Assault Weapon Ban - Sale?

[SteveWag]

Has anyone noticed that when people talk about re-instating the Assault Weapon Ban they usually say “I/we intend (or want to) re-instate the Assault Weapon Ban on the sale of assault weapon ….”? I have heard it many times. The original ban did not regulate the SALE, only the assembly or manufacture. This could be very interesting. “Sale” would have to be defined, and since firearms can be gifted or put on a gun raffle ticket, “sale” would be defined as any transfer of ownership, by gifting OR including the firearm in a will, or etc. This would pose an interesting situation. The law would not result in confiscation, but would require destruction of the firearm upon the owners’ death or if he/she becomes unable to own firearms.

Steve

[Perkascene]

Has anyone noticed that when people talk about re-instating the Assault Weapon Ban they usually say “I/we intend (or want to) re-instate the Assault Weapon Ban on the sale of assault weapon ….”? I have heard it many times. The original ban did not regulate the SALE, only the assembly or manufacture. This could be very interesting. “Sale” would have to be defined, and since firearms can be gifted or put on a gun raffle ticket, “sale” would be defined as any transfer of ownership, by gifting OR including the firearm in a will, or etc. This would pose an interesting situation. The law would not result in confiscation, but would require destruction of the firearm upon the owners’ death or if he/she becomes unable to own firearms.

Steve

Oh jeez, I've been justifying all of my recent purchases by calling them investments. Thanks a lot!

[Burton]

Good point. Another to ponder... if the goal is to keep these "assault weapons" out of the hands of bad guys. Which of the following makes it easier:

A) Banning manufacturing so none exist between 2010-????
B) Banning the sale, meaning that theoretically millions more could be manufactured perfectly legally?

Trick question

I know this is mentioned ad nauseum, but it really bothers me when folks don't understand that prohibiting the purchase of a particular firearm will prevent them from being obtained.

[Guns4Fun]

Has anyone noticed that when people talk about re-instating the Assault Weapon Ban they usually say “I/we intend (or want to) re-instate the Assault Weapon Ban on the sale of assault weapon ….”? I have heard it many times. The original ban did not regulate the SALE, only the assembly or manufacture. This could be very interesting. “Sale” would have to be defined, and since firearms can be gifted or put on a gun raffle ticket, “sale” would be defined as any transfer of ownership, by gifting OR including the firearm in a will, or etc. This would pose an interesting situation. The law would not result in confiscation, but would require destruction of the firearm upon the owners’ death or if he/she becomes unable to own firearms.

Steve

I'll try to chime in here---but remember, these are only my thoughts. We know the anti's never make sense.

What I think is meant is that no future sales of pre ban weapons would be allowed to be sold by a manufacturer. As in no newly manufactured "pre-ban" firearms could be sold to civilians. I don't take "sale" to mean transfer of existing firearms.

That was how it was before. Manufacturer's could still sell newly manufactured pre ban guns to LEO's but could not sell to us lowly civilians. However, any grandfathered pre ban firearms could be sold since they were built before the ban cut off date.

But who honestly knows what they'll come up with next. Until we see it in writing, we can only speculate what might happen.