Thursday, February 28, 2013

The Handguard Ban of 2013

Still from C-SPAN video

Dianne Feinstein sat before a Senate committee yesterday and outlined the details of her new proposed Assault Weapons Ban of 2013.  While watching the video on C-SPAN something caught my attention.

At 4:15 in the C-SPAN video an aide behind Mrs. Feinstein unveiled a cue card that displayed a semi-automatic AR15 rifle made by Colt Firearms.  Of course the first thing that I noticed was that Mrs. Feinstein had labeled the rifle as an Assault Rifle and not an Assault Weapon.  The accepted definition of an "assault rifle" is a rifle that is capable of semi-automatic OR fully-automatic fire.  As usual, Mrs. Feinstein is purposely trying to confuse the issue.

The term "assault weapon" was coined by Mrs. Feinstein and crew back in 1993 when they were working on the original Clinton era ban.  It was intended to describe not only "assault rifles" (modern sporting rifles like the AR15) but carbines, pistols and shotguns with certain evil features.  It too was also intended to confuse the issue and to instill fear in the uneducated by linking semi-automatic firearms (rifles, pistols and shotguns) to military assault rifles which were already heavily regulated, or banned, at the time.

The next thing I noticed was the "barrel shroud".  Right below the description for a "barrel shroud" a big red arrowed pointed towards the handguard of the rifle.  What?  I thought to myself, "Is she really this ignorant or is she trying to accomplish something else here?"  That's not a "barrel shroud", that's a handguard!

Brown Bess Musket
The handguard of a rifle is a necessary feature that's been used to protect the shooters hand since the musket was invented.  No one in their right mind would grab a bare barrel when shooting a firearm, not even a musket much less a semi-automatic rifle.  The heat generated by firing the rifle would quickly make touching the barrel not just uncomfortable but unsafe.  With only a few rounds fired a shooter would get 2nd or even 3rd degree burns from grabbing a bare barrel.  The handguard isn't an optional item, it's a necessity for the safe operation of any rifle.

I thought for sure this had to be a mistake, perhaps an aide that knows even less about firearms than Mrs. Feinstein was to blame.

Seeking clarity and trying to find the source of this confusion I opened my copy of the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013 which is available on Mrs. Feinsteins website and searched for "barrel shroud".  There it was on page 11, the definition of a barrel shroud:
15 ‘‘(38) The term ‘barrel shroud’—
16 ‘‘(A) means a shroud that is attached to, or
17 partially or completely encircles, the barrel of a fire18
arm so that the shroud protects the user of the fire19
arm from heat generated by the barrel; and
20 ‘‘(B) does not include—
21 ‘‘(i) a slide that partially or completely en22
closes the barrel; or
23 ‘‘(ii) an extension of the stock along the
24 bottom of the barrel which does not encircle or
25 substantially encircle the barrel.
Model 1917 Enfield
I was floored.  She has described a modern front handguard to the letter.  She really is trying to make the handguard that (1) evil feature that when coupled with a detachable magazine makes the firearm an "assault weapon/rifle" under the new AWB bill.

The musket would be excluded from this definition as the front handguard only encompasses 1/2 of the barrel... although is 1/2 "substantial"?  However the 1917 Enfield, 1903 Springfield, M1 Garand, M1 Carbine, Mini-14, AR15, AK, etc. all have "barrel shrouds" as defined by the AWB of 2013.

Couple this with the fact Mrs. Feinstein also bans grenade launchers (already banned), rocket launchers (do not exist on rifles), and forward pistol grips on pistols (already banned) and we see that the AWB of 2013 is another example of poorly written knee jerk legislation.  The AWB of 2013 is intended to confuse the public and ultimately make firearms laws so convoluted that through interpretation by the ATF almost any semi-automatic firearm could be banned. 

Tuesday, February 19, 2013

The plague of our Nation, evil or perhaps simply insane, legislators.

United Nations Building, NYC

I don't even know where to begin today. From legislation wanting cops to go door to door in WA, to Magpul about to be kicked out of CO to legislators wanting women facing a rapist to use a whistle... hold on, this is going to be a very bumpy blog ride.

First to Washington State. A new bill introduced would, among other guns grabbing schemes, have County Sheriffs go DOOR TO DOOR inspecting the homes of 'assault weapon' owners who would be grandfathered under a new ban.

Before I say "I told you going door to door is what the ultimate gun grabbers plan is", let me use this quote from a life long democrat instead:
“I’m a liberal Democrat — I’ve voted for only one Republican in my life... But now I understand why my right-wing opponents worry about having to fight a government takeover.” -Lance Palmer.
There are several cosponsors of the bill who are now back peddling because word is out about the door to door search portion of the bill. Some are claiming they didn't read the entire bill. While I don't doubt many politicians actually read the bills they cosponsor, let alone vote for, I have a feeling they are just trying to make excuses to save face as public backlash will likely reach a frenzy when this blog post goes live.

If you live in WA, you'd better contact your reps and the Governor. Right now.

