This is bikergeek from LJ; minoanmiss pointed me here. DW apparently is refusing OpenID from LJ, for some reason.
Couple of minor nits:
Importation of new full-auto weapons for civilian ownership was banned with the Gun Control Act of 1968, but domestic manufacture of new full-auto weapons for civilian ownership continued to be legal until 1986, when it was banned as part of the Firearm Owners' Protection Act.
Rifles that hold only one or two shots are rare in the U.S., as you note. Such rifles aren't limited to primitive designs like muskets; there are modern, single- or double-shot break-action rifles that fire modern, centerfire, smokeless-powder rifle cartridges. A lot of them are high-end guns manufactured by the likes of Purdey or Holland & Holland, and chambered in calibers suitable for large, dangerous game, anything from boars to rhinos. They are much more typical in Europe, where, according to strict firearms laws, such rifles are often the only sort of rifle allowed for civilian ownership. Hunting is, of course, nowhere near as prevalent in Europe as it is in the U.S., and rifle ownership is thus correspondingly uncommon.
There *was* one part of the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 that attacked a functional part of the weapon rather than a cosmetic part: the limitation on magazine capacity. AWB94 limited magazine capacity to ten rounds. To understand why this is irrelevant, watch this guy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLYNBF9FajU) changing mags on an AR-15 pattern rifle, of a type similar to that used in the Sandy Hook shooting. Blink, and you missed it. A magazine limit doesn't make a mass-shooter less deadly, it just means he has to bring more magazines. The Virginia Tech shooter had a whole backpack full for his two handguns.
"but domestic manufacture of new full-auto weapons for civilian ownership continued to be legal until 1986"
Uh, yeah, that's probably not a "minor nit". The point about full-auto being rare in civilian hands still stands, but I was a couple decades off in a different direction than I thought I might be.
"Rifles that hold only one or two shots [...] chambered in calibers suitable for large, dangerous game [...]"
Doh! Such rifles were described in a science fiction story I recently read about using a time machine to hunt dinosaurs for sport, so I really should have thought of those. (A digression: my understanding is that the seal that could be achieved with a repeating design wouldn't be strong enough for the amount of pressure those rounds generate. Have I go that right, or close? If so, why won't a falling-block action work?)
"To understand why this is irrelevant, watch this guy"
*nod* And I think I saw a similar YouTube video with a revolver and a speed-loader of some sort. So far I'm unconvinced either that limits on magazine size make any sense or that they're completely irrelevant -- I want to know/understand more. How common is that level of speed+reliability, and how likely is it that somebody who can do that in a demo will screw it up in a people-are-actually-getting-killed situation? I'm not saying you're wrong; I saying that I lack (a) the personal expertise or (b) as much detailed examination of this from people who do have the expertise, to evaluate your point. (Feel free to dig deeper into this here; I want to have either (a) or (b).)
Since the National Firearms Act regulating full-auto weapons was passed in 1934, the number of lawfully-owned civilian full-auto weapons that have been used in crimes is exactly two. One of them was committed by an off duty police officer with a personally-owned weapon; he killed a police informant.
There are repeating rifles manufactured in very large calibers. Here's a video of a man firing a bolt action rifle chambered in .700 Nitro Express (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D41NYBHkb9M).
I would suspect that the reason break-action single- or double-shot rifles are a Thing in Europe and not in the U.S. is that weapons laws there greatly limit what civilians can own in many countries. In fact the wikipedia page for "break-action" claims that break actions aren't as capable of withstanding high pressures as many types of repeating firearm actions.
As far as swapping magazines...well, the guy in that video has obviously practiced it to the point of it being a party trick. Swapping magazines under combat conditions, when you're stressed and when there are people firing back at you, is very very different to doing it in front of a video camera in your living room. However, unless you're absolutely so nervous and stressed that you're dropping the things and can't find the magazine well on the third, fourth, or fifth try, it's still pretty quick. But I'm by no means an expert there, either.
(Cripes, I know an awful lot about this stuff for someone who doesn't actually OWN ANY GUNS.)
I don't own any guns either. I've got a borrowed one, but I've only ever been to shooting ranges twice, so I'm a complete beginner.
It turns out a fair number of my friends own guns, but it just never came up in conversation until I mentioned wanting to learn to shoot. Until recently, I had no idea how many gun owners (and former gun owners, and occasional target shooters with or without their own guns) were around me. When it comes up, they speak, so it's not like they were trying to keep it secret or anything; it just never came up.
