Thread: AR15 pending rule changes?

Originally Posted by gimp

The A cat vetting ought to stop those "nutters" getting their hands on firearms at all, and you haven't supplied any evidence that it doesn't - Grey was before the current system, Molenaar had let his license lapse and no-one bothered to check that he had got rid of his guns. Molenaar is also irrelevant as there are plenty of people who have shot people with bolt actions, shotguns etc, why cherry pick one single example out of dozens to point to and say that he's the only 'nutter' and had some illegal 'MSSAs' therefore nutters are attracted to MSSAs? What about all the other 'nutters' who were attracted to ye olde .303? Or the 'nutters' who beat someone to death with a bar stool? Or a samurai sword?

You're not reading what I'm writing, I said nutters are attracted to MSSAs hence the Mollenar and Grey examples, very relevant. Where are your examples of people going on shooting sprees with bolt actions? There will be the odd one but far out numbered by MSSA examples. If they had the choice I would put money on which one they would have chosen and how much more damage would have they done?

I have seen people I would consider a bit strange or unstable with a FAL, I've also met many criminals with a FAL, and I've done something about it. I don't need evidence that there are some unsavoury people with a FAL, I've seen and dealt with it myself.

The A-Cat should be perfect and stop the bad people getting a FAL but lets be realistic, it doesn't. For a start it is only once every 10 years without any requirement for inspections. People can change a lot in 10 years, join a gang, develop paranoid schizophrenia etc, at least with E-Cat they should be getting regular inspections and meetings with AO. Ideally the A requirements should be equal to the E IMHO.

Our laws aren't perfect but they are pretty good I think.