28 June 2008

Another interesting aside

I said a while back that the best way to ban or regulate "assault rifles" was to consider them machineguns citing the Federal Definition of a machinegun (26 USC 5845(b)):

any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger. The term shall also include the frame or receiver of any such weapon, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun, and any combination of parts from which a machinegun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.
From VPC's website:
The Court’s ruling today does not appear to affect the District’s ban on “machine guns,” which under DC law includes any gun “which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily converted or restored to shoot semiautomatically, more than 12 shots without manual reloading.” This definition would include virtually all semiautomatic handguns. As a result, the District’s ban can remain in force for those types of handguns, commonly known as pistols. In essence, the Court’s ruling for the most part will only affect revolvers and derringers.

So, forget registering a semi-auto pistol, unless it cannot accept a magazine larger than 11 rounds!

Also, anyone wanting to ban assault weapons could take the DC statute definition of machinegun. That makes it hard to skirt the ban with "sporter models" that made the last assault weapon ban a joke.

So, the real winners in DC v. Heller aren't the RKBA crowd, but the gun control crowd.

Take about blowback!