Congress and the 50 caliber question

A little while ago, several members of congress proposed a "Long Range Sniper Rifle Safety Act". Bear in mind, this is an idea from congress. Anything with "safety" or "security" or "children" in the title is not necessarily a good thing coming from these people.

The gist of the bill, as listed on congress.org, is as follows...

"Long-Range Sniper Rifle Safety Act of 2007 - Amends the federal criminal code and the firearms registration provisions of the Internal Revenue Code to classify the .50 BMG caliber sniper rifle as a destructive device. Modifies the definition of "rifle" to include a weapon intended to be fired from a bipod or other support. Directs the Attorney General to implement regulations for notice and registration of .50 BMG caliber sniper rifles as destructive devices and require the registration of unregistered rifles within seven years after the enactment of this Act."

Now with 11 co-sponsors, this bill is still on the floor waiting for review.

I wonder if this .50 BMG rifle was singled out because of the recent featuring of this rifle in several popular movies this past year. The last gun ban started off focusing on the AK-style rifle. Why not re-visit that stance? The AK packs a massive punch and is available all over the United States. Why all the focus on .50 BMG rifles all of a sudden? .50 BMG rifles are not easy to come by, and the ammunition for these rifles is very expensive. Plus, they are massive rifles. Much larger than most 7.62, .308, or other similar rifles with a good deal of power behind them. So why the intense focus on this particular rifle?

Admittedly, the .50 BMG is an incredible weapon, but labeling it as a "destructive device"?

Destructive devices are explosives. C4. RPGs. Things that do not need to be pointed directly at a specific target to destroy it. If you aim one foot to the right of a target with a .50 BMG and fire the weapon, your target will be just fine. If you aim one foot to the right of a target with an RPG, chances are your target will be damaged. That's a destructive device.

Aside from completely missing the boat on what a destructive device is, under this new proposal, the definition of a rifle will be changed to include not only firearms used off the shoulder as support, but also "from a bipod or other support".

Its that "or other support" part to watch out for. Sometimes I use my opposing hand to steady my handgun when I fire at a target at the shooting range. Would that be considered an "other support"? Seriously.

How about a sling or holster to hold a firearm to your body as you walk through a field? That sounds like "other support" to me. I didn't see any barrel or stock length requirements or any kind of specific measurements for any firearm in the bill, so who gets to define what "other support" is?

Finally, all .50 BMG rifles will need to be registered as destructive devices. Right now, to register as a owner of a destructive device, you have to adhere to very, very strict regulation by the government. Multiple thick books concerning detailed regulations and very stringent rules that must be followed to the letter. Plus the background check for destructive devices is even more exhaustive than the check for a Federal Firearms License.

Classifying this rifle as a destructive device will dramatically increase the associated costs of owning this rifle, and by proxy, force some owners of this particular rifle to surrender it just out of financial necessity.

You can read the text of the bill here, or by clicking the link in the summary post of the bill.

Hopefully this bill will remain dormant. It looks like the bill's supporters are going to wait until there is a great majority of their peers to try and push it through. Or they may try to slide it through under another bill that has a more broad appeal. Regardless, this bill is bad news. Poorly written, dramatically overreaching, and completely misguided.

Then again, it is from congress.

-end-

Armed America by Kyle Cassidy - a detail to know

On the front page of MSNBC today was a photo essay link to the new book by Kyle Cassidy titled "Armed America: Portraits of Gun Owners in Their Homes".

Although the book is gaining a lot of publicity, there is one little thing I do not think anyone has picked up on yet.

In the sidebar on the MSNBC page, the author states "in 1999, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives estimated that there are about 215 million guns in America--at least one firearm in half the households in the country. The anti-gun Brady Campaign, however, puts that number at 192 million guns."

Quick math problem. Lets assume the lower estimate of 192 million guns is correct. If the author photographed 200 individuals out of 192 million, what percentage of gun owners is that?

200 * 100 = 20 000

20 000 / 192 000 000 = 0.000104166667

Wow.

One ten thousandths of a percent.

His book is on Amazon.com and has been reviewed as a fair book concerning firearm ownership. One reviewer link says "The Washington Post had nice things to say about Armed America in the Sunday Books section on July 29th, 2007. Excerpt: "...highly political, even polemical. The question is, in which direction? Each picture in Armed America could be a pro-gun advertisement -- or an anti-gun poster. That's what makes the book so riveting.""

Just bear in mind, as wonderful and incredible as the book has been reviewed by both pro and anti gun advocates, all the author's hard work is for far less than one percent of the total gun ownership in this country.

Something to ponder while reading his book.

-end-

The 2008 presidential candidate's views

Want a quick overview on what each of the candidates for the 2008 Presidential election stand for?

I just found a website that has a table of hot topic issues on the left column and all the current 2008 Presidential candidate names on the top row. Each intersection lists whether that particular candidate opposes, supports, flip-flops or just never made public their views on that particular hot topic.

The page is located at http://2decide.com/table.htm

Take a minute to look at this site. Only Brownback, Huckabee, Hunter, McCain, Paul, Richardson and Tancredo oppose a new assault weapon ban. Seven out of eighteen candidates. Every other candidate supports implementing a new assault weapon ban. Five of those seven candidates are also against background checks for firearms!

Homeland Security, Abortion, Gay Marriage... its all in that chart.

Another website that builds off the information in that chart is located at:

http://www.dehp.net/candidate/index.php

On that site, you can pick your key issues from a pop-up menu, and the website will generate a list of candidates who most closely match your criteria. Try it out! I was surprised on who my choice to vote for should be.

Take a look at both of these websites to get informed on who your best choice to vote for will be in the upcoming elections.

-end-

Ebay says no more firearm part auctions

There's nothing like the smell of cheap publicity.

After years of allowing firearm parts and accessories to be sold on their website, and well over three months after the Virginia Tech shootings, Ebay made an announcement that they are no longer going to offer, support or list auctions for firearm parts or accessories.

Here's the email from way back on July 30th...

"***Message from Matt Halprin – New Listing Restrictions on Gun Parts***

Hello everyone…In mid-August, we will be updating our Firearms, Weapons and Knives Policy to place more restrictions around gun-related items. Once these changes take effect, we will prohibit listings of any firearm part that is required for the firing of a gun. This includes items like bullet tips, brass casings and shells, barrels, slides, cylinders, magazines, firing pins, trigger assemblies, etc. Please read the Firearms, Weapons and Knives Policy for more details on our current policy.

As you may know, eBay does not allow the listing of any items which are regulated by individual states or the federal government; however, there are still a large number of firearm-related parts that are legal and are widely available in retail stores. These items have also historically been allowed on eBay.

After learning that some items purchased on eBay may have been used in the tragedy at Virginia Tech in April 2007, we felt that revisiting our policies was not only necessary, but the right thing to do. After much consideration, the Trust & Safety policy team – along with our executive leaders at eBay Inc. – have made the decision to further restrict more of these items than federal and state regulations require.

This new update continues to encourage safety among our community members and brings our policies in the U.S. and Canada in closer alignment with our existing policies in other markets around the globe.

Sincerely,

Matt Halprin
Vice President, Trust & Safety"

This "new update" only encourages ebay customers to stick their head in the sand. Safety is fortified by knowledge. By ignoring the fact there were thousands of firearm accessories and parts listed on their site before, they fail to see this horrible tragedy at Virginia Tech was the result of a demented idiot who should have put the business end of the firearm in his cranium first. Ebay had nothing to do with this moron's actions, and neither did the individual(s) selling the parts on the auction site.

How many vehicles has Ebay listed on their website? What happens when one of the thousands of vehicles they have listed is involved in an accident? Will they send another email saying that since one of the vehicles purchased on Ebay "may" have been involved in a terrible accident, they are going to restrict the sales of all vehicles and vehicle parts?

And how about all those knives? I typed in "knife" just now in the Ebay search bar and the results came back with over 23,000 results. All were grouped under a listing titled "Knives, Swords and Blades"

Knives, Swords and Blades. Hey Ebay, what were swords used for again? Back in the BC-Roman-dark ages time? I forget. Its been awhile. And knives under the "Militaria" section... shouldn't that be spelled "Military"? Or is that a special way of addressing this section so it doesn't have to be banned as well?

Back to the dead horse for a second... my point is even if you could magic away all the firearms in the world, people will still do rotten things to each other with knives, pointy objects, rocks or whatever is immediately available.

Its all about personal responsibility.

There are plenty of other stores and auction sites online that sell firearm parts and accessories, but with Ebay leaving the arena with their tail firmly tucked up between their legs, I think for all their good intentions, they are establishing a terrible precedent.

-end-