1022 is back again

House Resolution 1022 Back with a vengeance.

Representative Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) is out for blood as she has reintroduced the so call "Assault Weapons Ban", which she says is "to reauthorize the assault weapons ban, and for other purposes." So why do I care? Well most friends wouldn't wonder that, but I thought I'd list a few things out.

First off, let's see what an assault rifle is. This Blogger gives a nice little breakdown of the what the bill defines as an assault weapon. Basically, the main definitions include a lot of cosmetic details that people see in movies, and think must be important for a gun to be dangerous. Does the Rep introducing the bill even understand? View this video to find out . That's right, the lady admits she doesn't even know what the barrel shroud is, and admits the bill isn't the best.

As for pistol grips on a rifle, I get really upset. I enjoy having this style of grip, why? Because my normal trigger finger was shattered as a teenager, and I have less movement with it, so I fire with a different finger, and a standard rifle inhibits my ability to shoot. So should I make an argument that this bill is anti-disability? In a way it is, because part of the text of the law goes on to describe that merely the existence of a kit to modify a gun to have these features makes that gun banned. That's right, if you own a Ruger 10/22 (one of the most popular rifles ever produced) you will never be able to sell it, because of the existence of barrel shrouds, folding stocks, foregrips, and because it has an evil detachable magazine.

Many people contest that this ban should be ok, because what person would want a gun like that? What use does it have? Actually, quite a bit. The law is so broad that it bans guns of every type. Even your most common Scout range .22, to the most popular hunting and competition target rifles are included. Every semi-automatic shotgun, most non revolver pistols.

This bill would ban:
* Every gun that was modified to comply with the Clinton ban
* Most of the most popular hunting rifle styles
* Guns with "any characteristic that can function as a grip." (lawyers will have fun with that)
* WWI and WWII era carbines, unless rendered inoperable
* Any gun the attorney general claims is not "Sporting" (yes, up to the current attorney general to decide, no elected oversight)

Any of these guns (the vast majority that exist) could cause a penalty of "at least 10 years" in jail, followed by fines, confiscation of property, etc. Just being charged for violation would cause all weapons to be confiscated, without return!
Please read up on the law, and some resources about it here, and follow up with your representative.

Why is it the people most champion civil rights seem to be the first to want to remove your ability to keep them?
--------