Did the Assault Weapons Ban kill gun control?

[bossy22]

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/03/20/did-the-assault-weapons-ban-kill-gun-control.html

Sen. Harry Reid announced Tuesday that he would not be including Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s proposal to ban the sale of assault weapons in the package of gun legislation he’ll bring to the floor of the Senate. This all but ends gun-control advocates’ hopes of reinstating the ban on assault weapons, although Feinstein can offer it as an amendment once Reid’s package is being debated. Reid, however, says there aren’t anywhere near the 51 votes for passage, much less the 60 needed to overcome an expected filibuster.

[Tx4obama]

1. The AWB is not dead. It will be voted on separately.

It will still be voted on.

Call/write/email/tweet your Senators and Reps!

[bossy22]

3. you miss the point of the article

the assault weapons ban is a symbolic measure that diverts people's attention from real solutions

on edit: it will probably fail even as an amendment. I did call write my reps asking them to oppose the AWB but support universal checks

[Melon_Lord]

44. I did the same...

Called Reid's office to congratulate him yesterday.

[X_Digger]

65. Can't get more than 40 senators, never mind 60, never mind the house.

Yeah, not gonna happen.

[sadbear]

2. It will be resuscitated after the next assault weapon massacre.

What, does anyone seriously think it's not going to happen again one of these days?

[bossy22]

4. as usual

symbolic measures will always show up after tragedies

[99Forever]

6. The more I hear from gun freaks...

.. the less respect I have for them.

[bossy22]

10. so someone who is against a measure that is mostly symbolic

is a gun freak? Lets just think logically for a second- is banning a weapon that is used in less than 5% of homicides really going to significantly affect gun violence? You have to assume to believe that mass shooters like Lanza can only pull off their deadly plans using assault weapons- which has been anecdotally disproven by the likes of the binghamton shooter and the VT shooter.

Why not put the effort into more effective measures such as background checks and limits on the number of firearms people can buy at one time?

[99Forever]

13. Save it for...

... the Delicate Flower Brigade. It's sounding pretty hollow to the sane people of the World.

[bossy22]

15. i don't care if it sounds hollow if its the truth

you don't need an assault weapon to carry out a massacre. Plenty of other weapons will work just as well. So why is it worth the effort and all the political capital to push something that won't change the situation? "Common sense" isn't always the right direction, especially when "common sense" on a very complex issue is seen through a simplistic lens.

and it only sounds hollow because of the "ostrich head in the sand" mentality of many when it comes to this issue. You have preconceived notions and nothing anyone says or does will change that.

[99Forever]

22. That's right bud.

I've got the awful preconceived notion that 20 dead and mutilated bodies of precious children might have broken thru the mental illness that is gun culture. And furthermore, you are also correct there isn't a gawddamn thing you can EVER say that will change that.

[bossy22]

26. and that's alright by you?

I hope you don't get angry at all those anti-abortion activists as well. after all, they are just doing the same thing you are doing.

This is why your "victory" is in awful peril.

[99Forever]

28. Strawman much?

You Delicate Flowers get lamer all the time.

[bossy22]

36. how is being so stubborn in your convictions

on gun control different from anti abortion activists?

[99Forever]

37. I don't answer bullshit questions.

[bossy22]

40. its not bullshit

its only bullshit if you are being hypocritical- which is alright, just don't jump on the high horse with it

[99Forever]

42. Another one bites the dust.

Bye bye, say hello to the other Delicate Flowers.

I predict the next thing I will read from you will say:

"You are ignoring this member."

[Aristus]

25. "You don't need an assault weapon to carry out a massacre."

Of course no one needs an assault weapon to carry out a massacre. But I've never heard of one of these suburban Rambos bringing a black powder flintlock musket to one of these things.

[bossy22]

27. but the AWB allows much more than flint locks

it allows for pistols, revolvers, shotguns, semi-auto rifles w/out pistol grips.

Your point is "pointless".

[Aristus]

31. I don't give a shit about pistol grips, for fuck's sake!

I care about rapid-fire capability; fast re-loading capability. Mass muder capability.

Get off the fucking pistol grip bullshit...

God! Gun-crazies are stupid fucks...

