Even BATF Says ‘Assault Weapons’ is a Fake Term

[The Legion]

https://www.alloutdoor.com/2018/11/26/even-batf-says-assault-weapons-fake-term/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_content=2018-12-02&utm_campaign=Weekly+Newsletter

"It's about scaring the public"

A link to an Outdoor Life article recently found its way across my Facebook feed, and although it’s a bit of an oldie (Feb 2017), its content bears repeating… especially as the politicos of both Red and Blue varieties continue to steal away our firearms rights. The gist of it is the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (BATF)’s admission that “assault weapon” is a manufactured term designed to scare the public — something most gun owners have known all along.

A Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF) ‘white paper’ [authored by ATF second-in-command Ronald Turk] correctly identifies ‘assault weapons’ as a politically contrived term with no real meaning and recommends dramatic federal law revisions in how they are regulated.
-+-+-
Turk’s ‘white paper’ says the agency is interested in reforms that ‘promote commerce and defend the Second Amendment without significant negative impact on ATF’s mission to fight violent firearms crime and regulate the firearms industry.’

Turk wrote that the misleading ‘assault weapons’ term to describe AK-and-AR-style rifles should be replaced with a ‘modern sporting rifles,’ to reflect how the use and popularity of these firearms has grown. In fact, he noted, their use in ‘sport shooting’ has grown ‘exponentially’ and such guns ‘are now standard for hunting activities.’

The ATF official also argued in favor of changes in policy for the import of WWII-era military weapons, such as M1 Garand rifles.

As I said, this isn’t earth-shattering news, except that it’s nice to see someone in government making sense. When even BATF says “assault weapons” is a phony label, any thinking person should sit up and take notice. Sadly, that omits many anti-gunners and most elected officials, both Republicans and Democrats.

[Garufa]

Where is the “white paper” twice quoted but not sourced?

[The Legion]

1 hour ago, Garufa said:

Where is the “white paper” twice quoted but not sourced?

https://d3uwh8jpzww49g.cloudfront.net/sharedmedia/1509466/atf-white-paper-options-to-reduce-or-modify.pdf

https://www.nraila.org/media/20170210/pdf/atf-white-paper-pdf

Edited December 2, 2018 by The Legion

[Jamie Jackson]

Thank you Legion.

Sadly logic and rational thinking is sorely lacking among elected officials and the general populace...

[btq96r]

Kind of a stretch with the title of the thread...at the end of the letter, Turk acknowledges the contents of the paper are "merely the ideas and opinions of this writer."  So, not ATF saying any of this, just one of its members.

Plus, when you realize the timing of this paper was at the beginning of the Trump administration, and the actions taken on the subjects listed have been little and less (save for a bump stock ban)...we're seeing just how played for fools gun owners were.  We had a top level ATF official writing justification for a lot of the things we wanted, with action steps that could make it happen.  The fact that all these good ideas never left this paper is telling.

[DaveTN]

I couldn’t care less what the ATF has to say about this, or how many "white papers" they write. These are the same idiots that decided a bump stock didn’t violate the ban on full auto rifles. Arguing over the term “Assault Weapons” is silly. And to think the gun grabbers will call them “Modern Sporting Rifles” is just as ridiculous.   

Both sides know what those terms mean.

As far as the public that doesn’t understand gun terminology, they see 50 people killed and 53 were injured in the pulse nightclub, 59 dead and 422 injured in Vegas; they don’t care what name you put on those weapons.

You can bet that those that write legislation will be very specific in their descriptions unless they try to ban things like “all semi-auto firearms”.

It appears the SCOTUS will be leaving these decisions up to the states. These bans can’t get through the U.S. Senate we have now. If they ever do; the SCOTUS will need to hear the case. I doubt that will happen, but you never know.

If the 2nd amendment allows for the people to protect themselves from an out of control government; then we have a right to have fully automatic weapons. I don’t expect to see a Federal ban or that case heard at the Federal level in my lifetime, but some of you longer folks may. So far no Federal Court has upheld the right to have what they call “Assault Rifles”.

I believe in States Rights, I believe that states and local government have the responsibility of law enforcement; not the Feds. So far the courts have allowed “reasonable restrictions” on the 2nd as they do on the 1st. I don’t think the SCOTUS will hear every case and decide if it’s reasonable. That’s good if you are in Tennessee; its sucks if you are in Maryland.