Why not require semi-auto rifles to be modified to fixed magazine weapons in all future sales.

[NutmegYankee]

Present this as the classic American Compromise: A lot of people want designs like the AR-15 for hunting small game or target practice, so allow it to be sold but modified for civilian use.

Pass a bill to stop all sales of semi-auto rifles and require any new sales after 15 days to be of designs that incorporate a fixed magazine of 5-10 rounds that can only be loaded one round at a time. Require significant disassembly to remove and replace that magazine, such that only the single bullet at a time loading mechanism will be used. In addition, require all future sales of pistol magazines to be 10 rounds or less like they were under the AWB.

People who want semi-autos for legal uses can still get them, but the modification will make them far less effective for mass murder purposes.

The best part -this isn't a 2nd Amendment issue. It's Congress regulating interstate commerce.

[yourpaljoey]

1. Yikes. I take it you are not a gun person.

The AR-15 is a civilian-use rifle.
The platform is versatile, from target practice to
hunting to match shooting.

[NutmegYankee]

11. Yeah, it has quite the reputation of civilian use mowing down children and unarmed people en-mass.

[Press Virginia]

26. Must be why rifles kill about 400/year

And that's rifles of ANY kind

[Hoyt]

33. There you go, let's not forget restricting semi-auto pistols too.

[Press Virginia]

68. I doubt you could identify one

[Hoyt]

71. Can still field strip a 1911 blindfolded, but I grew up.

[Press Virginia]

72. Sure you can

You're on the Internet

[Duckhunter935]

77. He saw it on YouTube

[Press Virginia]

82. Probably an R Lee Ermy video

[Drahthaardogs]

64. I have hunted all my life

in Colorado and Alaska. An AR-15 is a shit hunting rifle and most states only allow five cartridges in magazine and chamber for big game. IT is hardly a versatile hunting rifle. Good for varmits and maybe small eastern whitetails. Now, a .300 Win Mag, there is a versatile cartridge in a remington 700 action. Everything from 100 gr. bullets for pronghorn up to 200 gr for moose and grizzly.

[Duckhunter935]

78. The AR10 is better for large game

The AR 15 is fine for small game and varmints

[Drahthaardogs]

79. That is a .308

and still kind of underpowered for a lot of big game. A kid's elk rifle per se.

[yourout]

2. My gut says their is no putting the gun genie back in the bottle. Best chance of ..

reigning things in is "ammunition" control.
Make all the guns you want but we are going to tax the hell out of ammo and limit it's dispersal.

[hack89]

3. That is blatantly unconstitutional

de facto bans are still bans.

[fifthoffive]

84. Works for abortion

All kinds of stupid regulations have been passed to effectively curb the constitutionally protected right of women to control their reproductive health, including the right to abortion.

So no, until we settle the question of whether de facto bans are constitutional, I'm ready to try ammunition restrictions as a path to controlling the proliferation of gun violence in this country.

[hack89]

87. So you will embrace RW tactics to restrict civil rights

because " they do it too"? Seems pretty hypocritical to me.

[melm00se]

88. and look how the

pro-choice movement reacts.

and how the Supreme Court rules.

[friendly_iconoclast]

4. Won't happen- it was tried with printers' ink and got booted by the Supreme Court:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minneapolis_Star_Tribune_Co._v._Commissioner

[yourout]

7. While I agree it will probably never happen I am not sure this case....

really applies.

[friendly_iconoclast]

10. The Second Amendment is extant, and a blatant attempt to impede rights under it...

...will fail.

[NutmegYankee]

6. That wouldn't stop the mass murder.

Too easy to reload or stockpile enough to carry out a mass shooting. All the ammunition controls would do if piss normal people off. Most mass shooters purchased their firearms recently. Making those weapons less dangerous and slowing down the purchasing process will go a long way to reducing these types of shootings.

[PJMcK]

59. Respectfully, do you have a proposal? (n/t)

[NutmegYankee]

60. Yeah, the thread I started...

The one you are posting in right now.

