Government Orders 7000 "Personal Defense Weapons."

[AUloggerhead 2,238]

The two issues, mentally ill people(and potentially mentally ill) and high capacity guns. You have to deal with both. Yet the only argument the other side can spew is that of fighting our own tyrannical govt.

Right. That pesky ole 2nd Amendment thing again. How dare any US citizen ever use the Bill of Rights as justification in an argument?

Because whether or not the Bill of Rights can justifiably be applied in this argument is obviously a matter of opinion. Idealism vs. reality, I guess.

Reality. The recent NY state gun law railroaded through the legislature is being challenged by a Buffalo attorney citing ... wait for it ... the 2nd Amendment. http://www.wktv.com/news/local/Attorneys-to-challege-constitutionality-of-NY-gun-control-laws-187151321.html

Attorneys to challenge constitutionality of NY gun control laws

By WKTV News

Story Created: Jan 16, 2013 at 1:21 PM EST

Story Updated: Jan 16, 2013 at 4:13 PM EST

BUFFALO, N.Y. (WKTV) - "Not so fast," says a Buffalo attorney who is challenging the legality and constitutionality of New York State's new gun control laws, believed by some to be the toughest in the nation.

Attorney James Tresmond says that in the next week or so, he will ask the Federal Court in Buffalo to enjoin the law, essentially keep it from going into effect, until federal court can examine and determine its constitutionality.

Tresmond is acting on his own, without financial compensation, although several attorneys throughout the state have signed on to help him with research and advancing the lawsuit.

Tresmond says forcing law-abiding citizens to sell ammunition is an 'unlawful taking'. He says the suit will be a class action and that people who will be affected by the law will be included in the class.

Not only does the Buffalo attorney believe New York State's new gun control law is unconstitutional, he believes it's ineffective.

"Forcing the sale of magazines by law abiding citizens is not going to prevent a single murder or single death," says Tresmond.

[AUDub 11,153]

The two issues, mentally ill people(and potentially mentally ill) and high capacity guns. You have to deal with both. Yet the only argument the other side can spew is that of fighting our own tyrannical govt.

Right. That pesky ole 2nd Amendment thing again. How dare any US citizen ever use the Bill of Rights as justification in an argument?

So why aren't you "up in arms" about the restrictions on so many other weapons? Doesn't the second amendment apply to RPG's (for example)?

I'm not "up in arms" about restrictions on so many other weapons. Did you know you can legally buy a grenade launcher, or a 20 mm anti-tank gun, provided you have the time to get the necessary background checks, and of course, the disposal income to purchase them? http://www.cracked.com/article_18732_6-things-you-wont-believe-are-more-legal-than-marijuana_p2.html

What a country, huh?

I never thought I'd see somebody link a Cracked article here!

+1 internets for you, sir!

But there is a very good reason they are so prohibitively priced and strictly regulated. It's so the average Joe like you or I can't get our hands on them.

[AUloggerhead 2,238]

The two issues, mentally ill people(and potentially mentally ill) and high capacity guns. You have to deal with both. Yet the only argument the other side can spew is that of fighting our own tyrannical govt.

Right. That pesky ole 2nd Amendment thing again. How dare any US citizen ever use the Bill of Rights as justification in an argument?

So why aren't you "up in arms" about the restrictions on so many other weapons? Doesn't the second amendment apply to RPG's (for example)?

I'm not "up in arms" about restrictions on so many other weapons. Did you know you can legally buy a grenade launcher, or a 20 mm anti-tank gun, provided you have the time to get the necessary background checks, and of course, the disposal income to purchase them? http://www.cracked.com/article_18732_6-things-you-wont-believe-are-more-legal-than-marijuana_p2.html

What a country, huh?

I never thought I'd see somebody link a Cracked article here!

+1 internets for you, sir!

But there is a very good reason they are so prohibitively priced and strictly regulated. It's so the average Joe like you or I can't get our hands on them.

No, the price of these legally obtainable weapons is determined by scarcity, supply/demand and that sort of thing. It's an expensive indulgence, I'll grant you that. But any "average Joe" that passes the background checks & pays the ATF tax stamps can then make the same economic decision as any wealthy person to buy or not.

[AUDub 11,153]

No, the price of these legally obtainable weapons is determined by scarcity, supply/demand and that sort of thing. It's an expensive indulgence, I'll grant you that. But any "average Joe" that passes the background checks & pays the ATF tax stamps can then make the same economic decision as any wealthy person to buy or not.

On closer inspection, you're correct. Sure is a lot of bureaucratic red tape (i.e. heavy regulation) in order to obtain them.

[autigeremt 6,644]

No, the price of these legally obtainable weapons is determined by scarcity, supply/demand and that sort of thing. It's an expensive indulgence, I'll grant you that. But any "average Joe" that passes the background checks & pays the ATF tax stamps can then make the same economic decision as any wealthy person to buy or not.

On closer inspection, you're correct. Sure is a lot of bureaucratic red tape (i.e. heavy regulation) in order to obtain them.

Because they are truly military styled weapons.

[homersapien 11,388]

The two issues, mentally ill people(and potentially mentally ill) and high capacity guns. You have to deal with both. Yet the only argument the other side can spew is that of fighting our own tyrannical govt.

.... High capacity mags have to have a criminal with intent t do harm before thy are an issue.

Like the mother of the Sandy Hook shooter?

Or the shooter himself. He knew right from wrong. He needed help, no doubt. But a high capacity mag had nothing to do with the reason why he lost his mind.

Who the hell suggested that?

[AUDub 11,153]

Because they are truly military styled weapons. ;)/>

Why shouldn't a weapon with a 30 round magazine be subjected to such strict regulation? Isn't it a "military styled" weapon?

[homersapien 11,388]

The two issues, mentally ill people(and potentially mentally ill) and high capacity guns. You have to deal with both. Yet the only argument the other side can spew is that of fighting our own tyrannical govt.

Right. That pesky ole 2nd Amendment thing again. How dare any US citizen ever use the Bill of Rights as justification in an argument?

So why aren't you "up in arms" about the restrictions on so many other weapons? Doesn't the second amendment apply to RPG's (for example)?

I'm not "up in arms" about restrictions on so many other weapons. Did you know you can legally buy a grenade launcher, or a 20 mm anti-tank gun, provided you have the time to get the necessary background checks, and of course, the disposal income to purchase them? http://www.cracked.c...rijuana_p2.html

What a country, huh?

OK, I apologize for using such a hyperbolic characterization. Let me try again:

If you are making a simple argument that our 2nd amendment rights are founded on the principle we must be able to counterbalance the government (i.e.: the local and regional police forces and/or the local and national military forces) do you think any military "arms" should be just as available as an AR-15 (for example)?

If so, why is it so hard for you to admit it?

If not, please explain your rationale for restricting some weapons and not others?

[homersapien 11,388]

The two issues, mentally ill people(and potentially mentally ill) and high capacity guns. You have to deal with both. Yet the only argument the other side can spew is that of fighting our own tyrannical govt.

Right. That pesky ole 2nd Amendment thing again. How dare any US citizen ever use the Bill of Rights as justification in an argument?

So why aren't you "up in arms" about the restrictions on so many other weapons? Doesn't the second amendment apply to RPG's (for example)?

I'm not "up in arms" about restrictions on so many other weapons. Did you know you can legally buy a grenade launcher, or a 20 mm anti-tank gun, provided you have the time to get the necessary background checks, and of course, the disposal income to purchase them? http://www.cracked.c...rijuana_p2.html

What a country, huh?

I never thought I'd see somebody link a Cracked article here!

+1 internets for you, sir!

But there is a very good reason they are so prohibitively priced and strictly regulated. It's so the average Joe like you or I can't get our hands on them.

No, the price of these legally obtainable weapons is determined by scarcity, supply/demand and that sort of thing. It's an expensive indulgence, I'll grant you that. But any "average Joe" that passes the background checks & pays the ATF tax stamps can then make the same economic decision as any wealthy person to buy or not.

Right. It's sooooo much harder and more expensive to produce fully automatic weapons than it is semi-autos. The gun manufacturers are just willing to keep producing the easy stuff and simply watch the market for fully-auto weapons inflate due to lack of supply.

[autigeremt 6,644]

Because they are truly military styled weapons. ;)/>

Why shouldn't a weapon with a 30 round magazine be subjected to such strict regulation? Isn't it a "military styled" weapon?

Nope. It's not the clip but the action...and the actions of criminals. That said, I've made my case and I am firm with it. However, it's easy to see why so many Americans don't trust where this could lead.

[alexava 6,973]

The two issues, mentally ill people(and potentially mentally ill) and high capacity guns. You have to deal with both. Yet the only argument the other side can spew is that of fighting our own tyrannical govt.

