“A San Francisco UPS driver who killed three colleagues in a shooting rampage at a company warehouse was armed with two stolen guns and appeared to target his victims,” abcnews.go.com reports. “Lam was armed with two stolen weapons. One was an assault pistol that is illegal in California and was stolen in Utah.” And that would be . .

Lam shot his victims with a MAC 10 made by MasterPiece Arms, an automatic pistol that is illegal in California. The pistol was also equipped with a special magazine that held 30 bullets instead of 10, gun gear that is also illegal in California.

First, what’s an “assault pistol”?

A true assault rifle is a select fire weapon (capable of fully-automatic fire). Gun control advocates feel free to redefine that definition to “any rifle that’s black and scary looking (with a shoulder thingie that goes up).”

I reckon an “assault pistol” is any pistol that doesn’t look like a revolver or a GLOCK. Or anything with a threaded barrel (as per California law). Which is kinda funny ’cause GLOCK makes a fully automatic pistol, and most gunmakers make pistols with threaded barrels

Second, it wasn’t a MAC-10.

MasterPiece Arms doesn’t make a MAC-10. Never has. The company started after the ATF declared “open bolt” firearms to be verboten. (Click here to read Nick’s post on the company.) MPA redesigned a MAC-10 clone and rechristened it.

MPA makes a range of such guns, under a variety of model designations. We don’t know which model the killer used, but it wasn’t a MAC-10.

As for the source of the killer’s gun, well, good luck with that. While the ATF suddenly becomes really interested in tracing a stolen gun that’s used in a high-profile crime, the horse has left the barn.

The odds of shutting down a stolen gun “smuggling ring” are pretty small. (There are a lot of “casual sales” of stolen guns.) As the ATF’s predecessors learned during Prohibition, destroying one source of a highly-prized illegal item only enables another.

45 Responses to Police: UPS Shooter Was Armed With Stolen “Assault Pistol”

  1. I reckon an “assault pistol” is any pistol that doesn’t look like a revolver or a GLOCK

    Since it was in California, I would presume that it’s some form of handgun that falls under California’s definitions of “assault weapon”. A GLOCK with a threaded barrel is an “assault weapon” in CA. So is any semi-auto pistol that accepts a detachable magazine outside the pistol grip.

    • Yes. My Ruger 22/45 Lite target .22 pistol is similarly classified as an “assault weapon”, because it also has a threaded barrel.

      • Wow! Seriously? I have two 22/45s that I had customized specifically for competitions. I guess I won’t do any competitions in California.

        • I should clarify: that is under NY SAFE. I’m not sure about the statutes in the PRC.

        • If your 22/45 (or any other semiautomatic pistol that takes removable magazines) has a threaded barrel, it’s likely an “assault weapon” in CA.

          Penal Code 30515.
          (a) Notwithstanding Section 30510, “assault weapon” also means any of the following:
          (4) A semiautomatic pistol that does not have a fixed magazine but has any one of the following:
          (A) A threaded barrel, capable of accepting a flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer.

          (B) A second handgrip.
          (C) A shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel that allows the bearer to fire the weapon without burning the bearer’s hand, except a slide that encloses the barrel.

          There’s an exception for pistols “that were used for Olympic target shooting purposes as of January 1, 2001”.

          https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&sectionNum=30515

    • The Left….making up sheet as they always do.

      “Being on the Left means never having to say you are sorry or wrong.”….Dennis Prager

  2. Again wasting our time arguing over semantics that Anti 2A nor the non gun community care about.

    Do you really think anyone reading the article cares that they got the model or maker wrong? They only see “scary looking gun” and move on with their opinion. We should be combating the narrative, not the language used by anti 2A publications.

    • (looks at the top of the page)
      Hmmm. The Truth About Guns.
      I guess you came here looking for cookie recipies?
      The story here: guns. Used in a shooting. Media gets the facts wrong (‘natch).
      Well okay, I guess it really isn’t “newsworthy” when we put it like that…

      • Actually no, that wasn’t the point at all. But cute attempt at a witty response anyway.

        The point is that we spend WAY too much time dealing with the description or name of the weapon used, when the anti-2A agenda doesn’t give a shit if it was a full auto MAC 10, a semi auto Modern Arms clone, or whatever. They see it as a scary gun that needs to be banned. if anything, saying it was a MAC10 in the papers that was already illegal HELPS our narrative, that it doesn’t matter if the weapon is legal or illegal, psycho criminals don’t care about the law.

