Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-26-2009, 10:19 AM
 
Location: San Diego, CA
10,581 posts, read 9,783,616 times
Reputation: 4174

Advertisements

What used to be the worst-kept secret in Washington, has now become documented public knowledge: President Obama will seek a new ban on so-called "Assault Weapons", similar to the ban that expired in 2004.

The old ban, which ran from 1995 thru 2004, was a spectacularly ineffective piece of legislation. People who predicted a lowering of crime rates in the 90s due to the ban, saw them rise instead. And people who predicted "gunfights in the streets" as a result of its expiration, found none. No increase in crimes, and actually a lowering of crimes in many areas as some state and local govts cracked down on petty crimes, enacted three-strikes laws for more severe crimes, started to allow law-abiding citizens to carry concealed weapons, and otherwise started acting like actual governments. Criminals fearing that their victims might now be better-armed, probably also contributed to the decline in crime after the AWB expired.

Some people have speculated that the reason the so-called "Assault Weapons" ban had so little effect, is because that kind of weapon was almost never used in crimes to begin with, either before or after the ban.

They didn't even get the definition of an "assault weapon" right. The type was invented in Germany around WWII time, and was a small, light machine gun that could be held and fired like a rifle, but which would fire many shots as long as the trigger was held down. Different from conventional machine guns of the period, which usually had to be mounted on a stand on the ground or in a vehicle, and often served by a crew of two or more men. Other countries started making similar small automatic-fire weapons, such as the Russian AK-47 machine gun and the American M16. Some had a selector switch, that let the user choose between one shot per trigger pull, and continuous fire (machine gun) when the trigger is pulled.

But none of the weapons described in the so-called "Assault Weapons" ban, were machine guns at all. All of them were only capable of firing one shot when the trigger was pulled. Functionally they were identical to many common hunting rifles and target guns. The only difference specified in the AWB, were that the guns had to have certain features that looked scary but didn't change how the gun actually worked - a hole in the stock, or a flash hider on the muzzle end, or a fitting to mount a bayonet knife on the end, etc.

The AWB was the ultimate "feel-good" law for hysterical people afriad of guns: It banned scary-looking ones that were no different from not-so-scary-looking ones. Effects on crime were nonexistent, since such guns were almost never used in crimes anyway. And as many people pointed out, laws banning guns only affect people who obey laws. They disarm only the law-abiding, while criminals go right on getting all the guns they want.

The AWB had only one real consequence: It set a precedent, by which the government claimed the authority to control and even ban guns for completely arbitrary excuses - in this case due to their appearance. And in total disregard of the 2nd amendment to the Constitution, which declared that since an armed populace was necessary, no government could ban or restrict guns in any way.

Now, despite the AWB's demonstrated record of ineffectivity and uselessness, the Obama administration wants to put it back. They are well aware that it has no effect on the crime they claim to be concerned about - the facts are well documented and available for anyone to see.

Instead, they want to re-establish the idea that they can ban guns at any time, for any reason, and don't have to worry about that pesky Constitution any more.

In a word, BOHICA.

---------------------------------

ABC News: Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban

Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban

by JASON RYAN
WASHINGTON, Feb. 25, 2009

The Obama administration will seek to reinstate the assault weapons ban that expired in 2004 during the Bush administration, Attorney General Eric Holder said today.

Wednesday Attorney General Eric Holder said that the Obama administration will seek to reinstitute the assault weapons ban which expired in 2004 during the Bush administration.

"As President Obama indicated during the campaign, there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons," Holder told reporters.

Holder said that putting the ban back in place would not only be a positive move by the United States, it would help cut down on the flow of guns going across the border into Mexico, which is struggling with heavy violence among drug cartels along the border.

"I think that will have a positive impact in Mexico, at a minimum." Holder said at a news conference on the arrest of more than 700 people in a drug enforcement crackdown on Mexican drug cartels operating in the U.S.
Mexican government officials have complained that the availability of sophisticated guns from the United States have emboldened drug traffickers to fight over access routes into the U.S.

A State Department travel warning issued Feb. 20, 2009, reflected government concerns about the violence.

"Some recent Mexican army and police confrontations with drug cartels have resembled small-unit combat, with cartels employing automatic weapons and grenades," the warning said. "Large firefights have taken place in many towns and cities across Mexico, but most recently in northern Mexico, including Tijuana, Chihuahua City and Ciudad Juarez."
At the news conference today, Holder described his discussions with his Mexican counterpart about the recent spike in violence.

"I met yesterday with Attorney General Medina Mora of Mexico, and we discussed the unprecedented levels of violence his country is facing because of their enforcement efforts," he said.

Holder declined to offer any time frame for the reimplementation of the assault weapons ban, however.

