Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Information to help generate testimony

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU
 
HiDemGunOwner Donating Member (166 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-09-08 03:50 AM
Original message
Information to help generate testimony
As a new member of this forum, I have been impressed with everyone's knowledge of the various issues surrounding gun control. With that in mind, I need to ask for some assistance. I have been asked to write some testimony against a Bill in our legislature, and the hearing is on Tuesday morning. The Bill has several components, but the ones I am least familiar with, and would appreciate information on, are:

Restrictions on the purchase of ammunition to the type required for the guns you have valid permits for (yes, in Hawaii, you need a permit for each gun).

Restrictions on BMG 50s and the ammo.

Exempting the State, County and local "government" from the strict liability clause relating to the "owner" of a firearm that is discharged with resulting damage or injury.

Here's a couple of my thoughts on the subjects. In regards to the BMG 50s - any info on crimes committed by same would be helpful, as I suspect it is minimal to none, but I need verifiable sources.

ammo purchase - any other states that may have tried and either repealed the law, or are thinking about doing so, especially if it was due to record keeping difficulties and/or associated costs.

And, anything else you might think helpful. Thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Lasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-09-08 04:30 AM
Response to Original message
1. Just one thing
If it is proper to exempt government entities from the liability clause, then wouldn't it be proper to absolve all gun owners by repealing the clause?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiDemGunOwner Donating Member (166 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-09-08 01:44 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. Well, that's why we have an issue with it....
Seems like the Gov wants to hold everyone, except themselves to an incredibly high standard in regards to liability on the issue. We of course are against it, feeling like what's good for one is good for all....Thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-09-08 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. That's right.
Every argument you could make to say the government should be exempt could reasonably be applied to the case of private ownership.

Good luck.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Boomer 50 Donating Member (288 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-10-08 11:42 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. That's a tough one
We over came that simply by refusing to honor any exemptions in firearms laws. My company will not sell any firearms or any accessories to a government that has a prohibition in place preventing us from selling to the citizen at large. If you get local companies in your area to stand up in this manner, the government there will back off.

I just turned down the state of California who wanted some of our .308 precision rifles because they deem them to have "evil" features and we can't sell them to the citizens of California, we won't sell them to the state either. We've also informed all of our distributors that should they sell our products to California or any other state or entity on our prohibited list, we'll cut them off. Amazing how well that has worked.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JustABozoOnThisBus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-09-08 10:04 AM
Response to Original message
2. No answers, just questions
How does HI plan to limit ammunition to certain guns? Most reloading components are pretty much unregulated, right? Except for powder and primer, which are too generic to tie to any specific cartridge type, and they're not tightly regulated, just classified as hazardous materials for shipping.

Each gun is "licensed" separately? How is that applied to purchases from CMP, where rifles don't go through local FFLs? (www.odcmp.com).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiDemGunOwner Donating Member (166 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-09-08 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. Reloading is one issue
Not specifically covered in the bill and is one of the things we will try to use to our advantage.

Yes, in Hawaii, you need to obtain a "Permit to Acquire" for each gun, with the process a little more involved for a handgun purchase....remind me later and I'll tell you all about the process...which is slightly reminiscent of Canada's process....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krispos42 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-09-08 12:37 PM
Response to Original message
3. Regarding the .50-caliber rifles...
The effective anti-personnel range of any rifle is the lesser of a) the range at which the bullet drops from supersonic to subsonic, or b) the range the shooter can hit an 8" circle consistantly.

Regarding a), this transition causes a shock wave to knock the bullet around randomly, destroying what had been until then a smooth ballistic trajectory. A .308 or .30-06 for example generally reaches that point at about 800 or 900 yards, depending on the specific bullet.

Regarding b), the limiting factor is either the rifle/ammunition combination or the shooter. The rifle is only as accurate at the person shooting it in most cases. A good .50 BMG is as accurate as a .308 or .223, so the limiting factor is how good the shooter is. If a person can shoot 2" groups at 100 yards with an accurate rifle, then that's the limit, irrespective of the bullet size or the muzzle energy.

The vitals of the human body are generally considered to be 8 inches across. That means that the shooter's maximun effective range under ideal conditions as a sniper is 400 years regardless of rifle type.



In order to be able to take advantage of the extremely long range potential of a .50-caliber round, a person needs an extremely accurate rifle and the ability to use said rifle to shoot tiny little .25" groups at 100 yards, which translates into an effective range of some 1,600 yards, about a mile.