State Legislature:
Representative Locator:

Seriously, this blog post will still be here in 15 minutes, come back and finish it after you make your calls and fire off those emails.

Before I get to Colorado, keep in mind all the other Rights being violated in addition to the Second Amendment. While I primarily focus on RKBA and it's enumeration in the 2A, I must point out the insanity being employed by legislators from top to bottom both State and Federal. It's just as asinine to think that an interstate commerce clause could be used to justify background checks (at a federal level) as it is to think that exercising your God (or Gaja or natural born) given Right to self defense, which just so happens to be enumerated in the Second Amendment, would somehow negate your Right to be secure in your persons, papers and possessions. Which just so happen to be enumerate in the Fourth Amendment.

This isn't a blog about your Rights, where they came from or the fact that they existed prior to 1787 when the Constitution was signed in to existence as the supreme law of the land so I won't get into facts like the Supremacy clause only deals with the Constitution and BOR, not every single law passed by Congress. So lets move on.

Oh Colorado... you poor bastards. Four anti-gun bills passed in the House and get your rape whistle ready ladies, things are going from bad to worse.

The first bill is about universal background checks. For those of you who aren't familiar with what that means. Read it as: Universal Gun Registration.

Right now, in virtually every state it is legal for a person to sell their private firearm to another person without going through a federal firearms dealer and using a form 4473 and the associated background check. Keep in mind this isn't a carte blanche check to sell to anyone. Laws vary in requirements but generally you aren't allowed to give or sell a firearm to a person you know is a prohibited person, a minor (by state law, remember the 18/21 rule is for FFL's only) and so forth. Don't let the gun grabbers fool you on that.

Universal registration or background checks as the gun grabbers would call it, is the first step in confiscation. Everyone who has ever read a history book or listened to the stories of the survivors of genocide, democide or the holocaust knows this is true. In just the 20th century alone, over 100 million citizens were killed by their own governments.

The gun grabbers know the term 'registration' is toxic on the national level and in most states is also just as toxic. So they are now using the term Universal Background checks instead.

For those not familiar with the laws pertaining to those once yellow, now white, background check forms (4473), the FFL must hold on to them for 20 years before they can destroy them. Should they close shop for any reason, they must send all the 4473's from the past 20 years in to the federal government. FFL's are non transferable, so every time your local gun shop has changed hands... yep, all their 4473's less than 20 years old were turned over.

Right now, the only thing stopping the federal government from knowing exactly who has what, with the stroke of a pen, is that locating all those private transfers would be a very daunting task.
For all those "I lost my guns in a tragic boating accident" and "I sold them at the gun show last month" guys... are you paying attention? Your dream of having a cache of (rusted and useless) guns buried in the back forty is over.

Next is a bill about the fees and recovery of background check costs in CO. Visit the link if you'd like to know more, but ask yourself, why wouldn't they just use the 'free' federal one? See universal registration from bill one if you'd like the answer.

Third... Magpul (kudos to them for standing tall) is probably moving soon because the CO Senate will be voting on this shortly. A ban on "high capacity". 8 rounds for a shotgun and 15 for everything else. Why? Because your life isn't as valuable in CO as a politicians or a police officers. Silly proles.
Fourth and certainly not last is a ban on college campus carry. This is where Rep Joe Salazar suggests call boxes, safe zones and whistles. Apparently women aren't intelligent enough to realize when they are being raped-
“It’s why we have call boxes, it’s why we have safe zones, it’s why we have the whistles. Because you just don’t know who you’re gonna be shooting at. And you don’t know if you feel like you’re gonna be raped, or if you feel like someone’s been following you around or if you feel like you’re in trouble when you may actually not be, that you pop out that gun and you pop … pop around [sic] at somebody.” Rep Joe Salazar, CO.
Other law makers from CO in support of this bill had similar statements showing complete lack of regard for the safety and well being of college students and in particular young women. I'm livid over this. I'm beside myself. These people are insane... or perhaps just evil.

How evil must a person be that they want women to be defenseless against a rapist? Evil, evil to their very core. Yes I said it, they are evil. I submit to you that a person who wants rapists to be safe from injury while committing their crimes is evil. It's time to call them what they are. Evil.
As a father of three daughters, I can't imagine sending them off to college, or anywhere else, with a whistle for "defense". It's absurd.
For those of you in Colorado, please contact your reps and the Governor right now. Don't wait.
House 1-800-811-7647
Senate 1-888-473-8136
Governor (303) 866-2471

For those of you in the rest of the country, keep the pressure up. Both at the State and Federal levels. Forget about yourselves. Your children and grandchildren are counting on YOU. Because when it comes down to it, you and I will be the only ones to blame should we allow their Rights to be taken from them.
“The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.” Edmund Burke
We'll be working hard to keep all of you up to date as we move forward.

©2013 -Permission is granted to reprint or repost this article provided it is used in full, with links intact and the content is not altered, including this section.

You can read more about the CO bills here: