On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 19:38:39 -0000 (UTC), Bill wrote:

John H. wrote:
On Thu, 01 Mar 2018 13:58:08 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 01 Mar 2018 13:22:57 -0500, John H.
wrote:

I'm glad to see 'barrel shroud' is included as a no-no. Those things
are definitely dangerous to
others!

===

I suppose there might actually be some rationale to it. Touching an
unshrouded barrel in a rapid fire situation could definitely be
hazardous to your hand.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

You're right. We wouldn't want the shooter to get a blister on his hand.


I thing that was a problem with the old Henry rifle. Maybe was the Sharps
rifle. 1800’s.

So what was the bottom line with your gas tank? Did I miss it?

John H. wrote:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 19:38:39 -0000 (UTC), Bill wrote:

John H. wrote:
On Thu, 01 Mar 2018 13:58:08 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 01 Mar 2018 13:22:57 -0500, John H.
wrote:

I'm glad to see 'barrel shroud' is included as a no-no. Those things
are definitely dangerous to
others!

===

I suppose there might actually be some rationale to it. Touching an
unshrouded barrel in a rapid fire situation could definitely be
hazardous to your hand.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

You're right. We wouldn't want the shooter to get a blister on his hand.


I thing that was a problem with the old Henry rifle. Maybe was the Sharps
rifle. 1800Â’s.

So what was the bottom line with your gas tank? Did I miss it?


Had a few gallons of water. Will pull the floor after the present storms
finish. Cold and wet and windy. Snow level 1500’. I live at about
450’.

On 3/1/18 12:34 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 01 Mar 2018 11:55:48 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 01 Mar 2018 11:34:17 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 01 Mar 2018 07:27:15 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Wed, 28 Feb 2018 19:45:50 -0500, Alex wrote:

John H. wrote:
Cicilline's list:

http://app.providencejournal.com/glo...709.1519823660

Looks like your Mini-14 is safe unless you change the stock to something
scary looking! It would be more deadly if you did that.

Yeah, the original article stated: ""The bill prohibits the “sale, transfer, production, and
importation� of semi-automatic rifles and pistols that can hold a detachable magazine, as well as
semi-automatic rifles with a magazine that can hold more than 10 rounds."

That would have included the Mini-14 and the Sig Sauer P226. But, the bill includes only 'assault'
rifles and pistols. Looks like my stuff is safe.

It all depends on how they choose to read it.
This is the preamble to that list.
"(H) All of the following rifles, copies, duplicates, variants, or
altered facsimiles with the capability of any such weapon thereof:"

"capability" being the key word.
Any Mini 14 is just as capable as any other to accept the same
magazines.
It later give a list of firearms exempted from the AWB of 2017 (that
did not pass) BUT this is the AWB of 2018.
Simply because this is just feel good legislation they may go ahead
and leave that list standing making the whole bill meaningless in any
real sense.
They also added that stupid clause that any magazines manufactured
after X date shall have a serial number, implying if it doesn't it is
"pre ban" but I remember how "pre ban" magazines were a glut on the
market in the late 90s. Some still seemed warm from the stamping
operation.
The only good news for the gun grabbers is, most were ****. I had 2
that I just left on the rail at the range. I assume someone could have
tuned them up but I wasn't going to screw with it.

I suppose you could call the Mini-14 a 'variant' of the AR-15, but that would be stretching it. It
must meet the first prerequisites before the 'capabilities' kicks in, the way I read it.

The regular mini 14 is a variant of the tactical rifle that is
specifically banned. The only difference is the stock.
They certainly have the same capabilities.


Speaking of Mini 14s, I have a brand-new walnut stock for a Mini 14 I'd
like to sell. Perfect fit, though I never tried to fit it. Cost me $90,
I think. Best serious offer, plus $15 for shipping.

On Thu, 01 Mar 2018 13:22:57 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 01 Mar 2018 12:34:25 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 01 Mar 2018 11:55:48 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 01 Mar 2018 11:34:17 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 01 Mar 2018 07:27:15 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Wed, 28 Feb 2018 19:45:50 -0500, Alex wrote:

John H. wrote:
Cicilline's list:

http://app.providencejournal.com/glo...709.1519823660

Looks like your Mini-14 is safe unless you change the stock to something
scary looking! It would be more deadly if you did that.

Yeah, the original article stated: ""The bill prohibits the “sale, transfer, production, and
importation� of semi-automatic rifles and pistols that can hold a detachable magazine, as well as
semi-automatic rifles with a magazine that can hold more than 10 rounds."

That would have included the Mini-14 and the Sig Sauer P226. But, the bill includes only 'assault'
rifles and pistols. Looks like my stuff is safe.

