search
top

Gun Control Works: Assault Weapons in NJ, Chicago, and MA

Stories in Massachusetts, Chicago (in schools, no less), and New Jersey. I don’t know how this could happen, since all three of those states ban them. Also, go take a look at the photo on the Massachusetts story. That looks like a slidefire stock to me, on one of the seized guns. Watch that become the next “loophole.”

12 Responses to “Gun Control Works: Assault Weapons in NJ, Chicago, and MA”

  1. Maria says:

    I will be the first to admit that I don’t get the need for assault rifles (even just semi-auto). But I will acknowledge that banning them seems to be working just as well as banning drugs. /sarc

    • Sebastian says:

      I can’t speak for everyone, but mostly, they are just a lot more pleasant to shoot than most other firearms. I can spend all day shooting an AR-15. That’s not true of other firearms I own. A lot of it is that the ergonomics of many of what people call “assault weapons” are just a lot better than traditional firearms, which is probably why they’ve seen such widespread adoption, even in civilian police forces.

      • Jamie in ND says:

        @ Sebastian: +1

      • Harold says:

        It’s worth pointing out that the assault rifle concept is entirely driven by ergonomics. Yes, there’s military doctrines that drive the ergonomic requirements, but those are mostly of secondary concern to us, especially since we’re not allowed to buy newly manufactured full auto weapons (as of 1986).

        Not of secondary concern is their lower energy and therefore lower recoil which allows for faster followup shots (they’re used fairly often by civilians in self-defense). For various reasons many people also strongly desire the lower recoil.

        The cost of ammo is also lower, both due to there being less of everything (brass, powder, bullet) and the adoption of theses designs by the worlds’ militaries. E.g. ATK (Federal etc.) operates the Lake City, MO small arms ammo plant for the government with a very interesting, mutually beneficial contract. If ammo fails military specification tests but is good for the civilian market (I’ve heard most often due to not getting the sealant quite right), they can sell it to us. And the government can cancel an order; ATK doesn’t care, they just run it off as normal, test for safety and we enjoy the bargain.

        • Weer'd Beard says:

          Yep and those evil “extended pistol grips” are simply what happens when your bring the stock up to inline with the bore. You lose the gripping surface on the stock so it needs to be placed lower.

          Oh and did anybody notice in the slidefire rifle somebody jammed a Mini-14 magazine into an AK pattern?

          • Maria says:

            Thanks. Interesting answers and something to think about. I still don’t see the need but I appreciate the desire and practical nature of the choice.

            • Harold says:

              If you recognize the need for self-defense, it shouldn’t be much of a jump to self-defense against multiple assailants. At that point, with proper bullet selection (the military is limited there, and thousands of US troops have paid the price starting with the Vietnam War), a “civilian” semi-auto “assault rifle”, especially with good optics, can be an excellent choice, especially since the effective range of handguns is pretty short and the bad guys are known to use rifles and shotguns.

              It’s very scenario dependent, with semi-auto handguns being used the vast majority of incidents, but there are plenty of examples out there. Here’s a recent one, “Alto Bonito Teen fires at suspected home intruders with AK47” (if he’s Hispanic (possible given the location), that’s a trifecta for the gun-grabbers :-).

              The reduced recoil and in some cases reduced weight of these rifles can make a big difference to those with smaller bodies. I wouldn’t hand a full power “Get off my lawn” battle rifle to a younger teen unless they’ve learned to deal with significant recoil and pre-teen certainly not at all (although when and if a pre-teen can be trusted with such has to be determined on a case by case basis). Women of course are on average of smaller stature and these ergonomic factors are often important to them.

            • Harold says:

              Oh, let’s not forget the familiarity factor. Many men and women are doing a hitch in the US military ground forces where in theory they learn how to operate and maintain AR-15 pattern rifles. Naturally many of them they like to shoot (roughly) the same thing when they return to civilian life.

              We saw some of the same in e.g. the ’50s, when M1 Garand safeties were adopted in a lot of civilian rifle and shotgun models. Since that’s ambidextrous, my left handed father procured more than a few of those before the industry started offering better adopted models for lefties.

              The same holds for the move to bolt action rifles firing serious cartridges after the US Army started adopting the concept in 1903 (or earlier if you count the 1892 or thereabouts Krag).

              • Weer'd Beard says:

                +1 I have a relative who is VERY liberal. But he’s also a vet, and he mentioned to me that if he was going to get a gun it would be an AR-15 because its the gun he’s most familiar with.

                Makes sense, that’s the reason why I carry a 1911. Its not that its the best pistol in the universe, but it IS the pistol I’m most familiar and comfortable with.

            • Mr Evilwrench says:

              If I come back with 29 rounds, or especially 30, left in the mag, that’ll suit me fine, but if I have a “food riot” coming up my street, looting, raping and throwing molotovs along the way, I want to be able to put down as many of them as I can before they get to me and mine. That’s why I have one, my son will be carrying one, my SO will have one, and her son when he gets old enough. I hope I never “need” one, but I hope I never need a fire extinguisher, too.

  2. AndyN says:

    I think the guy who wrote the MA article deserves at least a little credit for getting some quotes from a gun store owner about what those seized rifles are and aren’t, as well as pointing out later in the article that those types of weapons are almost never used in violent crimes.

    • Jeff says:

      The store he went to is the go to place for AK stuff in MA too. Not sure if that was on purpose or just luck because they happen to be nearby.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. SayUncle » Unpossible - [...] These instances could not have happened because assault weapons are banned in Chicago, Massachusetts, and New Jersey. [...]
top