Tuesday, January 29, 2013

Ruger Mini-14 Not an Assault Weapon

The reasoning behind the new "Assault Weapon Ban of 2013" is flawed on many levels, but there is one particular aspect that clearly points out how it would not have prevented one of the worst massacres of modern times committed by one man. It is important to preface this message by stating that we are not trying to demonize any firearms and frankly there are too many Federal restrictions as it is given the freedoms upheld by the 2nd Amendment. We acknowledge that "Assault Weapon" is a made up term to demonize certain firearms with particular features. So, try to see the forest for the trees. 

 "Assault Weapons Ban of 2013" (Page 24 of Bill)
Anders Breivik killed 77 people. Eight of which were killed by his initial bombing of government buildings. We will leave that aspect out of the equation for this discussion, though a massacre on that level is cause enough to show that an Assault Weapons Ban will prove useless in preventing these horrific events. 

We have Not researched the case thoroughly nor do we claim to know all of the facts, but many outlets have reported that Breivik used a Ruger Mini-14 Ranch Rifle and Glock 17 during the  assault on Uyota Island. You can verify this for yourself, as we are looking to make a quick point. The Ruger Ranch Rifle Mini-14 is specifically allowed under Feinstein's Assault Weapons Ban of 2013. While Breivik utilized 30 round magazines, which would also be banned under the bill if passed in its entirety, he clearly had plenty of time to reload and did so often. Breivik did not use the "tactical" version of the Mini-14 rifle, which is on the ban list along with several other rifles he tried to procure and failed. From what we read in the bill, "large capacity" magazines will be grandfathered in. So, you will still be able to utilize 30 round magazines that ares already in possession.

One aspect that is telling is the amount of firearms they list that will not be banned in comparison to those that will be banned. There are several rifles and shotguns that are listed by name for the ban, but semi-automatic pistols with a magazine of 10 round or more are practically non-existent, despite a wide ranging expulsion from new manufacturing if this ban is passed. Perhaps there is more logic in why they point out so many firearms will still be allowed, despite banning a large proportion of those actually being manufactured today.

If anyone thinks this bill will stop someone from pursuing a mass shooting they are wrong. The appeasement to those who own "Ranch" or "Hunting" rifles is a great divide and conquer approach against the large proportion of Americans who do own firearms. There are many out there willing to throw AR15 rifles or many Semi-Auto Pistols under the bus, simply for their own personal agenda at hanging on to their own. Hopefully many of those folks will see the flawed logic of this bill and realize a simple future amendment could quickly have their favorite deer rifle to the list. Those that want to uphold the constitution will realize that any new ban is a further infringement on a right that was clearly stated, "shall not be infringed".

Related Posts:

No comments:

Post a Comment