“To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.”
by Richard Henry Lee




"walls of the city" logo conceptualized by Oleg Volk and executed by Linoge. Logo is © "walls of the city".

the stupidity of assault weapon bans, revisited

About two weeks ago, I addressed the stupidity of “assault weapon bans”, and specifically the moronic claim that they are intended to keep “military-style” hardware out of the hands of civilians. Today, we are going to replow that same ground, but in a different fashion.

Consider these rifles. What do you see?

The first is a good old M1917 bolt-action rifle, constructed by Eddystone in September, 1918 and used by the Canadian armed forces (as evinced by its stamping and rack number).

The second is, of course, the unmistakeable Model 39 Mosin Nagant bolt-action rifle, slapped together by SAKO in 1943, complete with an appropriately beaten-up wartime stock, and an old Finnish Civil Guard inventory number.

The thrid is a beautiful example of the MAS-49/56 semi-automatic rifle, manufactured by Saint Etienne in 1972, and not only includes its APX L806 scope, but also three 10-round magazines and a bayonet.

The fourth and final is probably my favorite, and is a Model PE 91/30 Mosin Nagant bolt action rifle, built at Tula in 1937, and comes with the appropriate serializations, appropriate stamps, and appropriate PEM scope.

Not only are every last one of those rifles “military-style”, they are, in fact, military rifles shooting “military calibers”, and they probably actively served in their respective countries’ armed forces. And yet, even during the blissfully-expired Federal Assault Weapons Ban, and still during Kalifornistan’s and Massachussets’ still-enacted AWBs*, I could have all four of these rifles shipped straight to my door with my Type 03 / Curio and Relic FFL**.

For heaven’s sake, the MAS-49/56 uses a gas impingement system that is nearly identical to that employed by the M-16/AR-15, has detachable magazines, shoots a still-available-if-expensive round that is roughly comparable to the 7.62x51mm NATO in terms of power, and was accurate to at least 600m when coupled with its included scope… and it could show up on my doorstep in a box, assuming I had the funds and beat its actual buyer to the punch. Despite being a bolt-action, the 91/30 shoots a slightly-more powerful round probably equally as accurately (its scope indicates that it was a “sniper” variant, and thus more-accurate than the average, off-the-shelf Mosin Nagant), and it too could be shipped straight to me.

Make no mistake – these are not replicas, these are not reproductions, these are not copies, these are not just “military-style”, and these have not been “de-milled”. They are, in fact, 100%, hardcore, honest-to-God military-issue rifles, and some of them may have even spent some time perforating Soviets, Germans, or Lord knows what else (not likely, but it is possible).

And every last one of them was legal to possess, buy, and sell during the Federal AWB**.

Remind me again how the “Assault Weapon Ban” was/is supposed to keep “military-style” hardware out of the hands of us untrustworthy citizens?

(* – MA still requires its subjects to provide their “license to own” permit when purchasing C&Rs, and California’s C&R laws are maliciously complicated but can still be forced to work.

** – This is assuming my understanding is correct. Information online regarding the legal interactions betwen C&R licenses and the expired FAWB is somewhat… lacking.)

(All images blatantly borrwed from Empire Arms.)

11 comments to the stupidity of assault weapon bans, revisited

  • […] AWB is Stupid By JP, on October 20th, 2010 Another brilliant post from WallsoftheCity.net. This one regarding the stupidity of AWBs and some C&R gun pr0n. Go read it. Guns […]

  • ZK

    As Ja-Pete said, it’s just because some guns are more scary looking.

  • Yep I could get any of those shipped to my door no problem in Mass (but it would be criminal possession if I didn’t have an FID/LTC (and what guns would fit under what permit is overly complicated)

    Better yet I have an 1896 Tula M1891 Mosin Nagant. I happened to buy it at a local shop with my C&R (So I skipped the whole background check foolishness) but given that it was made Pre 1900 its not a gun by BATFE standards and you can ship that to ANYBODY’S door, no permit needed (not even in Mass…tho you WOULD need a permit to posses 7.62x54R of any vintage to feed it!)

    Hey but many of the anti-rights jerks (Think AHSA, or Joan Perterson) own guns that are likely copies or similar to military weapons (like the K98 Mauser, or the Winchester M12 shotgun) they can’t ask for laws that ban THEIR rights!

  • I have both the Mosin M44(gun show pickup) and 91/30(Fleet Farm purchase)(actually is my son’s, gave it to him for Christmas last year)

    I found another M44 yesterday at a Gun Shop near my office. 109.00. Tempting but I really do not need another.

    Is interesting all the C and R weapons you can buy.
    And it is a fairly simple process to get your C&R License.

    Now I should just use the damn thing more often….

  • dagamore

    the MAS looks great, i bet it was only dropped once!

  • @maddmedic – I LOVE the M44 its my favorite of all the Mosin nagant patterns. Of course I could point out if you are looking at an old guy, buy it now, as they aren’t making any more. 🙂

  • @JP – Spaceba :).

    @ZK – She actually admitted to that? I mean, she came out and said those very words?

    Wow. Well, at least she can let that obvious notion slip without too much trouble… but the idea that she honestly ascribes to it scares the bejesus out of me. People like that are a threat to freedom everywhere, not just in relation to firearm-related rights… and it is somewhat astonishing to me that some people cannot understand that. I guess they figure they can use her while they need her, and then offload her when they do not – fat chance of that.

    @Weer’d Beard – Heh, antique guns are even better… an amazing number of them take still-readily-available cartridges, and yet they are completely, totally, and entirely unregulated. Better yet, every damned last one of them probably saw service in a military or armed force somewhere.

    If anti-rights nuts actually grasped that idea, something tells me they would loose sleep for about a solid month…

    ‘Course, the simple truth is that the vast majority of commonly-available firearms, even current “hunting” rifles, are direct descendants from firearms that have killed thousands of people in warfare and conflicts around the country. But none of that matters – those are “safe” guns, even though they are still designed to kill. Or something.

    @maddmedic – Heh, I should use my C&R ever. Might just have an idea for that, though, in an upcoming post.

    @dagamore – *snort* Well, someone else agreed with you – the darned thing vanished an hour after it was posted.

  • @Weer’d Beard
    Yes is much fun to shoot the M44. The muzzle blast in proper lighting or lack thereof is awesome. One thing with the 91/30, if the muzzle blast does not get them, the darn thing is long enough to smack them upside the head!!

  • ZK

    Quote, Japette:

    In my opinion, these type of guns are scarier- yes scarier- than regular hunting guns that my family used when I was growing up. That may be why these are weapons of choice for many of the gangs and criminals…

    End Quote.

  • @ZK – Wow. I guess I should be thankful that the idiot finally let that particular talking point slip, but the fact that she actually ascribes to those kinds of beliefs rather boggles the mind. I suppose Gil Hibben’s knives are “scary” too, but that sure as hell does not make them more effective…

    *sigh* Idiots everywhere. I guess we should be thankful this particular one is in no position of power or control.