AWB '94 - How did this work?


PDA






Kind of Blued
November 13, 2008, 10:39 AM
So you couldn't have a semi-auto that accepted a detachable mag and had at least two of "the features"...

Were collapsable buttstocks still available for purchase? They wouldn't have been illegal if you had a pre-ban rifle or if you had a rifle which had none of "the features", right? The stock would constitute ONE of the features, keeping it legal.

They shouldn't have been able to ban something which is only illegal to buy under a very specific circumstance...

The same should apply to the others as well.

If you enjoyed reading about "AWB '94 - How did this work?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
harmonic
November 13, 2008, 11:00 AM
The same should apply to the others as well.


Do you mean other bans? Because if that's what you mean, there's no telling what they'll go after.

'94 was a different climate. But after Gore lost the election largely due to his, "No American home needs a 9mm" comment, politicians have become a little "gun" shy, pun intended.

Plus, with the internet and how quickly we gunnies share information (there's strength in numbers), and with the recent SCOTUS decision, I wouldn't be surprised to see any efforts at excessive gun control fail.

if you had a rifle which had none of "the features

I wasn't into EBRs back then, but IIRC, you could have a semiauto with detachable mag and pistol grip as long as it didn't have any other features. The varmint ARs we see now with a straight stock would have been legal all during the ban. You just couldn't have been able to get a mag for more than ten rounds.

benEzra
November 13, 2008, 11:06 AM
So you couldn't have a semi-auto that accepted a detachable mag and had at least two of "the features"...

Were collapsable buttstocks still available for purchase? They wouldn't have been illegal if you had a pre-ban rifle or if you had a rifle which had none of "the features", right? The stock would constitute ONE of the features, keeping it legal.
Correct. However, most guns with adjustable (AR-15) or collapsible (Feather, etc.) buttstocks also had protruding handgrips, and a protruding handgrip was also an Evil Feature. So for practical purposes, adjustables/collapsibles were limited to preban rifles.

You are correct, it was perfectly legal to sell adjustable/collapsible/folding stocks. You could also buy stocks that were pinned in one position for postban rifles, with the idea that after the idiotic law expired, you could remove the pin.

They shouldn't have been able to ban something which is only illegal to buy under a very specific circumstance...
They did not. (And I agree with you.)

However, H.R.1022, had it passed, would have banned such parts.

Bubba613
November 13, 2008, 11:22 AM
How did it work?

Not very well!

Kind of Blued
November 13, 2008, 11:24 AM
Correct. However, most guns with adjustable (AR-15) or collapsible (Feather, etc.) buttstocks also had protruding handgrips, and a protruding handgrip was also an Evil Feature. So for practical purposes, adjustables/collapsibles were limited to preban rifles.

So collapsable stocks were still being produced, readily-available for sale, and legal to install on "pre-ban" rifles?

benEzra
November 13, 2008, 12:08 PM
So collapsable stocks were still being produced, readily-available for sale, and legal to install on "pre-ban" rifles?
Yes. However, most new manufacture was being sold in the "pinned" configuration so that more people could buy them (and if you had a preban rifle, you could always just remove the pin). Ditto for mini-14 folding stocks and whatnot.

Don't count on that occuring in the unlikely event than an AWB 2.0 comes down the line, though. Like I said, most drafts of an AWB 2.0 have included bans on parts that could be used to construct a so-called "assault weapon," which would include things like adjustable stocks and whatnot.

Kind of Blued
November 13, 2008, 12:25 PM
Like I said, most drafts of an AWB 2.0 have included bans on parts that could be used to construct a so-called "assault weapon," which would include things like adjustable stocks and whatnot.

Do you have links to those drafts?

benEzra
November 13, 2008, 12:44 PM
Do you have links to those drafts?

Here's H.R.1022:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-1022

SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

(a) In General- Section 921(a)(30) of title 18, United States Code, as added by section 2(a) of this Act, is amended to read as follows:
`(30) The term `semiautomatic assault weapon' means any of the following:

...

`(K) A conversion kit.

...

`(37) Conversion Kit- The term `conversion kit' means any part or combination of parts designed and intended for use in converting a firearm into a semiautomatic assault weapon, and any combination of parts from which a semiautomatic assault weapon can be assembled if the parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.

If you enjoyed reading about "AWB '94 - How did this work?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!