m1 garand

**darkhunter** · December 22nd, 2012, 01:57 PM

Would the m1 garand be considered an "assault weapon" under the awb, I know in nj it isn't only the m1 carbine is but don't know on the federal level

This is all hypothetical, I still believe an awb won't get through

**scruff** · December 22nd, 2012, 03:16 PM

I don't think it would be considered an assault weapon even though Patton called it "the greatest battle implement ever devised." I'm in the market for a 1911, with its low-capacity magazines, to go along with my Garand. That way I'll have some nice "safe" firearms, compared to my kids' scary, soon-to-be-banned M&P 15-22.

**dkf** · December 22nd, 2012, 03:28 PM

Funny thing is the M1 Garand is one of the few semi auto rifles that takes the "clips" the media falsely called magazines. I have always wanted an M1 Garand.

**father-of-five** · December 22nd, 2012, 03:35 PM

The short answer is no, assuming that a possible future weapons ban would be the same as the previous one.

It is sad that the media and many others appear to have falsely learned about "clips" from urban terminology.

**7998** · December 22nd, 2012, 06:29 PM

I think you can modify a M1 Garand to accept detachable magazines all Beretta M59.

**bogey1** · December 22nd, 2012, 06:40 PM

An 03 springfield can be converted to an "assault weapon" (if you have the money). http://www.remingtonsociety.com/questions/Pedersen.htm

**BobGun** · December 22nd, 2012, 06:57 PM

The m1 Garand was not considered a AW in NJ for two reasons. The first was that it was clip fed not magazine fed. The second was that the Dems in NJ did not want to alienate the Camp Perry shooters. This and the fact that it did not effect the hunters is how Florio and company got it passed.