General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIf Sandy Hook Had Happened In 50's To Mid 1970's There Would Be No AR-15's Available. ---
In fact automatics and semi automatics would be severely controlled if they were available at all. And laws would have been very strict. I am amazed at how far down we have come.
John Fante
(3,479 posts)ruled by them - I find it remarkable that fully automatic weapons were banned during the Reagan administration. How the hell did that happen?
You know you've gone off the deep end when you make the Gipper look sensible.
gopiscrap
(23,761 posts)often with a majority in both Houses
aikoaiko
(34,170 posts)Bush 1 banned the import of semi-autos without sporting purposes.
Its a different world.
retread
(3,762 posts)Back in 1967, says Jacob Sullum at Reason, "the NRA supported the Mulford Act, which banned open carrying of loaded firearms in California. The law, a response to the Black Panthers' conspicuous exercise of the right to armed self-defense, also was supported by Gov. Ronald Reagan." As the bill's conservative sponsor, Don Mulford (R), argued in 1989, "openly carrying a gun is an 'act of violence or near violence,'" Sullum noted. "Apparently Reagan and the NRA agreed." The Mulford Act is still on the books in California, America's most populous state.
Devil Child
(2,728 posts)In the 50's there were plenty of semi-automatic AR-15 like rifles to choose from. For example an M1 carbine would've been easily available by mail order to home until the 60's.
Point being is accessibility was even greater and less controlled than what we have now.
TheMastersNemesis
(10,602 posts)It is that they were not in the numbers we had today. And I do not remember the craziness around them. Most families that I knew the dads had shotguns or 22 rifles. Perhaps a few hand guns.
gladium et scutum
(808 posts)My dad bought an M-1 carbine at the local J.C. Pennys for $15.00 in 1962. Said they had about 20 in two barrels to choose from.
hack89
(39,171 posts)in the 1960's you could guy a gun from a mail order catalogue without a background check - that's how Lee Harvey Oswald got his gun. Background checks didn't become law until 1993.
The first commercial AR-15 sales were in 1964 and were not restricted in any way.
EX500rider
(10,849 posts)AncientGeezer
(2,146 posts)Auto's aren't banned for those with the right FFL paperwork by the way.
Semi autos had been around for many decades before the '50's.
Remember Chuck Whitman picking people off on the street/campus...killed 14 with a bolt action in '66.
OneGrassRoot
(22,920 posts)the link below provides historical context specifically re: the AR-15. I've been researching this topic the last few days and this article encapsulates things clearly based on my other reading.
I grew up in the 60's and 70's, around hunters. The standard hunting rifle was common and visible. I don't recall any instance of people bragging about having any other type of gun (even though they did, pistols, for example). In fact, it wasn't until my dad passed away 10 years ago (he's a Vietnam vet) that I learned he had a gun in the house all along.
I noticed a change in the 80's. Chest-thumping types (white collar and blue collar, btw) started collecting Uzi's and Glocks, bragging about them; I have a feeling gun ranges became more plentiful around that same time though I haven't researched that yet. Lots of people who wanted the "bling" of being in the military without BEING in the military started to come out of the woodwork, bragging about their military-style weaponry.
But the gun, designed for close, confusing combat, was not an immediate hit. In the eyes of many gun enthusiasts, the "black rifle" -- as it was nicknamed -- was ugly and expensive.
"To its champions, the AR-15 was an embodiment of fresh thinking. Critics saw it as an ugly little toy," wrote C.J. Chivers in his book, "The Gun."
In July 1981, the fan magazine Guns and Ammo waxed eloquent about the Sporter's unappealing reputation.
"Most shooters and veteran riflemen look down their noses at these steel-stamped rifles as remnants from an erector set. The turn-bolt aficionado looks with a great deal of disdain at anybody toting one of these space-age rifles with plastic stocks and fore-ends. The dyed-in-the-wool deer hunter watching his domain being infiltrated by these black and gray guns assumes that these 'new generation' hunters are merely fantasizing 'war games' and are playing 'soldier.'"
Instead, the gun was mainly sold to law enforcement and other narrower demographics -- notably, "survivalists" who imagined they would one day face combat situations in an apocalyptic future, according to Tom Diaz, a gun expert and author of "Making a Killing: The Business of Guns in America."
https://www.cnn.com/2017/12/14/health/ar15-rifle-history-trnd/index.html
jmg257
(11,996 posts)back in the day? There are clips available to hunt with an M1 Garand of WW2 fame, but why would you?
Wood and blued steel are great, but so are weapons refined by the military over 50+ years.
Besides - what kid these days (or in the 80s) grows up loving what his grandfather did??
OneGrassRoot
(22,920 posts)hence my reply. Not sure what your point is.
jmg257
(11,996 posts)Regardless of their attraction for hunting.
OneGrassRoot
(22,920 posts)hunters are a minority of gun owners now, so the hunting excuse for wanting such weapons is pretty lame, imo.
jmg257
(11,996 posts)Hunting-legal mags of 5 rounds is still 5 rounds, whether from an accurate as hell parkerized HB AR-10, or an old lame blue & walnut Woodmaster 742.
hack89
(39,171 posts)You were saying?
OneGrassRoot
(22,920 posts)it acknowledges when they were introduced (to military and LEO), weren't very popular with civilians and then were bought out by Colt. They didn't gain traction in the civilian population until the 80s. Hunters were especially not a fan of them.
hack89
(39,171 posts)The OP was full of it.