Americans Should Be Able To Own Any Weapon

We should not even be having a discussion on the validity of Americans owning guns. It is our right under the Constitution and any discussion or law to the contrary should be Un-Constitutional. In fact, we believe, that ALL Americans should be able to own any weapon they desire.

Until the 1930's Americans could own any weapon they wanted. They did not need to register it, did not have to get a permit to own it and it could be purchased at the local department store or sometimes even the drug store.  Guns were available, easily purchased and somehow, there were few shootings.

Then the "smart ones" decided that we should outlaw liquor which gave rise to the rum runners and the "Chicago" style gangsters with their Tommy Guns. All of a sudden we needed to stop these people from killing each other with these guns that fired "thousands of bullets" a minute.  At this point the first gun regulation started and it has been downhill ever since.

Today we are facing a political class, which conveniently excludes itself from obeying any law including gun control(see our post yesterday regarding the exclusion of "any government official" from the proposed assault weapons ban.) Their ultimate idea is an America without guns. Correction: America without guns owned by the common law abiding citizens. The ruling class will still have their weapons as well will the thugs, knuckle dragging neanderthals, and criminals but we have just repeated ourselves.

However, the Founding Fathers knew human nature and how these "smart ones" think, we mean feel, as thinking is not required to be a part of this class. They knew that given enough time, they would want to take this Constitutionally regulated Republic away from the citizens and grant all power to themselves. We are at that point now.

The Feinstein attempt to take away all guns must be defeated, whether it is in the halls of Congress, locally (as in the following post) or by citizen action.  We should reverse all the laws that have been passed since the 1930's. 

We should allow any citizen to own any type of military hardware up to and including tanks, rocket launchers and if someone wants, an F-16. Why, you say should a citizen own these weapons? Because, he as a free citizen of this country has the right to them!

In 1776, the top line of military hardware was the musket. It was used successfully against the British and Spaniards.  No longer were soldiers running around the country with axes or even bows and arrows. They carried the most up-to-date gun and cannon.  

The Founders would think no different today. They would want a citizen to have the same equipment as the government as this is the only way  the populace can be an effective counterbalance to an overbearing government.

We understand that Supreme Court decisions in the past have ruled against this argument, however, Justices can get things wrong. We saw that in the ObamaCare court case. It is time for the Court to reverse itself and grant Americans the right to defend themselves against the government. The Founders would agree!

Conservative Tom

The Gun Fight Will Be Local

January 25, 2013 by Bob Livingston 

PHOTOS.COM

Senator Dianne Feinstein (Communist-Calif.) introduced her draconian and unConstitutional bill to ban weapons with scary-looking features and high-capacity magazines and create a national registry system yesterday. It was classic sleight of hand.

The bill was introduced with sound and fury by a person who has stated it’s her goal to confiscate every firearm in America. It was done in violation of Washington, D.C.’s existing gun laws. Of course, laws don’t apply to the 1 percent (just ask David Gregory). They get special exemptions and specially exempted body guards to watch over them. Over the course of the coming days, the gun grabbers will hail her as a heroine.

The CINO (conservative in name only) Republicans in Congress will wail and gnash their teeth. Threatened by Tea Party challenges from the right and the National Rifle Association, most will not cave.

Senators are already indicating that passing a gun ban will be a tough sell. And Congressional Republicans — who have already alienated conservative Americans by agreeing to an unConstititutional fiscal cliff deal that raised taxes on 77 percent of the population — would be committing suicide by passing more gun laws.

That’s not to say you can ignore Congress. Lawmakers will do all they can to walk the tightrope between what their masters want (disarmament of Americans) and what the voting population and the NRA will endure.

The real gun grab is coming by stealth. President Barack Obama’s (Fascist-Who knows where?) bank, Bank of America has frozen the accounts of two gun manufacturers. Another gun manufacturer has had his liability insurance, held by GEICO, cancelled because his vehicle “does not meet our underwriting guidelines because it is used in conjunction with a company that deals in the weapons industry.” GEICO, of course, is owned by Obama’s BFF, Warren Buffett.

On the State level, gun rights are being snatched overtly and covertly. New York just rammed through a comprehensive gun ban that will allow weapons to be confiscated once the original owner dies. It will also institute a database of gun owners and require re-registration every five years.