[Just reading posts]

8. Zero chance of that passing Constitutional muster.

Or passing, period, for that matter.

[jmg257]

13. Thomas Jefferson...

"The right to use a thing comprehends a right to the means necessary to its use, and without which it would be useless." --Thomas Jefferson to William Carmichael, 1790.

[cleanhippie]

43. Do you have any idea how easy it is to load your own ammo?

The whole "restrict ammo" argument is nonsensical.

[Angel Martin]

73. sshhh ! don't le them know...

[safeinOhio]

5. Something like the laws on

Waterfowl shotguns. They must have a plug so only 3 rounds can be loaded in a semi-auto or pump. Just make it permanent and not a plug. I like you thoughts.

[NutmegYankee]

9. This was exactly what I was thinking of when I decided to write this.

[jmg257]

12. It's pretty interesting that an AMENDMENT to the constitution, which changes the original document

to say a right "shall not be infringed" is ignored when an original clause in that document is used to infringe on that right.

I understand that is the way it is and has been, I still think its interesting.


Anyway, would there be a grandfathering, or confiscation of existing stocks?

[NutmegYankee]

14. Like any other product on the market - grandfathering.

This country doesn't have the funds to pay for every rifle at market value and fund the courts/police required to enforce such an act.

Any future magazines sold for existing owned stock would be 10 rounds max. In the meantime, the market value of grandfathered guns would skyrocket and get sold to and collected by people who aren't the mass murdering type.

[ncjustice80]

16. Pay for them?

Ban the illegal ones and give "grace period" for people to hand them over. Door to door searches are impractical, but anyone caught with an illegal one should suffer severe penalties.

There is really no reason to own anything other than a one shot weapon anyway.

[NutmegYankee]

18. Taking previously legal property requires just compensation by law.

Australia had the same wording that we do in the 5th amendment, which is why they had to raise taxes and buy the guns back at full market value.

Currently states and localities get around this by allowing people to move the weapons out of state or city. A national law would require buying them.

[ncjustice80]

21. We dont pay fair market for cocaine.

Why should illegal guns be different?

[NutmegYankee]

23. The cocaine wasn't legal to own when acquired as it is a perishable good.

I guess if you could prove it was acquired prior to the Harrison Narcotics Tax Act of 1914 it would be grandfathered in.

[cleanhippie]

45. Cocaine isn't a constitutional right.

But you knew that already

[NutmegYankee]

54. It's simpler than that though.

The sale and distribution of drugs has been illegal for over 100 years. If you are caught with it now, it was never legal to acquire as property in the first place. Since it was acquired illegally, confiscation is legal.

[jmg257]

19. I thought a tax deduction could work as a way of buy-back. nt

[Amishman]

86. unless you are willing to compensate way over pre-ban market value, few will be turned in

Unless there is a huge financial gain to be had, those with large arsenals will just hide them away and lobby non-stop to have the law changed back.

Would also need to be a magazine buyback, and maybe ammo as well.

[ileus]

36. What if you need two shots to protect your life?

[ncjustice80]

76. Unfortunate but unlikely. That argument leads to "what if I need 50 shots to save my life?"

[jmg257]

17. If you can get in there something that will bring about an attrition

of existing stock (like NY attempts in the Safe Act) that could be even more effective.

[NutmegYankee]

15. I don't see it as an infringement on the right to own.

It's just setting some commercial standards on what is sold. People can still buy the gun, it just can only shoot 5-10 rounds at a time before it has to be reloaded slowly. Perfect for sporting use.

[hack89]

20. Then mass killers will use handguns like at VT. Nt

[NutmegYankee]

22. That killer had a lot of 15 round mags.

He also had terrain advantages and a population that huddled in place versus the modern "run, hide, fight".
Reduce the magazine size to 10 and there are more chances to attack or escape the gunman.

This is a shooting I'm very familiar with. My dynamics professor was one of those killed and I had many classes in that building.

[hack89]

24. Perhaps

the only problem is all the existing guns and magazines won't magically disappear.