[bossy22]

38. THAT'S ALL THE BILL DOES!

it doesnt ban firearms based on "high rate of fire". It bans weapons on whether they have such things a pistol grips and such.

tell me where it says it bans weapons with high rate of fire http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/files/serve/?File_id=9a9270d5-ce4d-49fb-9b2f-69e69f517fb4 ? All i see is it bans a semi-auto weapons which have pistol grips, flash hiders, thumbhole stocks etc...

I'm not the one bringing up the pistol grip shit- the legislation that is being proposed is.

You call me stupid yet you are not aware of what you are referring to.

[slackmaster]

47. The bill says nothing about speed of firing or of reloading. It's literally about things like...

...pistol grips.

Read it.

[X_Digger]

61. None of which are addressed by an "assault weapon" ban.

The same rifle, of the same firing rate, of the same re-loading capability- is legal, once some mainly cosmetic changes have been made.

Pin the collapsible stock, weld on the muzzle break, install a non-pistol grip.

Now it's not an ebil 'assault weapon'.

[Lizzie Poppet]

33. Nice (absolute non-)rebuttal.

If personal insult and inane sweeping generalization is all you're bringing to the table, maybe you should consider a more productive use of your time. The poster you replied to is right: the AWB is pure symbolism that would, if enacted, do fuck-all to lower the rate of gun-related homicide. Where we need action is in keeping handguns out of the hands of habitual criminals. That's where real progress would be made.

[99Forever]

34. You think I'm concerned...

... with what another yet Delicate Flower has to say? Get real.

[bossy22]

39. I thought you were concerned about gun violence?

it's becoming clear you aren't

[Lizzie Poppet]

50. Probably not...

...on those rare occasions where you actually manage to comprehend what's being said.

Meanwhile, the adults will arrive at some workable, effective solutions. If you'd rather indulge yourself in infantile conflict mongering, knock yourself out.

[99Forever]

54. Should have left it at "Probably not..."

That where I stopped reading.

Have a nice evening.

[Lizzie Poppet]

57. Good call.

I'm sure that saved your lips a lot of unnecessary movement...

You have a great evening, too.

[99Forever]

59. Ahhh...

... a real wit, well half of one anyway.

[Melon_Lord]

45. Save your logic for someone who isn't emotional and scared?

Lovely...

[99Forever]

46. Welcome to DU.

Enjoy your stay.

[Kingofalldems]

63. Lovely what?

The post you responded to said nothing about 'emotional and scared'.

[Paladin]

7. Brace Yourself For A Lot Of Those "Symbolic Measures," Then.

Because there are a shit-load more tragedies involving guns which are bound to happen.

[jmg257]

9. Yup - while gun fucks will keep expressing their emotion by buying more

guns...people surrounding themselves with loved ones is also common after a tragedy. So imagine the excitment a gun fuck feels at having another excuse to buy more!

[bossy22]

12. don't you think that attitude might be part of the problem with the debate

is it about a culture war or a war against gun violence? I have to believe that for some on DU destroying the "gun culture" is primary while its affects on gun violence are secondary.

Would you support a law banning the NRA and prohibiting anyone form forming any group that is against gun control?

[jmg257]

16. MY attitude, you mean? I could give a shit about 'the gun culture'.

What bothers me is when some gun fucker decides to kill people with their guns.

That IS gun violence. And destroying or even reducing the ability to do that should be high on everyone's list. Numerous ways to go about it - gun control being 1.



No, I would not.

[bossy22]

21. "gun culture" and "gun violence" are not the same culture to many

the gun culture can be a father son hunting trip, or a trap shooting competition- neither of which are strongly related to gun violence. You wouldn't say that the "wine tasting culture" is the same thing as drunk driving.

that is the problem, that you don't see a distinction or won't even recognize that there might be. With that belief nothing will done. This is not a cut and dry issue, there isn't only a "pro gun vs anti gun" side- there are a shit load of people in the middle. These tactics won't help win them over

[jmg257]

30. That's wonderful. But the problem here is your reading comprehension.

Once again - I said I don't give a shit about 'the gun culture'. I do care about gun violence.

Ya know - gun fuckers murdering people, and especially in bunches. And let's add in enablers that allow such things to happen far too often, or are quite OK with such things happening far too often.

ETA: All the other shit after you said "that you don't see a distinction or won't even recognize that there might be" is meaningless in this discussion, as this is made up BS with regards to me. Maybe you have point where others are concerned.


