From the Brady Center Website:
Q. What is the difference between an automatic and a semi-automatic weapon?
A. An automatic weapon (machine gun) will continue to fire as long as the trigger is depressed (or until the ammunition magazine is emptied). A semi-automatic weapon will fire one round and instantly load the next round with each pull of the trigger. Semi-automatic firearms fire as rapidly as you can depress your finger.
This means that a semi-automatic fires a little more slowly than an automatic, but not much more slowly. When San Jose, California police test-fired an UZI, a 30-round magazine was emptied in slightly less than two seconds on full automatic while the same magazine was emptied in just five seconds on semi-automatic.
Ownership of machine guns has been tightly controlled since passage of the National Firearms Act of 1934, and their manufacture for the civilian market was halted in 1986. However, semi-automatic versions of those same guns are still being produced.
This looks to me to be an equating of semiautomatic "military-style" "assault-weapons" and machine guns. They talk about how tightly controlled machine guns are regulated and then argue that semi automatic versions are not.
This looks like the perfect example of where they use the acceptance of "bans" on machine guns to try and further a ban on semiautomatics, including some semiautomatic handguns. All they have to do is equate the dangers and then ask: "Why, if the US has tightly regulated and virtually banned machine guns, do we not ban semi automatic weapons as well, since they are almost as dangerous?".
That is exactly the original point I was making.
Q. What is the difference between an automatic and a semi-automatic weapon?
A. An automatic weapon (machine gun) will continue to fire as long as the trigger is depressed (or until the ammunition magazine is emptied). A semi-automatic weapon will fire one round and instantly load the next round with each pull of the trigger. Semi-automatic firearms fire as rapidly as you can depress your finger.
This means that a semi-automatic fires a little more slowly than an automatic, but not much more slowly. When San Jose, California police test-fired an UZI, a 30-round magazine was emptied in slightly less than two seconds on full automatic while the same magazine was emptied in just five seconds on semi-automatic.
Ownership of machine guns has been tightly controlled since passage of the National Firearms Act of 1934, and their manufacture for the civilian market was halted in 1986. However, semi-automatic versions of those same guns are still being produced.
This looks to me to be an equating of semiautomatic "military-style" "assault-weapons" and machine guns. They talk about how tightly controlled machine guns are regulated and then argue that semi automatic versions are not.
This looks like the perfect example of where they use the acceptance of "bans" on machine guns to try and further a ban on semiautomatics, including some semiautomatic handguns. All they have to do is equate the dangers and then ask: "Why, if the US has tightly regulated and virtually banned machine guns, do we not ban semi automatic weapons as well, since they are almost as dangerous?".
That is exactly the original point I was making.
Last edited: