• the_crotch@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Assault rifles are full auto or burst fire. They’re not legal for civilians without a specific form of FFL, which is difficult and expensive to get. Even with an FFL you will probably run into problems with state and local laws. That’s why you’ll pretty much only see assault rifles at places like the ones outside Vegas where they let you pay to fire one for a few minutes.

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_rifle

      • SSTF@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        21 hours ago

        Fully automatic weapons can be legally owned after a mere $200 application to the ATF.

        The real hurdle is the closed nature of the full auto registry creates artificial scarcity and pushes the price of the gun itself up.

        But, assuming you have the money, it is a straightforward process no more complicated or time consuming than legally owning an SBR.

        Edit: Not sure why I’m being downvoted. Here is the transfer form. Block 4B is where you list what type of NFA item you are buying.

      • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        23 hours ago

        I think they call em “assault weapons” and they’re basically anything high capacity and semi auto and black and scary. Basically no recent discourse about assault whatever has actually referred to burst or auto weapons.

        • the_crotch@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          23 hours ago

          I think you’re probably right that those are what the law is targeting, and Newsweek is simply lying in this article.

          • SSTF@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            22 hours ago

            I went and read the text. The TLDR is the law was targeted to semiautomatic weapons, but the text itself defined those as “assault rifles”.

            The text proposed banning “assault rifles” and within the bill it laid out a definition for the purposes of the bill:

            “Assault rifle” means a semiautomatic rifle

            (1) With an overall length less than thirty inches;

            (2) That has a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than ten rounds, except for an attached tubular device designed to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber rimfire ammunition; or

            (3) That accepts a detachable magazine or that may be readily modified to accept a detachable magazine and has one or more of the following characteristics:

            (A) A folding, telescoping, or detachable stock, or a stock that is otherwise foldable or adjustable in a manner that operates to reduce the length, the size, or any dimension, or otherwise enhances the concealability of the weapon;

            (B) A pistol grip or thumbhole stock;

            © Any feature capable of functioning as a protruding grip that can be held by the non‑trigger hand;

            (D) A flash suppressor;

            (E) A shroud that is attached to or partially or completely encircles the barrel and permits the shooter to hold the firearm with the second hand without being burned, but excluding a slide that encloses the barrel;

            (F) A bayonet mount;

            (G) A grenade launcher; or

            (H) A threaded barrel capable of accepting a barrel extender, flash suppressor, forward hand grip, or silencer.

            https://legiscan.com/HI/text/SB401/id/3226101