Here it is again for you to re-read:
"I could give a shit about 'the gun culture'.
What bothers me is when some gun fucker decides to kill people with their guns.
That IS gun violence. And destroying or even reducing the ability to do that should be high on everyone's list. Numerous ways to go about it - gun control being 1."

[bossy22]

41. apologies

I mis-read.

We are all concerned about gun violence, and just because we don't support every piece of gun control legislation that is proposed doesn't mean we are "gun fuckers".

[Melon_Lord]

48. You must hate children...

At least you dont love them like some of the people here do.

[jmg257]

56. Who knows, COULD be he doesn't have any of his own, or hasn't known one or seen one

that was blasted by some ass with a gun.

Then there are those sick fucks who are so selfish they just insist on putting there own wants & "perceived needs" above all else.

[jmg257]

53. Agreed. Nor did I say that either. Sorry if I gave that impression. nt

[Tx4obama]

5. I agree. If it doesn't pass this time then the next time...

the bill will already have been written and it will be able to go the floor of the Senate quicker and will probably be passed more easily.

[Clames]

43. The bill has been written and re-written almost every year since 2004.

A version has been introduced in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011, and 2012 as far as I can tell. Can't get any easier than copy/paste.

[X_Digger]

68. And every time it gets proposed, more folks buy them..

.. making Heller's 'in common use for lawful purposes' test harder and harder to pass.

[Clames]

71. I think annual AR rifle production in the few years before 1994 was less than 70k.

Now it is several, several times that amount. Years worth of AR's, their accessories, and ammo have been added to the civilian arsenal in the last few months.

[X_Digger]

72. At least 970k in 2012, per the NSSF. n/t

[krispos42]

67. Newtown was not an assault weapon massacre

Connecticut has had a ban in effect since 1994. Fuckwad's rifle did not have the requisite number of secondary features to make it an assault weapon.

This highlights the past and present problem with defining an "assault weapon"... it outlaws secondary characteristics like pistol grips and heat shields, but does afford a solution to the perceived problem, which is that that the guns can fire too many shots in too short of a time.

[jmg257]

8. Not really. Colorado just signed new laws into effect.

CT is on the verge, apparently.

Some measures will make it through Congress.

As mentioned in a post above, what the non-vote did is buy NRA & gun fuckers some time till the next massacre {We got lucky at UCF}. Then we can start the bullshit ALL over again. Gun fucks will express their emotion in surrounding themselves with loved ones by buying more guns. NRA dupes will once again show how just plain nuts they are by ignoring the real issue. But eventually they'll get to lament the severe restrictions placed on their precious arms as control is finally taken in bits and pieces over all the dead bodies.



[URL=/][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

Uploaded with [URL=http://imageshack.us]ImageShack.us[/URL]

[bossy22]

11. are you so sure of that?

there is skepticism about any gun control passing congress. It might pass the senate but die in the house or it might not even get out of the senate.

Reality is that most people really don't think about gun control and for the people who do, the pro-gun side outnumbers the anti-gun side. Gun control has never really been a major issue in this country and its hard to believe that it will become one in the near future. Polls are already showing that support for gun control is slipping and that less people are paying attention to it.

[jmg257]

14. Yes - 100%. Reality is that another massacre or 2 will continue to change things.

"Reality is that most people really don't think about gun control "

Yeah - no one was thinking about it after VT, Auroa or Newtown...no one at all.


"Gun control has never really been a major issue in this country"

See above.


"Polls are already showing that support for gun control is slipping and that less people are paying attention to it."

See above.

Reality is, most people don't like seeing a bunch of other people getting mowed down, especially kids, students etc. When 'law abiding' gun fuckers suddenly decide not to be, they tend to kill a bunch of people with guns. Most people notice, and really do not like it.

[bossy22]

18. i looked above, there isn't anything.

no one likes seeing these tragedies, but you have to ask, how often do people think about it? Do you think that the majority of americans go about their day thinking about Newton?

and if what you say is so true how do you explain this http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/03/18/cnn-poll-is-support-for-gun-control-dipping/ ?

I'm not necessarily saying people won't support gun control, but that it won't really be a major issue on people's minds- and that politicians might lose more than they gain from supporting gun control. That is the reality of the current situation.

[jmg257]

24. You keep saying "dipping" and 'WON'T be on people's minds'. I agree. Right up until

the next gun fucker kills a bunch of people.