"It's something, as I said, that the president talked about during the campaign," he said. "There are obviously a number of things that are -- that have been taking up a substantial amount of his time, and so, I'm not sure exactly what the sequencing will be."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-26-2009, 10:21 AM
 
26,214 posts, read 49,044,521 times
Reputation: 31786
Here's just one reason: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/26/us/26borders.html?hp

Seems the USA is nothing but an arms bazaar for the Mexican Drug cartels, who buy AK-47's from shady dealers (like the one in the NYTimes article) or private owners and ship them over the border to Mexico, where thousands of people have been murdered in the past two years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2009, 10:35 AM
 
Location: southern california
61,288 posts, read 87,420,711 times
Reputation: 55562
the soviets for all their shortcomings did 1 thing right. they tried to put an AK47 in every home in every third world country. i regret that we didn't get the same gift.
the reason they did it was aside from goodwill they knew the pigs that control those 3rd world countries. what is sad is we thought the 3rd world had a monopoly on pigs.
do you have any idea how much money is spend on gun control in this country?
40% of homocides are puncture wounds, what's up with that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2009, 10:40 AM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
9,059 posts, read 12,971,196 times
Reputation: 1401
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huckleberry3911948 View Post
the soviets for all their shortcomings did 1 thing right. they tried to put an AK47 in every home in every third world country. i regret that we didn't get the same gift.
the reason they did it was aside from goodwill they knew the pigs that control those 3rd world countries. what is sad is we thought the 3rd world had a monopoly on pigs.
do you have any idea how much money is spend on gun control in this country?
40% of homocides are puncture wounds, what's up with that.
The AK is the insurgents' gun of choice. Able to topple entire governments as an equalizer for any freedom fighter. Unfortunately, some of the terrorists are mistaken for "freedom fighters". Every freedom loving American should own one. Who cares what oppressive government invented it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2009, 10:49 AM
 
Location: Chicago Suburbs
3,199 posts, read 4,316,979 times
Reputation: 1176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike from back east View Post
Here's just one reason: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/26/us/26borders.html?hp

Seems the USA is nothing but an arms bazaar for the Mexican Drug cartels, who buy AK-47's from shady dealers (like the one in the NYTimes article) or private owners and ship them over the border to Mexico, where thousands of people have been murdered in the past two years.
So my Constitutional rights are taken away?
Take that mind numbing logic over the border with you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2009, 11:31 AM
 
Location: San Diego, CA
10,581 posts, read 9,783,616 times
Reputation: 4174
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike from back east View Post
Here's just one reason: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/26/us/26borders.html?hp

Seems the USA is nothing but an arms bazaar for the Mexican Drug cartels, who buy AK-47's from shady dealers (like the one in the NYTimes article) or private owners and ship them over the border to Mexico, where thousands of people have been murdered in the past two years.
Yep, that's the Excuse of the Week. It wasn't the one they used last time. And when that one goes away, they'll come up with yet another, the next time.

As I said, laws banning guns only affect people who obey laws. They disarm only the law-abiding, while criminals go right on getting all the guns they want.

Now the Obama administration wants to put it back. The current excuse is that a neighboring country is having problems with its own citizen, over which we have no jurisdiction. But for them, we now have to give up our own guns. Or at least start. Never mind that this has never worked in the past, and that criminals will still freely get all the guns they want... since criminals don't obey our laws.

In fact, the Obama administration wants to re-establish the idea that they can ban guns from law-abiding citizens at any time, for any reason, and don't have to worry about that pesky Constitution any more.

Last edited by Little-Acorn; 02-26-2009 at 11:44 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2009, 11:40 AM
 
Location: Near Manito
20,169 posts, read 24,330,946 times
Reputation: 15291
Answer to the OP: because "assault weapons" sounds scary.

Keep in mind that these are people who assault arugula.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2009, 11:45 AM
 
Location: San Diego, CA
10,581 posts, read 9,783,616 times
Reputation: 4174
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeledaf View Post
Answer to the OP: because "assault weapons" sounds scary.
Halloween sounds scary. But they're not banning that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2009, 11:57 AM
 
Location: NW Nevada
18,160 posts, read 15,628,539 times
Reputation: 17150
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike from back east View Post
Here's just one reason: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/26/us/26borders.html?hp

Seems the USA is nothing but an arms bazaar for the Mexican Drug cartels, who buy AK-47's from shady dealers (like the one in the NYTimes article) or private owners and ship them over the border to Mexico, where thousands of people have been murdered in the past two years.
LMAO, do you actually believe that the cartels get their weapons from LEGAL sources in the US, or that the private ownership of these so called "assault weapons" by US citizens has a thing to do with the problems caused by the drug runners? OH my. They get their weapons from MANY sources and the AK's they have did not come from the US. Some of the A2's and M4's and such may have been stolen from NG armories here and such but PLEEEASE. The semi auto versions of service rifles that we are allowed to own here in the US are NOT what these guys are buying. They get the real deal. That itty bitty swicth on the reciever has an extra setting that we can't have off the shelf and contrary to popular belief it ain't so easy to modify a semi auto only to full auto. especially when they can buy them that way already from gun runners out of South and Central America who have suppliers in Eastern Europe, Southeast Asia, and all over Africa. LOL, so the cartels guns all come from the US across the Rio Grande aye? Whatever
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2009, 12:25 PM
 
513 posts, read 647,016 times
Reputation: 127
Assualt weapons are awesome because they give you the ability to protect your family from a home invasion far better than a pistol or shotgun could. Home invasions usually happen at night with multiple thugs who are heavily armed. With 3 thugs shooting at you each with at least 10 rounds available to them, your pistol with just 10 rounds won't be able to effectively protect you like an AR15 with a 30 round capacity.

An AR15 can unleash a serious wall of fire to protect your family that a pistol or shotgun just can't do. You can effectively alleviate the threat since 223 rounds can penetrate the wall that the gang-banger is hiding behind inside your home - that gives you more safety too.

Plus an AR15 is a heck of a lot more accurate than a pistol and accuracy counts when the adrenalin is running!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:35 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top