1994-2004 "Assault Weapons" Ban (Read 5858 times)

changemyoil66

1994-2004 "Assault Weapons" Ban
« on: October 04, 2017, 08:55:52 AM »
I was in middle/high school during this time, so for any old timers out there  ;D, what was the ban like?  Can you confirm:

1) No new "assault weapons" could be bought
2) Grandfather clause, so if you had one, you can keep it, but can't sell or transfer it to anyone

Can you answer the following:

1) Was only the lower considered an "assault weapon", so you could still buy mags, barrels, BCG, etc...
2) If you had only a lower, was it still legal to assemble a rifle if you had the parts, but only registered the lower to HPD

I just want to be ready because since the ban happened once, it can happen again.

rklapp

Re: 1994-2004 "Assault Weapons" Ban
« Reply #1 on: October 04, 2017, 09:04:47 AM »
I don't see a ban on parts at the time except for hi-cap magazines.

The Act prohibited the manufacture, sale transfer, or possession of "semiautomatic assault weapons" as defined by the Act. "Weapons banned were identified either by specific make or model (including copies or duplicates thereof, in any caliber), or by specific characteristics that slightly varied according to whether the weapon was a pistol, rifle, or shotgun" (see below).[11] The Act also prohibited the transfer and possession of "large capacity ammunition feeding devices" (LCAFDs). An LCAFD was defined as "any magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device manufactured after the date [of the act] that has the capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition."[11]

The Act included a number of exemptions and exclusions from its prohibitions:

* The Act included a "grandfather clause" that allowed for the possession and transfer of weapons and ammunition that "were otherwise lawfully possessed on the date of enactment."[11]
* The Act exempted some 650 firearm types or models, including various types of Browning, Remington, and Beretta guns, as these were viewed as primarily "suitable for target practice, match competition, hunting, and similar sporting purposes. This list was not exhaustive and the act provided that the absence of a firearm from the exempted list did not mean it was banned unless it met the definition of 'semiautomatic assault weapon.'"[11]
* The Act "also exempted any firearm that (1) is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or slide action; (2) has been rendered permanently inoperable; or (3) is an antique firearm."[11]
* The Act "also did not apply to any semiautomatic rifle that cannot accept a detachable magazine that holds more than five rounds of ammunition nor any semiautomatic shotgun that cannot hold more than five rounds of ammunition in a fixed or detachable magazine."[11]
* The Act provided an exemption for the use of "semiautomatic assault weapons and LCAFDs to be manufactured for, transferred to, and possessed by law enforcement and for authorized testing or experimentation purposes," as well as transfers for federal-security purposes under the Atomic Energy Act, "as well as possession by retired law enforcement officers who are not otherwise a prohibited possessor under law."[11]

In 1989, prior to the enactment of the 1994 legislation, the George H. W. Bush administration had banned the importation of foreign-made, semiautomatic rifles deemed not to have "a legitimate sporting use." It did not affect similar but domestically manufactured rifles.[12] (The Gun Control Act of 1968 gives discretion to the Attorney General of the United States to choose whether to "authorize a firearm or ammunition to be imported or brought into the United States" under what is known as "the sporting purposes test."[11]) Following the enactment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, the ATF determined that "certain semiautomatic assault rifles could no longer be imported even though they were permitted to be imported under the 1989 'sporting purposes test' because they had been modified to remove all of their military features other than the ability to accept a detachable magazine," and so in April 1998 "prohibited the importation of 56 such rifles, determining that they did not meet the 'sporting purposes test.'"[11]
Yahh! Freedom and justice shall always prevail over tyranny, Babysitter Girl!
https://ronsreloading.wordpress.com/

2ahavvaii

Re: 1994-2004 "Assault Weapons" Ban
« Reply #2 on: October 04, 2017, 09:52:29 AM »
What is your opinion on a potential ban on components, such as the bump stock modification?  Would it treated with a "grandfather clause" or would there be an outright ban, where you need to turn in any illegal parts to avoid felony charges?

changemyoil66

Re: 1994-2004 "Assault Weapons" Ban
« Reply #3 on: October 04, 2017, 09:58:21 AM »
What is your opinion on a potential ban on components, such as the bump stock modification?  Would it treated with a "grandfather clause" or would there be an outright ban, where you need to turn in any illegal parts to avoid felony charges?