(no subject)
Couple of minor nits:
Importation of new full-auto weapons for civilian ownership was banned with the Gun Control Act of 1968, but domestic manufacture of new full-auto weapons for civilian ownership continued to be legal until 1986, when it was banned as part of the Firearm Owners' Protection Act.
Rifles that hold only one or two shots are rare in the U.S., as you note. Such rifles aren't limited to primitive designs like muskets; there are modern, single- or double-shot break-action rifles that fire modern, centerfire, smokeless-powder rifle cartridges. A lot of them are high-end guns manufactured by the likes of Purdey or Holland & Holland, and chambered in calibers suitable for large, dangerous game, anything from boars to rhinos. They are much more typical in Europe, where, according to strict firearms laws, such rifles are often the only sort of rifle allowed for civilian ownership. Hunting is, of course, nowhere near as prevalent in Europe as it is in the U.S., and rifle ownership is thus correspondingly uncommon.
There *was* one part of the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 that attacked a functional part of the weapon rather than a cosmetic part: the limitation on magazine capacity. AWB94 limited magazine capacity to ten rounds. To understand why this is irrelevant, watch this guy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLYNBF9FajU) changing mags on an AR-15 pattern rifle, of a type similar to that used in the Sandy Hook shooting. Blink, and you missed it. A magazine limit doesn't make a mass-shooter less deadly, it just means he has to bring more magazines. The Virginia Tech shooter had a whole backpack full for his two handguns.
(no subject)
Uh, yeah, that's probably not a "minor nit". The point about full-auto being rare in civilian hands still stands, but I was a couple decades off in a different direction than I thought I might be.
"Rifles that hold only one or two shots [...] chambered in calibers suitable for large, dangerous game [...]"
Doh! Such rifles were described in a science fiction story I recently read about using a time machine to hunt dinosaurs for sport, so I really should have thought of those. (A digression: my understanding is that the seal that could be achieved with a repeating design wouldn't be strong enough for the amount of pressure those rounds generate. Have I go that right, or close? If so, why won't a falling-block action work?)
"To understand why this is irrelevant, watch this guy"
*nod* And I think I saw a similar YouTube video with a revolver and a speed-loader of some sort. So far I'm unconvinced either that limits on magazine size make any sense or that they're completely irrelevant -- I want to know/understand more. How common is that level of speed+reliability, and how likely is it that somebody who can do that in a demo will screw it up in a people-are-actually-getting-killed situation? I'm not saying you're wrong; I saying that I lack (a) the personal expertise or (b) as much detailed examination of this from people who do have the expertise, to evaluate your point. (Feel free to dig deeper into this here; I want to have either (a) or (b).)
Thank you for the corrections.
(no subject)
Since the National Firearms Act regulating full-auto weapons was passed in 1934, the number of lawfully-owned civilian full-auto weapons that have been used in crimes is exactly two. One of them was committed by an off duty police officer with a personally-owned weapon; he killed a police informant.
There are repeating rifles manufactured in very large calibers. Here's a video of a man firing a bolt action rifle chambered in .700 Nitro Express (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D41NYBHkb9M).
I would suspect that the reason break-action single- or double-shot rifles are a Thing in Europe and not in the U.S. is that weapons laws there greatly limit what civilians can own in many countries. In fact the wikipedia page for "break-action" claims that break actions aren't as capable of withstanding high pressures as many types of repeating firearm actions.
As far as swapping magazines...well, the guy in that video has obviously practiced it to the point of it being a party trick. Swapping magazines under combat conditions, when you're stressed and when there are people firing back at you, is very very different to doing it in front of a video camera in your living room. However, unless you're absolutely so nervous and stressed that you're dropping the things and can't find the magazine well on the third, fourth, or fifth try, it's still pretty quick. But I'm by no means an expert there, either.
(Cripes, I know an awful lot about this stuff for someone who doesn't actually OWN ANY GUNS.)
(no subject)
It turns out a fair number of my friends own guns, but it just never came up in conversation until I mentioned wanting to learn to shoot. Until recently, I had no idea how many gun owners (and former gun owners, and occasional target shooters with or without their own guns) were around me. When it comes up, they speak, so it's not like they were trying to keep it secret or anything; it just never came up.