10/22 and the proposed AWB


PDA






Steve H
December 28, 2012, 02:09 PM
I have been looking but cannot come up with and answer for this. Will the 10/22 be banned under Feinstiens AWB? Also what about high capacity semi auto pistols such as the 9mm XDm, holds 19 +1?

If you enjoyed reading about "10/22 and the proposed AWB" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Broken Anvil
December 28, 2012, 02:41 PM
All magazines over 10 rounds just like last time. But they want to fix the "loopholes" like magazine kits, etc. You can't do that without banning the pistols......I'm not sure about the 10/22.....I am sure they eventually want them all. Make those phone calls to your politicians.

Batty67
December 28, 2012, 02:45 PM
I have, and enjoy, my Ruger 10/22 very much. The way I would intepret it is that the use of standard 10-rd (and lower capicity) rotary magazines would be legal. The lovely 25-rounders would not. Let's hope none of this comes to pass...

G.barnes
December 28, 2012, 02:54 PM
it would also have to be kept in stock configuration as all aftermarket kits have a buttstock and pistol grip

Batty67
December 28, 2012, 02:55 PM
I actually use a Hogue over-molded rifle stock sans pistol grip. It is pretty sweet.

texasgun
December 28, 2012, 03:41 PM
the last AWB excluded "tubular" magazines for .22LR

(ii) Clause (i) shall not apply to an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.

not sure if the 25rd "banana shaped" magazine for the 10/22 is a tubular device? anybody know more?

a blanket 10rd ban for anything from .22LR to 7.56mm is ridiculous.
10 rds of .50 cal to significantly more damage than 10 rds of .22LR....

I only have one Ruger 25rd magazine for my 10/22.... any experiences on longevity and what repairs are needed and can be done?

my 10/22 is my only rifle and with CCI Stingers and the 25rd clip it could be a SHTF gun with some SD potential. However... certainly not with just 10rds....

slidemuzik
December 28, 2012, 03:51 PM
What about the 10/22 TD? If they go after folding stocks, that doesn't apply since they break at the breach.

holdencm9
December 28, 2012, 03:51 PM
Pretty sure the banana mags were illegal prior to the 2004 sunset.

Swing
December 28, 2012, 03:55 PM
not sure if the 25rd "banana shaped" magazine for the 10/22 is a tubular device?

They were verboten to make during the 1994-2004 ban.

Girodin
December 28, 2012, 04:08 PM
Will the 10/22 be banned under Feinstiens AWB?

we have not seen the actual language of the proposed bill. But, going off the summary she has posted on her website I would answer that it depends on the configuration.

According to her site the legislation would ban:

Certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and have one or more military characteristics; and

She does not list these "military characteristics." An educated guess is things like pistol grips, folding stocks, collapsible stocks, threaded barrels, barrel shrouds (AKA shoulder things that go up). She also suggests that certain "work around" features will be included such as thumbhole stocks.

A 10/22 is a semi auto rifle that has a detachable magazine. Thus if it has one of these "evil" features it will be included.

In sum,

This would not be included

http://www.ruger.com/products/1022Carbine/images/1103.jpg

The following would be "assault weapons" and banned.

This one has a thumbhole stock which apparently we are to believe makes it much more dangerous.
http://www.eabco.com/images/Tactical01.gif

This one has a folder, a pistol grip, barrel shroud and flash hider. How any of those make it more dangerous than the the first gun posted is beyond me.

http://www.labusas.org/photopost/data/3024/Ruger_10-22_Folded-web.jpg

Again the pistol grip and telescoping stock make this one a gun that would require the same process to retain possession of as is required to buy a machine gun. That cheap tapco stock Feinstein believes has made it MUCH more dangerous.

https://www.buymilsurp.com/images/1022%20Fusion%20Rifle%20System


Yes this bill is that absurd. It is as big a step as they think they can take towards simply banning all semi autos and making existing ones NFA.

Additionally all mags over ten rounds would be restricted as well.

As an aside this Remington speed master would be a banned "assault weapon":

http://img1.findthebest.com/sites/default/files/495/media/images/Remington_552_BDL_Speedmaster_Rifle_1.JPG

Here proposal is both absurd and frighteningly sweeping. It helps to show their true motivation though and serves to give a strong position to argue against it. Even the the Jim Zumbos, and other "hunting gun" guys stand to have their tube magazine fed .22s banned and become NFA items to keep existing ones.

WALKERs210
December 28, 2012, 04:27 PM
I was curious about the 10/22 myself, spent quite a bit of money on a bullpup stock. Of course I could just keep it as is for home defense.

fxstchewy
December 28, 2012, 04:30 PM
could you not put a different stock on a AR-15? and make it "legal" i just like to hunt with mine!!

mgmorden
December 28, 2012, 04:41 PM
could you not put a different stock on a AR-15? and make it "legal" i just like to hunt with mine!!

No matter what you do, the AR15 will be one of those "specifically named" guns that are banned not by features, but specifically. Under the proposed legislation you couldn't legally make an AR15 no matter how much you neutered it.

jrdolall
December 28, 2012, 04:44 PM
I guess this means my imitation PPSH with the drum would be illegal? It misfires every 3 shots where my Winchester 77 with the tubular magazine can fire 15 rounds in about 5 seconds.
Makes sense to someone I guess.

Grassman
December 28, 2012, 04:53 PM
It just blows my mind that we are sitting here talking about what plastic somehow makes a gun more lethal. What absurdity.

M-Cameron
December 28, 2012, 04:59 PM
No matter what you do, the AR15 will be one of those "specifically named" guns that are banned not by features, but specifically. Under the proposed legislation you couldn't legally make an AR15 no matter how much you neutered it.

so that begs the question.....just how much would you have to change the AR-15 so that it is no longer an legally an AR-15?

since the lower is legally the firearm, could we not just design a "traditional" rifle lower that uses AR-15 uppers....

something like this:
http://i264.photobucket.com/albums/ii196/TMSNPR/shoop_zps5eb382b0.jpg

MAKster
December 28, 2012, 07:04 PM
Even if AR rifles or 10/22s are banned by name it is basically irrelevant. The expired AWB listed the AR-15 and AK-47 by name but they were still available for sale under different names. The Colt AR became the "Sporter."

Plan2Live
December 28, 2012, 07:24 PM
In the past 24 hours I have been in 2 Walmarts, one Sportsman's Warehouse and three independant gun stores and none of them have 10-22s. Only one had any .22 long rifle ammo. Apparently a bunch of people think the 10-22 will be on the list. I can understand the rifle being in short supply, I can't understand the ammo shortage.

Al Thompson
December 28, 2012, 07:35 PM
Until something is actually filed, it's just speculation.

If you enjoyed reading about "10/22 and the proposed AWB" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!