Corkscrew
August 06, 2008, 12:09
I believe that regardless of who is elected in November; the .50 will be on the chopping block. It makes perfect political sense, when you think about it. It is a weapon that has been demonized, described as a device that can be used to take down aircraft, breach body armor, and coveted by terrorist. There are simply not enough owner of this weapon to mount a defense on its behalf. The issue I would like to discuss is how a ban of this nature would be implemented? The .50 has some qualities that may make a ban somewhat difficult. All, .50s, to my knowledge are manufactured domestically. This offers them some protection as they are not as easily regulated by the department of treasury like the imported weapons, i.e. Fal, AK, H&K ECT. Another problem for the antis is that the BATFE has control over receivers and complete rifles and while they could implement a ban on a completed .50 rifle, how would they stop someone from building a .50 on an AR lower? Without an out right ban on parts that relate to the .50 it would be very difficult to regulate them. After doing some research, I am thinking that the ban will probably involve listing the .50 as a destructive device and making it fall under the NFA of 1934. The antis used this to effectively ban the Striker 12, aka Streetsweeper. I don’t know what would happen to persons that owned .50s prior to the ban, I would assume that they would be grandfathered, but maybe someone else could answer that.
I would like to hear your options on this subject and if anything I have stated is incorrect please point it out. Thanks
CC
I would like to hear your options on this subject and if anything I have stated is incorrect please point it out. Thanks
CC