Quote:
Originally Posted by Targan
I envy you guys living in places with less restrictive gun laws. Here in Oz even pump action shotguns are a no-no. Ridiculous.
|
Here, the NRA would have us believe that if we don't all become lifetime members (of the NRA), the Democrats in charge of [insert a) White House b) Senate c) House of Representatives d) governor's mansion e) state legislature f) two or more of the above] will follow the example set by the UK and Australia. It's a shame that the two extremes of the private firearms issue can't come to some agreement, as both sides have some things to offer and some baggage in need of shedding.
Here in the People's Republic of California, the state has a list of features that classify a weapon as an assault weapon. When the legislature realized that banning specific firearms was futile (renaming a firearm is easier than amending a law to include a re-named firearm), they devised a list of features that includes a pistol grip, a detachable magazine with a capacity greater than ten rounds, a bayonet lug, a flash suppressor, and a folding stock. Any weapon with more than one of these features is considered an "assault weapon", which is not to be confused with an assault rifle. Owning an assault weapon is a felony. There are plenty of ways around this, though. For instance, one can build an SKS with a muzzle brake and a monte carlo stock and have the option of leaving the bayonet lug intact. I really don't see the need for a bayonet lug in the civilian world. That's why God made the .357.
I'd love to go back to Arizona as a gun owner, though. Or Texas, or Nevada.
Webstral