An Open Letter To G.w. From Michael Moore

[KCFlyer]

I also said that we did not know the model of the gun so that was also up for grabs.

The Drudge report said it was a Browning Auto-5

The big loophole here is that if the gun will accept an externam mag, then it will accept a 5 shot mag just as easy as a 20 shot mag. Where and how it them becomes illegal in the bill is anybodys guess.

It's the difference between an internal magazine that holds 5 shells and a detachable magazine that holds 20. I know you load the shells underneath the bolt, but it sure seems difficult to detach that magazine. The bill sepcifically states, even in it's brief summary, that in order to be included in the ban it must have a detachable magazine. If it's just got the "pistol grip", but no detachable magazine, it would not be covered under the ban. So I ask you....where is the detachable magazine that was fitted to the gun that was given to Kerry. Heck, all I know about guns I learned from my brother , who is a gun collector. Even an idiot can see that just about every rifle out there has a "pistol grip". The assumption (lie) that was made that the gun was illegal because of a "pistol" grip is a perfect case of taking one thing, but not the WHOLE thing and making as statement to appeal to a right wing NRA member, who might not recognize that Kerry is a hunter and actually OWNS some guns of his own.

As far as Feinstein...since she was the coauthor of the bill, I would imagine that she's got a pretty fair insight into what is and is not covered. Guess I shouldn't assume. But then again, if you are cosponsoring a bill, and you publish a 16 page document that pretty much specifies what is and isn't covered, then you pretty much open yourself up for any deviations from that list.

 

[FredF]

You are correct KC, she should have great insight into the bill she is referring to and nobody questioned it, I just asked for a reference to it, BUT it is not the bill referred to in the article and that bill did not have that provision

So why do you keep bringing it up?

 

[sentrido]

I read the bill linked to in the drudge article. The gun in Kerry's hand does not qualify.

 

[FredF]

I read the bill linked to in the drudge article. The gun in Kerry's hand does not qualify.

[post="177142"][/post]​

Why not?

 

[KCFlyer]

You are correct KC, she should have great insight into the bill she is referring to and nobody questioned it, I just asked for a reference to it, BUT it is not the bill referred to in the article and that bill did not have that provision

So why do you keep bringing it up?

[post="177138"][/post]​

Fred...it most certainly IS the bill that is referred to in the article. The intro to her brochure says "the assault weapons ban of 1994 is set to expire", then goes on from there. The bill that was cited was to continue the assault weapons ban of 1994. The verbiage is IDENTICAL to the snippet referenced in the drudge report. Here's a cut and past FROM THE BILL REFERENCED ON THE DRUDGE REPORT:

Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2003 - Amends Federal firearms provisions to revise the definition of "semiautomatic assault weapon" (SAW) to include conversion kits (for converting a firearm to a SAW) and any semiautomatic rifle or pistol that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and that has any one of the following characteristics, respectively: (1) a folding or telescoping stock, a threaded barrel, a pistol grip, a forward grip, or a barrel shroud; or (2) a second pistol grip, a threaded barrel, a barrel shroud, or the capacity to accept a detachable magazine at a location outside of the pistol grip.

The gun Kerry was holding did NOT have a detachable magazine. So you'd have to drop the line in the requirement of a detachable magazine...then you have to ignore the AND, and only include the remaining characteristics. In other words - here's what they "cited" as making the gun he was given as "illegal"

Republican version of the bill:

Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2003 - Amends Federal firearms provisions to revise the definition of "semiautomatic assault weapon" (SAW) to include any semiautomatic rifle or pistol that has any one of the following characteristics, respectively: (1) a folding or telescoping stock, a threaded barrel, a pistol grip, a forward grip, or a barrel shroud; or (2) a second pistol grip, a threaded barrel, a barrel shroud, or the capacity to accept a detachable magazine at a location outside of the pistol grip

They only left out 20 words...but those 20 words told, as Paul Harvey likes to say, "the rest of the story".

 

[FredF]

Quite simply, the Feinstein article has references to excepted weapons, but where did that list come from?

The article in Drudge references another piece of legislation that, if you read it, has no list of excepted weapons. Is that the full legislation?

The Drudge article also lists the shotgun as a Baretta 300 which, is not specifically listed in Feinstein's articel but close to is is the Baretta 303A. Are they the same?


Lastsy, WHO CARES

This is silly. The legislation never passed. Somebody else raised the issue. There is confusion about the exact make and model of the shotgun.

Who cares?

 

[KCFlyer]

Quite simply, the Feinstein article has references to excepted weapons, but where did that list come from?

The article in Drudge references another piece of legislation that, if you read it, has no list of excepted weapons. Is that the full legislation?

The Drudge article also lists the shotgun as a Baretta 300 which, is not specifically listed in Feinstein's articel but close to is is the Baretta 303A. Are they the same?
Lastsy, WHO CARES

This is silly. The legislation never passed. Somebody else raised the issue. There is confusion about the exact make and model of the shotgun.

Who cares?

[post="177221"][/post]​

Apparently, the ones who had hoped that they could "demonstrate" Kerry's "flipflopping position" on assault weapons. The folks were caught in a lie. I guess when that happens, and it's your side that was caught, then it boils down to the make and model of the shotgun. Nevermind the clever omission of key elements of their statements about the candidate - just as long as they can take something and try to paint it as a negative. Next time they'll just have to do a better job.

 

[diogenes]

Actually, it is a composite of things that make a rifle or shotgun illegal under the current ban. A combination of detachable magazine, attached bayonet, pistol grip, etc. are factors in that calculus.

Under the current ban, a 'sawed off' shotgun (barrel 18 inches or greater) with an extended tube (magazine extension) is legal - my home defense weapon of choice.

I think the ban is cosmetic and worthless. Tv shows and movies to the contrary, most thugs use pistols (concealability). IIRC, 55 officers died in the line of duty last year, 35 by pistol, about 10 or 15 by rifle/shotgun, and the balance by car, knife and club.

Now, one officer is too many. But if you banned everything right now, there'd be plenty of weapons to go around.

A better solution is to give the 55 perps of the aforementioned heinous activities a choice - "regular or extra-crispy?"

Stock models of Berettas and Brownings are WELL within the guidelines under the current ban. My 20 year old Beretta is a fine dove gun.