Assault Weapons Ban

Discussion in 'Political Discussions' started by maranto, Sep 13, 2004.


What is the significance of the expiration of the assault weapons ban?

Poll closed Sep 20, 2004.
  1. End of civilization as we know it.

    3 vote(s)
  2. Possibly some increase in gun crime.

    9 vote(s)
  3. Little to no impact on gun crime.

    9 vote(s)
  4. A wonderful thing for constitutional rights.

    13 vote(s)
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. maranto

    maranto New Member

    Just wondering what your thoughts are on the assault weapons ban? I'm an avid second amendment rights supporter, but in my view, this law was meaningless (both for pro gun and gun control groups). It was so full of holes that it really banned nothing... all it really did was drive up the price of a few specific types of guns and magazines (although that in and of itself was annoying).

    I'm always glad to see ineffective laws sun-set... but all in all, I veiew the current debate about the law's expiration as a tempest in a teapot.

    Your thoughts?

  2. AV8R

    AV8R Active Member

    Have you noticed the media panic? The assault weapons ban expires at midnight tonight! By tomorrow morning our streets will be packed with roving gangs carrying machine guns.

    Two things. First ... these so-called "assault weapons" have played a very minor role in the American crime picture over the years. There were a few incidents in California involving some rather ugly semi-automatic weapons and Barbara Boxer went nuts. And that brings us to our second point. Do you know how the various weapons listed in the soon-to-expire ban were chosen? Barbara Boxer and some staffers got their hands on a weapons catalogue and decided which weapons looked the most dangerous. These were the weapons ultimately banned. The decision was based on cosmetics.

    Legislation written the way this law was written deserves to die.
  3. Guest

    Guest Guest

    I think this was a mistake on President Bush's part. I have always supported both the right to keep and bear arms as well as gun control/registration.

    I don't think they are diametrically opposed to each other as so many espouse.

    The bottom line, however, is that no matter what item is banned or illegal, the misreants of society will always find a way to obtain said item.
  4. maranto

    maranto New Member

    NPR has been at the tip of the panic spear. For the last two days, they have really pushed the significance of the end of the ban. I keep hearing how the DC area snipers’ rifle was the quintessential “assault weapon”… but they didn't buy that gun, they stole that weapon, and last time I checked, that was already illegal (as was multiple murder… but that didn’t seem to stop them either). Jimmy's right (and it's a concept that the media and most politicians don't get),... criminals don’t respect laws... by definition.

  5. I've always thought the assault weapons ban was a stupid law, since the same exact gun can be purchased as a hunting rifle (semi-automatic, but it just doesn't look like a nasty machine gun with a banana clip).

    If I were a gangsta I would much prefer a reliable and powerful handgun than a bulky and inaccurate assault rifle that burns up bullets while hitting nothing.

    Hence my vote - it will have little impact on gun crime. I wish I could pick two choices, because my other vote is that it is a wonderful thing for constitutional rights.
  6. Bill Grover

    Bill Grover New Member

    Since the last time I commented on this topic here I felt my Christian experience was questioned, I think that I should not say that I think the ban is stupid--so I won't :rolleyes:
  7. javila5400

    javila5400 New Member

    The assault weapons ban was worthless. The law was strictly cosmetic. For example, one cannot purchase an AK-47 or SKS with bayonet lug. Additionally, AR type rifles (civilian version of M-16) could not have flash suppressors or collapsible stocks. In some states, owners could not use high capacity magazine on their semi-automatic rifles.

    Let me point out that there is a huge difference between semi-automatic and automatic. Semi means you pull the trigger and one bullet shoots; the rifle will shoot as fast as you can pull the trigger. Automatic means you pull and HOLD the trigger and bullets shoot automatically, hence the term "automatic." But guess what, liberals? Your disgusting nasty hero Diane Feinstein was so ignorant about weapons that she kept referring to semi-autos as if they were fully automatic. The liberals are making it sound that with the assault ban one cannot purchase an AK, whereas now it is possible to purchase. This is a BIG misconception. Even during the ban, "post-ban" semi-automatic rifles were available to law-abiding, 2nd amendment supporters. The only difference, like I said, is the cosmetic.

    You are fooling yourself if you believe that the lift on the ban will increase crime rate. In the hands of a criminal, my post-ban M-4 carbine is just as capable of doing harm than a pre-ban M-4. Just because my post-ban rifle does not have a flash suppressor or just because it has a fixed stock as opposed to collabsible, it is not any less lethal or dangerous than an identical rifle with a bayonet lug. Stop kidding yourselves. It is not the end of the world.


Share This Page