[iapetus]

There was a brief piece on BBC radio this morning about the AWB.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/listenagain/ram/today1_guns_20040913.ram


They had an NRA spokesman, and an Anti (who's brother was killed with an "assault weapon").

The victim was apparently killed with a Mac-10 "assault pistol" that was "small enough to hide under his jacket, put powerful enough to fire off dozens of bullets in a matter of seconds".


Is such a weapon actually covered by the AWB*? It sounds like a full auto from his description.


(I'm only interested from a factual perspective, not "would the AWB have stopped it". After all, the criminal had already ignored the "no guns in DC", and "Don't murder people" laws).

[c_yeager]

Is such a weapon actually covered by the AWB*? It sounds like a full auto from his description.

Definatly full-auto. And as such it is a machinegun and is completely unefected by the AWB.

[Warbow]

I don't know. It sounds like the typical jargon used to villify semi-autos to me.

The AWB names some SWD models, which are MAC clones. It also lists one of the features that would make a pistol an "assault weapon" as being a "Semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm."