Assault Weapon Ban

[mrbscott19]

As most of you probably know, as of this Monday, the Assault Weapon Ban is set to expire. AK-47s, glocs, and uzis will all be legal to have again, along with with the 10+ round clips that were once outlawed under the ban. I am worried. I have no problem with citizens owning guns for protection, or even as a hobby, but assault weapons are for just that, assault. In my mind, having weapons like that freely flowing around the US like any other gun will only up the chances of a Russia school type event here in the US. What are your opinions on this?

 

[Boomyal]

Re: Assault Weapon Ban

All semi-automatics, just like a Browning semi-auto hunting rifle. They just look mean. If you are into symbolism over substance then I guess you would be worried. It was never anything more than liberal feel good legislation. Ten shot plus magazines were never outlawed either. You just couldn't make them/import them anymore. Existing inventories, which were plentiful have been sold right along.<br /><br />Furthermore, crimes committed with this style of weapon, were so infinitesimal as to not even be calculable.<br /><br />It is also evident by your statement of "like any other gun" that you have fallen for the liberal anti gun tripe. That subject has been hammered out in numerous previous posts and I will not go there.

 

[SoulWinner]

Re: Assault Weapon Ban

Ice-T once said "Go ahead and out law 'em, I got ten automatic AK's buried in my back yard." It aint the legal weapons you should fear. Recently there was a cop shooting in a nieghborhood near here. If it had been across the street from my house, I would have the cops best freind, rollong out with my AK to drag him to the ambulance. When you opt to give up your freedom, beware to whom you give it.

 

[BQMatt]

Re: Assault Weapon Ban

Maybe certain Glocks were banned, but certainly not all, or even most. Boomyal is correct about the magazines also. I recently purchased a used gun that came with two 14 round magazines, as well as one 10 round magazine. I was actually hoping the ten round magazine manufacture/import limit would stand. My pre-ban mags would have gotten more and more valuable!<br /><br />Seriously though, the problem is that bans don't do any good. Illicit drugs are illegal, yet many people purchase them on a regular basis. The same thing would apply to guns. I wouldn't think a semi-well connected criminal would have any problem getting just about any small weapon they want, banned or not.

 

[mrbscott19]

Re: Assault Weapon Ban

Originally posted by Boomyal:<br /><br /><br />Furthermore, crimes committed with this style of weapon, were so infinitesimal as to not even be calculable.<br /><br />It is also evident by your statement of "like any other gun" that you have fallen for the liberal anti gun tripe. That subject has been hammered out in numerous previous posts and I will not go there.

Alot changes in 10 years. This is the most criminally violent nation on Earth, by far. Not to mention how tense this country already is after 9/11. <br /><br />And my statement "like any other gun" is true. You will be able to go into any gun store and buy one "like any other gun". Do you dispute this? Thats what I said. But I just reread my statement and it could have been taken 2 different ways. I didn't mean any other gun could up the chances of the Russian school thing, I meant you could buy them like any other gun. Sorry for any confusion. I personally don't have a gun, but I've only been allowed a personal firearm for a few years due to my age. But I will get one, no doubt about it. I just think that on a common sense level, people would see that there is never a need for a 10+ round semi-automatic clip for any weapon unless you're fighting a war or trying to hurt of kill alot of people quickly. The more readily available these guns are to gangsters, nutjobs, and the like, the less secure this nation will be. Guns should be for protection, not assaults.

 

[Homerr]

Re: Assault Weapon Ban

I agree... It had nothing to do with the fact they shoot faster, or carried more ammo...<br /><br />It was all about how they "looked scary"<br /><br />YES... Old argument....<br /><br />I want to know who the idiot was that convinced the people that a magazine that had 10 rounds or less was LESS dangerous than a higher capacity mag.... That's pure brain damaged-Liberalism at work there.<br /><br />I'm glad they lifted the ban... Now we can see the numbers come out on how many crimes were actually committed and/or prevented by the guns and bans.<br /><br />Guess I'll start stocking back up on fresh new high capacity mags!<br />(I bought several prior to the ban and made a ton of profit on EBay... too bad they are coming off the ban list... there goes my profit! )<br /><br /><br />H.

 

[mrbscott19]

Re: Assault Weapon Ban

Originally posted by BQMatt:<br /> Seriously though, the problem is that bans don't do any good. Illicit drugs are illegal, yet many people purchase them on a regular basis. The same thing would apply to guns. I wouldn't think a semi-well connected criminal would have any problem getting just about any small weapon they want, banned or not.

Does that mean they should make the illict drugs legal? Just because you can get ahold of them doesn't mean that its ok. Thats exactly why they're illegal. If nobody wanted to get high, then nobody would care if they were illegal or not. Same with assault weapons.<br /><br />Now I do think that responsible gun owners should have every right to have these weapons, but the problem comes trying to distinguish those from the not-so-responsible gun owners. Kind of like drugs. Responsible drug users pose no threat whatsoever to the community, but the ones killing people for an ounce of cocaine, or robbing their neighbors house for the next fix make every other drug user look down right evil. I guess the same applies here. The criminals of america make these assault weapons look evil.

 

[ratracer]

Re: Assault Weapon Ban

To correct a couple of mrbscott19's factual errors:<br /><br />- Glocks were never covered by the ban. The only effect the law had on Glocks were to restrict the sale of magazines manufactured/imported after the effective date of the ban with a capacity > 10 rounds to law enforcement organizations, with all such magazines labeled as "For LEO ONLY" or similar phrasing. High-capacity magazines manufactured before the ban went into effect could still be bought and sold. <br /><br />As Homerr alluded to, about the only measurable effect this restriction had was to raise prices on high-cap mazazines and on firearms manufactured before the cutoff date. Purchasing them legally wasn't a problem (at least according to Federal law), you just had to be prepared to pay more for them.<br /><br />- AK47s and Uzis (and a number of other firearms listed either by name or by type) were not banned, if they had been sold and shipped (or imported) as complete rifles before the ban went into effect in late 1994. <br /><br />- If you look at the published statistics over the last several years by both the US and Australian governments, you are in fact statistically more likely to be a crime victim in Australia than you are in the US. <br /><br />- "gangsters" and "nutjobs" i.e. convicted felons and those who have at one point been involuntarily committed to mental institutions are prohibited by Federal law from purchasing firearms. That's part of the reason for the Form 4473 you must fill out and the NICS background check you must go through whenever you buy a firearm from a licensed dealer (even at a gun show - the "gun-show loophole" gun-grabbers like to whine about is a myth). <br /><br />The ban expiration is not universal, because some states in the last 10 years have imposed laws since 1994 which overlap the federal regulations, but which do not expire after September 13th. Anyone in the US who purchases a firearm must comply with the state laws in effect in their state of residence AND the state of purchase as well as Federal law. Private citizens can only purchase a handgun in their state of residence.<br /><br />Also, the terms "assault weapon" or "assault rifle" are incorrectly used in this context, because by technical definition an assault rifle/weapon must be capable of full auto or multi-round burst with each trigger pull. The firearms covered by the ban are all semi-automatic, i.e. operate identically to other firearms which are commonly accepted as being "hunting" firearms. That's why you'll see some media refer to the AR-15 etc. as "semi-automatic assault rifles".<br /><br />Note that the AR-15 for example is commonly used as a varminter.

 

[ratracer]

Re: Assault Weapon Ban

Originally posted by mrbscott19:<br /> The criminals of america make these assault weapons look evil.

It's not the criminals, but the media shilling for the anti-gunners, who is responsible for making these "assault weapons" look evil by their deceiving and often incorrect portrayals of them. Statistically they make up approx. 2% of all firearms owned by private citizens in the US, yet according to at least 1 govt. funded study that I'm aware of they were used in less than 0.25% of all firearms-related crimes.

 

[dogsdad]

Re: Assault Weapon Ban

The so-caled "assault weapons" that the 1994 law banned were not really assault weapons at all. A true assault weapon is capable of full-auto fire. That means that it keeps firing as long as you hold the trigger down, until the magazine is empty---one long squeeze, multiple rounds fired. Every one of the weapons affected by the ban are semi-automatic, which means that you must pull the trigger each time you want to fire it. One squeeze, one round. There are many semi-automatic deer rifles used every year that function exactly like those so-called "assault weapons." The AW Ban of 1994 is nothing but sheer silliness.<br /><br />It may surprise you to learn that you may own a fully automatic weapon---a machine gun. All you have to do is pay a federal tax on it. But the things are terribly expensive to purchase, and shooting them is expensive also because you can go through so much ammo so quickly!<br /><br />I have fired full-auto weapons, and I can attest to the fact that they are a lot of fun! But, I don't think I'd ever want one. However, I have no problem whatsoever with law-abiding people owning them.<br /><br />I encourage you to buy yourself a firearm. Learn to use it safely, and you'll have a lot of fun with it. I think it would change your outlook on a lot of things.

 

[BQMatt]

Re: Assault Weapon Ban

Here's the thing mrb, you reference responsible drug users. Do your mean people who are prescribed that drug by their doctor? If that's not what you mean, then the person you refer to is, in fact, a criminal. The only reason to use recreational style drugs is to get "high". Getting "high" and the term "responsible" aren't usually used in the same sentence. With that said, I wouldn't have a problem with legalizing pot. Tax the hell out of it, just like alcohol. The pothead that goes home and smokes a joint really isn't hurting anyone other than themselves, and the same goes for someone who goes home and kills 6 or 8 beers. <br /><br />The difference between drugs and guns are many. Guns actually have a purpose. Even fully automatic weapons can serve a purpose in the hands of a responsible owner. There really aren't too many responsible uses of illicit drugs.<br /><br />While it's overly simplistic, the old bumper sticker slogan rings with some truth:<br /><br />"If you outlaw guns, only the outlaws will have guns"<br /><br />You mentioned that you have no problem with the non-banned weapons. You said that you will get a gun. Why do you think you need a gun? Have you researched the proper type of gun for your needs and experience level in handling firearms? If you have not thought about these questions, please do so before purchasing any type of weapon. From your statements, I also infer that maybe you have never taken a firearms safety course. I would suggest that as a first course of action. In your research and training, I think that you will find that guns are as safe as their owner. You will also find that the owner can be a criminal or a perfectly law abiding citizen. A gun in the hands of someone who hasn't really taken the time to learn firearms safety and use really can be very dangerous.

 

[mrbscott19]

Re: Assault Weapon Ban

Originally posted by Homerr:<br /> I agree... It had nothing to do with the fact they shoot faster, or carried more ammo...<br /><br />It was all about how they "looked scary"<br /><br />YES... Old argument....<br /><br />I want to know who the idiot was that convinced the people that a magazine that had 10 rounds or less was LESS dangerous than a higher capacity mag.... That's pure brain damaged-Liberalism at work there.<br /><br />I'm glad they lifted the ban... Now we can see the numbers come out on how many crimes were actually committed and/or prevented by the guns and bans.<br /><br />Guess I'll start stocking back up on fresh new high capacity mags!<br />(I bought several prior to the ban and made a ton of profit on EBay... too bad they are coming off the ban list... there goes my profit! )<br /><br /><br />H.

The more bullets you can fire in a shorter time was definitely part of it. You can't honestly tell me that the ability to fire 10+ rounds in the time it takes to fire 1 in a handgun had nothing to do with it. Go talk to the cops on partrol that are trying to make this country safer and see what they think about the ban not being renewed. Their jobs will become alot more dangerous after Monday.

 

[BQMatt]

Re: Assault Weapon Ban

Actually mrb, after re-reading your post, I take it to mean that you have no problem with resposible citizens owning so-call assault weapons. You seem to be concerned about the background check process? If that is your concern, I submit to you that most that purchase a gun with the intent on criminal use of it don't buy it from a gun dealer. They probably buy the weapon (used) out of the back of someone's van. <br /><br />When you buy a gun from a dealer, you are required to undergo a background check. In addition to the possibility of failing the background check, I'm pretty sure that the gun will be under that person's name in some database. Not a good thing if you want to murder someone. So, what do you, as a criminal do? You buy a gun on the black market, so it isn't traceable to you. <br /><br />Anyway, if I read your post correctly, I think we agree on more than than we disagree.

 

[Dunaruna]

Re: Assault Weapon Ban

Originally posted by ratracer:<br /> <br />- If you look at the published statistics over the last several years by both the US and Australian governments, you are in fact statistically more likely to be a crime victim in Australia than you are in the US. <br />

This subject has been done to death and I still got bruises from the last time boomyal pointed that cannon at me so I'll keep my comment short.<br /><br />I've seen the above quote many times in these forums. Pick one of the following, I don't care which one.<br /><br />Its a myth. Its propaganga, its BS! For every published stats you can show me I can show you opposing stats. I live here, the above quote is simply not true.<br /><br />Aldo

 

[BQMatt]

Re: Assault Weapon Ban

Actually, the studies I have seen show that law-enforcement generally endorses tthe right of law-abiding citizens to own guns.<br /><br />As for the magazine ban, I like my 14 round mags better than my 10 round mag. Why? The range I shoot at charges for lane time by the half hour. I can get more practice in with the 14 round mag than the ten.

 

[mrbscott19]