[NutmegYankee]

27. No. But they will tend to get collected by people who are far less likely to do a mass shooting.

Most mass shooters buy the gun within months and only own what they need or think they need.

[hack89]

29. Not sure I agree with that

they are not impulsive acts - they are usually meticulously planned over an extended period. There would be an extensive black market that would make it fairly easy to get the weapons the killer wants.

[NutmegYankee]

31. It wouldn't prevent all, but it would make it harder.

More queries, more face contact. Acquiring older parts would require knowing people. And black market sales tend to like to keep them within circuits that won't get them busted by doing stupid things like a mass shooting.

[Recursion]

46. So require fixed internal magazines for handguns

I'm a fan of that idea.

[hack89]

50. Hard to imagine a "solution " more detached from reality.

here is something gun control advocates will have to come to grips with - there will not be gun control without the support of gun owners. So let's bring the conversation back into the realm of reality.

[Recursion]

53. Why? 30% of adults don't automatically get to make the decision here

I can think of a few laws that have been passed over the objections of gun owners...

[hack89]

56. If 100% of the population voted you might have a point.

there is a reason politicians fear the NRA - they can deliver the votes.

[Crepuscular]

28. So

it would still be ok to own firearms with detachable magazines, as long as they are not a semi-auto?

Or are you suggesting banning all firearms with detachable magazines?

[NutmegYankee]

30. Banning future sale of detachable mag semi-auto rifles.

Existing guns were legally purchased and like all consumer products, grandfathered. Bolt and pump action rifles can have detachable mags. Handguns are legal, only limited for further sale to 10 round mags, like 1994-04.

[Crepuscular]

32. So under your proposal

you would be perfectly fine with someone owning this?



It's a pump action rifle in .223 caliber that uses standard AR magazines (10, 20, 30 rnd).

Not a semi-auto so no one can get hurt with it, right?

[NutmegYankee]

34. Yes. Pump action is still slower than semi-auto.

Even a bolt action can be operated within one second. Both require some concentration and effort that disrupts aim.

[Crepuscular]

37. Not much

If you think the difference in operating a pump vs. a semi-auto is going to result in a tangible decrease in the potential number of people killed in a mass shooting scenario, you are sadly mistaken. I own both types of weapons and am very familiar with their operation. Regardless of the type of weapon, there is a time lag between shots while the target is being acquired, the difference between doing so with a pump and a semi-auto is just about irrelevant from a safety standpoint.

Just exactly how fast do you think someone needs to be able to shoot in order to kill a bunch of people, if they are crazy enough to do so?

[NutmegYankee]

41. If you say pump action is just as effective, why allow semi-auto at all?

I suspect it's because people don't want to keep pumping the gun as it gets tiring.

[jmg257]

47. Why bother to argue? Replace "Semi-auto" with "repeating arm" with fixed mags and be done. nt

[Crepuscular]

49. Because

there is no legitimate reason not to allow semi-autos.

Variety is the spice of life. Is a standard shift less effective then an automatic? I own vehicles with each type of transmission. The fact that people may find using a clutch more tiring does not diminish the effectiveness of the standard transmission.

My point is that if the goal of your proposal is to actually reduce the potential for people being killed in a mass shooting scenario, banning semi-auto's or requiring them to have fixed magazines will do nothing to accomplish that goal, as criminals will always find a work around. No more then banning automatic transmissions would stop people from driving drunk.

[NutmegYankee]

51. I think it would slow it down. Remember all magazines for new rifles would be limited to 10 rounds

So unless a killer got pre-ban mags, his pumping would stop at 10 before the next reload. It slows the shooting down and gives a greater chance for escape or attacking the gunman.

I think after a decade or two pre-ban mags would get scarce in the marketplace.

[Crepuscular]

55. Why

would magazines become scarce if a detachable magazine pump gun was legal? There would simply be new magazines manufactured specifically for use in that weapon.

Or are you suggesting banning all detachable magazines with a capacity greater then ten, even if used in a legal rifle?

[NutmegYankee]

58. People would collect and hoard them, reducing pre-ban 11+ round mags out in the market.

All new magazines would be 10 rounds or less.