In Missouri, the Senate is considering a bill that would require a parent or guardian of a Missouri school student to notify the school board in writing that he or she owns a firearm. Parents of children who commit crimes with guns would be prosecuted as felons.

Though ordered by a recent Federal appeals court to create a law that would allow for concealed carry in Illinois, gun grabbers there are rather seeking ways to circumvent the ruling and keep guns in the hands of criminals but away from law-abiding citizens.

States like Texas, Wyoming, Tennessee, South Dakota and South Carolina have bills pending before their legislatures that would block enforcement of unConstitutional Federal firearms laws. Other States like Pennsylvania, Alabama and perhaps a dozen more, have pro-gun rights bills set for their next sessions.

Dozens of local sheriffs have declared that they will defend the Constitution and resist unConstitional gun laws. The real gun fight will go on at the State and local levels.

Meanwhile, the gun grabbers and Obama through his executive orders are Balkanizing America. It seems that disarmament and division are their main goals, and they’re using children as human shields. And don’t forget, they’ve accumulated billions of rounds of ammunition to deal with those who won’t peaceably comply.

The Military Loses Another Great General

The White House/Pentagon/Obama/whomever want puppy dogs!  Lap dogs that will not express their opinion but will do what the civilian leadership says they should do. The operational statement should be "Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Keep your job!"

This is how this current White House operates. It fires good men, who give their learned opinions and then are fired. The worst of it is that they don't have the guts to face the man and tell him to his face. They give his aid a note!

We also see it in the new lapdogs that the president has selected for State (Kerry), Defense (Hagel) and Treasury (Lew.)  They all are anti-military, anti-Israel and anti-American suck ups.

This next four years is going to test our stamina, if we are lucky and will bring to the end of our country as we know it, if we are not.  All of the problems we see just keep getting worse.  But hey, we are pessimistic!

Be Scared, Be Very Scared.

Conservative Tom

P.S. We wish General Mattis a nice retirement. You don't need to work for this bunch of anti-American lightweights.

REPORT: WASHINGTON DIDN’T EVEN TELL MARINE GEN. HE WAS BEING REPLACED

Jan. 25, 2013 12:05pm Becket Adams

• 564
• 21.9K
• 15
• 10
• 473

Gen. James N. Mattis (Getty Images)

United States Marine Corps Gen. James “Mad Dog” Mattis was notified that he was being replaced as commander of U.S. Central Command not by a phone call from Washington, but by a note passed to him by an aide, according to Foreign Policy’s Thomas E. Ricks.

From Ricks’ report:

… General Mattis was travelling and in a meeting when an aide passed him a note telling him that the Pentagon had announced his replacement as head of Central Command. It was news to him — he hadn’t received a phone call or a heads-up from anyone at the Pentagon or the White House.

Ricks says he inquired further into this report. This is what he was told:

…the commander-in-chief can make a change whenever he wants and give no reason. That is right and proper under our system of government.

But there’s also the matter of common courtesy to an uncommon man. Here is what one person wrote to me: “What message does it send to the Services when the one leader known for his war-fighting rather than diplomatic or bureaucratic political skills is retired early via one sentence in the Pentagon’s daily press handout? Even in battle, Mattis was inclusive of all under his command. He took the time to pull together his driver and guards after every day’s rotation on the battlefield, telling them what he thought he had learned and asking them for input. Surely senior administration officials could have found the time to be gracious. But they didn’t.”

President Obama appointed Gen. Mattis as commander of U.S. Central Command in the summer of 2010. He was quickly confirmed by the U.S. Senate.

“During his time as commander, none of the symptoms of unhealthy civil-military relations such as those that characterized the tenure of Donald Rumsfeld as secretary of defense, have manifested themselves,” Mackubin Thomas Owens writes in the Weekly Standard.

“There have been no leaks to the press over policy disagreements and no reports of ‘slow rolling’ or ‘foot dragging’ in Gen. Mattis’s implementation of the president’s policy,” Owens adds.

U.S. Marine Corps Gen. James Mattis, commander, U.S. Central Command speaks with Chief of Defense of the Qatar Armed Forces Lt.Gen. Hamad Bin Ali Al-Attiah and Staff Lt. General Hamad Mohammed Thani Al Rumaithi, Chief of Staff of the UAE Armed Forces Kuwaiti National Day military parade on Feb. 26, 2011. (DoD photo by Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Chad J. McNeeley/Released)

In short, Gen. Mattis was efficient and professional. So when it was announced last year that Gen. Mattis would be exiting his post sometime in March 2013, many of us were surprised. For a general who had carried himself and performed his duties so well, his tenure as commander of U.S. Central Command was unusually short-lived.

What happened?

Again, we turn to Ricks at Foreign Policy:

Pentagon insiders say that he rubbed civilian officials the wrong way — not because he went all “mad dog,” which is his public image, and the view at the White House, but rather because he pushed the civilians so hard on considering the second- and third-order consequences of military action against Iran. Some of those questions apparently were uncomfortable.

Like, what do you do with Iran once the nuclear issue is resolved and it remains a foe? What do you do if Iran then develops conventional capabilities that could make it hazardous for U.S. Navy ships to operate in the Persian Gulf? He kept saying, “And then what?”

Inquiry along these lines apparently was not welcomed — at least in the CENTCOM view. The White House view, apparently, is that Mattis was too hawkish …

Gen. Mattis, as Ricks notes, also disagreed with the White House on the U.S.’ ongoing operation in Afghanistan, Pakistani stability, and (perhaps most importantly) the U.S.’ response to the so-called “Arab Spring.”

And it’s because of these disagreements that certain commentators believe the White House decided to dump Gen. Mattis.

AL ASAD, Iraq – Lt. Gen. James Mattis, the commander of U.S. Marine Corps Forces Central Command, speaks to Marines with Marine Wing Support Group 27, May 6. Mattis explained how things in Iraq have gotten better since the first time Marines came to Iraq. (Photo by Cpl. Zachary Dyer)

“Of course, a president has every right to choose the generals he wants, but it is also the case that he usually gets the generals he deserves,” Owens notes.

“By pushing Mattis overboard, the administration is sending a message that it doesn’t want smart, independently minded generals who speak candidly to their civilian leaders. The message that generals and admirals may receive that they should go along to get along, which is a bad message for the health of U.S. civil-military relations,” Owens concludes.

Will Government Officials Be Treated Different Than Average Citizens

With all that has been written about the assault weapons bill that Frankenstein Feinstein introduced, we have noticed a most interesting phrase that is included in the following article. Here is the quote:

"Finally, the bill includes a number of exemptions: It exempts more than 2,200 hunting and sporting weapons; any gun manually operated by a bolt, pump, lever or slide action; any weapons used by government officials and law enforcement; and any weapons legally owned as of the date of the bill's enactment."

Why would "any weapons used by government officials..." be excluded. Does that mean that Feinstein could keep her AR-15? We wonder how they might interpret government officials? Does that mean a TSA agent? How about a janitor at the Federal building? A page in the House? A secretary at a Social Security office? Obviously, all Senators and Representatives, the President, Vice President, all cabinet officers, and Federal judges all would be able to keep their guns, but where would it stop?  Maybe, if you work for the government you can keep your guns. Wouldn't that we wonderful!

With any out of control government, officials (of all levels) are treated better than the citizens over which they rule. It does not matter if you are a top official or the person lowest on the rung.  When the final gun control rules come out, we expect that ALL employees of the government (federal, state and local) will be able to keep their guns! Isn't that special!

Conservative Tom

Dianne Feinstein Introduces Assault Weapons Ban, Urges Public To Help It Pass

Posted: 01/24/2013 3:10 pm EST  |  Updated: 01/25/2013 1:27 am EST

976

257

55

12569

GET POLITICS ALERTS:

SIGN UP

FOLLOW:

Gun Control, Gun Control, Video, Carolyn McCarthy, Harry Reid Gun Control, Assault Weapons,Assault Weapons Ban, Carolyn Mccarthy Gun Control, Dianne Feinstein, Dianne Feinstein Assault Weapons Ban, Dianne Feinstein Gun Control, Dianne Feinstein Gun Violence, Dianne Feinstein Guns,World Elections In 2013, Second Amendment, Gun Violence, NRA, Politics News

WASHINGTON -- Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) introduced legislation Thursday that would ban more than 150 types of assault weapons along with certain high-capacity gun magazines, saying she knows she faces an uphill battle to get her measure through Congress but, with the help of the American public, it can be done.

Feinstein's bill is far more detailed than the 1994 assault weapons ban that lapsed in 2004. Her bill would stop the sale, manufacture and importation of 158 specifically named military-style firearms and ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. It would also ban an additional group of assault weapons that accept detachable ammunition magazines and have at least one military characteristic -- a new provision she said addresses a loophole in the 1994 law.

"One criticism of the '94 law was that it was a two-characteristic test that defined it, and that was too easy to work around. Manufacturers could simply remove one of the characteristics and the firearm was legal," Feinstein said during a press conference, where she stood next to a wall of actual assault weapons on display. "The bill we are introducing today will make it much more difficult to work around by moving to a one-characteristic test."

Other new provisions include requiring background checks on all future transfers of assault weapons covered under the bill and eliminating the 10-year sunset that allowed the original ban to expire.

Finally, the bill includes a number of exemptions: It exempts more than 2,200 hunting and sporting weapons; any gun manually operated by a bolt, pump, lever or slide action; any weapons used by government officials and law enforcement; and any weapons legally owned as of the date of the bill's enactment.

Feinstein's legislation represents the most ambitious -- and most politically difficult -- piece of the gun violence package that President Barack Obama unveiled earlier this month. The recent push for gun control legislation comes in response to last month's shootings at a Newtown, Conn elementary school, and, more generally, in response to the spike in mass shootings that has occurred in recent years.

Feinstein spent nearly a year crafting the bill and said she did her best to keep it specifically focused on "guns designed for military use and used for mass murder."

"No weapons will be taken from anyone," she emphasized. "The purpose is to dry up the supply of these weapons over time."

Throughout the hourlong event, where police officers stood behind speakers ranging from Connecticut lawmakers to victims of mass shootings to former staffers of former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.), Feinstein acknowledged the steep climb ahead for her bill, which has yet to pick up public support from any Republicans or moderate Democrats.

"This is really an uphill battle. If anyone asked today, 'Can you win this?' the answer is, I don't know, it's so uphill," she said, pinning the success of the measure almost entirely on public will. "There is one great hope out there and that is you. Because you are stronger than the gun lobby. You are stronger than gun manufacturers ... Only if you stand up, if America rises up, if people care enough to call every member of the House and every member of the Senate and say, 'We have had enough.'"

Indeed, Obama is banking on public sentiment to help to carry pieces of his gun violence package through Congress, where gun control has long been a taboo subject. He has vowed to travel around the country pushing pieces of his plan, which includes other, less contentious proposals like tighter background checks and better data collection for people determined by courts to be mentally ill. On Friday, Vice PresidentJoe Biden will travel to Richmond, Va., to discuss the plan. Biden also held a Google+ chat on Thursday afternoon focused on gun violence.

Opposition to the assault weapons ban is nearly universal among Republicans, many of whom receive campaign contributions from the National Rifle Association, one of the most powerful lobbying groups in Washington. Speaking at a press conference in late December, NRA chief executive Wayne LaPierre called the assault weapons ban "a phony piece of legislation … built on lies," and a violation of Second Amendment rights. LaPierre and congressional Republicans have long argued that an assault weapons ban would not reduce overall crime, and therefore is ineffective.

Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.), whose husband was killed in a 1993 shooting spree on a Long Island Rail Road commuter train, is introducing the House version of Feinstein's bill. She said she's been meeting with the NRA over the past few weeks to try to figure out a way to work together, a process that she called "frustrating" but one that she said still gives her hope.

"To be honest with you, I'm not going to be able to trust them to be there for the tough votes," McCarthy said. "You're going to hear from the NRA and a lot of them are going to be saying [the assault weapons ban] is not going to do anything. I'm saying it's going to save lives."

As if on cue, the NRA put out a statement right after Feinstein's press conference completely dismissing her bill and its chances of moving through Congress:

"Senator Feinstein has been trying to ban guns from law-abiding citizens for decades. It's disappointing but not surprising that she is once again focused on curtailing the Constitution instead of prosecuting criminals or fixing our broken mental health system. The American people know gun bans do not work and we are confident Congress will reject Senator Feinstein's wrong-headed approach," reads the statement.

Tom Diaz, a longtime gun industry analyst and gun control expert, said the most likely outcome in the Senate would be the shelving of the assault weapons ban in favor of a bill requiring universal background checks on all gun sales -- among the least controversial of Obama's legislative proposals.

"You've got to watch the ball, and the ball here is really the universal background check," Diaz said. "That's what they've compromised down to."

Others saw a path forward for the bill, though a rocky one.

"Nobody thinks this is going to be an easy lift," said Ladd Everett, of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. "We're going to have to mobilize some grassroots activity behind this and send a very loud and clear message."

If there is any action to be had on gun control, it will have to start in the Senate, where Democrats hold the majority and have a greater chance of being able to pass a bill. The Senate Judiciary Committee will hold its first of several hearings next week on gun violence, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has said he's prepared to bring some kind of gun legislation to a floor vote, though he hasn't specifically said he'd bring up an assault weapons ban. In fact, he previouslydismissed the idea that a ban could even pass, but has since walked back his remarks somewhat.

Asked about Reid saying an assault weapons ban can't go anywhere, Feinstein scoffed.

"Look, I just said it's uphill. Clearly it wasn't helpful," she said of his comment. "He has a right to say it. That doesn't mean he's always right."

Christina Wilkie and John Rudolf contributed reporting.

Proposed Gun Ban List

If this were not so serious, one would be tempted to laugh at this list and some of its components. The one that is especially humorous is that your gun cannot have a grenade launcher, rocket launcher or a shotgun with a revolving chamber! Whaat?  We have never seen a gun with any of these components. Yes, there are rocket launchers and grenade launchers and  a very limited 5 shot revolving shotgun but none of these weapons have been involved in any of the 30 shootings over the past 28 years.  This is just the first step toward total gun confiscation.

To the confused, there is also a provision that forces you to put your gun in a government lockup, even though you are a law abiding citizen (the only ones who will follow the law, felons will not), have paid your fees, registered your guns and passed the background check. This is total insanity therefore there must be another reason for the law. 

This and the earlier attempt will fail and then we will see the real guns come out and demand total disarmament.  However, the bad guys will not and so we will see a Wild West without a sheriff!

These people are misleading the public and will do anything in their power to neuter the people so that they can take us over. Once that happens, they can do anything they want and nothing will stop them.

This law, if it passes, is the beginning of the end.

Conservative Tom

Dianne Feinstein Gun Bill: Text, List Of Guns Banned And Details Of 'The Assault Weapons Ban of 2013'

• TEXT SIZE:
• AAA

• 133
• 2.1k
• 29
• 2
• MORE+

BY IBTimes Staff Reporter | January 24 2013 1:54 PM

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, introduced a bill that would ban the sale, transfer, manufacture and importation of 100 specialty firearms and certain semiautomatic weapons. The bill would also outlaw the sale, importation and manufacture of ammunition magazines that accept more than 10 rounds.

(Photo: Reuters)
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, introduced a gun ban bill.

Sponsored Link
Mortgage Rates Hit 2.13%

Based on the legislation, called "The Assault Weapons Ban of 2013,"Americans would be able to keep certain weapons if they were already in their possession when the bill was enacted, and exemptions would be made for specific hunting and sporting weapons, as well as antique or disabled weapons.

Sen. Feinstein’s bill comes as gun control advocates say the political environment is more favorable for new gun control laws than it has been in years.

The California Democrat was joined by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., and five other Democratic lawmakers, along with gun violence victims, as they unveiled a bill that would reinstate the assault weapons ban, which went into effect in 1994 but lapsed in 2004.

Obama called on Congress to pass the assault weapons and high-capacity magazine ban on Jan. 16, as well as a requirement for universal background checks for gun sales and other measures. Citing the Newtown, Conn.,  massacre that occurred last month, the president said that "if there's even one thing we can do to reduce this violence, if there's even one life that can be saved, then we've got an obligation to try."

The White House chose not to draft its own bill but said it supports Feinstein's effort and has worked with her office in crafting the new version.

Read Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s gun bill here.

Assault Weapons Ban of 2013

Mass shootings in Newtown, Aurora, and Tucson have demonstrated all too clearly the need to regulate military-style assault weapons and high capacity ammunition magazines. These weapons allow a gunman to fire a large number of rounds quickly and without having to reload.

The legislation bans the sale, transfer, manufacturing and importation of:

All semiautomatic rifles that can accept a detachable magazine and have at least one military feature: pistol grip; forward grip; folding, telescoping, or detachable stock; grenade launcher or rocket launcher; barrel shroud; or threaded barrel.

All semiautomatic pistols that can accept a detachable magazine and have at least one military feature: threaded barrel; second pistol grip; barrel shroud; capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip; or semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm.

All semiautomatic rifles and handguns that have a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.

All semiautomatic shotguns that have a folding, telescoping, or detachable stock; pistol grip; fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 5 rounds; ability to accept a detachable magazine; forward grip; grenade launcher or rocket launcher; or shotgun with a revolving cylinder.

All ammunition feeding devices (magazines, strips, and drums) capable of accepting more than 10 rounds.

157 specifically-named firearms (listed at the end of this document).

The legislation excludes the following weapons from the bill:

Any weapon that is lawfully possessed at the date of the bill’s enactment;

Any firearm manually operated by a bolt, pump, lever or slide action;

Assault weapons used by military, law enforcement, and retired law enforcement; and

Antique weapons.

The legislation protects hunting and sporting firearms:

The bill excludes 2,258 legitimate hunting and sporting rifles and shotguns by specific make and model.  

The legislation strengthens the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban and state bans by:

Moving from a 2-characteristic test to a 1-characteristic test.

(The bill also makes the ban harder to evade by eliminating the easy-to-remove bayonet mounts and flash suppressors from the characteristics test.)

Banning dangerous after-market modifications and work-arounds.

Bump or slide fire stocks, which are modified stocks that enable semi-automatic weapons to fire at rates similar to fully automatic machine guns.

So-called “bullet buttons” that allow the rapid replacement of ammunition magazines, frequently used as a work-around to prohibitions on detachable magazines.

Thumbhole stocks, a type of stock that was created as a work-around to avoid prohibitions on pistol grips.

Adding a ban on the importation of assault weapons and large-capacity magazines.

Eliminating the 10-year sunset that allowed the original federal ban to expire.

The legislation addresses the millions of assault weapons and large-capacity magazines currently in existence by:

Requiring a background check on all sales or transfers of a grandfathered assault weapon.

(This background check can be run through the FBI or, if a state chooses, initiated with a state agency, as with the existing background check system.)

Prohibiting the sale or transfer of large-capacity ammunition feeding devices lawfully possessed on the date of enactment of the bill.

Allowing states and localities to use federal Byrne JAG grant funds to conduct a voluntarybuy-back program for grandfathered assault weapons and large-capacity ammunition feeding devices.

Imposing a safe storage requirement for grandfathered firearms, to keep them away from prohibited persons.

Requiring that assault weapons and large-capacity ammunition feeding devices manufactured after the date of the bill’s enactment be engraved with the serial number and date of manufacture of the weapon

Assault Weapon Bans Have Been Proven to Be Effective

The 1994 Assault Weapons Ban was effective at reducing crime and getting these military-style weapons off our streets. Since the ban expired, more than 350 people have been killed and more than 450 injured by these weapons.

A Justice Department study of the assault weapons ban found that it was responsible for a 6.7% decrease in total gun murders, holding all other factors equal.

Source: Jeffrey A. Roth & Christopher S. Koper, “Impact Evaluation of the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act of 1994,” (March 1997).

The same study also found that “Assault weapons are disproportionately involved in murders with multiple victims, multiple wounds per victim, and police officers as victims.”

The use of assault weapons in crime declined by more than two-thirds by about nine years after 1994 Assault Weapons Ban took effect.

Source: Christopher S. Koper, “An Updated Assessment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Impacts on Gun Markets and Gun Violence, 1994-2003” (June 2004), University of Pennsylvania, Report to the National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice.

The percentage of firearms seized by police in Virginia that had high-capacity magazines dropped significantly during the ban. That figure has doubled since the ban expired.

Source: David S. Fallis and James V. Grimaldi, “In Virginia, high-yield clip seizures rise,”Washington Post, at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/22/AR2011012204046.html

When Maryland imposed a more stringent ban on assault pistols and high-capacity magazines in 1994, it led to a 55% drop in assault pistols recovered by the Baltimore Police Department.

Source: Douglas S. Weil & Rebecca C. Knox, Letter to the Editor, The Maryland Ban on the Sale of Assault Pistols and High-Capacity Magazines: Estimating the Impact in Baltimore, 87 Am. J. of Public Health 2, Feb. 1997..

37% of police departments reported seeing a noticeable increase in criminals’ use of assault weapons since the 1994 federal ban expired.

Source: Police Executive Research Forum, Guns and Crime: Breaking New Ground by Focusing on the Local Impact (May 2010).

