PDA

View Full Version : Non "assault" assault rifle for DC?


Coop de Ville
January 14, 2009, 03:28 PM
This may fit better in the rifle forum but since it's rights related I'll start here.

As a good, law abiding LEO and resident of DC I decided to take my Bushy down to headquarters to have it test fired and registered and submit photos, etc. because I do the right thing.

Within the last week the wonderful members of Council decided to pass legislation banning "assault weapons" and the ".50 Cal." I decided to call downtown and find out what the details were (since it's not in writing yet). Turns out that by April it will be in effect. Currently, they have stopped registering "assault" weapons (ex:Ar-15).

I was informed that there are 2 possibilities:
1) Since registration is required every 3 years, they would not allow reregistration at the 3 year point.
or
2) They would "call in" all assault weapons starting in April.

I plan on leaving, My fiancee has been here for 15 years, which is why I moved here. Don't know if we can make the move in that time period.

I'll probably end up transferring it to someone out of state since I don't want to sell it outright.

I'm starting to ponder other options. I really haven't heard any good things about the mini14, but thought maybe if I sold or traded the Bushy I could use the extra money to accurize it. I have a cr@p load of .223, so the caliber is staying. Just looking for a semi auto platform that won't fall into the "assault" category.

I really can not believe the arrogance and disconnect of these idiots here in Washington. I work in probably the most dangerous housing projects in the country. Gun violence every day.. I still think we should have the right to own these weapons.

I can't believe what these people do to my blood pressure. I'll quit bitching now.

I'll take a look at California's laws. DC seems to be copying them almost verbatim. I really hope SCOTUS spanks these expletives like never before.

Best,

-Coop

roach4047
January 14, 2009, 03:47 PM
You're an LEO and yet are still going to have to give up the AR-15? Did I read that right? Either way hope things work out. This weapons ban crap is a load of ****. Why can't these liberals understand that Criminals don't care about laws and the by passing such legislation it's simply going to invent Criminals because I know plenty of good Christian Americans that will stand by their 2nd ammendmant rights that won't be giving up their guns untill The Man knocks down their door and takes them.

Stupid stupid legislators.

Roach

Webleymkv
January 14, 2009, 05:44 PM
Since semi-automatic rifles typically take the brunt of the heat in AWB's, you may consider something like a Remington 7615 Tactical. Being a pump-action, perhaps it would slip under your inane politicians' radar.

http://www.remington.com/products/firearms/centerfire_rifles/model_7615_tactical.asp

I agree, however, that if you're planning on leaving DC anyway, you'd be better to transfer your AR out of the district until you move.

cookhj
January 14, 2009, 05:53 PM
a good lever action in a pistol caliber maybe?

azredhawk44
January 14, 2009, 06:06 PM
I was informed that there are 2 possibilities:
1) Since registration is required every 3 years, they would not allow reregistration at the 3 year point.
or
2) They would "call in" all assault weapons starting in April.


What?

You mean... people who lobby for gun registration would arbitrarily and capriciously decide not to allow registration at a certain point, and demand forfeiture instead?:eek::rolleyes:

I would never have guessed such an unconscionable act possible by even the most heinous of people!:p;)

[/sarcasm]

johnwilliamson062
January 14, 2009, 06:58 PM
Leave. See if any other LEOs will go with you. Turn in your resignation together with an explanation of the reason.

rwilson452
January 14, 2009, 08:56 PM
If your leaving DC you won't like maryland or New Jersey either. Verginia is not too bad but I like Pennsylvania. No EBR limitations or Magazine, ammo And our License to Carry a Firearm (CCW permit) is shall issue with very few limitations as to where you can't carry. No permission slip is needed to buy a rifle or pistol.
Pass PICS ( NICS PA style) and your out the door. When I bought my Bushmaster I was cleared before I finished the 4473.

MeekAndMild
January 14, 2009, 11:20 PM
2) They would "call in" all assault weapons starting in April.Pardon, but that sounds like it would be actionable. Perhaps a class action suit?

If I was going to live in a place like that I'd wonder about the features by which the locals misdefine "assault rifle". I can think of several modification possibilities, depending on the specific laws. These include replacing the magazine catch with a California style catch requiring a tool to drop the magazine, replacing the pistol grip with either a thumbhole stock or a backswept California grip, removing the gas tube and closing the gas plug to convert the rifle to a straight pull bolt action, placing a permanent sled in the magazine well to create a single shot rifle, replacing the lower with a California lower.

As far as I know all these methods are commercially available except for the gas plug closure kit.

blume357
January 15, 2009, 09:11 AM
there needs to be no 'legal' definition of assault weapon or rifle. The 2nd is to insure a citizen can have such... in 1790 it was a single shot musket or pistol the same as the military carried... there should be no difference today. When gun owners finally realize this basic fact and start defending it is when we truly turn the tide.

Coop de Ville
January 15, 2009, 12:39 PM
And.... here we go.

http://mpdc.dc.gov/mpdc/frames.asp?doc=/mpdc/lib/mpdc/info/pdf/firearms_act_17651.pdf

My head's spinning.

Semi auto rifles with detachable mag & any 1(ONE) of the following:
-Thumbhole stock
-Folding or telescopic stock
-Grenade or flare launcher
-Flash suppressor
-Forward pistol grip

.............................................BANNED!

LucifersPants
January 15, 2009, 01:42 PM
OK, let me see if I get this right. The handgun ban is ruled unconstitutional, and they move right on to yet another ban? :barf: I'd leave too. But how long can we all keep doing that before the next move is out of the country? America is finished. I was asleep for far too long...not paying any attention to any of this stuff. Complacency will eventually render this country unrecognizable. I think many of the Founding Fathers would be embarassed at what we've become. It's just sad.

Al Norris
January 15, 2009, 01:49 PM
One federal enclave and you're going to move outa the US? I hope that was all sarcasm.

There are many really good States that don't have bans of any kind. Can we keep things in perspective?

Coop de Ville
January 15, 2009, 02:08 PM
I was hoping that weapons in "common usage" would be exempt. I'm pretty sure the AR is a common usage weapon in the US.

We will definitely be moving out. My folks are about 3 hrs. away in PA, but VA might be more realistic since we both work in DC. Right now, my fiancee has owned her house in DC for maybe 8 years or so. I can purchase a house, but we can't move just yet. I was looking for a multiple residence place, where I could claim residence and rent the other half....

Maybe this is just the fire I needed lit under my a$$.

Mini-14 is still an option ;) If I could afford the ammo I'd get an M1-A.

Best,

-Coop

Al Norris
January 15, 2009, 02:22 PM
"Common usage."

We have to remember, that the Heller decision only applies to handguns, and then, only to those kept at home. As it may apply to longarms, that particular quote is dicta, until a court rules it otherwise.

Like everything D.C. has tried and is trying, it will have to be litigated. This is the point in time that actual Federal legislation needs to be made, to prohibit the D.C. government from making these ridiculous laws.

MeekAndMild
January 15, 2009, 04:25 PM
I wonder if there are enough affected persons to warrant a class action suit against your local political animals, using the Heller decision for support, identifying them as conspirators to violate your civil rights and aiming at their pocket books? I don't think that DC citizens' civil rights can be fully protected until a really good attorney emerges who can successfully sue for damages against the individual perpetrators in a way similar to the success Morris Dees and the Southern Poverty Law Center have had in suing the Klan.

I'd probably be contacting the NRA Civil rights Defense Fund (http://www.nradefensefund.org/) at this point if it was me.

gc70
January 15, 2009, 07:48 PM
We have to remember, that the Heller decision only applies to handguns, and then, only to those kept at home. As it may apply to longarms, that particular quote is dicta, until a court rules it otherwise.


The "assault weapon" ban makes me wonder if the DC Council ever bothers to get legal advice.

Heller contained some fancy footwork to declare handguns protected while skirting the Miller issue of military weapons. So the DC Council obligingly bans both the automatic and semiautomatic versions of the primary individual US military weapon. If that is not just asking for it, I don't know what is.

Coop de Ville
January 15, 2009, 08:29 PM
The majority of residents here are not in a position to sue. The majority don't own guns and, quite frankly, despise guns. Those that financially stable and own guns tend to move/ live in VA and MD. Those that are financially less secure don't own guns.

Where I work "East of the River" in the poorer neighborhoods, there are scores of good conservative lower class people who are tired of being victimized. The problem is that many of these people don't have the functional capability or whatever means necessary to for much more than neighborhood speedbumps.

I say that and it upsets me. I work with some of the greatest people who have been in these areas for generations. It seems a good example of how an oppressive government can render otherwise independent people, helpless or indifferent to their surroundings.

I've been an NRA member for years, maybe I should inquire.

-Coop

raimius
January 16, 2009, 12:03 AM
Obviously, I don't know your situation, but a good lawsuit would make this sideline spectator Very happy. Somebody needs to slap down the DC lawmakers in dramatic style. This is a rediculous violation of rights, IMO. Maybe the NRA or CATO would be interested, if someone had a solid standing.

Just between Miller and Heller, there are a lot of good arguments to be made.

Coop de Ville
January 16, 2009, 12:10 AM
Kalifornia managed to ban certain firearms...

I assume that's precedent.

-Coop

gc70
January 16, 2009, 12:20 AM
Kalifornia managed to ban certain firearms...

I assume that's precedent.

Not for purposes of federal law. DC is a federal enclave only subject to federal law or local ordinances adopted under delegated federal authority.

Coop de Ville
January 16, 2009, 12:25 AM
Can't City Council surrogate for "state?" In other words, enact local law similar to state law (Home Rule?).

By same, I am "Federally sworn" as a Metropolitan Police Officer, but I do not have the same Federal privelages as, say, Capitol Police or US Park Police. I am considered municipal.

-Coop

rwilson452
January 16, 2009, 12:56 AM
The reason some states have enacted "Assault Weapons Bans" is the second amendment has yet to be incorporated under the 14th amendment. That fight is now on.

gc70
January 16, 2009, 01:12 AM
Can't City Council surrogate for "state?" In other words, enact local law similar to state law (Home Rule?).

