Assault rifes are illegal. (It is possible to own one....cost extra to gov, pass a very stringent background check, and have the at least $20,000 it cost to buy one legally) They are basically illegal for everyone but a few rich people who can pass the strict background test.
.22 Rifles are used for hunting animals, verment shooting, target shooting, collecting and defense.
There was some grandfathering with the assault rifle ban under Clinton. I was not aware that that ban expired until recently. Congress failed to extend it. Some states have outlawed automatic and semi-automatic weapons....and they created their own definitions as to what it means. So nowadays the answer to the legality of assault weapons is, it depends. Some of the states define semiautomatic weapons as assault weapons. I think this is why we keep hearing people call an AR-15 an assault weapon. Anyway, it's even more confusing and the laws all over the place than I thought. In Florida semiautomatic guns are not considered assault rifles. You have a three-day wait period between buying a gun, and receiving the gun. Background checks are mandatory and information goes through the FBI database. The only thing that I know for sure about guns is that they do not kill people. Knives don't either. The masses are so easily controlled and distracted by the media. That just scares the heck out of me.
This post was edited by Thriftymaid at August 10, 2019 4:16 PM MDT
All that is correct with except one thing. Federal government outlawed all full automatic weapons in the 1980s. But yes, law makers who are mostly ignorant about guns have redefined the term assault weapon. Which is supposed to mean a full automatic. A tactic I believe it being used on purpose trying get the public behind a ban. Most think AR in AR15 stands for assault rifle. It does not...it means Alumina Lite. The original manufacturer.
This post was edited by my2cents at August 10, 2019 4:17 PM MDT
The 1986 law was the missing piece. It is the ban on fully automatic weapons. The 1994 law actually included some semi-automatics but called them assault. That is the law that lapsed.
A similar argument is being played out on another site I'm on. Part of the discussion is about the Second Amendment issue and someone posted the front page of the New York Post which says, "Ban Assault Weapons." The argument advanced was that the loony left was coming for their guns. I said no one was trying to take away their guns, that AR-15s are not "every" weapon, to which this reply was given:
"Well no, those are the most advanced designs, that's why Defense uses them, (albeit with features civilian versions aren't allowed to have) and it's also why they're a popular choice for home defense. And when it comes to home defense, guns like the AR15 are some of the easiest for women to handle effectively.
Murder is already illegal, if it wasn't guns it would be bombs or trucks or poison. If someone is determined to kill a bunch of people, there are many options. But most of those options wouldn't be a practical means of home defense. So you won't stop attacks, you'd just make it harder for people to defend their homes, particularly women."
So, now we're worried about women not being able to defend their homes? As far as I can recall, not one of the mass murderers was a woman. And yes, there are other ways to kill a lot of people quickly, but how many people can you kill with a knife or poison one minute from the time you walk into a venue? Granted, a bomb would.
Thriftymaid 