Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!columbia!rutgers!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!jade!jkh From: jkh@jade.BERKELEY.EDU (Jordan K. Hubbard) Newsgroups: mod.rec.guns Subject: Re: New Firearms Laws Message-ID: <1955@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> Date: Tue, 16-Dec-86 15:43:27 EST Article-I.D.: jade.1955 Posted: Tue Dec 16 15:43:27 1986 Date-Received: Thu, 18-Dec-86 03:23:20 EST Organization: U.C. Berkeley Lines: 60 Approved: jkh@ucbjade Author: voder!kontron!cramer@ucbvax.Berkeley.Edu (Clayton Cramer) Article: 12:17 > In-Reply-To: your article <1716@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> > > Thanks to Mr. Cramer for the summary of the new > gun laws. Could he provide the current definition > of "armor piercing" as defined in the new laws? > Sorry, I don't have the legal definition of armor piercing available. What I have read (which may or may not be correct) is that only handgun ammunition is affected by the "armor piercing" ban. I have read in other (less trustworthy places) that iron or steel-core bullets for handguns or rifles are prohibited, and therefore the new 62-grain 5.56mm ammo adopted by NATO is illegal. In brief, there's no way you are going to run into armor-piercing ammo in a gun store, and I think there is an adequate amount of rifle ammunition that will pierce bullet-proof vests to keep politicians in fear. > I strongly suspect that we can look forward to > increased BATF zealousness in locating "machine guns" > and "silencers." That organization needs a reason to exist. > Already, there has been at least one reported raid on > a "machine gun" manufacturer in Utah, which led to > no arrests, but lots of media hype. > If it's the one I'm thinking of, it led to convictions. The manufacturer pleaded guilty to back-dating manufacturing dates on automatic weapon frames. It's hard to believe BATF could be any more zealous than they already are pursuing automatic weapons and silencers. At one time several years ago they were confiscating mailing lists of companies that sold silencer parts "kits" then getting search warrants to search people's homes for completed silencers. (Hence, the ads you will see in Shotgun News from companies emphasizing, "We keep no records except amount of sale for tax purposes.") > The next logical step is for the BATF to re-define > "readily convertible" to include all semi-auto > weapons. "Readily convertible" is in the eyes of the > beholder. Almost all semi-auto guns firing from > an open-bolt position have already been banned by BATF > edict. Periodically, attempts to define the semi-auto > M14 rifles and their copies as "readily convertible" occur. > Should this succeed, expect the flood gates to open > as HK 91s and 93, AR15s, etc. become illegal. What's really > bad is that now there is NO WAY to register these guns > in case of such a re-classification, because civilians > may not acquire new machine guns. > Of course. I'm just speculating. > > Jon Kaplowitz California Assemblyman Art Agnos of San Francisco has made repeated attempts to reclassify semiauto rifles that have, or can accept, magazines with a capacity of 20 rounds or more as machine guns under California law. The law is written so sloppily that it could be used to prohibit the Browning Hi-Power pistol (there are 21-round magazines available). Clayton E. Cramer