No, no, it’s not a ban

Really, we promise. It seems that (surprise, surprise) my former Senator Dianne Feinswine has introduced a bill into the Senate to subject .50 BMG rifles to the restrictions placed on all NFA ’34 weapons, such as machine guns and explosive devices.

Now, while I’ve said in the past that I’d be willing to accept that – that was with the caveat that we got something in exchange for it, such as nationwide reciprocity on concealed carry. Since I really, strongly doubt that Feinswine is going to give us anything in exchange for banning restricting .50 BMG weapons, I’m staunchly opposed to this bill.

Here’s the biggest reason why.

Require the same registration for any “copycat” sniper rifles that might be developed in the future with destructive power that is equivalent to the .50 BMG caliber sniper rifle; and

That is from the text of the bill, and it gives me the willies. It gives me the willies because it betrays that the true intent of the bill is to ban “sniper rifles”, which is a neat political term for “all rifles, anywhere”. In the blog post I linked to, the Armed Canadian rightly points out that there are several calibers that approach the terminal performance of the .50 BMG already.

I’ll be firing off a quick letter to Senators Luger and Bayh; I expect Luger will oppose the bill, and Bayh will be support it.

%d bloggers like this: