Submitted for your perusal and edification, E-mail Blog report received from:
The Tactical Wire sponsored by Bushmaster
*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*!*
Editor's Notebook
by Rich Grassi
I was going back through old article files and saw where I'd done a piece in 2002 on an AR-15 variant. There's nothing immediately odd about that; I've covered dozens in the past few years. But this was the first AR piece I'd done in the years of gun writing and looking back over it brought memories.
This was during the period of the 1994 federal gun ban. Remember that? It was the bill that defined "assault weapon" - something that firearms experts scratch their heads over as the concept hadn't existed until that point.
Basically, the concern was over "ugly rifles," "high capacity ammunition feeding devices" (they couldn't spell "magazine"), pistol grips, bayonet lugs and flash suppressors.
When "Bill's Crime" passed and was signed, it became unlawful for me, a police officer, to purchase one of the "restricted" items absent a signature from the chief executive over me swearing that the item was to be used "for duty use."
Amazing.
Fortunately, the gun/magazine ban had a sunset. During the term of the ban, interesting things happened. AR15s - as well as other "ugly rifles" - became more popular. Magazines, originally use to destruction - then throw away items, became lusted after items.
The rifle I got for the gun test was "neutered," made Clinton-acceptable, because I wasn't getting a chief's signature to do a gun article. There was a muzzle brake - nude AR15 muzzles make me nervous - and an A2 stock that was too long for my reach. It still had a pistol grip and was supplied with odd-ball sub-capacity ammunition feeding devices.
We used the rifle in a law enforcement class, in spite of its configuration. The officer teaching the class used full capacity magazines, but we kept them from assaulting schools or the like.
Rifles of military appearance got more and more popular during the period of the ban. When the ban sunset, people were ready. It was like having a drink at the end of Prohibition. What has happened since then?
Nothing really. The predicted increase in violent crimes failed to arrive. The AR15 became a mainstream hunting and sporting arm, more popular today than at any time in history.
The government subterfuge has shifted to "no gun ban = Mexican drug cartel violence." Had they simply secured the borders as we asked, they'd have to find a different reason that "bans are good."
Bans aren't good. Laws that prohibit "stuff" aren't legitimate. People don't respect laws that "ban things." People respect laws that ban behaviors.
It's always a good time to remind representatives at every level of government that you won't stand for gun bans - of any type, for any reason. They prevent no violent crime. They're a waste of ink and energy. And the only people constrained are people who are law-abiding anyway.
Tell your representatives that if they ban guns, you'll vote "no" on re-election.