Welcome to DU!
    The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
    Join the community:
    Create a free account
    Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
    Become a Star Member
    Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
    All Forums
        Issue Forums
        Culture Forums
        Alliance Forums
        Region Forums
        Support Forums
        Help & Search
    
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: The loophole in the Mass. assault weapons ban [View all]Straw Man
(6,911 posts)36. Actually, it is what she said.
        The law as written spells out those features as definitive of an "assault weapon." The AG seems to think that this isn't enough. She seems to think she can stretch enforcement beyond "law as written" to "spirit of the law." I don't think the higher courts will agree, but we'll see.
Military-looking rifles don't fire any faster than other semi-auto rifles. If it's not the cosmetic features, then ultimately she's going to go after all semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines, because that's where the increased lethality lies. And that will never pass the "common use" standard because such rifles have been in civilian use for over 100 years.
That is what happens when you pass ill-conceived, sloppily written laws.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
  Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
						
							45 replies
							
								 = new reply since forum marked as read
							
						
      
      
					
						Highlight:
						NoneDon't highlight anything
						5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
						RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
 = new reply since forum marked as read
							
						
      
      
					
						Highlight:
						NoneDon't highlight anything
						5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
						RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
					
                    
					
                     = new reply since forum marked as read
							
						
      
      
					
						Highlight:
						NoneDon't highlight anything
						5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
						RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
 = new reply since forum marked as read
							
						
      
      
					
						Highlight:
						NoneDon't highlight anything
						5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
						RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
					
                    
					
        
        Their laws might be idiotic and have holes in them, but their AG is great for trying to fix them!
        scscholar
        Jul 2016
        #26
      
        
        er, what you just said is the exact opposite of what the AG said.  Try to keep up.
        Schema Thing
        Jul 2016
        #8
      
        
        The piece was written by the AG and published through the Globe (and elsewhere, I presume).
        Nuclear Unicorn
        Jul 2016
        #11
      
        
        Yup, the 1994 Federal AWB did *not* ban AR and AK variants that passed the features test.
        benEzra
        Jul 2016
        #28
      
        
        It is a shame that 'knowing what one is doing" isn't a political criteria
        discntnt_irny_srcsm
        Jul 2016
        #38
      
        
        I don't know why but discussions of legal concepts always fascinates me.
        Nuclear Unicorn
        Jul 2016
        #14
      
        
        I'm grateful that that is so and quite sorry so few pro-control folks share your fascination
        discntnt_irny_srcsm
        Jul 2016
        #18
      
        
        I know after reading NY's 1st ban way back when, I was quite surprised so many "copies"
        jmg257
        Jul 2016
        #23
      
  