The focus after Newtown, Gifford, and Aurora shootings has lasted FAR longer then has happenned in the past. LOT'S of people are talking about it {shit we still are up here - by the ton}, and interest and thoughts about it are not going away anytime soon.

A few years ago no-one talked about GC seriously, as proposed bills passed quietly into the night. Now there are hearings in Congess just about weekly, plus in many other states where bills are being introduced AND PASSED. Biden is staying on it, as is a President who has nothing to lose. Editorials appear daily in papers and on-line about the lunacy and idiocy of anti-control representatives, as well as gun freaks and the NRA.


Face it - the NRA did not do a good enough job diverting attention this time. Guns are THE target.

[bossy22]

35. it has lasted longer

but that does not mean it will last forever. Nor does it mean it will lead to the support for radical changes many suggest.

[jmg257]

58. 'Till the next massacre". Then it WILL start ALL over again...but farther along then it was.

There has already been changes. Because there hasn't been enough is why there will be radical ones eventually.

[spin]

49. You obviously believe that responsible and sane gun owners are not horrified by ...

the tragedies that our nation has lived though in recent days. Perhaps that is because they do not believe that that banning certain weapons because they resemble military weapons makes any real sense or will make a significant reduction in gun violence.

But let me assure you that gun owners do not wish to see innocent children die at hand of a madman nor do we wish to see innocent people die in the crossfire between drug gangs fighting over turf. We have many good ideas on how we can improve and better enforce our gun laws but our suggestions are ignored or ridiculed by politicians, gun control organizations and the media.

Instead we hear from politicians and gun control advocates on the media telling us that the solution to the problem is to pass ANOTHER assault weapons ban. Considering that the first one was a total flop, we are not impressed.

Gun owners view the AWB as similar to trying to reduce accidents caused by people who exceed the speed limit by banning Corvettes and Mustangs. Right or wrong, many of us feel that if the AWB passes it will accomplish little and consequently new laws will be proposed to ban all semi-automatic firearms followed by a ban on all handguns.

And of course we tend to become even more entrenched in resisting gun control advocates when we are insulted and called names such as "gun fuckers."

[jmg257]

51. "obviously believe that responsible and sane gun owners are not horrified"?

Who said that?!?

Why would you consider yourself a gun fucker? Have you killed a bunch of people with your guns?


Maybe you are one of those gun owners who expressed their emotions about Newtown by using it as an excuse to line up to buy another AR or 3?

[spin]

62. You seem to enjoy using that term. ...

For example:

As mentioned in a post above, what the non-vote did is buy NRA & gun fuckers some time till the next massacre {We got lucky at UCF}. Then we can start the bullshit ALL over again. Gun fucks will express their emotion in surrounding themselves with loved ones by buying more guns....
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2552762

For some reason I get the feeling that you lump many gun owners who recently bought assault weapons under that term. Many who have an actual use for an assault weapon decided to buy an assault weapon now as they are worried that if they wait such a firearm will cost a small fortune. Some bought one as an investment hoping to profit later. Some bought one as when anything is banned, people want it. A very,very few bought one to use to slaughter people in a mass murder. The media has portrayed the AR-15 style rifles as "mass murder machines" and there is no doubt that advertising works. Perhaps that's the type of person you meant to describe by using "gun fuckers." I personally would call them individuals with severe mental issues that really need professional help.

Now I have a very thick skin and insults merely bounce off. Unfortunately many gun owners will read your post and miss the point you were attempting to make which was that the non-vote was a bad idea as it merely allows more people time to buy assault weapons before the next massacre finally leads to the AWB being passed. (As I interpret it.)

I personally believe that Harry Reid made a wise decision as he didn't have the votes to pass the AWB and he realizes that he might conceivably lose his majority in the Senate by forcing the losing effort.

Although I don't support the AWB, I have no problem with you doing so. There is always the chance that the AWB will pass in the future but that chance decreases significantly if at the midterm elections, the Republicans gain control or increase the number of seats they hold in the Senate.

Also remember that each state gets two Senators. Therefore Montana has the same number of votes as does California. Even if the majority of votes in the United States want the AWB passed they can be stopped by the minority of voters who live in gun friendly Red Sates.

The best chance for gun control advocates like you is to ever get an AWB is to wait for the next opportunity and meanwhile to pass the gun control legislation that is possible. It is not wise to force a vote that will give up control of the Senate to the Republicans as that will not only ruin the chances of any AWB in the future but might well ruin all the progress the Democratic Party has been able to accomplish since Bush the Junior left office.