.... High capacity mags have to have a criminal with intent t do harm before thy are an issue.

Like the mother of the Sandy Hook shooter?

Or the shooter himself. He knew right from wrong. He needed help, no doubt. But a high capacity mag had nothing to do with the reason why he lost his mind.

Who the hell suggested that?

it just made it so much more possible for him to be a hero.

[autigeremt 6,644]

The two issues, mentally ill people(and potentially mentally ill) and high capacity guns. You have to deal with both. Yet the only argument the other side can spew is that of fighting our own tyrannical govt.

.... High capacity mags have to have a criminal with intent t do harm before thy are an issue.

Like the mother of the Sandy Hook shooter?

Or the shooter himself. He knew right from wrong. He needed help, no doubt. But a high capacity mag had nothing to do with the reason why he lost his mind.

Who the hell suggested that?

it just made it so much more possible for him to be a hero.

Lame.

[alexava 6,973]

The two issues, mentally ill people(and potentially mentally ill) and high capacity guns. You have to deal with both. Yet the only argument the other side can spew is that of fighting our own tyrannical govt.

.... High capacity mags have to have a criminal with intent t do harm before thy are an issue.

Like the mother of the Sandy Hook shooter?

Or the shooter himself. He knew right from wrong. He needed help, no doubt. But a high capacity mag had nothing to do with the reason why he lost his mind.

Who the hell suggested that?

it just made it so much more possible for him to be a hero.

Lame.

the word of the defeated

[autigeremt 6,644]

Never To Yield. That's one guarantee I can make with no hesitation.

[AUDub 11,153]

Right. It's sooooo much harder and more expensive to produce fully automatic weapons than it is semi-autos. The gun manufacturers are just willing to keep producing the easy stuff and simply watch the market for fully-auto weapons inflate due to lack of supply.

In all fairness to AULoggerhead, he does make a good point on grenade launchers.

Nope. It's not the clip but the action...and the actions of criminals. That said, I've made my case and I am firm with it. However, it's easy to see why so many Americans don't trust where this could lead.

I guess we'll just have to disagree then. There are a lot of people that favor an expansion of the arbitrary regulation we currently practice concerning true assault rifles. I think including the magazines is reasonable, and I believe I've made my case, as well.

[AUloggerhead 2,238]

The two issues, mentally ill people(and potentially mentally ill) and high capacity guns. You have to deal with both. Yet the only argument the other side can spew is that of fighting our own tyrannical govt.

Right. That pesky ole 2nd Amendment thing again. How dare any US citizen ever use the Bill of Rights as justification in an argument?

So why aren't you "up in arms" about the restrictions on so many other weapons? Doesn't the second amendment apply to RPG's (for example)?

I'm not "up in arms" about restrictions on so many other weapons. Did you know you can legally buy a grenade launcher, or a 20 mm anti-tank gun, provided you have the time to get the necessary background checks, and of course, the disposal income to purchase them? http://www.cracked.c...rijuana_p2.html

What a country, huh?

OK, I apologize for using such a hyperbolic characterization. Let me try again:

If you are making a simple argument that our 2nd amendment rights are founded on the principle we must be able to counterbalance the government (i.e.: the local and regional police forces and/or the local and national military forces) do you think any military "arms" should be just as available as an AR-15 (for example)?

If so, why is it so hard for you to admit it?

If not, please explain your rationale for restricting some weapons and not others?

What exactly do you want me to admit about prohibitions on "military arms?" The purpose of the first federal law regulating machine guns, the National Firearms Act of 1934, was due to crime. Organized criminals like the Mafia & Al Capone's Chicago gang as well as individual hoods like "Machine Gun Kelley" were infamous for using the Thompson sub-machine gun during Prohibition & the Great Depression eras. The US military didn't officially adopt that weapon until four years later in 1938.

I don't know how many times it has to be said but ... weapons in the hands of law-abiding citizens are not the problem. You want to legally shoot automatic fire weapons, but don't want to go through the paperwork hassle & expense of owning one? Check out these sites:

http://www.knobcreekrange.com/next-machine-gun-shoot-dates

http://www.steelrain.info/ViewPage-6-8-8.html

http://www.nbcnews.com/travel/itineraries/fire-away-new-las-vegas-gun-range-215556

[AUloggerhead 2,238]

The two issues, mentally ill people(and potentially mentally ill) and high capacity guns. You have to deal with both. Yet the only argument the other side can spew is that of fighting our own tyrannical govt.