[Crepuscular]

65. That is different

from your original proposal, which limited the magazine capacity for semi-auto weapons. So you are saying the the new manufacture of detached magazines for pump rifles would also be limited to ten rounds?

[NutmegYankee]

66. Yeah, if that wasn't clear that was my mistake.

Only semi-auto rifles would require fixed mags, but new mags sold period are 10 round max. Obviously there would be a "pre-ban" market.

[Crepuscular]

67. If that's the case,

why bother with the whole semi-auto aspect? Recursions suggestion of simply focusing on a magazine capacity ban is probably more likely to gain traction and would be less likely to face constitutional challenges, realistically.

[NutmegYankee]

69. Make newer rifles harder to kill with, even if you find pre-ban mags.

It also ruins the "battle or military" argument about the rifle while allowing normal civil uses. Loading the rounds one at a time into the fixed mag isn't an issue at the range and clearly results in a "civilian use" rifle.

In handguns, it's rare to change mags in most murders. It happened at VT, but it was an outlier. There are also issues with making this mod on such a compact design as a handgun.

[ncjustice80]

75. I believe the Tech Shooter also changed clips.

[NutmegYankee]

90. That was the outlier I mentioned.

[Crepuscular]

83. ...

Handguns are used in the vast majority of gun homicides, so your plan does little to curb those instances. Changing mags is rare in homicides because instances where more then a few people are killed at the same time are outliers, yet you want to enact laws specifically targeting these very rare events.

I think you are tilting at windmills, as most efforts at gun control seem to do but good luck in your crusade.

Personally, I think the focus has to be on addressing the root causes of such crimes, which has nothing to do with guns themselves, they are simply the tool used by the perpetrators of these crimes but YMMV.

[Recursion]

44. I personally think the action argument is a red herring: the problem is the detachable magazine

No matter the action, just get rid of detachable magazines.

[Crepuscular]

52. While

I will agree that a detachable magazine has more bearing on making it easier to shoot large numbers of rounds than the type of action, it's still not going to have much of an impact on 99.999% if the situations where guns are used to commit violence.

How many situations are there annually where more then 20 people are killed in a single event, where the shooter would have no opportunity to either reload or grab another loaded weapon, as the result of being limited to a fixed magazine?

The exceedingly small number of instances would not merit the enormous political cost involved in enacting such a ban, especially with no guarantee that a single life would be saved.

[Recursion]

57. 99% of murderers never need to go past the first bullet; the entire argument is window-dressing

However, politics being what they are, window dressing is often where you have to go because it moves the public opinion needle.

Given the choice, I'd much rather severely restrict handguns than semi-automatic rifles. (Furthermore, I personally think the Constitutional argument for a right to a handgun is significantly weaker than for a rifle.) However, the public simply doesn't seem to care about the ~20 handgun homicides per day, but they do care about publicized mass casualty events. Sometimes you have to go where the public is, even if it's sub-optimal policy.

[Crepuscular]

61. I don't disagree

with much of what you said. While mass shootings are certainly horrific, tragic events, they don't cause me much undue concern, in terms of being worried about personal safety, as they tend to be isolated, random events.

The chronic levels of gun crime that has essentially been deemed to be "acceptable" because it usually happens only in certain neighborhoods or to certain types of people, is a much more serious concern, from my viewpoint. As tragic as the 50 deaths in Orlando were, they are no more tragic then the 282 victims in Chicago that have been murdered so far this year with guns, yet those victims are largely ignored by society.

[Recursion]

62. Remember the Navy Yard shooting?

Same day, in a park in Chicago, 12 kids were shot in the crossfire of a shootout. I kind of naively expected that would get even a little news coverage.

[Oneironaut]

35. I don't believe this is possible. A gun owner can correct me.

First of all, you would need to require an outright redesign of the gun to work this way. The manufacturers would just stop producing them. You would just create a boom for the existing weapons market.

Also, thieves would be in their glory. The price fetched for a stolen AR-15 just quadrupled. It's now that much more worth it for thieves to steal them.

Since a rifle is a tool, tools can be taken apart and refactored. People convert guns all of the time (example: semi-auto to full auto).

Doing the changes to the magazine would be useless. Manufacturers could just create custom magazines. It doesn't matter how illegal they are - a black market would exist for them. Knowledgeable gun users could circumvent this.

Do the changes apply to cops as well? If not, those guns can be stolen or "stolen" if you know what I mean. If not, they'll be outgunned by people with illegal assault rifles. The classic assault weapons ban problem still exists.

There are many more issues. If I was inaccurate on anything, a gun person will probably correct me. These are some things to consider.

[NutmegYankee]

39. Manufacturers are already making some for the NY and Conn. markets.

They would quickly convert nationally to keep selling them. As for theft, that is always going to be a problem, but it gets a lot harder to acquire them for mass murder. Lone wolfs don't normally come from crime syndicates.

There are actually a lot of changes required to convert a semi-auto to full auto. It requires basically a new receiver, so what people see is goofy mods like "bump firing", which isn't full auto.

[Recursion]

42. This one is a pretty feasible redesign

You tell Armalite, et. al., to weld a fixed magazine of a specific size into the lower receiver.

[Lizzie Poppet]

63. The rise of 3D printing makes any such ban completely pointless.

All non-detachable-magazine models would do is supply parts "bundles" for the 3D-printed receivers that accept magazines (of which there are literally hundreds of millions already in circulation, and which are even easier to 3D print). Such receivers would be illegal to make...but I can't imagine anyone thinks that will matter to scads of folks.

The genie is well and truly out of the bottle, for better or worse. Bans can't work any more, so we have to concentrate on limiting access on the part of people that have no business with weapons.

[Angel Martin]

74. the world supply of AR/Ak rifles is so large that

access will always be easy.

Current black market price of an AR in europe is 300 euros, due to supply from Balkan wars.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/11/13/this-is-how-ak-47s-get-to-paris.html

Also, Russia is buying new infantry rifles for its military, so that is millions of additional AKs coming onto the world market,

If drugs and illegal immigrants can get into the USA, smuggled guns certainly can.

[Duckhunter935]

80. People do not convert semi-automatic to full auto all the time

It is highly illegal and you have to have an auto sear. the lower receivers are designed to not make this easy.

[metalbot]

91. People do not convert from semi-auto to auto "all the time"

It's a very, very serious felony with long mandatory jail sentences. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but it's certainly not a common occurrence.

[doc03]

38. Oh no the NRA won't permit that, Muricans need a 30 round detachable magazine in case

of a Zombie Apocalypse.

[Recursion]

40. CA has something similar to this already (it's a bit weaker than you're suggesting)

It would actually be pretty easy on the technical side, at least with AR-style rifles, to require that their magazine be fixed and that the upper receiver have to be opened to reload it.

CA's law allows (allowed?) for a magazine that could be removed with some kind of tool.

[NutmegYankee]

48. Yeah. I'm trying to avoid the "bullet Button".

Really the purpose is to make the gun non-appealing for mass murder, while allowing people to still use them for legal activities. I think such a compromise could actually pass without complete opposition. Unlike policies that seek to bother/harass/punish people, this makes the gun design less damaging via product regulation and has less of a "culture war" feel.

[JanMichael]

70. Freaks that get a hard on blasting trees, bunnies, deer, and sometimes people would have a cow. nt

[Kablooie]

81. You assume Congress will regulate guns. They won't. Period. No regulation.

[Dem2]

85. It would take a long time to implement

But eventually it would have an effect. Don't listen to the gun-nuts either - as a fellow gun owner and highly mechanically inclined person, I will tell you that it could be done - perhaps the magazine would be integral to the gun but on a hinge mechanism that would require major modifications to use an external magazine - one that would be proprietary and have almost no availability.

[aikoaiko]

89. Even a round limit for detachable mags didn't fly after Sandy Hook.

I can't see this more severe solution getting a pass.

But I will give you credit for putting your finger on the issue instead of the calls to ban ARs and similar rifles.