[jmg257]

64. I often lump numerous gun owners together. More so recently with the sudden wave

Of "pro-gun progressives" we have here. Depends on much...opinions they might express, sources they may cite, calousness, attempts at justifications, willingness to break laws, obvious lack of caring or selfishness, but also intelligent discussion, reasonable and understandable points or beliefs, &c &c.
My level of emotion or conviction would also play a fctor based on topic of discussion.

Simply disagreeing on a point or 2 isn't really that important, and usually makes or more interesting conversation.

Anyway, FWIW I am quite sure that there are vast numbers of gun owners I would not ever refer to as gun fuckers. People can make up their own minds, as if it matters, where they might fit in, if it even matters to them. Too pre-occupied to really bother much more about it all right now.

[spin]

66. Over the years I have learned not to lump people together. ...

It makes life far simpler as you pick your side of any issue and start to feel that you are right and they are wrong. Soon you start to believe that you and your side are much smarter than those who disagree with you. Eventually you start calling those who hold the opposite position names.

But people are complicated and a person's views are largely determined by their life experiences and upbringing. Issues are not black and white but shades of gray and we do not live in a simple world of just right and wrong. Often we see a simple solution to a problem and find that applying it leads to unintended consequences and our solution causes far more problems than it resolves.

I learned to listen to the views of those who I disagree with and to carefully consider the value of their points. It's not my object to change their position but to learn something from them and also to be able to critically analyze my own view for faults. Over the years I have changed my opinion on several issues.

I feel that if more people and especially those we elect to represent us would sit down to discuss issues in a polite and respectful manner we might be able to find areas we can compromise on and end up living in a better nation. Unfortunately I fear the art of debate and compromise has been lost during my lifetime and all we do now is bicker for power and control.

I agree with you that disagreeing on a point or two is not all that important and feel that looking for a middle ground is a better approach.

[jmg257]

70. You make numerous good points. Keeping cool and keeping

An open mind is good advice. I tend to forget the stuff about different experiences on occasion.

Cheers.

[spin]

73. I think we have had a interesting and productive discussion. ...

Cheers back to you.

[HereSince1628]

17. No. Lack of representing the people's interest killed the AWB n/t

[One_Life_To_Give]

19. EO's didn't need a vote and there is still hope for background checks etc.

It was always an overreach in the house. But there is still opportunity for some regulation to be passed.

[premium]

20. Are you suggesting that Pres. Obama can issue an EO banning assault weapons?

[One_Life_To_Give]

29. Suggesting he singed 23 EO's on gun safety

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2013/01/16/here-are-the-23-executive-orders-on-gun-safety-signed-today-by-the-president/

AWB was only one point

but other things — like the size of the magazines, the background checks, straw purchases — are all things that have a good chance of passing,” Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/biden-guns-executive-actions-86187_Page2.html#ixzz2OJ49YY1C

72 to 90% of Gun Murders are committed with Handguns. EO's, background checks and Straw Purchases are a good start. Combined they will save more lives than a AWB without them could. More importantly they actually have a chance of passing.

[premium]

32. I agree with you.

Thanks for the clarification.

[bossy22]

23. that's the point

drop the AWB and go for stuff that will actually have a greater affect.

[Deep13]

52. No, we'll still have universal background checks...

...and possibly magazine restrictions.

[graham4anything]

55. NO. BUT It ended the career of probably about 155 house 20 senators who will lose by 2020.

It will take a few cycles and 1000s of more deaths unfortunately, but the NRA is dead.
Dead by their own greedy, selfish slimy fingers.

Remember the movie "on the beach"?
That is the NRA.

The authoritarian bully pulpit hold the NRA has is finished.

Thanks to Meek Mike and the 800 mayors against guns.

Robert E. Lee thought he was going to win too in his attempted overthrow.
OOPS, reality got in his way.

OBL thought he was immune too. OOPS, reality got in his way.

Reality is a soon to be 7 to 2 US Supreme Court, and new interpretation of the 2nd.

And the irony will be Justice Obama in 2019 might just right the wrong, when he writes the ruling himself.

[badtoworse]

69. Keep dreaming.

[elleng]

60. No, NRA 'killed' gun control.