AHSA - Change 50 BMG Policy?

[rbernie]

I don't see any indication on their gun policy web site that they have intention of supporting or recommending any additional restrictions on semi-automatic hunting rifles. I feel very confident that the AHSA does not recommend any additional restrictions on any semi-automatic rifles (hunting or sporting) - so asking the question is a bit like asking "When did you stop beating your wife"?

That is a ludicrous statement. Given that their web site does not contain this data, asking for their position is absolutely relevant and appropriate.

"When did you stop beating your wife"? is a question for which there is no correct answer, and that is designed to entrap the answerer. I am posing no such question. I am asking if the AHSA supports any restrictions on the manufacture, sale, or use of semiautomatic 'hunting' rifles other than those restrictions that currently exist.

I do not know how much more linear or fair a question can get.

Relying on what the NRA-ILA says about AHSA is a bit like relying on what Sarah Palin says about Barack Obama

I am not. I am relying upon your original post, and asking a good faith question to continue one of the topics in that post.

At any rate, Mr. Schoenke is very clear on the fact that the AWB is a silly law the regulates the looks of some kinds of semi-automatic weapons. I don't want to put words in his mouth, but if I understood home correctly, he did not want AR-15s regulated any differently than any other of what he would call "semi-automatic hunting rifles".

Are you not willing to defend and/or elaborate upon your own statements?

The logic extrapolation of your conversation with Ray is the question of whether the AHSA supports any Federal or state restrictions on the manufacture or sale or ownership of semiautomatic 'hunting' rifles other than those restrictions that currently exist. Since he lumped AR15 restrictions into the same camp as other semiautomatic hunting rifles, it stands to reason that we should ask AHSA their position WRT that broader class of rifles.

 

[JImbothefiveth]

I was joking about a general proclivity on THR for calling hunters "Fudd". Search will show lots of instances. I tjhink that calling someone names and making fun of their abilities - as a group - drives a wedge.

No, a "fudd" is someone like Zumbo, who opposes weapons that "aren't sporting enough".

 

[RPCVYemen]

Again, for at least the 10th time, maybe more, I will ask you to explain this and why you believe these men are pro gun.

If you have raises your objection 9 previous times, then there is - by definition - nothing new there.

To repeat myself:

I do not want to repeat the debate we had two days ago about the AHSA - if you have any overall objections to the AHSA, please see the following two threads:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=419569

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=405427

I will not repeat any arguments in either of those threads. If you want to raise some new objection to the AHSA, please PM me. If it's truly new, we may have a private discussion. If it's a re-hash of anything in those threads, I will probably ignore it.

For folks who were not on the previous two threads, I don't want to appear to be dismissing TexasRifleman's questions out of hand. We have had two very long exhaustive discussions about the theory that the AHSA has a secret agenda, is really a "front" for anti's, etc. I believe that I answered all of TexasRiflelman's objections, he thinks that I did not. That's OK.

When the last thread was closed the moderator suggested that the thread was getting long and repetitive, and that any future threads on the same tactic would be closed, and posters would be referred to the previous threads.

I am inclined to think that the mod was correct - and doesn't really matter whether I think the mod was correct or not - the mods are the RSO's here. So I will not enter into any long debates about AHSA here.

I opened this thread because of my conversation with Ray Schoenke about AWBs and the SHSA policy about 50 BMG weapons. Other stuff is for PM.

This is the last time I will respond to postings about AHSA diabolical conspiracies, etc. on this thread.

Mike

 

[TexasRifleman]

Nevermind, I'm done. The board members actions speak for themselves.

 

[JImbothefiveth]

If they don't support an AWB now, why would they support one a while ago?

http://web.archive.org/web/20070311...com_content&task=blogcategory&id=22&Itemid=43

Moreover, an overwhelming majority of hunters support proposals like background checks to purchase guns, keeping military style assault weapons off our streets and the elimination of cop killer bullets.

What this means is no private sales, another "it's a crime, Bill"!, and no hollowpoints. (How are you supposed to hunt without softpoints or hollowpoints, anyway?)

 

[SuperNaut]

For some reason this is still up on the AHSA website:

AHSA supports legislative efforts to regulate .50 caliber BMG sniper rifles in the same manner as machine guns are regulated under the provisions of the National Firearms Act of 1934.

There's a lot more, follow this link. The link contains contradictory statements about the AHSA's concern about criminal use and Mr. Shoenke's admission of the "miniscule" use of the .50 by criminals. This is odd.

Wouldn't it be amazing if Mike were able to change AHSA policy? Given Mr. Shoenke's statements to Mike on the phone it is obvious that he isn't as against the .50 as the AHSA website would have you believe. If Mr. Shoenke has any influence as president/chairman/whatever I'd expect a change in the AHSA's position. I mean it seems that there is a philosophical split between what Mr. Schoenke has said to Mike and the official position of the AHSA.

 

[JImbothefiveth]

Given Mr. Shoenke's statements to Mike on the phone it is obvious that he isn't as against the .50 as the AHSA website would have you believe.

He said he was against them, I believe he just didn't want to make Mike mad and ruin his political stunt.

Mr. Schoenke agreed that the evidence for criminal use of the 50 BMG was "minuscule".

Unfortunately, the cell phone connection was very bad at that point and I couldn't really understand his response

If he did say he was against it, Mike wouldn't have been able to undestand him anyway.

Remember this:

Ray Shoenke - The "Ray and Holly Schoenke Foundation" is listed as a high dollar donor to Handgun Control Inc and both Ray and his wife have attended HCI fundraising dinners in the past. Not just his wife as some have argued.

 

[SuperNaut]

I'm speaking directly to the OP's implication that the AHSA might change their policy. I'm curious about how much influence Mr. Shoenke has upon "his" organization. You'd think that the president/chairman/whatever would want "his" organization to be in line with his own beliefs.

You'd think...

 

[JImbothefiveth]

I'm speaking directly to the OP's implication that the AHSA might change their policy. I'm curious about how much influence Mr. Shoenke has upon "his" organization. You'd think that the president/chairman/whatever would want "his" organization to be in line with his own beliefs.

You'd think...

I think it already is.

 

[RPCVYemen]

Wouldn't it be amazing if Mike were able to change AHSA policy? Given Mr. Shoenke's statements to Mike on the phone it is obvious that he isn't as against the .50 as the AHSA website would have you believe. If Mr. Shoenke has any influence as president/chairman/whatever I'd expect a change in the AHSA's position. I mean it seems that there is a philosophical split between what Mr. Schoenke has said to Mike and the official position of the AHSA.

I don't know about "amazing", but I do hope to change AHSA policy this regard.

I do need to read the GAO report referenced on the link you cite. I have not yet done so.

Mike

 

[hso]

Folks, this is supposed to be an Activism Discussion thread on how to get the AHSA to drop their .50 opposition.

Can we focus on that?

What do folks propose to change their position? How should we put this new contact with the AHSA leadership to help change that position? Picking at the AHSA isn't the objective here. Making a change on this issue is. What are the ideas on making that happen?

 

[SuperNaut]

Mike is also testing his own theory about the amount of influence that the AHSA's membership wields. Mike obviously disagrees with the positions held by the organization to which he belongs; I wonder how long he will remain a member of an organization that doesn't represent his beliefs?

To follow Hso's advice, I think a THR email campaign vigorously endorsed by Mike that is critical of the AHSA's position on the .50 would be effective.

 

[JImbothefiveth]

This is what they say about them on the website:

Issue: Modern semiautomatic .50 caliber BMG sniper rifles are weapons designed for military use that combine long range, accuracy, and massive power. Intended for use in combat situations, these weapons can penetrate structures and destroy or disable light armored vehicles, radar dishes, helicopters, stationary airplanes, and other “high-value” military targets. The Branch Davidian cult in Waco, Texas, Al Qaeda, the Irish Republican Army, street and motorcycle gangs in California, Missouri and Indiana, and various militia groups and criminals across the United States are all documented as having possessed or used modern .50 caliber BMG sniper rifles

Apparently motorcycle gangs are using the .50 BMG for drive-by shootings.
And I'd be more concerned with Al-Queda's RPGs than their 50's. (Which they probably got from a supplier like Iran.)

I think someone's being fooled.

 

[JImbothefiveth]

The "I use it for target shooting" argument won't work.

The .50 caliber BMG’s popularity lies not just with target shooters, but criminals, gangs and terrorists as well.

This statement is false of course, as .50 BMGs have been used in only 5 or so crimes ever, in the history of the U.S. Ferraris have probably been used more than that.

 

[RPCVYemen]

Folks, this is supposed to be an Activism Discussion thread on how to get the AHSA to drop their .50 opposition.

It seems like place to start is with the GAO report cited on the AHSA web page. Here it is:

http://archive.gao.gov/paprpdf2/162397.pdf

I can guarantee you'll know one name on that report!

At least they talked with the Fifty Caliber Shooters Association.

It appears to me that only the last two paragraphs on page 6 raise any issues relevant to the criminal use of 50 BMG weapons.Most of the previous 6 pages are about availability.

This report was from 1999 - does anyone know of any more recent reports from agencies/organizations with credibility similar to the GAO?

Mike

 

[JImbothefiveth]

They aren't going to change their minds just because of statistics, or facts. You'll have to find some other way.

In my opinion this is more pointless than trying to get their fellow anti-gun organization, the Brady campaign, to change their view of handguns.

 

[RPCVYemen]

This statement is false of course, as .50 BMGs have been used in only 5 or so crimes ever, in the history of the U.S.

If that is true, that is a powerful argument against re-classifying 50 BMG weapons as NFA weapons. Do you have a cite for statement from a source likely to be convincing to folks who would accept the GAO report?

If not, then maybe the next step would be to lobby members of Congress to request another report. I don't know quite how the GAO decides what to investigate, and what not to investigate, but the cover letter for the report makes it appear that the report was at the request of five members of Congress. The report cited by the SHSA web page is almost 10 years old - presumably the investigations cited are somewhat older than that.

If the new report replicates the data from the old report - next to no use of 50 BMG weapons in criminal activity - then I think that would bolster the effort to change the AHSA policy.

Mike

 

[JImbothefiveth]

The "Violence policy center" was, last time I checked, only able to document 4 uses of the cartridge in a crime.

Also, the General Accounting Office prepared a report in 1999, in which it stated that the ATF had only received a total of 18 "traces" for 50 BMG rifles related to criminal activity for rifles made by the largest of 50 BMG manufacturers, Barrett. I believe only one was actually used in a crime.

If the new report replicates the data from the old report - next to no use of 50 BMG weapons in criminal activity - then I think that would bolster the effort to change the AHSA policy.

No, it wouldn't. The AHSA is handgun control inc. disguised as fuds(I already posted the definition.) international inc.

 

[TexasRifleman]

This statement is false of course, as .50 BMGs have been used in only 5 or so crimes ever, in the history of the U.S.

This is where groups that are pro gun and anti gun diverge.

Groups like AHSA and Brady Campaign dispute those numbers. While the 5 or so uses of the rifle are well known, and any pro gun group knows where to find these statistics, the anti groups like these skew the numbers.

They do this by including crimes where a .50 caliber was PRESENT at the crime scene, even if it wasn't used.

An example of .50 caliber "crime":

On April 1, 2008, police in Hanover Maryland found a cache of firearms including a 50 caliber Barrett sniper rifle, an Uzi, and several other rifles and handguns in a hotel room after a man was evicted from the room. When police searched the man's car they found Oxycontin.

On February 17, 2008 police in Newbury, Massachusetts charged a man with 26 counts of failing to safely store weapons after officers responding to a domestic violence call found 20 firearms including a 50 caliber Armalite sniper rifle.

They continue to argue that the POTENTIAL for criminal use is there.

And they are right.

The POTENTIAL exists for my wife's Yorkie to kill everyone in the neighborhood, even though there is no historical data to show that it's ever happened.

But since it's POSSIBLE, you cannot refute the argument.

And that's where the anti gun groups thrive, on that fear that it COULD happen.

Even VPC, for the years 1989-2007 could only come up with 22 instances, most of these as described above, the 50 caliber was just on site, not actually fired. A good number of these were not in the US so they don't apply anyway.

http://www.vpc.org/snipercrime.htm

This argument is illegitimate on the face. 50 calbers are not statistically relevant in crime, and never have been and any group that calls itself pro gun would know this and not have to be shown "the error of their ways".

For actual sources, the CDC and FBI both track this kind of thing.

 

[JImbothefiveth]

and any group that calls itself pro gun would know this and not have to be shown "the error of their ways".

+1.

But this is AHSA, also known as handgun control inc. with a mask on.

 

[rbernie]

Making a change on this issue is. What are the ideas on making that happen?

This is the necessary question to ask, and I'm afraid that the answer seems to be, "Can't be done, because AHSA already knows the data we'd like them to consider and they simply won't internalize it."

On the second issue, I did express my objections to the AHSA suggestion that 50 BMG weapons as NFA weapons. His argument was that there wasn't a legitimate hunting use for a 50 BMG weapon, unless you are hunting elephants. I argued that there are legitimate non-hunting uses for 50 BMG weapons - the example I used was long range target shooting - and that I hadn't seen any stats indicating any criminal use of 50 BMG weapons. I think that criminal use of full auto weapons was the basis of the 1934 NFA. Mr. Schoenke agreed that the evidence for criminal use of the 50 BMG was "minuscule".

How do you argue with somebody who concedes your points but still opposes you? It's irrational, and it cannot be directly addressed.

As an Activism Planning thread, this one is (IMO, of course) a loss unless you move out of the area of the 50cal arena and into the area of the AWB and semi-auto hunting rifles. In that area, the AHSA position is far less clear and not terribly linear.

 

[JImbothefiveth]

His argument was that there wasn't a legitimate hunting use for a 50 BMG weapon, unless you are hunting elephants

You can hunt deer at really long range, but that requires some really good shooting.

Also, are "elephant guns" suddenly non-sporting? Shall we ban the .375 H&H?(Also used for hunting bigger North American game by those who can stand the recoil.)

 

[SuperNaut]

Also, are "elephant guns" suddenly non-sporting?

Good catch. Apparently in addition to certain shooters there are also certain hunters that the American Hunters and Shooters Association do not support. LOL! Who do they support besides Obama?

Mike there's another stance that needs illumination.

 

[Jim K]

AHSA, no matter what they say now, has never considered anything but hunting as a "sporting use" of any firearm. They have said that guns with no legitimate "sporting" (i.e. hunting) use should be banned.

Further, they have made it clear that only single and double barrel shotguns are "sporting guns" and that everything else can and should be banned. (Same laws as Australia and England.)

Jim

 

[hso]

The largest dangerous game in the US is the grizzly and polar bear. Both of these are hunted. The largest non-dangerous game in the US is the elk and moose. Many shots on elk are taken at long range and a heavy flat trajectory bullet is well suited to this sort of hunting. The moose is can be dangerous game due to size and temperament. The .50 is suitable for any of these and therefore a suitable hunting round.

Add long range competition shooting as well as recreational shooting and the fact that there's no statistically significant crimes committed with these firearms and there's little point in restricting or banning them.

Not recognizing the use of these firearms in hunting, competition and recreational shooting is as hypocritical as those "hunting authorities" who said AR type rifles weren't in use in hunting.