Assault weapon banned failed in 1997, North Hollywood shootout

9

9mm

New member
I was just thinking and I rememberd. The NHS was in 1997, The AWB was in 1994>2004... That means somehow they had AK'S and their other "big round magazines" during this ban.

I also want to know how did the cops go to the gun shop and get AR's when they were banned at this time..:confused::confused::confused:
 
Well there's still an AWB in California. That's why you'll see CA Compliant version of weapons. Assuming they really did go to the gun shop and get ARs, and that wasn't an urban legend.
 
I assume you are asking this as a rhetorical question, but I'll answer anyway to vent. :)

As we know, the 1994 AWB was sloppy since they were not really banning true assault weapons and would then have a clear definition, but some made up collection of features they called assault weapon, such as a bayonet or attachment point, flash hider, new 30 rd mag, etc.

So manufactures removed the bayonet lug and flash hider, installed a muzzle brake and called it a Sporter. Models of collapsible stocks (how evil!!) were made into fixed ones to sell after the ban. AKs were further restricted if they had less than 10 parts made in the US, so US parts kits came out.10+ rd mags were grandfathered so all the old USGI mags in surplus came out of the wood work, plus there happened to be cargo containers full of AK mags. I seem to recall AK mags were under $5/ea, maybe $3/ea in bulk, and Ar mags around $10/ea or less before the ban. Huge surplus market.

Being CRIMINALS the NHS shooters did not care much for the laws about gun restrictions since they planned to rob a bank and lay down a wall of lead on anyone who tried to stop them.

As far as I know NO ONE has ever been able to show that gun bans of any sort reduce violent crime. And apparently in Britain, neither are effective bans on knives, swords, bats, hair pins, pens or pencils, or any other object used for self defense. ans only disarm the law-abiding and enale the criminal or tyrant to have the advantage.

Finally, from what I have read of the shootout, the police did in fact go to a local gun shop and get AR-15s but SWAT arrived with their own rifles before the civilian ones were deployed.

From Wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Hollywood_shootout
SWAT eventually arrived with rifles powerful enough to penetrate the body armor. Several officers also appropriated AR-15 rifles from a nearby firearms dealer. The incident sparked debate on the need for patrol officers to upgrade their capabilities in similar situations in the future.
Click to expand...
 
Columbine shooting happened under last awb too. We already know that laws don't stop crime. If they did we would have no crime.
 
I was just thinking and I rememberd. The NHS was in 1997, The AWB was in 1994>2004... That means somehow they had AK'S and their other "big round magazines" during this ban.
Click to expand...

I'll one up you and just mention its also a failure of the gun control act. Those AK's were smithed into full auto machine guns. There was no single pull of the trigger going on which likely is the reason the only 2 deaths out of the whole ordeal was the 2 dirtbags. They shot up a whole lot of crap and wounded several with spray and pray but didn't kill anyone.
 
Quote:
I was just thinking and I rememberd. The NHS was in 1997, The AWB was in 1994>2004... That means somehow they had AK'S and their other "big round magazines" during this ban.

I'll one up you and just mention its also a failure of the gun control act. Those AK's were smithed into full auto machine guns. There was no single pull of the trigger going on which likely is the reason the only 2 deaths out of the whole ordeal was the 2 dirtbags. They shot up a whole lot of crap and wounded several with spray and pray but didn't kill anyone.
Click to expand...

I believe you're thinking of the National Firearms Act rather than the Gun Control Act as it was the former that restricted fully automatic weapons to the point of a de-facto ban. You bring up a good point, however, in that even when certain weapons are not commonly avaialable, there is still nothing to stop criminals from illegally fabricating them.
 
The gun shop guns were not used in the NHS by officers. They went to get them but didn't use them in the fight. IIRC, it had moved on by then.
 
You bring up a good point, however, in that even when certain weapons are not commonly available, there is still nothing to stop criminals from illegally fabricating them.
Click to expand...

True but it is such a rarity. There is a much greater chance of hitting the lottery than seeing one of those. As I have pointed out before full auto weapons are horrible for use in committing crimes, mass shootings or most other events that antis think they would be useful. In truth they have limited but useful application on the battlefield. In the NHS they may have saved lives.
 
Fun rebuttal: a decent bolt-action rifle in the right hands could have ended that fight quickly.

The main problem on the ground was that patrolmen were armed with pistols and shotguns. They were logistically unprepared for opponents armed with rifles. Doctrine and loadout have changed since then.

North Hollywood really wasn't about "assault" rifles. The bad guys used illegally modified hardware, and the good guys didn't have the right hardware for long-distance confrontations.
 
North Hollywood really wasn't about "assault" rifles. The bad guys used illegally modified hardware, and the good guys didn't have the right hardware for long-distance confrontations.
Click to expand...

Ultra rare occurrences like this are why I justify a high powered rifle trunk gun. In this case being .30-06. Two shots at range would have ended the whole thing.

Still they were assault rifles, even if illegally created ones.
 
The real question you should be asking.. why are there no mass shootings in schools, malls, or movie theaters with actual machine guns? The answer is not only surprising, but also a stab against the firearms community. But we can easily cover it up with finger pointing, assumptions, and disbelief.
 
I don't know maybe they know full auto is not effective for hitting a target. I see no connection with this and your supposed indictment of the firearms community from which you separate yourself. Are you saying you don't own firearms or everyone else is to blame but not you?

The closest event to this is perhaps the North Hollywood bank robbery and with the amount of ammo they expended on full auto they did not get a very good hit to rounds fired ratio.

Since you support universal background checks maybe you can explain why those have never stopped a mass shooting.
 
The real question you should be asking.. why are there no mass shootings in schools, malls, or movie theaters with actual machine guns? The answer is not only surprising, but also a stab against the firearms community. But we can easily cover it up with finger pointing, assumptions, and disbelief.
Click to expand...

Come again? For starters, you can't hit a durn thing with one. Have you ever had the pleasure of firing one? Tons of fun, that's about it. A friend of mine has a (completely legal) little .22 machine gun. I'm a very big, very strong man, and it took a lot of strength to maintain control of it, and accuracy was less than stellar, to say the least. I can imagine a full auto AK would be a real handful, and seriously hard to hit anything at all with.
 
Last edited:
Come again? For starters, you can't hit a durn thing with one. Have you ever had the pleasure of firing one? Tons of fun, that's about it.
Click to expand...

The HK91 in full auto is a whole lot to handle, but the HK MP5 isn't a problem to control with a bit of practice. Accuracy may be less than stellar, but more than sufficient for combat. Carlos Hathcock used an M2 .50 BMG for sniping.

Not all full auto guns handle the same way and a little training goes a long way to learning to use them effectively.

As for the AWB or NFA failing as indicated by the North Hollywood incident, then every law broken is a failure too? No.
 
The real question you should be asking.. why are there no mass shootings in schools, malls, or movie theaters with actual machine guns? The answer is not only surprising, but also a stab against the firearms community. But we can easily cover it up with finger pointing, assumptions, and disbelief.
Click to expand...

Well why don't you elighten all of us then.
 
The real question you should be asking.. why are there no mass shootings in schools, malls, or movie theaters with actual machine guns? The answer is not only surprising, but also a stab against the firearms community. But we can easily cover it up with finger pointing, assumptions, and disbelief.
Click to expand...
Assuming you are discussing legal machine guns? Extensive background checks, exorbitant prices, limited quantites as a result of govt control (Shall not be infringed), signs saying NO GUNS ALLOWED... those sorta things as a stab against? Or what exactly are you inferring? If I may be so bold as to ask. :confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top