List of Firearms Prohibited by Name

Rifles: All AK types, including the following: AK, AK47, AK47S, AK–74, AKM, AKS, ARM, MAK90, MISR, NHM90, NHM91, Rock River Arms LAR–47, SA85, SA93, Vector Arms AK–47, VEPR, WASR–10, and WUM, IZHMASH Saiga AK, MAADI AK47 and ARM, Norinco 56S, 56S2, 84S, and 86S, Poly Technologies AK47 and AKS; All AR types, including the following: AR–10, AR–15, Armalite M15 22LR Carbine, Armalite M15–T, Barrett REC7, Beretta AR–70, Bushmaster ACR, Bushmaster Carbon 15, Bushmaster MOE series, Bushmaster XM15, Colt Match Target Rifles, DoubleStar AR rifles, DPMS Tactical Rifles, Heckler & Koch MR556, Olympic Arms, Remington R–15 rifles, Rock River Arms LAR–15, Sig Sauer SIG516 rifles, Smith & Wesson M&P15 Rifles, Stag Arms AR rifles, Sturm, Ruger & Co. SR556 rifles; Barrett M107A1; Barrett M82A1; Beretta CX4 Storm; Calico Liberty Series; CETME Sporter; Daewoo K–1, K–2, Max 1, Max 2, AR 100, and AR 110C; Fabrique Nationale/FN Herstal FAL, LAR, 22 FNC, 308 Match, L1A1 Sporter, PS90, SCAR, and FS2000; Feather Industries AT–9; Galil Model AR and Model ARM; Hi-Point Carbine; HK–91, HK–93, HK–94, HK–PSG–1 and HK USC; Kel-Tec Sub–2000, SU–16, and RFB; SIG AMT, SIG PE–57, Sig Sauer SG 550, and Sig Sauer SG 551; Springfield Armory SAR–48; Steyr AUG; Sturm, Ruger Mini-14 Tactical Rife M–14/20CF; All Thompson rifles, including the following: Thompson M1SB, Thompson T1100D, Thompson T150D, Thompson T1B, Thompson T1B100D, Thompson T1B50D, Thompson T1BSB, Thompson T1–C, Thompson T1D, Thompson T1SB, Thompson T5, Thompson T5100D, Thompson TM1, Thompson TM1C; UMAREX UZI Rifle; UZI Mini Carbine, UZI Model A Carbine, and UZI Model B Carbine; Valmet M62S, M71S, and M78; Vector Arms UZI Type; Weaver Arms Nighthawk; Wilkinson Arms Linda Carbine.

Pistols: All AK–47 types, including the following: Centurion 39 AK pistol, Draco AK–47 pistol, HCR AK–47 pistol, IO Inc. Hellpup AK–47 pistol, Krinkov pistol, Mini Draco AK–47 pistol, Yugo Krebs Krink pistol; All AR–15 types, including the following: American Spirit AR–15 pistol, Bushmaster Carbon 15 pistol, DoubleStar Corporation AR pistol, DPMS AR–15 pistol, Olympic Arms AR–15 pistol, Rock River Arms LAR 15 pistol; Calico Liberty pistols; DSA SA58 PKP FAL pistol; Encom MP–9 and MP–45; Heckler & Koch model SP-89 pistol; Intratec AB–10, TEC–22 Scorpion, TEC–9, and TEC–DC9; Kel-Tec PLR 16 pistol; The following MAC types: MAC–10, MAC–11; Masterpiece Arms MPA A930 Mini Pistol, MPA460 Pistol, MPA Tactical Pistol, and MPA Mini Tactical Pistol; Military Armament Corp. Ingram M–11, Velocity Arms VMAC; Sig Sauer P556 pistol; Sites Spectre; All Thompson types, including the following: Thompson TA510D, Thompson TA5; All UZI types, including:Micro-UZI.

Shotguns: Franchi LAW–12 and SPAS 12; All IZHMASH Saiga 12 types, including the following: IZHMASH Saiga 12, IZHMASH Saiga 12S, IZHMASH Saiga 12S EXP–01, IZHMASH Saiga 12K, IZHMASH Saiga 12K–030, IZHMASH Saiga 12K–040 Taktika; Streetsweeper; Striker 12.

Belt-fed semiautomatic firearms: All belt-fed semiautomatic firearms including TNW M2HB.u