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.
Whatever was considered an assault weapon during the 1994-2004 ban. From Wikipedia,
The assault weapons ban was "feel good legistlation". It was ineffective.
It did not diminish gun crime because: 1.) Long guns are not typically used in crime, and 2.) Gun manufacturers were able to easily bypass the restrictions of the ban (remove a bayonet lug here, change the stock). It was a joke.
Good intentions don't always make good legislation. Unfortunetly it's easier for legistlative bodies to pass laws rather then to address the root cause of complex problems.
The assault weapons ban was "feel good legistlation". It was ineffective.
It did not diminish gun crime because: 1.) Long guns are not typically used in crime, and 2.) Gun manufacturers were able to easily bypass the restrictions of the ban (remove a bayonet lug here, change the stock). It was a joke.
Good intentions don't always make good legislation. Unfortunetly it's easier for legistlative bodies to pass laws rather then to address the root cause of complex problems.
1) national violent crime rates went down considerably during that 10 year period
2) school shooting deaths went down during that 10 year period
It was falling before and has continued to fall after that 10 year period. Which means the legislation was not the cause of the fall in crime.
But you can't assume that. Yes, the violent crime rate was falling before and after, but it fell the most during the late 1990s, just after the ban was introduced.
There will always be criminals, ban guns and it will just fuel organized crime. The level of psychotic gun violence in the US is not just an issue of gun control. Switzerland has a very high gun ownership rate and their violent crime is almost zero. There is something deeply wrong with American society itself.
1) national violent crime rates went down considerably during that 10 year period
2) school shooting deaths went down during that 10 year period
One is not correlated to the other. Crime rates went down regardless, they are still going down 10 years after the ban was lifted. I see that as related and correlated to the increase in law enforcement, criminal penalties, and jail populations. That's a good thing, but it had nothing to do with the assault weapons ban.
I told you, long rifles before, during, and after the ban are not typically used in crimes. The OP's link also shows this. In my opinion the recent trend of well publicized school shootings appear to be copycat by troubled youths, perhaps one of the problems is that they are so well publicized. That needs to be addressed - the root cause, not the tool, not innefective "feel good" laws.
Knives are used more often to kill people than so called assault weapons. You'd think somone with intelligence would see that and not prove how uninformed they are. Sanders can't help himself.
Assault weapons are a group of semi-automatic weapons with automatic reloading after each shot, where the ammunition is typically stored in a clip--this means the capability of many, many shots before there's a need to reload. Think of assault weapons as the every-day version of military weaponry.
The problem with the OP's thesis is that total numbers killed does not equal the potential of an assault weapon. The majority of mass shootings are from assault weapons and semiautomatic handguns--and that is the problem. Here you have the capability to kill or wound dozens upon dozens of victims without the need to stop & reload. So controlling this type of weapon would impact this type of crime. It is a niche area, but one that needs to be addressed. When you look at the numbers and see HOW assault weapons are used and on WHO--I don't understand how anyone can say it's okay. It's not. Not in any way. Yes, I understand the argument that someone will find a way. Do you honestly think all of those children in Sandy Hook would be dead if the killer only had access to a knife? How about the movie theater in Aurora? These are weapons designed to do the most damage in the least amount of time. There is no time to react, no time to run away, no time for a good guy with a gun.
As an aside, I resent this "lefty" & "liberal" talk. I am a very left liberal--there is a gun in my house, used for hunting. Soon there will be another, if Santa comes through for my budding Elmer Fudd. Nobody, but nobody, is trying to take my guns away from me. Quit letting yourselves be manipulated by people who have financial interest in selling more & more guns.
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.
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.
