- Messages
- 600
- Reactions
- 704
- Thread Starter
- #41
In my read of the bill, it did not appear that C&R was referenced outside of the definitions. I think your thought is correct- even if C&R elgible, that firearm has been declared an "assault weapon" per their definition. Keep in mind that critics are calling this the most restrictive ban in history- far worse than even CA or NY- mn, it is quite true that nearly every semi auto centerfire rifle will be banned. With regards to C&R guns, I find this particularly interesting because the bill calls out the SKS. The bill clearly states that the "additional features" - ie barrel shroud, muzzle brake, grip etc must also include a rifle with a detachable magazine. The bill excludes rifles with FIXED magazines with capacity at 10 rds or less. In its most common and purest form, the SKS fits this definition- it has a fixed 10 rd mag- no pistol grip, threaded barrel- just a handguard- but the magazine is fixed- so therefore not an "assault weapon" but YET- it is on their "list" - how dumb are they? This is what happens when you have folks writing laws about something they know very little about.Any opinions on how/if 1240 affects C&R holders and transfers of firearms that are otherwise eligible under C&R guidelines? From what I can make of all this, it sounds like any C&R firearm that otherwise meets the new definition of "assault weapon" couldn't be transferred even if both buyer and seller hold C&R licenses.