This is an incredible distance, more so because environmental and gravity factors become hugely important the further down-range the target is. At those distances, knowing the exact range to the target is vital because gravity is starting to really take it's toll on the bullet's path. Being wrong by 50 yards either way can result in a miss, as the bullet either flies over the target's head or hits the ground at it's feet.

Not only that, but you have the wind to contend with as well, not only where you are, but every where along the bullet's path. Remember, it only has to blow the bullet to the left or right by five or six inches to make you miss. How much training do you think you'd need to be able to do that?

And is your target moving? That compounds your problem even more because flight time can be well over a second at extreme ranges.

.50 BMG rifles are very expensive, thousands of dollars for even a single-shot one. The kind of scope that has enough clarity and power and durability for a .50 BMG also costs over a thousand dollars. Practice ammo costs $3 a round, and the good match stuff even more.

And what is the potential terrorist getting for their money? A half-inch hole put in something. Shooting a gasoline or propane tank makes it leak, that's all. Like leaving a valve cracked open a little. Shooting down an airliner? Please. Maybe with a .50-caliber machine gun. Next to the runway. Assassination? Except for the President or Vice-President, there is no person in the country that you cannot get close enough to to use an ordinary rifle with a much higher chance of success than a .50 at a mile.

And, finally, after California banned the .50 BMG in 2004 new alternatives emerged. One is the .510 DTC, which fires the same bullet at the same velocity using a slightly different cartridge, and the other is the .416 Barrett, a .50 BMG brass case necked down to a slightly smaller bullet.

It's such a fringe issue it's not even worth pondering.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gorfle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-09-08 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Responses
Restrictions on the purchase of ammunition to the type required for the guns you have valid permits for (yes, in Hawaii, you need a permit for each gun).

I have never encountered such restrictions, because I have never lived anywhere were I was required to have a permit for the firearms themselves.

I would be against any such permits, as they create gun registration, which is a necessary precursor to confiscation.

All my life I've just walked into the local Walmart and bought all the ammo, of any type, I wanted.

Restrictions on BMG 50s and the ammo.

This was already addressed in this post as well as I ever could.

Exempting the State, County and local "government" from the strict liability clause relating to the "owner" of a firearm that is discharged with resulting damage or injury.

I would say that this is probably stems from #1 CYA but #2 ostensibly anyone with sufficient training is deemed "safe" and exempt from liability.

I would extend this protection to anyone who voluntarily passes a safety exam, not just government officials.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiDemGunOwner Donating Member (166 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-09-08 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. I agree...things should be different...we're trying.....Thanks n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiDemGunOwner Donating Member (166 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-09-08 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. I agree...
It's a fringe issue....but they have attached the language to a broader bill, so I want to have some "ammo" to use against it. My intent was to suggest that the firearm is indeed a "fringe" issue with little actual potential for criminal use and therefore not cost effective to legislate against, hence the need for statistics on the use of the gun in crimes....if it hasn't been used in the commissin of a crime, why go to the expense and time of creating a law for it? Thanks for the info.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enfield collector Donating Member (821 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-11-08 12:02 AM
Response to Original message
11. regarding ammo sales, the GCA of 1968 required all ammo sales to be
recorded. it proved to be a worthless step and that part of the GCA was repealed in 1986. you should ask your legislature to prove unreasonable laws will be effective in reducing crime and also insist that since not all LEO are honest that they should not be exempt from any restrictions either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krispos42 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-11-08 12:08 PM
Response to Original message
12. Oops, I made a little mistake in my reply #3
I said to have an effective range of 1600 yards the .50 BMG rifle must shoot 0.25" group. That's incorrect, it's .50" groups.

MOA is short of "minute of accuracy". A "minute" in this case stands for 1/60th of a degree (like in latitude and longitude), and 1/60th of a degree at a range of 100 yards is almost exactly one inch.

So in the diagram I put up (and which I resized to make reading easier) your standard-issue iron-sighted M16 has accuracy of 3 MOA, an Army sniper rifle has an accuracy of 1 MOA, and FBI sniper rifles have an accuracy of 0.5 MOA.

It is also proportional. If an Army sniper rifle shoots 1 MOA, it will shoot 1" groups at 100 yards, 5" groups at 500 yards, and 8" groups at 800 yards.

In other words, it's a narrow cone, rather than a cylinder.

As an interesting related factoid, the world record for long-range shooting was a Canadian sniper in Afghanistan who shot and killed a Taliban with a .50 BMG at over 2,600 yards (about a mile and a half). Assuming he didn't just get lucky, he and his rifle were capable of shooting less than .31 MOA.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 02:55 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC