As has been pointed out several times, discussion of whether or not the AHSA is pro gun has been declared off limits for this thread by a moderator - in fact, if this thread were about that issue, it would have been closed.
And again, over and over, if you want to change a groups mind on something you need to understand THEIR MOTIVES for having an opinion in the first place. That is extremely relevant to this topic.
I will not PM you on anything. There is nothing I have to say that I am not willing to post publicly.
So again, your argument is to somehow change AHSA's position on the .50BMG and I am asking you WHY that position exists in the first place if they are a pro gun group.
I also asked you what you thought AHSA would think of the .50 DTC and other alternatives. The argument that the .50BMG has been used in crimes can't apply at all to the .50DTC since it is brand new.
It does however have the exact same ballistics characteristics of the .50BMG which is why approaching the issue from NFA, Heller, or Crime statistics is pointless; there will just be another caliber tomorrow and then you are into the Creeping Incrementalism of gun banning.
What then?
The fundamental argument to AHSA should be that "If you are a pro gun group you have to be a pro gun group all the way"
Having to argue specifically around the .50 BMG will not work for that reason. Today the .50BMG, tomorrow the .50DTC, then the .600 Nitro, then the 7mm Mag, then the .30-06, then the .308... 308? That's a military calber! Can't have that. .223? Military also. Rifle ammo? Some of that rifle ammp can pierce kevlar so it's "cop killer".
This isn't fantasty, this is how the creeping incrementalism has worked in other countries, and with many other organizations.
The AHSA must be completely pro gun or completely anti gun. There is no middle ground on this. If AHSA wants to focus on hunting, as their name implies, then do that, stay completely out of the .50 stuff to begin with.
If you cannot successfully make that simple argument to AHSA then they will remain, as they are now, an anti gun group.
It's VERY relevant to your thread, you just don't want to discuss it.
Here is an example of how this works. This is taken from the AHSA position statement on .50BMG:
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.
The 9mm handgun round has also been possessed or used by all of these groups. Should it be banned? Shockingly enough there are laws also against hijacking airplanes and flying them into buildings. I wonder how many of these same groups have possessed or used televisions, cell phones, and cars? This kind of data doesn't really mean anything at all and is only included to ramp up the irrational fear factor. A sign that your argument is very weak.
The modern .50 caliber BMG rifle is one of the most powerful and destructive weapons legally available to civilians in the United States. A modern .50 caliber BMG rifle can hit a target accurately from distances of 1,000 to 2,000 yards, depending on the skill of the shooter, and can reach targets at a longer range with less accuracy. At significantly closer distances, these rifles are much more destructive and able to blast through solid concrete at 200 yards or penetrate an inch of armor plate at 300 yards.
So can .50 DTC, and it's never been used in a single crime. It's California legal and more makers are coming to market with it. Since 50BMG is not the only round capable of this, why is only the 50BMG being called out for banning? Again, the fear mongering, irrational panic inducing stuff that these kinds of descriptions of weapons brings to mind.
The destructive power of the modern .50 caliber rifle can be intensified by the use of various types of ammunition that is available commercially. In addition to the standard "ball" round of .50 caliber ammunition, armor-piercing, incendiary, and combination armor-piercing and incendiary ammunition for the modern .50 caliber rifles can significantly enhance the destructive capacity, particularly against chemical and industrial facilities and civil aviation targets.
The .50BMG arrmor piercing that is legal to buy is 1930's and 1940's vintage. Modern AP round, incendiary rounds, and combo rounds are ILLEGAL ALREADY. Why is this in the AHSA position statement at all? This stuff is already illegal. Tracer rounds are NOT incendiary.
Despite their deadly power, or possibly because of it, .50 caliber rifles in various configurations are proliferating on the civilian firearms market and in many states are subject to less regulation than handguns. Because .50 caliber rifles are classified as long guns under federal law, they can legally be purchased by an 18 year old (unless state law restricts such purchases). 18 U.S.C. § 922(b)(1), (c)(1).
The .50 BMG is proliferating at a miniscule level compared to all other rifle calibers. This doesn't even make any sense here.
Modern .50 caliber BMG sniper rifles possess no reasonable utility for hunting or self-defense.
Neither does the .22 Colibri. Why does this matter? And who is going to define "reasonable", AHSA?
The .50 caliber BMG’s popularity lies not just with target shooters, but criminals, gangs and terrorists as well.
So does every other firearm. Most firearms used by these groups are handguns. AHSA want to ban those next? And of course the crime statistics show that, while these groups might think the 50BMG "popular" they don't see it as "practical" since they don't use them in crimes.
Under federal law, firearms sellers who do not possess a federal firearm license can sell 50 caliber rifles to individuals at gun shows and elsewhere without performing a background check on the purchaser. Although some states (such as California, Massachusetts, and New Jersey) regulate private sales and prohibit all sales of firearms without a background check on the purchaser, in most states terrorists and other criminals can easily acquire a .50 caliber BMG sniper rifle.
Same with every other Title 1 firearm, which gets to the AHSA's position on gun shows, another anti gun position. Where does AHSA stand on this so called "gun show loophole"?
Currently, .50 caliber BMG sniper rifles are not regulated at the federal level.
Of course they are. All firearms are regulated at the Federal level by Title 1. This is just flat dishonesty here. Again, it's this kind of language that is used to create fear of the unknown in uninformed and uneducated gun owners and the general public. It's dishonest.
In September 2004, California became the first state to regulate .50 caliber BMG rifles. Effective January 1, 2005, .50 caliber BMG rifles will fall under California’s Assault Weapons Control Act, Cal. Penal Code §§ 12275-12277, 12280 et seq., which will generally prohibit the weapons' manufacture, sale, importation and possession without registration.
2 weeks later Serbu announced the .50DTC would be available in their product line. It is now shipping and legal to own in California. It has identical ballistics characteristics to the .50 BMG. This shows that banning specific types of firearms is wasteful of taxpayers money and only serves to allow politicians to say they are "doing something". It's the same reason groups like AHSA call for these bans, to show they "care". It's not really meaningful legislation since it "cured" a problem that didn't really exist. Note the part I put in bold about registration, we'll come back to that later.
Because of the potential for criminal misuse, the immense “fire power” and the potential for terrorist use, AHSA believes the .50 caliber BMG sniper rifles should be regulated in the same manner as the federal government regulates machine guns under the provisions of the National Firearms Act of 1934.
And here we are, at the crux of the issue. So far the arguments AHSA makes against the .50 BMG could apply to hundreds of other firearm types.
POTENTIAL for use in crimes. Thought crimes next? So the closing argument is that since the 50BMG MIGHT be used someday for bad things, we better get it banned now. Even though many other guns can do the same thing.
So, why is just .50 BMG being singled out here? The motivation for that would answer the question: How, if at all, do you change the AHSA position on .50 BMG.
And of course the AHSA and other groups will counter and say "It's not a ban, we just want them put under NFA rules". Knowing full well that since many states don't allow NFA weapons, and that LE officials can at their leisure approve or deny signing the forms, you have a defacto ban. You also have defacto gun registration.
Which by the way the AHSA appears to be in favor of since they also want all NICS searches open for access. We'll save that argument for another time, wouldn't want to go off topic here
http://www.huntersandshooters.org/issues/gunrights/fbi
