Page 1 of 1
Reagan's postion on semi-automatic weapons
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2016 11:28 am
by MajGenl.Meade
May 3, 1994
To Members of the U.S. House of Representatives:
We are writing to urge your support for a ban on the domestic manufacture of military-style assault weapons. This is a matter of vital importance to the public safety. Although assault weapons account for less than 1% of the guns in circulation, they account for nearly 10% of the guns traced to crime.
Every major law enforcement organization in America and dozens of leading labor, medical, religious, civil rights and civic groups support such a ban. Most importantly, poll after poll shows that the American public overwhelmingly support a ban on assault weapons. A 1993 CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll found that 77% of Americans support a ban on the manufacture, sale, and possession of semi-automatic assault guns, such as the AK-47.
The 1989 import ban resulted in an impressive 40% drop in imported assault weapons traced to crime between 1989 and 1991, but the killing continues. Last year, a killer armed with two TEC9s killed eight people at a San Francisco law firm and wounded several others. During the past five years, more than 40 law enforcement officers have been killed or wounded in the line of duty by an assault weapon.
While we recognize that assault weapon legislation will not stop all assault weapon crime, statistics prove that we can dry up the supply of these guns, making them less accessible to criminals. We urge you to listen to the American public and to the law enforcement community and support a ban on the further manufacture of these weapons.
Sincerely,
Gerald R. Ford
Jimmy Carter
Ronald Reagan
Re: Reagan's postion on semi-automatic weapons
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2016 1:47 pm
by Big RR
I am still confused about the difference between the so-called "assault weapons" (like the AK 47) and other semiautomatic rifles. Basically the only difference I have seen is the appearance, but I am not certain. I have never heard of a blanket ban on all semi automatic rifles (except in a few states), only "assault rifles".
Re: Reagan's postion on semi-automatic weapons
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2016 4:24 pm
by rubato
Big RR wrote:I am still confused about the difference between the so-called "assault weapons" (like the AK 47) and other semiautomatic rifles. Basically the only difference I have seen is the appearance, but I am not certain. I have never heard of a blanket ban on all semi automatic rifles (except in a few states), only "assault rifles".
Yeah, when I hunt I want 30 rounds of small caliber high velocity ammo, designed to wound rather then kill outright, ready to go. Everybody does. What if there's a whole HERD of deer?
yrs,
rubato
Re: Reagan's postion on semi-automatic weapons
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2016 5:00 pm
by Big RR
?????????????
why change the discussion to ammo or, I presume, magazine size?