The DC Council makes local laws under authority delegated by Congress. Because its authority derives from the U.S. Congress, DC's local laws can't contravene the U.S. Constitution (i.e. 2nd Amendment). The 2nd Amendment has not been "incorporated" against the states, so state firearms laws are not (yet) limited by the 2nd Amendment.

maestro pistolero
January 16, 2009, 01:16 AM
Mini-14 is still an option If I could afford the ammo I'd get an M1-A

M1A, ahhh. Are the rounds that much more expensive? How much are you going to shoot it, really? It makes one hell of a SHTF weapon.

Mini 14s are great, if you put a serious barrel on it, otherwise it's a bit inaccurate when the barrel heats up, after just a few rounds.

I like the idea of something that uses a standard magazine like this:

http://www.impactguns.com/store/640832000795.html
http://www.KELTECPISTOLS.COM/category/985_SU16_Rifles.aspx

These are getting real popular in CA. It is my understanding that they accept standard AR mags.

On the legal subject, eventually I think a strong case will be made that if the 2A has ANYTHING to do with the security of a free state, then the standard issued rifle of the US military ought to be the MOST protected weapon in the land. US v Miller denied 2A protection for sawed-off shotguns, only because they hadn't been shown to have a military purpose.

Unfortunately, the litigants never finished arguing the case so that incorrect assumption was left unchallenged. We know better today. Short barreled shotguns do IN FACT have a military purpose. 'Miller' did, however, leave in it's trail a rare breadcrumb of 2A precedent for weapons which have a militia, or military purpose.

We have a long history of civilian ownership of whatever is the standard long arm of the day, that didn't end when the M1 Garand came along. Neither did the M14 (M1a civilian variant) cause nationwide panic. So along comes the AR15, with it's menacing look and relatively lightweight cartridge. So 40 some years later, it's suddenly a primary target of do-gooders on the Hill.

Once incorporation via the 14th amendment is in place, I think we will be in an excellent position to go after D.C, California, New York, Hawaii, and a few others. I hope the first to go will be cosmetic features bans, and magazine & ammo bans. That's the mouth of the gun-control dragon as far as I'm concerned.

Good luck with the move, I'm glad you're keeping your AR. After 9 years in Nevada, I seriously doubt I would ever take up residence in a state or district that didn't trust me with an AR15. Take a look at the Kel-Tec. Might be just the thing for the time being.

gc70
January 16, 2009, 01:20 AM
Once incorporation via the 14th amendment is in place, I think we will be in an excellent position to go after D.C. ...

D.C. is essentially the only place we can go after directly without incorporation being a factor.

raimius
January 16, 2009, 01:31 AM
In my, mostly uneducated, legal opinion, DC is one of the best places to attack these laws. The incorporation issue is not a factor and the local laws are so restrictive, it is easier to show how stupid they are. Granted, there are a LOT of other factors, but those two make the idea more appealing.

maestro pistolero
January 16, 2009, 01:54 AM
Anybody have any other suggestions for our friend from D.C.? I have some friends in California who are facing the same dilemma.

Seminole
January 17, 2009, 08:35 PM
Anybody have any other suggestions for our friend from D.C.?

My advice is to get in touch with Robert Levy at the Cato Institute and Alan Gura, who argued the Heller Case before the Supreme Court. You could be the next Dick Heller and help advance gun rights for all of us. Or, on the other hand, they might tell you that this isn't a good case. Either way, I would seriously consider talking to them.

scorpion_tyr
January 17, 2009, 08:45 PM
Move to Texas. Don't know if they still are, but a while back Dallas was hiring LEO's like crazy and paying enough people from all over Texas and Shreveport, LA were moving there. I understand that sometimes you might not be able to just pack up and leave, but that's what I would do.

maestro pistolero
January 18, 2009, 01:13 AM
My advice is to get in touch with Robert Levy at the Cato Institute and Alan Gura, who argued the Heller Case before the Supreme Court. You could be the next Dick Heller and help advance gun rights for all of us. Or, on the other hand, they might tell you that this isn't a good case. Either way, I would seriously consider talking to them.

Excellent idea, but might turn you into a bit of a pariah at the department. Sounds like you would make a good subject.

Double J
January 22, 2009, 01:54 PM
Sounds like a good time to report a "lost" firearm. Maybe it could be "found" at a latter date. ;)

kraigwy
January 22, 2009, 02:12 PM
First off, gun control laws are like boiling a frog.

If you throw a frog in a pot of boiling water, the frog will freak. Yet if you put the frog in cold water, and turn up the heat a bit at a time, the frog will accept his fate and not say a word.

Folks, we are the frog, its out fault for letting them turn up the heat.

You can live with it or Freak as the frog in boiling water, its up to us.

roscoe
January 22, 2009, 05:52 PM
Lots of heavy breathing and legal advice.

I say the get the Mini 14 (which nowadays are much improved), or any of the long list of effective semi-auto rifles that you can legally own:

SU16
SKS
Mini30
Saiga
Garand
M1A
M1 carbine
Hakim
Mas49
etc.