HF 241

[St. Olaf]

No, a rifle fore end and a shroud are two distinctly different things.

A 10-22 (and many other semi-auto rifles) are not covered by this bill because they have a fore end as part of their normal stock. They would need a shroud to be covered under it.

Not that we don't have to defeat it entirely, but we shouldn't waste time misinterpreting it either.

[2in2out]

It might not include some 10/22's, but I think that depends on whether it's tacticool or not:

2.30 (1) semi-automatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine and
2.31 has one or more of the following:

And, then to make sure we're adequately punished, they make sure they didn't miss anything.....

3.4 (2) semi-automatic pistol, or any semi-automatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle with a
3.5 fixed magazine, that has the capacity to accept more than seven rounds of ammunition;

[jshuberg]

No, a rifle fore end and a shroud are two distinctly different things.

Perhaps to you and me, but I saw no such wording to that effect in the bill. Politicians will often redefine common terms to suit their purposes. For the purpose of this section, a barrel shroud is something attached to the barrel, or that partially or completely encircles the barrel, allowing the bearer to hold the firearm with the nontrigger hand without being burned, but excluding a slide that encloses the barrel.

If they wanted a fore end to not count as a barrel shroud, they would have explicitly excluded it like they did a slide. Personally, I've never seen a rifle with a slide, but if you were to find one, the slide wouldn't be considered a shroud. Anything else that meets the definition that they provided would be considered a shroud. In conjunction with a semi-auto rifle that accepts a detachable magazine, you would have yourself an "Assault Weapon"

The common definition and legal definition of a term don't have to match.

[farmer44mag]

by my understanding- this bill would also ban the Marlin model 60 .22 with a 15 round fixed magazine-- the registration fee costs more than the rifle is worth.

[MXGreg]

Terms and descriptions are left vague on porpose, lawyers love that crap.

[BigBlue]

by my understanding- this bill would also ban the Marlin model 60 .22 with a 15 round fixed magazine-- the registration fee costs more than the rifle is worth.

Yes. And many, many others. That is the information we need to be disseminating to anyone we possibly can so they can understand just how far-reaching these proposals are. When people think only evil black rifles are the target they don't care that much. When they realize grandpa's "looks like a hunting rifle but fits the description" heirloom in their closet will be confiscated they start to open their eyes. We must be the ones telling the whole story so people can see the truth.

BB

[St. Olaf]

This, for example.....

3.4 (2) semi-automatic pistol, or any semi-automatic, centerfire, or rimfire rifle with a
3.5 fixed magazine, that has the capacity to accept more than seven rounds of ammunition;

......is so poorly written that it actually bans semi-automatic pistols with fixed magazines that have the capacity to accept more than seven rounds of ammunition.

We're dealing with fools......but they have a lot of power.

We BETTER gather up the votes from the rural legislators and make sure the Republicans stand firm.