Re: Reagan's postion on semi-automatic weapons
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2016 5:30 pm
by Bicycle Bill
rubato wrote:Big RR wrote:I am still confused about the difference between the so-called "assault weapons" (like the AK 47) and other semiautomatic rifles. Basically the only difference I have seen is the appearance, but I am not certain. I have never heard of a blanket ban on all semi automatic rifles (except in a few states), only "assault rifles".
Yeah, when I hunt I want 30 rounds of small caliber high velocity ammo, designed to wound rather then kill outright, ready to go. Everybody does. What if there's a whole HERD of deer?
yrs,
rubato
Two guys talking in the bar after the the hunt is over.
First guy: "Did you get any deer?"
Second guy: "Yeah, and with my new AR-15 I got him 12 times!!"
-"BB"-
Re: Reagan's postion on semi-automatic weapons
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2016 5:37 pm
by MajGenl.Meade
You're not alone. Reagan referred to the AR-15 as an automatic on one occasion. In the letter to Congress, the three esteemed colleagues mentioned the AK47 which is a semi-automatic rifle and the TEC9 which was a semi-auto machine pistol. And they are all "assault weapons".
The auto AK47 is of course banned anyway, except for collectors with oodles of cash. I think that weapons that look like semi-auto military arms are banned in CA, NY, NJ, MD, CT, and DC. I don't think that "assault rifles" per se are absolutely banned.
The AR-15 used to be illegal. President Bill Clinton’s assault weapons ban, which was in effect from 1994 to 2004, banned the AR-15 and other guns that were too similar to military-style weapons. However, this law did not prohibit Americans from owning semi-automatic weapons;1 it capped how many military features an individual gun could have. During the ban, a semi-automatic rifle like the AR-15 could legally have any one of the following features, as long as it didn’t have two or more of them: a folding stock (making the gun slightly easier to conceal), a pistol grip (making the weapon easier to hold and use), a bayonet mount, a flash suppressor (making it harder to see where shots are coming from), or a grenade launcher.
A 2004 report commissioned by the Department of Justice on the effects of the assault weapons ban concluded that the law was largely ineffective at limiting access to weapons with the power of the AR-15. According to the report, the ban focused on “features that have little to do with the weapons’ operation, and removing those features is sufficient to make the weapons legal.” The report noted that several semi-automatic rifles were functionally equivalent to the AR-15 and untouched by the ban. It’s hard to know whether Mateen’s AR-15-style weapon would have been covered by the old ban, though some versions of the Sig Sauer MCX rifle he used are sold with more than one of the components that were limited by the law. Depending on how many military-style features the rifle had when he bought it, it might have been legal under the assault weapons ban. And he would have been able to modify the gun himself, even under the old law.
The review for the DOJ concluded that bans on specific models or features of assault weapons had little to no discernible impact on gun deaths. If the law had any effect, the report said, it was most likely the result of bans on large-capacity magazines, which contain 10 or more rounds. (Large magazines allow shooters to keep firing without pausing to reload, a point at which their targets could run or fight back.) Calculations based on homicide reports in Jersey City, New Jersey, suggested that restricting large-capacity magazines might lower the number of gunshot victims by up to 5 percent. However, there are a huge number of high-capacity magazines already in circulation. The report authors concluded that a ban on them probably wouldn’t make it hard to keep a determined shooter from legally buying a pre-ban magazine and pairing it with an AR-15 equivalent
https://www.google.com/search?q=are+ass ... aaWCxr7SmM
Re: Reagan's postion on semi-automatic weapons
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:03 pm
by Big RR
That's my understanding of NJ law--there are recited firearms that are banned and the ban includes guns substantially similar to the recited ones. Guidelines for substantial similarity include having things like bayonet mounts, flash arresters, grenade launchers, and pistol grips, but I honestly do not understand why such guns are any more dangerous than guns without such military-like accoutrements.
Regulation of magazine size is something that at least is grounded in the reality that the higher capacity magazines permit far more extended firing if the gun is used in some kind of assault. I have a friend who is an avid shooter (going to the range several times a week and participating in competitions) and he destroyed his higher capacity magazines when NJ changed its law; I would bet a good number of others did the same, especially if the penalties are severe if you get caught violating it. Sure there are a lot of higher capacity magazines available, but it takes some off the street and makes existing ones more difficult to replace when they wear out.
Re: Reagan's postion on semi-automatic weapons
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:19 pm
by MajGenl.Meade
Re: Reagan's postion on semi-automatic weapons
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:23 pm
by Big RR
Meade and I are in agreement? I never imagined this day would come--next we'll be seeing Donald Trump win the republican nomination.

Re: Reagan's postion on semi-automatic weapons
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2016 6:26 pm
by MajGenl.Meade
I think that's the second time in the past couple of weeks... I'm afraid you're correct about the last part.
Re: Reagan's postion on semi-automatic weapons
Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2016 7:59 pm
by oldr_n_wsr
Big RR wrote:I am still confused about the difference between the so-called "assault weapons" (like the AK 47) and other semiautomatic rifles. Basically the only difference I have seen is the appearance, but I am not certain. I have never heard of a blanket ban on all semi automatic rifles (except in a few states), only "assault rifles".
There are semi-auto rifles for hunting. they look much like any other hunting rifle so your point "the only difference I have seen is the appearance," is valid. The AR-15 looks "cool" or "scary" depending on which side you are on. One other thing, it has almost no recoil.
Personally I like a nice single piece wooden stock like my remington 600.

Mine is similar but my scope is mounted a little higher as I mostly use the sights. I use the scope for long range searches. But the woodgrain is similar. My cousin (God rest his soul) gave it to me and it was pretty beat up. I re-finished the stock and had a gunsmith give it a good "going over" and mount the scope.
It's a "short rifle" (only an 18.5" barrel) which is great for the dense brush I usually hunt in. Also packs a punch with a .350 magnum cartridge which is good to have if the local moose or mama bear decides they don't like me going after bambi. It holds 6 rounds which is enough for most encounters. It would make a rabbit or squirrel "disappear". It has a pretty good kick to it also.
And just to repost "14 things..."
http://thefederalist.com/2015/02/24/14- ... bout-guns/