Re: Assault Weapon Ban

Originally posted by BQMatt:<br /> Here's the thing mrb, you reference responsible drug users. Do your mean people who are prescribed that drug by their doctor? If that's not what you mean, then the person you refer to is, in fact, a criminal. The only reason to use recreational style drugs is to get "high". Getting "high" and the term "responsible" aren't usually used in the same sentence. With that said, I wouldn't have a problem with legalizing pot. Tax the hell out of it, just like alcohol. The pothead that goes home and smokes a joint really isn't hurting anyone other than themselves, and the same goes for someone who goes home and kills 6 or 8 beers. <br /><br />The difference between drugs and guns are many. Guns actually have a purpose. Even fully automatic weapons can serve a purpose in the hands of a responsible owner. There really aren't too many responsible uses of illicit drugs.<br /><br />While it's overly simplistic, the old bumper sticker slogan rings with some truth:<br /><br />"If you outlaw guns, only the outlaws will have guns"<br /><br />You mentioned that you have no problem with the non-banned weapons. You said that you will get a gun. Why do you think you need a gun? Have you researched the proper type of gun for your needs and experience level in handling firearms? If you have not thought about these questions, please do so before purchasing any type of weapon. From your statements, I also infer that maybe you have never taken a firearms safety course. I would suggest that as a first course of action. In your research and training, I think that you will find that guns are as safe as their owner. You will also find that the owner can be a criminal or a perfectly law abiding citizen. A gun in the hands of someone who hasn't really taken the time to learn firearms safety and use really can be very dangerous.

Haha....you just called GW a criminal!<br /><br />Alcohol kills more people each year than every illegal drug combined, yet it's the one thats legal, but thats not the point. I was comparing now illegal drugs with now illegal assault weapons. There are plenty of drugs that I don't need a prescription for and not be labeled a criminal. Just like there are plenty of guns for you besides Assault weapons, which are now illegal. Look at it this way, not renewing the AWB would be equivalent to legalizing drugs. Plus there no way you can tell me that you'd buy a gun, regardless of what kind, and never shoot it unless it was necessary. Thats called recreational use. And drugs do serve a purpose. Ever heard of medicinal marijuana? It's one of the best drugs on earth for numerous ailments. What about cocaine? Alot of people don't know this but the US government classifies cocaine as a less harmful drug than pot because it has medicinal value....figure that one out! But how can you take your medicine without being labeled a criminal? The only possible solution is to move to Cali where the Feds bust licensed providers anyway, so either way you're screwed. Even though the state you live in doesn't call you a criminal, the feds do. Drugs are illegal because of the pharmaceutical companies. They are 100's of times safer than assault weapons. It only takes a bullet to end someones life, while I can snort 2 8 balls of coke and just be high, not that I do. I personally think coke is disgusting, but to each his own.<br /><br /><br />I don't need a gun, thats just the thing. But it's my constitutional right to be able to have one. Very few people on this planet actually need a gun, but that doesn't stop them. Do you actually need a gun? Could you not live without one? Have you ever had to shoot at someone for the sake of your protection? Military experience doesn't count. If not, then you don't need a gun either.

 

[mrbscott19]

Re: Assault Weapon Ban

Originally posted by BQMatt:<br /> Actually, the studies I have seen show that law-enforcement generally endorses tthe right of law-abiding citizens to own guns.<br /><br />As for the magazine ban, I like my 14 round mags better than my 10 round mag. Why? The range I shoot at charges for lane time by the half hour. I can get more practice in with the 14 round mag than the ten.

You're not getting it. Of course cops have no problem with people owning guns, they have them too. But ask them about assault weapons and see what they say. I'm don't care that people have guns, it's the assault weapons that worry me. Imagine what Columbine would have been like with AK's instead of what they had.

 

[pjc]

Re: Assault Weapon Ban

boring......as usual bs cott is trolling around an issue sure to raise passions.<br /><br />anyhooo.......sure do like my chinglee sks and other milsurps. great fun!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[mrbscott19]

Re: Assault Weapon Ban

Originally posted by mrbscott19:<br />

Originally posted by BQMatt:<br /> Actually, the studies I have seen show that law-enforcement generally endorses tthe right of law-abiding citizens to own guns.<br /><br />As for the magazine ban, I like my 14 round mags better than my 10 round mag. Why? The range I shoot at charges for lane time by the half hour. I can get more practice in with the 14 round mag than the ten.

You're not getting it. Of course cops have no problem with people owning guns, they have them too. But ask them about assault weapons and see what they say. I bet cops aren't too happy about people able to fire off 14 shots before they even get their gun out of the holster. I'm don't care that people have guns, it's the assault weapons that worry me. Imagine what Columbine would have been like with AK's instead of what they had.

 

[mrbscott19]

Re: Assault Weapon Ban

how am I trolling? I raised an issue and asked for peoples comments. They commented, I commented back. It's called a discussion. I'm trying to show why I feel the way I feel about it. If you don't like it, sorry for ya. Trolls provoke hostility. How am I doing that by expressing my opinion? If you wanna get hostile because I don't think you should have your sks, thats your problem. Don't try to blame me for your aggravation. I haven't been rude and haven't called anyone names. You're more the troll here by calling me one. If you have input on the AWB, then post about it. You're more than welcome to. If not, then why are you in this thread? I only post in threads where I have an opinion about the topic, unlike you evidently. Thats twice you've called me a troll, and all because our opinions differ. This isn't a republican forum, it's a boating forum and I happen to own a boat, so lay off.