Gun-control mistakes

[krispos42]

59. I see a .223 rifle.

The actual one Stone prototyped was presumably full-auto, which means it's legally a "machine gun" by US firearms law as applied to civilians. In military firearm terminology it's an "assault rifle", in that it is a shoulder-fired rifle capable of full-automatic fire, and fires a cartridge that is roughly between a bolt-action or semi-automatic "battle rifle" and a pistol-cartridge-firing submachine gun.

"Battle rifles" are generally in the .30 caliber/7.62mm range and fire a more powerful cartridge with one squeeze of a trigger. Examples included bolt-action military rifles like the M1903 Springfield (.30-06), the Mk III Lee-Enfield in .303 British, the K98 Mauser in 7.92x57mm, and the M1891 Mosin-Nagat in 7.62x54R. Semi-auto examples include the M-14, G-3, and FAL rifles in 7.62 NATO. The muzzle energy of these guns was very roughly in the 2,400 foot-pound region

"Submachine guns" are compact full-automatic rifles that shoot pistol ammunition. Popular 9mm examples are the Uzi, the Sten, the MP40, and the MP-5. The American Tommy gun and M-3 were in .45. The muzzle energy of these guns were roughly in the 425 foot-pound range.

In contrast, the .223 Rem (commercial version of 5.56 NATO) runs about 1,300 foot-pounds, and the Russian 7.62x39 runs about 1,500 foot-pounds.


Assuming a semi-automatic version ever went into production, what you would have is a semi-automatic .223 rifle feeding from a detachable magazine. Being a modern design made on modern machinery with modern materials, it would forgo the traditional "blued steel and polished wood" look with durable, low-glare plastics, extensive use of aluminum with a low-glare finish, and improved ergonomics by having a protruding pistol grip or grips. The use of plastic would allow the grips to be molded in an ergonomic fashion to fit the human hand better than a wooden stock, and textured to increase adhesion.

It might have a stock that is quickly adjustable without tools so it can be easily adapted to a person's size, clothing bulk, and shooting position, or one that folds for easy storage and transport. The stock may also have an adjustable cheek rest on it, so the user could line up their eye with the sights easily, quickly, and reliably.

It might be drilled and tapped for mounting a telescopic sight on it, so it could be used at longer ranges than iron sights.

It might have a device attached to the end of the barrel that helps hide the flash of the muzzle from the user during dim conditions, or a device that directs some of the propellant gasses upwards to reduce felt recoil and muzzle jump.

The barrel would probably be as close to being in-line with the shoulder as possible so that the gun would not be torqued up by recoil. The sights would have to be mounted higher above the barrel to compensate.

It might have attachment points on it for a sling, or a bipod, or both.

The magazine you reference is from 1986, so about 20 years later the design would have been updated with accessory rails so that tactical flashlights and laser sights could be attached near the muzzle, forward of the support hand. The drilled-and-tapped holes on the top for telescopic mounts would probably have been replaced with another accessory rail so that other sighting options, like red-dot sights, could be attached in lieu of iron sights or a scope.

The pistol grip would be updated with a storage compartment so that spare batteries for the flashlights, lasers, and red-dot scopes could be stored easily.

Pop quiz... which of these are "assault weapon" features?