Right. That pesky ole 2nd Amendment thing again. How dare any US citizen ever use the Bill of Rights as justification in an argument?

So why aren't you "up in arms" about the restrictions on so many other weapons? Doesn't the second amendment apply to RPG's (for example)?

I'm not "up in arms" about restrictions on so many other weapons. Did you know you can legally buy a grenade launcher, or a 20 mm anti-tank gun, provided you have the time to get the necessary background checks, and of course, the disposal income to purchase them? http://www.cracked.c...rijuana_p2.html

What a country, huh?

I never thought I'd see somebody link a Cracked article here!

+1 internets for you, sir!

But there is a very good reason they are so prohibitively priced and strictly regulated. It's so the average Joe like you or I can't get our hands on them.

No, the price of these legally obtainable weapons is determined by scarcity, supply/demand and that sort of thing. It's an expensive indulgence, I'll grant you that. But any "average Joe" that passes the background checks & pays the ATF tax stamps can then make the same economic decision as any wealthy person to buy or not.

Right. It's sooooo much harder and more expensive to produce fully automatic weapons than it is semi-autos. The gun manufacturers are just willing to keep producing the easy stuff and simply watch the market for fully-auto weapons inflate due to lack of supply.

:roflol:/>

I can't help it if you wish to remain ignorant of basic economic theory & terms. But scarcity and supply/demand determine the price of any commodity no matter where you are in the world. http://www.havocscope.com/black-market-prices/ak-47/

AK-47 prices on the black market

Afghanistan: $1,500

Average price of AK-47 worldwide: $534

European Union: $665 for rocket launchers and AK-47s

Iraq: Up to $800, with model favored by Osama Bin Laden going for $2,000

Mexico: $1,400 by U.S. border / $3,000 in Southern Mexico

Niger Delta: $75 for AK-47

Profit in the U.S.: $500 for selling AK-47 to Mexican drug cartels

Somalia: $400 for authentic Russian AK-47 / $600 for North Korean model.

Sudan: $86 for AK-47, $33 for child

Syria: $2,100 for AK-47, $2,000 for RPG

United States: $400 in California's black market

[homersapien 11,388]

Right. It's sooooo much harder and more expensive to produce fully automatic weapons than it is semi-autos. The gun manufacturers are just willing to keep producing the easy stuff and simply watch the market for fully-auto weapons inflate due to lack of supply.

In all fairness to AULoggerhead, he does make a good point on grenade launchers.

Hah! Are you kidding? I bet those things would sell like hotcakes.

You are talking about a market that doesn't hesitate to pay 40+ grand for a pickup or SUV. I won't even mention 4-wheelers and bass boats.

[homersapien 11,388]

The two issues, mentally ill people(and potentially mentally ill) and high capacity guns. You have to deal with both. Yet the only argument the other side can spew is that of fighting our own tyrannical govt.

Right. That pesky ole 2nd Amendment thing again. How dare any US citizen ever use the Bill of Rights as justification in an argument?

So why aren't you "up in arms" about the restrictions on so many other weapons? Doesn't the second amendment apply to RPG's (for example)?

I'm not "up in arms" about restrictions on so many other weapons. Did you know you can legally buy a grenade launcher, or a 20 mm anti-tank gun, provided you have the time to get the necessary background checks, and of course, the disposal income to purchase them? http://www.cracked.c...rijuana_p2.html

What a country, huh?

OK, I apologize for using such a hyperbolic characterization. Let me try again:

If you are making a simple argument that our 2nd amendment rights are founded on the principle we must be able to counterbalance the government (i.e.: the local and regional police forces and/or the local and national military forces) do you think any military "arms" should be just as available as an AR-15 (for example)?

If so, why is it so hard for you to admit it?

If not, please explain your rationale for restricting some weapons and not others?

What exactly do you want me to admit about prohibitions on "military arms?" The purpose of the first federal law regulating machine guns, the National Firearms Act of 1934, was due to crime. Organized criminals like the Mafia & Al Capone's Chicago gang as well as individual hoods like "Machine Gun Kelley" were infamous for using the Thompson sub-machine gun during Prohibition & the Great Depression eras. The US military didn't officially adopt that weapon until four years later in 1938.

Isn't that inconsistent with the "criminals will get whatever guns they want" line of argument?

If the restriction on automatic weapons was spurred by the use of said weapons by said criminals, then why not apply the same remedy to semi-automatic assault type rifles (detachable magazines). How many innocent people were killed by Thompson's or BAR's anyway? How long before we surpass that total using semi-auto rifles with equivalent magazine capacity. Does the automatic capability of such weapons really put them in a different category?

I say no. There is no practical difference between an automatic rifle or a semi-auto fitted with high capacity magazines.

But back to my original point:

If the argument for retaining such semi-automatic weapons is to counter the "state" as a potential enemy, why in the world would you not support the easy availability of similar automatic weapons or even more advanced weapons such as grenades?

To support the regulation of the latter is totally inconsistent with your rationale for opposing the regulation of the former.

[homersapien 11,388]

The two issues, mentally ill people(and potentially mentally ill) and high capacity guns. You have to deal with both. Yet the only argument the other side can spew is that of fighting our own tyrannical govt.

Right. That pesky ole 2nd Amendment thing again. How dare any US citizen ever use the Bill of Rights as justification in an argument?

So why aren't you "up in arms" about the restrictions on so many other weapons? Doesn't the second amendment apply to RPG's (for example)?

I'm not "up in arms" about restrictions on so many other weapons. Did you know you can legally buy a grenade launcher, or a 20 mm anti-tank gun, provided you have the time to get the necessary background checks, and of course, the disposal income to purchase them? http://www.cracked.c...rijuana_p2.html

What a country, huh?

I never thought I'd see somebody link a Cracked article here!

+1 internets for you, sir!

But there is a very good reason they are so prohibitively priced and strictly regulated. It's so the average Joe like you or I can't get our hands on them.

No, the price of these legally obtainable weapons is determined by scarcity, supply/demand and that sort of thing. It's an expensive indulgence, I'll grant you that. But any "average Joe" that passes the background checks & pays the ATF tax stamps can then make the same economic decision as any wealthy person to buy or not.

Right. It's sooooo much harder and more expensive to produce fully automatic weapons than it is semi-autos. The gun manufacturers are just willing to keep producing the easy stuff and simply watch the market for fully-auto weapons inflate due to lack of supply.

:roflol:/>

I can't help it if you wish to remain ignorant of basic economic theory & terms. But scarcity and supply/demand determine the price of any commodity no matter where you are in the world. http://www.havocscop...t-prices/ak-47/

AK-47 prices on the black market

Afghanistan: $1,500

Average price of AK-47 worldwide: $534

European Union: $665 for rocket launchers and AK-47s

Iraq: Up to $800, with model favored by Osama Bin Laden going for $2,000

Mexico: $1,400 by U.S. border / $3,000 in Southern Mexico

Niger Delta: $75 for AK-47

Profit in the U.S.: $500 for selling AK-47 to Mexican drug cartels

Somalia: $400 for authentic Russian AK-47 / $600 for North Korean model.

Sudan: $86 for AK-47, $33 for child

Syria: $2,100 for AK-47, $2,000 for RPG

United States: $400 in California's black market

Excuse me, but the problem here is not my understanding of economics, the point is that the (scarce) supply (which drives the price) is a result of regulations, not an inherent cost of production. If these guns were not restricted in the U.S. they would be a lot cheaper - and easier - to buy here. There wouldn't be a need for a "black" market at all.

Bottom line, availability of AK-47's in this country is affected by regulation.

Understand?

[autigeremt 6,644]

Everyone! Leave homer alone!!!!! He is

[homersapien 11,388]

While I'm not exactly sure what it means when posters are reduced to making ad hominem attacks in the form of posting cute cartoons, I have a pretty good guess.

[AUloggerhead 2,238]

Right. It's sooooo much harder and more expensive to produce fully automatic weapons than it is semi-autos. The gun manufacturers are just willing to keep producing the easy stuff and simply watch the market for fully-auto weapons inflate due to lack of supply.

:roflol:/>

I can't help it if you wish to remain ignorant of basic economic theory & terms. But scarcity and supply/demand determine the price of any commodity no matter where you are in the world. http://www.havocscop...t-prices/ak-47/

AK-47 prices on the black market

Afghanistan: $1,500

Average price of AK-47 worldwide: $534

European Union: $665 for rocket launchers and AK-47s

Iraq: Up to $800, with model favored by Osama Bin Laden going for $2,000

Mexico: $1,400 by U.S. border / $3,000 in Southern Mexico

Niger Delta: $75 for AK-47

Profit in the U.S.: $500 for selling AK-47 to Mexican drug cartels

Somalia: $400 for authentic Russian AK-47 / $600 for North Korean model.

