.

The only two reasons my gun was stolen are 1. A criminal was being a criminal, and 2. I was doing what people like you wanted me to. I can assure you I'll take better precautions in the future.

And yes, I've seen bar fights. I usually help break them up (at the bar above) or help stay out of the way for the bouncers. What's your point there? I never drink when I am armed.

[ileus]

48. Sorry about your loss...but the anti's got what they want

you legal firearm in a criminals hands....it's what they live for, then they can add you to the "hidden criminal" crowd.

Now you're tainted, rude toter, paranoid gun carrier, and hidden criminal. (well not so hidden)

[Ter]

16. Good

Too bad they require licenses.

[oneshooter]

19. ??? The seller or the buyer? n/t

[Ter]

20. Buyer

n/t

[oneshooter]

21. Not in Texas and I believe 40 other states.

In fact with my Texas CHL the seller dosen't even have to call for a NCIS check.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[Ter]

27. How about a driver's license?

Or anything where the government can trace the sale to you?

[PavePusher]

31. Ummm... seriously?

Do you know anything about buying guns?

[Ter]

36. Not in your area obviously

Here it's fingerprints and everything.

[PavePusher]

37. My apology if that seemed snarky, it was an actual honest question.

Most states do not require a permit or finger prints for mere purchase. I find the idea rather repugnant for a Constitutionally protected Civil Right.

Your profile doesn't specify, but I assume you are in Illinois, possibly D.C.?

[ManiacJoe]

38. This helps explain some of your other posts.

Where are you located?

[michreject]

43. Cash and carry in MI

I've bought and sold dozens.

All legal.

[ManiacJoe]

22. I am guessing that you thought the article was about actual assault rifles.

> Too bad they require licenses.

Actual assault rifles (machine guns) do require federal fees/licenses/paperwork.

The article is actually talking about semi-auto carbines, often referred to as "assault weapons" although there is no such thing in the Real World.

[ileus]

24. No I knew the article was talking about semi-autos, but the writer is too stupid to know...

[Ter]

26. You guessed wrong

I know all about the 1994-2004 "assault weapon" ban, or scary gun ban as I like to call it. These, although legal again (in most places at least), still require you to give information such as ID and/or a firearm permit.

[ManiacJoe]

29. All guns require that when buying from a dealer.

There is nothing special about the semi-auto carbines (outside the few odd-ball states).

[LAGC]

32. You don't need to show ID or a permit to buy private-party, only from dealers.

I bought my SAR-2 (AK-74 variant) 10 years ago, during the height of the "Assault-Weapon Ban."



Paid cash, no questions asked.

[benEzra]

34. They were never illegal, even 1994-2004.

AR's/AK's manufactured or imported between 1994 and 2004 had to have smooth muzzles or integral brakes, fixed or pinned stocks, and no bayonet lug, but they were perfectly legal to make/import and sell. My own AK is a 2002 model.

[benEzra]

33. They never left. That author thinks the 1994 law banned new AR's/AK's, but it did not.

Last edited Thu Jan 19, 2012, 11:08 AM - Edit history (1)

It was a features limit and name restriction, for new guns only.

Now, *Walmart* stopped selling modern-looking rifles for a while (but continued to sell traditionally Ruger Mini-14's and Mini Thirty's), but they continued to sell ammunition and accessories for them.

I guess it finally dawned on them that by refusing to sell the most popular rifles, they were missing out on a lot of sales that had been going to local gun shops instead.

FWIW, I wrote the author of that article, but I doubt I'll hear back:

Hi, just wanted to point out that the 1994 'assault weapons ban' didn't actually ban the sale of any guns, and didn't ban the sale of over-10-round magazines. A lot of people don't realize that.

Between 1994 and 2004, AR-15 type rifles, civilian AK's, etc. could still be freely manufactured, imported, and sold, they just had to comply with a features limit and a naming restriction. A protruding handgrip, a flash suppressor, or an adjustable or folding stock were still ok, but you couldn't have two such features on the same rifle if it was made after 9/94. New guns couldn't be marketed under any of 19 banned names, but many of those names were red herrings anyway. Rather than decreasing sales, the 1994 law sharply increased sales during and after 1994.

As far as magazines, the 1994 law exempted all over-10-round magazines made before September 1994, and manufacturers had enough lead time to produce and stockpile more than a decade's worth of them, ensuring continued supply after 1994. Importing legacy magazines from other countries post-1994 was also legal, as long as they were manufactured prior to 9/94.

Prices did rise a lot on proprietary pistol magazines due to uncertainty and increased demand, particularly for Glocks and such, but availability was always pretty good. Rifle magazine prices were much more stable during the ban era due to massive importation of preban 30- and 20-round AR/AK/FAL magazines from Europe and Asia, and the abundant supply kept prices down.

I shoot a ban-era AK (2002 SAR-1) and a post-ban Rock River AR recreationally and in local USPSA style matches. When I bought the AK new in 2003 ($379), magazines were $9.99/ea for 30's and $5.99/ea for 20's, which AFAIK is cheaper than they are now. I didn't pay attention to AR mag prices pre-2004 because I didn't get the Rock River until a few years later.

As far as misuse, rifles (including "assault weapons&quot are consistently among the least misused weapons in the nation, with only about 3% of U.S. homicides involving any type of rifle per the FBI UCR (see Table 20 in the UCR, Murder by State and Type of Weapon).

Thanks for your time, and have a good day!

benEzra

Edited to add:

For those here who still deny "assault weapons" were as available 1994-2004 as now, here's a picture of a 100% ban-compliant civilian AK. This is my 2002 model Romanian SAR-1, made in Cugir and imported that year; I bought it at a local gun shop in early 2003. That magazine is a ban-era import that came with the rifle.

[virginia mountainman]

53. You know Ben..

In a way, we are very lucky, to have such "gun ignorant" people writing these laws.

And that is a great post, that is just outside of the gun controllers grasp. Because of how they chose to ignore it time and time again. But it does cut right to the heart of how STUPID, toothless and pointless the Assault Weapon Ban really was.

[jeepnstein]

58. I'm shopping for one again.

This time around I think I'm going to wait until I can afford the extra $200 for a tax stamp. I'm thinking 11.5 inch barrel, A1 upper, and some kind of optic. Wal Mart probably isn't going to sell that one to me.

No rush, though, they're going to be around a long time.

[ileus]

60. 6.5, 6.8, 458, 50, 223, 410....so many calibers so little time.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

62. Happy now? nt