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.
By assault weapons, I mean military weapons, or military-like weapons. If what a gun is used for is hunting and personal protection, why would anyone need more than the regular plain guns?
Here's were I have a problem with your position of supporting a ban. This isn't abortion, gay marriage or making old ladies take annual vision tests to keep their driver license. This is a Constitutional right. If you are going to advocate for placing a restriction on a Constitutional right, you damn well better have a thorough understanding of what it is you're calling for. Not just because I or others will demand it, but because it's how our Republic stays a Republic.
By promoting the restriction of a Constitutional right without knowing what it is you're promoting, you're giving our "representatives" unimaginable power to control all our lives. If all they have to do is make a "feel good" argument that looks nice on the surface to get you to give up a Constitutional right, how much longer do you think it'll be before the Constitution is truly meaningless?
Try this approach the next time someone suggests placing another restriction on any of your rights, including those that you many not choose to exercise, such as the ones guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment. Replace whatever right they're wanting to restrict with the right to free speech or the right to vote. If you're not willing to place the same restrictions on your speech or your voting rights, then you should give serious thought to whether that restriction should be implemented at all.
Now... I know that you freely admit that you don't know much about guns. Frankly, neither do I. I do own several, and my 2nd Amendment rights are extremely important to me (as are my 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th...), but I'm not a "gun nut". I'm familiar with their basic operation, but not with the terminology surrounding every little moving part. I can't identify most brands or models by looking at a picture, and I don't know what caliber ammunition to feed every rifle or handgun out there. What I am is a citizen of the United States that chooses to exercise my 2nd Amendment rights, and vigorously defends them when I feel that they may be threatened, just as I'd do if it were my freedom of speech or freedom of religion that was threatened.
I wasn't keeping myself up to date on what was going on in the legislature when the first AWB was passed some 15 years ago. I was also much younger, with different priorities, and living in the Los Angeles area, where guns are about as taboo as a conservative Hollywood actor. After the ban was passed, and I started hearing noises about it from the other gun owners I knew or would come across at the store/range, I decided to look into it. What I found was that it contained bans on rifles that looked scary, but weren't any more dangerous than their non-scary-looking, but legal, counterparts. It banned cosmetic accessories that have nothing to do with the function or operation of the firearm. It banned "high capacity" magazines, which may sound good, but considering how quickly an empty "low capacity" magazine can be switched out for a full one by anyone who's practiced the action at all, is also meaningless. It was nothing but feel-good legislation that had no measurable effect on crime, drove prices up for legitimate sportsmen and collectors and made criminals out of otherwise law-abiding citizens.
Finally, I'd like to address the purpose of the 2nd Amendment, and why we have these rights in the first place. You said that you supported a civilian ban on "military weapons, or military-like weapons." The reason the 2nd Amendment exists can be found in the second clause of the preamble:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
What that means is that we must have the ability to physically keep our government in check, lest it decide to abuse its power. Without the ability to overthrow a government, a nation's citizens live free only at the discretion of those in control of its military, and that freedom can be taken away on a whim. The 2nd Amendment exists to ensure that the citizens will have access to the same standard issue instruments of war as its government, thereby assuring that the government respects, and abides by, its citizens' wishes.
Now the above paragraph will undoubtedly incite responses about my being a fringe lunatic, suggestions that I move to Wyoming, allegations that I want to overthrow the government, etc. Those, of course, will simply be knee-jerk reactions to a reasoned argument that is not easily countered by cutting and pasting MoveOn.org talking points. Unless one can see the future, they have no idea what any nation's government will try to do to its citizenry, and our nation is no different. The only way we can be certain that our government will not abuse its power is to defend the 2nd Amendment and not let the government take away the only insurance we have protecting us from the potential of tyranny.
You didn't answer the question, are they or are they not supposed to be registered? And why would a law-abiding citizen have a problem w/registering a firearm. You're aware you have to register a car, right?
I wouldn't expect the criminals to be brazen enough to buy the guns at the gun show but I suspect that the re-sales to criminals were purchased at a gun show since there is no record of the sellers having purchased it.
Why not?
You have stated several times how there are no background checks by a lot of vendors...
Wasn't this just covered? Maybe it was in the other Pelosi/gun thread. Either way, no, you don't have to register a car. That's neither here nor there, though. Ownership of a car isn't guaranteed by the Constitution.
Here we go again with the victimization meme... it's clear she's referring to an assault weapons ban... not guns normally used for hunting or self-defense. Most Americans support that. Most Americans also support registration of the guns you buy. How does it make sense that you have to register and get a background check if you buy a gun from a gun shop but you need nothing to buy a gun from a gun show? The NRA can get up in arms about this but they are on the wrong side of the American people on this issue.
self defense I shall use the best firearm I can use against an intruder. my usual choice is an M1A socom in 7.62x51mm with a 20 round magazine. it is not an assault rifle, even though alot of americans would think it is according to the liberal media and democrat party.
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.