Sudan: $86 for AK-47, $33 for child

Syria: $2,100 for AK-47, $2,000 for RPG

United States: $400 in California's black market

Excuse me, but the problem here is not my understanding of economics, the point is that the (scarce) supply (which drives the price) is a result of regulations, not an inherent cost of production. If these guns were not restricted in the U.S. they would be a lot cheaper - and easier - to buy here. There wouldn't be a need for a "black" market at all.

Bottom line, availability of AK-47's in this country is affected by regulation.

Understand?

Relax. You're the one that brought up the difference in production costs of auto & semi-auto weapons (post 259.) I was simply using the price of AK-47s world-wide as an example that the cost of production doesn't mean a hill of beans if the local market is awash in supply. Consider this, though: If the black market price of an AK-47 in CA is truly $400 a copy ... don't you agree that Jerry Brown should get on the stick and push a few more gun control laws through the legislature to "regulate" the price of the damn things?

[homersapien 11,388]

Right. It's sooooo much harder and more expensive to produce fully automatic weapons than it is semi-autos. The gun manufacturers are just willing to keep producing the easy stuff and simply watch the market for fully-auto weapons inflate due to lack of supply.

:roflol:/>

I can't help it if you wish to remain ignorant of basic economic theory & terms. But scarcity and supply/demand determine the price of any commodity no matter where you are in the world. http://www.havocscop...t-prices/ak-47/

AK-47 prices on the black market

Afghanistan: $1,500

Average price of AK-47 worldwide: $534

European Union: $665 for rocket launchers and AK-47s

Iraq: Up to $800, with model favored by Osama Bin Laden going for $2,000

Mexico: $1,400 by U.S. border / $3,000 in Southern Mexico

Niger Delta: $75 for AK-47

Profit in the U.S.: $500 for selling AK-47 to Mexican drug cartels

Somalia: $400 for authentic Russian AK-47 / $600 for North Korean model.

Sudan: $86 for AK-47, $33 for child

Syria: $2,100 for AK-47, $2,000 for RPG

United States: $400 in California's black market

Excuse me, but the problem here is not my understanding of economics, the point is that the (scarce) supply (which drives the price) is a result of regulations, not an inherent cost of production. If these guns were not restricted in the U.S. they would be a lot cheaper - and easier - to buy here. There wouldn't be a need for a "black" market at all.

Bottom line, availability of AK-47's in this country is affected by regulation.

Understand?

Relax. You're the one that brought up the difference in production costs of auto & semi-auto weapons (post 259.) I was simply using the price of AK-47s world-wide as an example that the cost of production doesn't mean a hill of beans if the local market is awash in supply. Consider this, though: If the black market price of an AK-47 in CA is truly $400 a copy ... don't you agree that Jerry Brown should get on the stick and push a few more gun control laws through the legislature to "regulate" the price of the damn things?

I agree the price of these weapons is determined more by availability than by manufacturing costs. That's exactly the point I have been making

That is exactly why existing regulations on automatic weapons make them more difficult to obtain and undoubtedly reduce the numbers of these types of weapons, both legal and illegal, in our society.

But I admit that I am not sure what your point is. Are you suggesting that restrictions on automatic weapons have no effect on availability? Or are you suggesting that because fully automatic AK's can be bought illegally, we should not regulate them?

[AUloggerhead 2,238]

I agree the price of these weapons is determined more by availability than by manufacturing costs. That's exactly the point I have been making

That is exactly why existing regulations on automatic weapons make them more difficult to obtain and undoubtedly reduce the numbers of these types of weapons, both legal and illegal, in our society.

But I admit that I am not sure what your point is. Are you suggesting that restrictions on automatic weapons have no effect on availability? Or are you suggesting that because fully automatic AK's can be bought illegally, we should not regulate them?

I was using satire to counter the argument that more gun control legislation is needed to regulate/control the price of restricted firearms. Clearly that's not the case with the price of AK-47s in CA, and $400/unit suggests to me that the supply is alarmingly high. Satire and/or sarcasm doesn't always work well on massage boards. My bad.

However, more laws & regulations don't mean a thing if current laws aren't going to be enforced. Consider the track record of prosecutions associated with current background check violations: http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/01/joe-biden-we-dont-have-time-to-prosecute-everybody-who-lies-on-background-checks/

What's the point of new laws if there's no teeth in the current ones?