Posted on 01/14/2013 1:07:24 PM PST by smoothsailing
January 14, 2013
Bryan Preston
Last week, retiring Gen. Stanley McCrystal made a stir when he suggested that America ought to take a look at enacting new gun control laws. Specifically, McCrystal said he supports banning military firearms such as M4 and M16 rifles. Such weapons are already banned from civilian ownership except in very few cases, and have been since 1934. Such weapons have played no role in any of the recent shootings that have been in the national headlines.
Appearing on America’s Radio News today with Chris Salcedo, Gen. McCrystal reiterated his stance. You may listen to the full interview at the link.
“I carried an assault weapon for many years, an M4 carbine. I think it’s the best weapon of its type in the world. Shoots a 5.56 round at 3000 feet per second. When it hits human flesh, it’s devastating. And if you see it up close, you know you don’t want it around our schools, you don’t want it on our streets.”
The M4 is not on our streets, at least not legally as a fully automatic weapon. The 5.56 round is fired by many other rifles besides the M4. It is similar in size to the .223 round, and is on the smaller side of rifle rounds that are available to civilians. The devastation an M4 brings upon its target is as much a result of its fully automatic fire rate as from its ammunition.
Gen. McCrystal continued: “I’m not an expert on gun control or the Second Amendment, but I am an expert on that kind of weapon. And I’m an expert on how I feel about my family. So what I want is a national conversation, a mature national conversation, that figures out how we protect innocent people from that kind of weaponry.”
How mature can that conversation be, when so many of its most prominent participants know nothing about current gun laws and refuse to learn anything about them? They admit that they know nothing, as McCrystal does here, yet opine anyway.
Host Chris Salcedo pointed out that with our porous border and lack of ability to control the illegal drug trade, only criminals will have firepower if civilians cannot legally own it.
“Think about the children of Newtown,” McCrystal said in reply. “That is not a philosophical argument. That’s a bloody reality, and that’s the kind of thing that I want us to talk about.”
The Second Amendment is also not a philosophical argument. It is a constitutional guarantee.
The weapons that Gen. McCrystal consistently brings up are already banned. They played no role in the recent shootings. They are not among the most powerful available, no matter what the weapons look like. They factor in fewer murderers per year than hammers do. Proper incarceration of murders would have saved the lives of the two firefighters murdered in New York State, by a felon who reportedly used a straw purchaser to obtain his weapons. An armed guard or faculty member would have had the chance to save all those children at Sandy Hook from an armed madman. “Gun Free Zone” signs may as well be painted to look like targets, for all the good they do in protecting innocent life.
Do the facts have any place in this “mature” discussion, General?
It does our side no good to simply ignore the fact that fully automatic weapons are, in general, not available to the average purchaser EVER!
BTW, taking some electrical wiring supports, strap together 5 green lasers. Rig them so they fire simultaneously.
There, you have a very dangerous weapon.
Sure, the worst it will do is cook some retinas, but that's all you need. You can buy them at walmart.
“You may only own a M16 or other fully automatic machine gun that was manufactured and registered with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives (BATFE) before May 19, 1986. Fully automatic weapons manufactured after that date are not currently legal for civilian ownership. Because of the 1986 cut off, fully automatic weapons that were registered before that date sell for exorbitant prices.
An individual purchasing a “ National Firearms Act Weapon “, NFA weapon or class 3 fully automatic weapon is required to pay a one time, $200 Federal Excise Tax fee. To obtain an NFA weapon, you must first select one. The reason is, forms are required to transfer the weapon from seller to buyer, requiring specific information. There are several types of forms to accommodate these transfers. A form “3”, accommodates dealer to dealer transfers (Class 3, in or out of state). A form “4”, accommodates dealer to individual transfers, within the state. Unlicensed individuals may not transfer class 3 weapons directly into their state. An active Class 3 license is required to execute the transfer. If you hold an active standard FFL, you may transfer the weapon in directly, however the law enforcement signature, photographs, and fingerprint cards are still required, as well as the $200 FET. The form “4” is quite simple. It will be filled out in duplicate by your Class 3 dealer, showing the current owner of the weapon and address, your name and address, description of the weapon and serial number, etc.. You will be given the forms, along with a set of fingerprint cards. On the back of the form is a place for your photograph and your local law enforcement official’s signature. If you are transferring the NFA weapon to your corporation, this Law Enforcement signature is not required. After you have obtained an official signature, return the forms along with your photographs (taped to the back), your fingerprint cards, and your check for $200, (payable to The Department of the Treasury) to your dealer. All of this information, along with the FET fee, will be forwarded to the BATF and they will begin the process of transferring the ownership of the weapon to your name or corporation.”
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Can_a_civilian_own_a_M16_rifle
You are correct about the TRANSFERABLE. However, you can make your own NON-TRANSFERABLE firearms. You still have to fire the proper paperwork and get the tax stamp and all.
Sorry General, the Hundred Year's War is being revived and you gotta' get out there ~ uh, take some of your stuff too. They like that!
Not full auto. Try it, you’ll find yourself in prison.
Yes, you can manufacture an AR-15 with a short barrel and CALL it an M-4, but you can’t make it select fire. You can call it what you want, but that ain’t an M-4, that’s a short-barrel AR-15.
Even if you could, why the heck would you want to? I always thought the 3 round burst was retarded and never used it. Well, I used it once.
As far as high velocity .22 rounds go the 22-250 has been around at least 60 years.
First as a wildcat cartridge and then as the 22-250 Remington. It puts a 55gr. bullet out at 3650 fps and does tremendous damage as a varmint round, hate to think what it would do to a human.
There are other 22 cal center fires that are comparable or faster than the 5.56 round.
So a trust can buy a new full auto? I thought not.
Fully automatic weapons manufactured after that date are not currently legal for civilian ownership
This is an incorrect statement. TRANSFER or sale of a firearm manufactured after 1986 is prohibited. Self manufacture of NON-TRANSFERABLE firearms is not prohibited. Still have to have the proper paperwork and tax stamp though.
What is the difference between McChrystal arguing for disarming the populace and Soviet, Chinese, German or Cambodian Generals arguing for disarming their populaces? Not a damn thing.
I have not been able to verify this about trusts, but I heard it might be applicable in certain circumstances. I don’t know if this is true or what restrictions might apply if true. Any Class III dealers out there?
Now you’re just moving the goal posts.
You’re gonna end up quibbling with your own nitpicks,
...or nitpicking your own quibbles! HA!
When a local guardsman I know referred to McC as "Taliban Stan," I asked him what was up with that? He proceeded to school me.
Mr. niteowl77
I think you'd require an FFL / Manufacturer's license, and any NFA build application would require some documentation showing that the firearm was being made for a federal or state agency. Lacking that documentation, you would not get the tax stamp.
I kid you not. They repeated the story twice on my way to work.
Are people really that stupid? It is like the movie “Anchorman” where Will Farrell's character reads whatever is on the teleprompter.
Yep.
The ROE change was a disgrace. Wasn’t Petraeus behind that as well?
I was bantering with a "professional LEO" on LinkedIn who used that same terminology. He couldn't define "high capacity ammunition" either.
Yes, they really are that stupid.
Yes, I believe it was Petraeus’ brainstorm but McCrystal backed it 100%, might have been a duel brainstorm.
SOME states allow citizens to own automatic weapons, not all. And getting a tax stamp is a lengthy, onerous, process that is a pretty effective ban in itself. Otherwise, you are right. We should be as accurate as possible.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.