> And, there is an ongoing move to outlaw even bolt > action rifles if they fire a cartridge that some people feel is "too > big"...the .50 BMG. You can see the slippery slope problem....if a > bolt-action .50 BMG can be outlawed as too powerful, what about the .500 .... > Nitro or the .505 Gibbs or the .600 Nitro. The devil is in the details it
And what about the soon to be "invented" .45 BMG? A 45 call bullet that is 1/20 inch smaller in diameter placed in a "necked down" .50 brass shell. The people who want to ban the .50 BMG would see no appreciable difference between the two. Would all .45 rifles be then be banned? Only those wose bullets weigh more than x grains? Only those whose shells can hold more than y grains of powder? Why wasn't .50 BMG "too big" when the GCA68 was passed? The firearms policy/ constitional rights problem does not get easy when the courts will have to decide where to draw this line. --jcr