It's too soon to tell which route they're going to go.  I don't see a "turning in" route though because the stocks aren't tracked (serial numbers/registration).  They may all together ban retirees who have money from owning guns.

rklapp

Re: 1994-2004 "Assault Weapons" Ban
« Reply #4 on: October 04, 2017, 10:06:34 AM »
They would have to have a buy-back program, and not many municipalities have the funds for that. I think the most they can hope for is a ban on the manufacture and sale of the components. I'd say stock up but they're probably much more expensive now. Don't see any on Ebay...
Yahh! Freedom and justice shall always prevail over tyranny, Babysitter Girl!
https://ronsreloading.wordpress.com/

ren

Re: 1994-2004 "Assault Weapons" Ban
« Reply #5 on: October 04, 2017, 10:43:22 AM »
Bump stocks are a novelty. I wouldnt consider one but I do care if they want to ban them. Theyd ban one thing today and ban something else tomorrow. Its not the tools...
Deeds Not Words

ren

Re: 1994-2004 "Assault Weapons" Ban
« Reply #6 on: October 04, 2017, 10:55:45 AM »
Next years Hawaii Legislatures wet dream would be to have a gun grab. Illegal but that wouldnt stop them. Id guess that all ARs would be turned in and a photo op with the gov, mayor and police chief and all the ARs turned in would read "Look at all these destructive weaponry in the hands of the public" or something of that sort undr the guise of "Common sense" or "public safety"
Thats their real agenda dont forget it.
Deeds Not Words

macsak

Re: 1994-2004 "Assault Weapons" Ban
« Reply #7 on: October 04, 2017, 11:08:43 AM »
They would have to have a buy-back program, and not many municipalities have the funds for that. I think the most they can hope for is a ban on the manufacture and sale of the components. I'd say stock up but they're probably much more expensive now. Don't see any on Ebay...

they don't have to have a buy back...

2ahavvaii

Re: 1994-2004 "Assault Weapons" Ban
« Reply #8 on: October 04, 2017, 12:24:38 PM »
What did they do when they restricted the mag limits to 10?

rklapp

Re: 1994-2004 "Assault Weapons" Ban
« Reply #9 on: October 04, 2017, 03:07:06 PM »
Of course they don't have to have a buy-back. The only way they're gonna get people to turn in their illegal parts is to pay cash to anyone who turns them in. I'm not saying it's an effective method. I'm saying that's the only way they're gonna get cooperation. The alternative is to try and subpoena the sales records for anyone who sold the illegal equipment then try to confiscate from the owner, but I doubt they'd ever get a judge to approve the multitude of subpoenas.
Yahh! Freedom and justice shall always prevail over tyranny, Babysitter Girl!
https://ronsreloading.wordpress.com/

gotnuance

Re: 1994-2004 "Assault Weapons" Ban
« Reply #10 on: October 07, 2017, 10:18:02 AM »
Of course they don't have to have a buy-back. The only way they're gonna get people to turn in their illegal parts is to pay cash to anyone who turns them in. I'm not saying it's an effective method. I'm saying that's the only way they're gonna get cooperation. The alternative is to try and subpoena the sales records for anyone who sold the illegal equipment then try to confiscate from the owner, but I doubt they'd ever get a judge to approve the multitude of subpoenas.
Look up Tiahrt Amendment.

http://smartgunlaws.org/gun-laws/federal-law/other-laws/tiahrt-amendments/

As far as tracking sales, there are some federal restrictions in place already, so it should make "lists" more difficult to generate. I don't like the source of this information, but if they're complaining about, then it must be good for gun owners.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

Bunker

Re: 1994-2004 "Assault Weapons" Ban
« Reply #11 on: October 07, 2017, 10:47:46 AM »
Of course they don't have to have a buy-back. The only way they're gonna get people to turn in their illegal parts is to pay cash to anyone who turns them in. I'm not saying it's an effective method. I'm saying that's the only way they're gonna get cooperation. The alternative is to try and subpoena the sales records for anyone who sold the illegal equipment then try to confiscate from the owner, but I doubt they'd ever get a judge to approve the multitude of subpoenas.
When the government makes something a felony, most people will get rid of the lousy bump stock, simply because it's not worth a huge fine and/or imprisonment, plus the loss of your 2A rights. Take the parts required to make a M1 carbine into a M2 select fire carbine. When that law came down in the 60s, parts disappeared or the people that kept them never brought them up or discussed them. Sure many still kept the parts but it was their little secret and if they sold them, it was to others in the same boat of secrecy at risk. Why would anyone in their right mind "hypothetically" risk it for a lousy bump stock. At least in the carbine example, the parts yielded a real select fire carbine, just like the military conversion.

drck1000

Re: 1994-2004 "Assault Weapons" Ban
« Reply #12 on: October 07, 2017, 12:02:13 PM »
Nevermind
« Last Edit: October 07, 2017, 12:14:04 PM by drck1000 »