The ATF posted this on it’s web site:
Semiautomatic Assault Weapon Update
By statute, the prohibitions relating to semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices expired on September 13, 2004. As a result, certain sections of the Gun Control Act, 18 U.S.C. Chapter 44, and its implementing regulations, 27 CFR Part 478, are no longer in effect.
I celebrated by assembling some full capacity magazines for my competition handgun out of parts I had laying around. The anti-freedom crowd are whining to such an extent that it is almost deafening. Here is something the Violence Policy Center put out:
Soon after its passage in 1994, the gun industry made a mockery of the federal assault weapons ban, manufacturing “post-ban” assault weapons with only slight, cosmetic differences from their banned counterparts. The VPC estimates that more than one million assault weapons have been manufactured since the ban’s passage in 1994.
It appears the VPC has a problem defining words. By the definitions they helped create for the ’94 law the manufactures complied with the law. Congress and the anti-freedom people were told again and again their definition of “assault weapon” was meaningless. It nothing to do with the function of the firearms. Their concern was all about cosmetics. Then when the manufactures changed the cosmetics they complained that they were still making “assault weapons”. Well… we on the pro-freedom side of the fence never could figure out what you were calling an “assault weapon” other than by the cosmetics as defined in the law.
The questions a rational person has to ask are, “What definition of ‘assault weapon’ are you using now?” and “If the definition that Congress used wasn’t what you meant why didn’t you complain about it then?” You got what you wanted at the time. You made all kinds of claims about how wonderful it was to have the law passed, the studies were done as per the law and they found out EXACTLY what we were saying at the time–the law will not make any difference in violent crime. I made an appearance on a television show in August of ’95 saying some of this if anyone wants to check this out I’ll let them see the video. And more importantly you can’t change the definition of ‘assault weapon’ to fit whatever is convenient at the time. For example they say about one out of five police officers are killed with an ‘assault weapon’. Well…. they don’t tell you what their definition of an “assault weapon” is for that number to be true. It’s abundantly clear that it’s NOT the definition used in Federal law.
Oh well… it’s all part of the meltdown of the liberals–Clinton and “what your definition of ‘is’ is.” and all that. And then Dan Rather and CBS are the laughing stock of the nation today. As my friend Sean says: “Today is Happy News Day.”