        It was the same case with the Baseball Shooter. People were quick to say “see you idiots, it wasn’t an AK47 or AR15” when to the Left and anti gunners, it makes zero difference. They see it as another rifle that needs to be banned.

        This played out in Massachusetts last year. You used to be able to purchase MA Compliant MSR’s by having certain features such as pinned comp, non adjustable stock. All the Anti Gun AG did was say “ok, well I am considering all of those illegal too” and thus wiped out the whole MSR market.

        We need to concentrate on fighting the overall Anti 2A agenda, and not proclaiming some sort of victory when the media makes yet another informational gaff.

  3. I don’t know anything about the MPA pistol but I’m guessing they’re not an automatic as stated in the article but a semi-automatic.

  4. All the local stations are saying it was an ‘assault pistol’ while they skim over the fact both pistols were stolen because that would mean their asinine gun control laws are a big fail.

    • Well, and the other – and possibly more important – point is that the firearm’s status as an “assault pistol”, and whatever features of that pistol that led to its designation as an “assault pistol”, had zero impact on the commission or severity of the crime.

  5. Did the victim of the theft report it immediately? If only there was a law that required the theft victim to report the crime under penalty of fine/imprisonment. That would surely have stopped this from happening.

  6. How to spot a weak attempt at anti-gun posturing:
    Whenever people feel obliged to add an “assault” descriptor to anything.

    Pretty soon we’ll have assault cars, assault police, assault ideas, etc.

    Sounds dumb, stop doing it.

    • Dont be talking smack about my combat ready assault 2 shot .22lr double barrel short barrel tactical derringer.

      ….it has a threaded barrel….

      ……well, i brushed it against a bolt on the side of a girder so it has thread marks on the barrel anyway…

    • In California “Assault Weapon” is a legal term defined in the penal code (30515(a) PC). Just like “sniper scope” refers to any weapons mounted night vision sight with an IR illuminator in the penal code (468 PC)….. “assault pistol” just sounds like an expedient way to differentiate between a California PC defined “assault weapon” that is a pistol and a rifle (acording to ATF’s interpretation title 18 USC 921)…… they can use the law here to define a man as a woman or classify your new born baby as “non-binary” on their birth cirtificate (SB 178 2017-2018) …… don’t have to agree with it, but that’s what passes for “reality” here.

  7. will just point out that some states, such as Maryland, specifically identify some pistols as “assault pistols” (and then ban them).

    doesn’t make the term more appropriate, of course.

  8. Welcome to my CA nightmare…

    California Penal Code 30510:
    As used in this chapter and in Sections 16780, 17000, and 27555, “assault weapon” means the following designated semiautomatic firearms:
    ………
    (b) All of the following specified pistols:
    (1) UZI.
    (2) Encom MP-9 and MP-45.
    (3) The following MAC types:
    (A) RPB Industries Inc. sM10 and sM11.
    (B) SWD Incorporated M-11.
    (C) Advance Armament Inc. M-11.
    (D) Military Armament Corp. Ingram M-11.
    (4) Intratec TEC-9.
    (5) Sites Spectre.
    (6) Sterling MK-7.
    (7) Calico M-950.
    (8) Bushmaster Pistol.

    California Penal Code 30515:
    (a) Notwithstanding Section 30510, “assault weapon” also means any of the following:
    …..
    (4) A semiautomatic pistol that does not have a fixed magazine but has any one of the following:
    (A) A threaded barrel, capable of accepting a flash suppressor, forward handgrip, or silencer.
    (B) A second handgrip.
    (C) A shroud that is attached to, or partially or completely encircles, the barrel that allows the bearer to fire the weapon without burning the bearer’s hand, except a slide that encloses the barrel.
    (D) The capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip.
    (5) A semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.

    ETA: and for any pistol to be legal for sale new in CA, it has to be on the CA handgun roster which is getting smaller every year.

  9. A MAC-10 without its suppressor or stock is just a flat out stupid gun, unless you like a 50 oz handgun

  10. I expect more of these type of killings to occur in the Bay Area. But the people in San Francisco live in the Matrx, with drugs like crystal meth to improve their sexual experience and legal marijuana intoxication. It helps them to forget the real world. Supposedly the tax revenue off of pot is filling the state’s coffers. They must be rolling in money in California.
    They have a remedy to help them quickly forget any unpleasant event with mind altering substances. All legal of course. An equal trade, guns for pleasure, just like in the Matrix.

    • As a proponent of legal weed, and all drugs for that matter, I don’t think people who are rolling balls deep in meth are doing it for the sex and to forget the everyday pains of life. They do however, go home after working labor 10-12 hrs a day and toke up to let the body relax. It’s no different than a glass of scotch, or a glass of wine, or a beer.

      I would venture to say if you legalized all drugs tomorrow, you would see a significant reduction in inner city violence, and violence across the board almost instantaneously. The people who are going home and hitting the bong and eating pizza are not the problem.

      • Yeah, I have to concur. The law abiding should not fear what they do in their free time, because that time is THEIRS. There’s no reason why, with the requisite preparation, you can’t live that life and still provide a safe environment for family, friends, etc… Now if we are talking about drugged out gangbangers then, that’s a dodge, because they are criminals, which isn’t the same as a hard working schlub who tokes a few and has a couple drinks. Yet, in personal bias against drug culture, those two are oft times suggested as being equal. It’s no different then when the anti’s claim that gun owners are the same people who are killing each other in the streets from ages 14 – 24. This claim is made BECAUSE they hate guns; people who hate drugs will make similar claims BECAUSE they hate drugs.

        • If people would just stay home and get high I would not care. But the pot head believes they have a right to drive DUI.
          A gay libertarian Justin Raimondo ran against Nancy Pelosi and lost. Because it was “Free Stuff” and the weed, that voters wanted the most. Gun aren’t even on their list of wants.
          As I said before, you have a choice. Guns and weed (Justin) or “Free stuff” (Nancy) and weed.
          They went for the “Free Stuff” and weed. No guns.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Raimondo

      • As a proponent of legal weed you should have no problem voting for a pro-legalization of drugs candidate but who is also anti-gun. Correct?

        I place having guns over having legal pot or crystal meth or what ever.
        We have choices.
        This story is about the city of San Francisco where the last gun store, High Bridge Arms, was forced by the city government to close. A marijuana dispensary was opened in its place. You can buy legal Pot from hundreds of places in SF. But you can’t buy a legal gun in SF. You are fine with that correct?
        As I said before you traded guns for pleasure. You voted for people who support giving you pleasure. You just had to give up your guns in exchange.

        In states where pot is not legal you have stronger second amendment civil-rights. Even states where its only medical marijuana that’s legal, you still have very effective attacks against gun civil-rights. Washington State and Colorado (California?) both have legal recreational weed, and your gun rights are rapidly going away. That’s a fact.

        There is no utopia. You have a choice between weed and guns. Many people have chosen pleasure (weed) over guns.

        • Absolutely not. I am a single issue voter, and the issue is guns. Our vote here came from a ballot measure, which didn’t force us to vote for a shit politician just to get legal weed. If I do use it, we’re talking once a year, and that’s a high statistic for me. (No pun intended.) I vote pro freedom. Anything that becomes decriminalized, I vote for. Nothing terrible ever came from legalizing anything. I’m very much a freedom absolutist. I believe the only laws that should exist are taking/destroying someone else’s property, or taking, hurting, killing another person. Those should be the only things that are illegal and there should be strict punishment for violation of such. Speeding laws are a good example of how the two laws would work. Do what you want, but if you wreck someone else’s stuff, or someone else, you’re liable.

  11. If California only had a law making murder using a stolen gun illegal this also wouldn’t have happened. Dang, Calif, just doesn’t have enough laws against harming other people. (/sarc)

  12. For whatever reason this story reminds me that full autos do go missing, usually from government “custody”.

    A couple years ago someone busted into the Rio Rancho National Guard armory and stole somewhere around half a dozen M4 rifles.

    Full autos going missing from police armories too.

    In my idle time I sometimes wonder where they all go.

  13. Lester Holt of NBC Fake News made the same comment on the evening news on the day of the shooting. Assault pistol. Pure Plain and Simple agenda driven drivel.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *