{"id":54613,"date":"2016-03-22T12:03:12","date_gmt":"2016-03-22T16:03:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.gunsamerica.com\/blog\/?p=54613"},"modified":"2016-03-22T12:03:12","modified_gmt":"2023-08-18T02:39:39","slug":"the-war-against-cheap-guns-fun-guns-and-nfa-items","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/gunsamerica.com\/digest\/the-war-against-cheap-guns-fun-guns-and-nfa-items\/","title":{"rendered":"The War Against Cheap Guns, Fun Guns and NFA-Items"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"President<\/a>

President Obama, the anti-gunner-in-chief.<\/p><\/div>\n

\u201cThis is not a plot to take away everybody\u2019s guns.\u201d — president Barack Hussein Obama, Jan. 6, 2016.<\/em><\/p>\n

President Obama\u2019s calm assurances<\/a> earlier this year were met with not-unreasonable eye rolling from the pro-gun community. The President made a valiant attempt, but by now we\u2019ve figured out that every time he promises us we can keep something<\/a> or assures us there isn\u2019t a conspiracy<\/a>, he\u2019s lying.<\/p>\n

Unlike some of their other policies<\/a>, Democrats are pretty clear when it comes to guns: they\u2019d rather not let us have them<\/a>. Hillary blatantly supports<\/a> another assault weapons ban (despite the fact it wasn\u2019t effective\u2014more on this later) and believes the Supreme Court got it wrong<\/a> when they upheld the individual right to keep and bear arms. The Second Amendment has, more or less, kept the anti-gun community in check thus far, but rest assured\u2014the end goal of \u201ccommon sense gun control legislation\u201d is the disarming of the American people.<\/p>\n

If \u201cthe price of liberty is eternal vigilance,\u201d the gun community better stay on its toes, especially in light of the current and potential Supreme Court vacancies. If Obama is allowed to fill Scalia\u2019s seat and Hillary wins the Oval Office, the highest court in the land will be anti-2A for decades to come.<\/p>\n

So to prepare for the future, let\u2019s look at the past. What is the history of banning guns in the United States? What excuses has the Fed used to keep guns out of the hands of law-abiding American citizens? What was the effect of those bans? This isn\u2019t an exhaustive list, but it hits on a few major laws, including one that newer gun owners might not recognize: the ban on cheap firearms.<\/p>\n

\u201cAssault Weapons\u201d<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\"Sen.<\/a>

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), the architect of the 2014 bill to ban so-called “assault weapons.<\/p><\/div>\n

First, the elephant in the room. The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994<\/a>, AKA, the \u201cAssault Weapons Ban,\u201d prohibited the \u201cmanufacture, transfer, or possession of a semiautomatic assault weapons.\u201d \u201cAssault weapon\u201d sounds scary enough, but how exactly did president Clinton and Congress define the term? From the bill, it is \u201ca semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of– a folding or telescoping stock; a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon; a bayonet mount; a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to; accommodate a flash suppressor; and, a grenade launcher.\u201d<\/p>\n

It\u2019s unclear how pistol grips and folding stocks contributed to crime, but Clinton wasn\u2019t about to let that stop him. He described his motivations for passing the bill in stark terms<\/a>: \u201cGangs and drugs have taken over our streets and undermined our schools,\u201d he said. \u201cEvery day, we read about somebody else who has literally gotten away with murder.\u201d<\/p>\n

Somehow, Clinton assured us, banning semi-automatic rifles with bayonet\u00a0mounts would remove gangs and drugs from schools, and keep criminals from getting away with murder. To be fair, the law included a variety of other provisions meant to stop crime, but if less than 1% of incarcerated criminals<\/a> used an AR-15 in their offense, how would banning AR-15s prevent crime in the future?<\/p>\n

As you\u2019re probably aware, it didn\u2019t. Democrats couldn\u2019t get enough support to renew the law, and it expired in 2004. That year the University of Pennsylvania released a study<\/a> that summarizes the ban\u2019s effectiveness: \u201cWe cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation\u2019s recent drop in gun violence. And, indeed, there has been no discernible reduction in the lethality and injuriousness of gun violence.\u201d<\/p>\n

Supporters of a new ban blame the original law\u2019s \u201cloopholes,\u201d<\/a> claiming that a stricter ban could do what the Clinton law didn\u2019t. Here\u2019s the problem: \u201cassault weapons\u201d account for so few crimes in the United States that even if the law were 100% effective, it still wouldn\u2019t reduce the overall crime rate. (And, if the San Bernardino shooting is any indication, even the strictest ban couldn\u2019t be 100% effective.)<\/p>\n

Cheap Guns<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\"A<\/a>

A Raven Arms MP-25, known as a “Saturday Night Special.”<\/p><\/div>\n

So much for scary rifles with flash hiders. But what about the other menace threatening our nation\u2019s existence\u2014cheap guns?<\/p>\n

Cheap handguns\u2014colloquially termed \u201cSaturday Night Specials\u201d (SNS)\u2014have been a favorite target for gun banners since 1879, when Tennessee banned the sale of any pistol except the most expensive \u201carmy or navy pistols.\u201d Unlike the arguments in favor of banning assault weapons, the arguments in favor of banning cheap guns have at least the semblance of logic: if criminals in lower-income neighborhoods tend to use cheap handguns, banning these handguns will reduce crime. At least, that\u2019s the argument.<\/p>\n

This line of thinking eventually led to the Gun Control Act of 1968, which included provisions intended to stop the importation of SNSs \u00a0[18 U.S.C. 925(d)(3)]. Among these provisions was the \u201csporting purposes test,\u201d which forced many overseas manufacturers like Glock, Walther, and Beretta to either modify their pistols or stop selling their firearms in the U.S. altogether. To get around the importation restrictions, these companies had to open U.S.-based facilities, which is how we\u2019re able to access these excellent firearms today. The federal government has yet to institute a domestic ban on cheap guns, but it\u2019s something the gun community needs to know how to fight.<\/p>\n

Towards that end, here are a few points of information, courtesy of an excellent fact sheet<\/a> published by the NRA-ILA:<\/p>\n