California Moves to Expand Definition of Assault Weapons Covered Under Ban

[SecularMotion]

In 1989, disturbed drifter and local resident Patrick Purdy opened fire at Cleveland Elementary School in Stockton, Calif., killing five children and injuring at least 30 others before committing suicide. In the aftermath, attention focused on the weapon he used – a semiautomatic rifle that fired 106 rounds in three minutes. Later that year, the California legislature passed the state’s first assault weapons ban which made it illegal to own or transfer more than 50 brands of semiautomatic rifles, as well as certain pistols and shotguns. The Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act of 1989 would be amended again in 1999 to restrict access to magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition.

The federal government would follow suit in 1994 with its own version of an assault weapons ban, but after it expired in 2004 several attempts to renew the ban have been unsuccessful. The number of mass shootings have continued and have become even deadlier as federal restrictions have sunset due to weapons that can hold more ammunition and fire more rounds in a shorter period of time. Even in states like California that still have bans, technology has made it easier to alter firearms that can be turned into a semiautomatic weapon that falls under the ban.

By definition, a semiautomatic firearm is one that can shoot one bullet (or cartridge) with each pull of a trigger. While the definition of assault weapon varies depending on jurisdiction, a generally accepted definition is a “semiautomatic firearm with a large magazine of ammunition that is designed and configured for rapid fire and combat use.” Many gun owners balk at the idea of calling these assault weapons and limiting the term to military style automatic weapons capable of firing several rounds with each trigger pull. However, a semiautomatic rifle with a large ammunition magazine still allows for the shooter to fire hundreds of rounds in minutes. This is why several states have limited the sale of ammunition magazines to those that can hold no more than ten rounds.

http://www.care2.com/causes/california-moves-to-expand-definition-of-assault-weapons-covered-under-ban.html

[Duckhunter935]

1. nobody is coming for your guns

[DonP]

6. Yup, "Nobody is coming for your deer rifle"

First we'll reclassify it as a deadly "sniper rifle", then we'll come for it.

[Duckhunter935]

7. lol

[Puha Ekapi]

2. Essentially this new bill will make...

..virtually all semi-automatic rifles illegal. The public is not in favor of it, and you can expect massive non-compliance if Governor Brown even signs it, which is highly doubtful.

[TeddyR]

3. I don't see this as making much difference to gun owners

And is pointless in any event - semi-automatic rifles are rarely used in crimes (and automatic weapons essentially never used in crimes). Of course California, with its already strict gun laws, falls near the national average in gun murders, while someplace like Vermont, with very liberal gun laws, has very few murders. "Gunz" aren't the problem, but it is easier to blame an inanimate object than ask and answer difficult questions about the real causes of gun violence in this country.

[Puha Ekapi]

4. It will make a huge difference to gun owners...

...by essentially outlawing the most common rifles in use, and creating a new group of criminals with a stroke of the pen.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

8. IMHO, that pen stroke...

...should be viewed, the same as a pen writing a bad check, as a criminal act, a constitutional fraud and a violation of the oath of office.

[beevul]

9. Thats the math out friends don't seem to understand.

Is it worth pissing off millions of voters, to add another layer of law which the criminal will simply ignore?

Its a net loss. Every time.

[ileus]

5. The citizens of CA should tell their 1%er "leaders" to FO.

Every law that's been passed against the will of the people should be tossed out....every one.