It all depends on how they choose to read it.
This is the preamble to that list.
"(H) All of the following rifles, copies, duplicates, variants, or
altered facsimiles with the capability of any such weapon thereof:"

"capability" being the key word.
Any Mini 14 is just as capable as any other to accept the same
magazines.
It later give a list of firearms exempted from the AWB of 2017 (that
did not pass) BUT this is the AWB of 2018.
Simply because this is just feel good legislation they may go ahead
and leave that list standing making the whole bill meaningless in any
real sense.
They also added that stupid clause that any magazines manufactured
after X date shall have a serial number, implying if it doesn't it is
"pre ban" but I remember how "pre ban" magazines were a glut on the
market in the late 90s. Some still seemed warm from the stamping
operation.
The only good news for the gun grabbers is, most were ****. I had 2
that I just left on the rail at the range. I assume someone could have
tuned them up but I wasn't going to screw with it.

I suppose you could call the Mini-14 a 'variant' of the AR-15, but that would be stretching it. It
must meet the first prerequisites before the 'capabilities' kicks in, the way I read it.

The regular mini 14 is a variant of the tactical rifle that is
specifically banned. The only difference is the stock.
They certainly have the same capabilities.

I've been saying that since I got mine. But, it's not plastic, and it's not black. Ergo, to the
stupid liberal, it's OK.

The Mini 14 Tactical is on the list, along with the Ruger AR-15s. You'd think they'd have said
'Ruger Mini-14' and been done with it. I think the Mini 14 Ranch is OK.

I'm glad to see 'barrel shroud' is included as a no-no. Those things are definitely dangerous to
others!

There seem to be a lot left in limbo like Harry's CZ Scorpion. If it
is the pistol version it is banned but the carbine is not mentioned as
banned or exempted. I assume the rail over the barrel and the
detachable magazine ban it tho.
I also notice my M1A is not on either list. I do see the M1 Carbine is
exempt and since the standard magazine is 20 rounds I am surprised. It
is certainly an implement of war.

On Thu, 01 Mar 2018 13:58:08 -0500,
wrote:

On Thu, 01 Mar 2018 13:22:57 -0500, John H.
wrote:

I'm glad to see 'barrel shroud' is included as a no-no. Those things are definitely dangerous to
others!

===

I suppose there might actually be some rationale to it. Touching an
unshrouded barrel in a rapid fire situation could definitely be
hazardous to your hand.
That is where the gun dumb have gone the wrong way. A shrouded barrel
would be easier to deflect and make a disarm easier.

On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 19:38:39 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

John H. wrote:
On Thu, 01 Mar 2018 13:58:08 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 01 Mar 2018 13:22:57 -0500, John H.
wrote:

I'm glad to see 'barrel shroud' is included as a no-no. Those things
are definitely dangerous to
others!

===

I suppose there might actually be some rationale to it. Touching an
unshrouded barrel in a rapid fire situation could definitely be
hazardous to your hand.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

You're right. We wouldn't want the shooter to get a blister on his hand.


I thing that was a problem with the old Henry rifle. Maybe was the Sharps
rifle. 1800’s.

The rate of fire may not have been fast enough in anything but a
military situation to cause a problem.

wrote:
On Thu, 01 Mar 2018 11:55:48 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 01 Mar 2018 11:34:17 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 01 Mar 2018 07:27:15 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Wed, 28 Feb 2018 19:45:50 -0500, Alex wrote:

John H. wrote:
Cicilline's list:

http://app.providencejournal.com/glo...709.1519823660
Looks like your Mini-14 is safe unless you change the stock to something
scary looking! It would be more deadly if you did that.
Yeah, the original article stated: ""The bill prohibits the “sale, transfer, production, and
importation� of semi-automatic rifles and pistols that can hold a detachable magazine, as well as
semi-automatic rifles with a magazine that can hold more than 10 rounds."

That would have included the Mini-14 and the Sig Sauer P226. But, the bill includes only 'assault'
rifles and pistols. Looks like my stuff is safe.
It all depends on how they choose to read it.
This is the preamble to that list.
"(H) All of the following rifles, copies, duplicates, variants, or
altered facsimiles with the capability of any such weapon thereof:"

"capability" being the key word.
Any Mini 14 is just as capable as any other to accept the same
magazines.
It later give a list of firearms exempted from the AWB of 2017 (that
did not pass) BUT this is the AWB of 2018.
Simply because this is just feel good legislation they may go ahead
and leave that list standing making the whole bill meaningless in any
real sense.
They also added that stupid clause that any magazines manufactured
after X date shall have a serial number, implying if it doesn't it is
"pre ban" but I remember how "pre ban" magazines were a glut on the
market in the late 90s. Some still seemed warm from the stamping
operation.
The only good news for the gun grabbers is, most were ****. I had 2
that I just left on the rail at the range. I assume someone could have
tuned them up but I wasn't going to screw with it.
I suppose you could call the Mini-14 a 'variant' of the AR-15, but that would be stretching it. It
must meet the first prerequisites before the 'capabilities' kicks in, the way I read it.
The regular mini 14 is a variant of the tactical rifle that is
specifically banned. The only difference is the stock.
They certainly have the same capabilities.


It's not all about that. They want to ban guns that look scary.
Apparently a gun with a pistol grip is deadlier than the same gun with a
walnut stock.