Sandy Hook: Looks can be Deceiving - Chances are it’s NOT an “Assault Weapon”

[Shawn Dodson]

According to news reports the Bushmaster rifle was purchased in compliance with Connecticut state law by Nancy Lanza. If this is indeed true, and the rifle was purchased from a firearms retailer, then, by law, it wasn’t a “semiautomatic assault weapon”. It would have been configured as a “post-ban” rifle, without prohibited “military features”.

Connecticut law bans a semi-automatic firearm if it is capable of accepting a detachable magazine and has more than one of the following “military features”:

Pistol grip
Folding or collapsing buttstock
Bayonet lug
Threaded muzzle to accept a muzzle device
Ability to mount a grenade launcher

I’m unaware of any photos that have been released of the recovered weapon. However chances are high that the only “military feature” on it is a pistol grip, therefore, technically, it would NOT be an “assault weapon” under Connecticut law or the expired 1994 federal law because it doesn't meet the legal definition.

 

[Queen_of_Thunder]

I don't doubt that but facts are not important in this case.

 

[22-rimfire]

Sounds like a Rush Limbaugh comment.

 

[Big Boy]

I agree wholeheartedly. It was probably a fixed A2 stock with pistol grip and no flash hider.

Problem is the media still calls it an assault weapon. Which just give itself more to the fact that any such ban or "categorizing" of weapons is Effing retarted.

 

[oneounceload]

Nice, so now they'll just add even more features to the definition - stop giving them ideas

 

[Mk VII]

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, that'll be good enough for them.

 

[leadchucker]

The news media has their teeth in this one. Facts are irrelevant.

 

[SSN Vet]

They moved to CT from NH.... where no such restrictions apply, and chances are that they brought it with them.

but... the police have said that all of her guns (including the AR) were properly "registered" (whatever that means).

When asked if the AR wasn't banned under CT state law.... after a looooong pause and a stammer, the officer stated that they were checking to see if it was modified in such a way as to make it illegal.

Mind numbing .... smoke and mirrors.... they'll drag their heals on the investigation, giving ample time for the liberals AW ban to gather steam, uninhibited by any annoying little facts.

 

[Shawn Dodson]

Nice, so now they'll just add even more features to the definition - stop giving them ideas

Cosmetic "features" are totally irrelevant. The point being made is that even if the federal assault weapons ban were still in effect the weapon would not be an "assault weapon" as defined by federal (and state) law. It's merely a semiautomatic rifle that accepts a detachable magazine.

 

[OpelBlitz]

There's little point in discussing specifics like this. None of this matters to anyone who knows little about guns (most people who don't own guns). It's all semantics.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

Yeah, sorry, but it doesn't matter to the liberals. This is irrelevant.

 

[Frank Ettin]

... The point being made is that even if the federal assault weapons ban were still in effect the weapon would not be an "assault weapon" as defined by federal (and state) law. It's merely a semiautomatic rifle that accepts a detachable magazine.

In other words, you're saying that if Congress wishes to ban the type of rifle used at Sandy Hook, the legislation will need to be written to clearly ban semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines. Does that really help us?

Let's not go there.