MMM: What if they held a protest, and nobody came?

[DoNotRefill]

Well, folks, the "Million Mom March" <snicker> is holding their DC protest for the renewal of the Assault Weapons Ban today, from 10 AM to 3 PM. Watch it as it (doesn't) happen:

http://www.earthcam.com/usa/dc/metrosquare/

It's around 12:00 noon, and I don't see much of a crowd around the Washington Monument.

Compare this to the pro-choice rally of a few weeks ago:

Looks like the AW ban is a dead issue....

[LittleApple81]

1. Perhaps they should have joined forces with the other march?

Two marches one almost right after the other...the second one gets watered down.

[DoNotRefill]

2. It wouldn't have worked...

"pro-choice" generally is based on the idea that people should be able to make a choice. The MMM is the antithesis of this. They want to take away people's choices.

And "watered down" doesn't cover this situation...There's almost nobody there.

[Catholic Sensation]

3. They want to take away people's choices.

Please tell me what's wrong with the AWB.

[DoNotRefill]

4. It punishes everybody for the misdeeds of the very, very few.

What was the point of the AW ban? The ONLY thing it actually did was decrease the number of random drive-by bayonetings from zero reported cases a year to zero reported cases a year. Oh, wait, that wasn't a problem to begin with.

The AW ban made it illegal to have bayonet lugs and flash supressors on rifles. It made a bunch of guns illegal to manufacture, restricting people's choices. Yet it did absolutely NOTHING to reduce the firepower available on the civilian market, since manufacturers simply dropped the banned features from their guns.

[Catholic Sensation]

10. yeah and kept fully automatic aks out of the hands of people

who can barely use the gun that came with Duck Hunt let alone one that shoots bullets.

[FeebMaster]

14. Actually the AWB had nothing to do with machine guns. (nt)

[DoNotRefill]

28. You need to stop posting...

and actually do some research about the law you're talking about.

"Fully automatic aks" were in no way affected by the AW ban. Read the law.

Ignorance is not a virtue.

[Catholic Sensation]

34. here's what i found on google

http://chris.cc/assault.htm

and here's what the site says:

First off, they banned a bunch specifically by name:

(a) Any of the firearms, or copies or duplicates of the firearms in any caliber,
known as:
(1) Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs (all models),

(2) Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil,

(3) Beretta Ar70 (SC-70),

(4) Colt AR-15,

(5) Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, and FNC,

(6) SWD M-10, M-11, M-11/9, and M-12,

(7) Steyr AUG,

(8) INTRATEC TEC-9... didn't want to post all the damn guns they listed, as the gun I'm talking about is mentioned initially.

basically they banned, by name, over half the guns used in the online game Counter Strike.

[DoNotRefill]

37. Sorry, you're wrong.

It banned semi-automatic CLONES of the "fully automatic ak".

Fully automatic AKs were regulated by the National Firearms Act of 1934, and then banned from manufacture by the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986.

I'm almost POSITIVE that the guns used in Counterstrike are fully automatic, not semi-automatic. Look at the top of the link you provided, and you'll SEE that he clearly states "semi-automatic". Thank you for playing.

[slackmaster]

91. Please refer to the full text of the actual law

You've obviously gone off half-cocked here. Section 921 of Title 18 of the United States Code defines what all of the words describing types of firearms mean under federal law.

Go to http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/921.html and search for the string "semi". It occurs six times. If you read those hits in succession and understand what you are reading you will have a much clearer idea of what the silly "assault weapons" ban is all about.

Thanks.

[MrBenchley]

35. Yeah, koresh forbid

anybody have their own opinion...

"Ignorance is not a virtue."
And willful ignorance doubly so.

[slackmaster]

92. You should abide by your own statement, MrBenchley

Willful ignorance is an intellectual sin.

[MrBenchley]

5. It keeps assault weapons out of the sweaty shaky hands

of gun nuts....

[DoNotRefill]

7. You're right...

of course, they define "assault weapons" as having a bayonet lug and a flash suppressor. An "assault rifle" that has had the bayonet lug removed and the flash suppressor replaced with a muzzle break (prior to the law, the terms were synonymous) isn't an assault rifle according to the law. So the net result: No more random drive-by bayonetings, which NEVER happened anyway.

[MrBenchley]

9. Not even close to true, refill....

Read the bills...

By the way, if all this was about was bayonet lugs and flash suppressors, why did the gun lobby kill their own disgraceful "immunity from liability" bill when this "cosmetic" amendment was attached?

"The passage of the assault weapons ban and gun show loophole amendments -- by bipartisan votes of 52 to 47 and 53 to 46 respectively -- were major victories for the police officers and gun violence prevention advocates who have been fighting hard to renew the 10-year-old historic legislation that bans military-style assault weapons, including AK-47s and Uzis, and to close the gun show loophole. The effort was also aided by Senators John Kerry and John Edwards, who returned to D.C. to vote in favor of the amendments."

http://www.jointogether.org/gv/news/alerts/reader/0%2C2061%2C569649%2C00.html

[DoNotRefill]

15. Correct me if I'm wrong here...

but isn't the AWB going to expire at midnight, September 13, 2004?

Please explain how that's a victory for the gun banners?

The MMM has held another "national march". Fewer people showed up than go to your average suburban strip mall on a weekend day.

"It's Dead, Jim."

If you had an ounce of integrity, you'd admit it. I'm not holding my breath...

[MrBenchley]

22. It only expires if Tom DeLay gets his way...

But hey, don't let actual facts get in your way.

And I'm not the one pimping for GOP causes...speaking of an ounce of integrity.

[DoNotRefill]

24. If I'm pimping for GOP causes...

then I'm in extremely fine anti-GOP company doing it....Describing Ted Rall as "Tom Delay's pimp" is factually ABSURD.

The AWB is going to sunset. It has nothing to do with Delay "getting his way." It's time has run out. A time limit, I might point out, that Bill Clinton signed into law.

[MrBenchley]

31. IF???

"Describing Ted Rall as "Tom Delay's pimp" is factually ABSURD."
Again, not even close to true. He's saying we ought to bend over and spread cheeks for the GOP on this issue.

"A time limit, I might point out, that Bill Clinton signed into law"
Now, I know you're not pretending that Bill Clinton wants assault weapons back in stores....so I wonder why you brought that up at all.

"It has nothing to do with Delay "getting his way.""
The fuck it doesn't...

"WASHINGTON, DC—House Majority Leader Tom DeLay's promise that he will allow the federal assault weapons ban to expire in September 2004 will keep America's police at the highest possible risk, the Violence Policy Center (VPC) warned today."

http://www.banassaultweapons.org/delay_pr.cfm

"Tom DeLay, the Texas Republican and House of Representatives majority leader, said last week he didn't believe the extension would come to a vote in the Republican-dominated House. DeLay's statement drew a surprising rebuke from the Republican Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert, showing that the gun ban does not easily cut across Republican-Democrat lines in this country.
While many Democrats are fearful of defeat if they are targeted by the gun lobby in the coming elections, there are many Republicans representing so-called "soccer mom" suburban constituencies who could become electoral toast if they are seen to be backing a measure which would bring the deadly weapons legally back to the streets of America.
White House spokesperson Ari Fleischer said last week Bush has not had any change of heart from his 2000 campaign promise. But he offered no explanation as to why Bush has given no presidential muscle to the promise."

http://www.banassaultweapons.org/press_center/editorials.cfm

Why any real Democrat wouldn't want to hold the unelected drunk's feet to the fire on this issue and make him piss off either evry moderate in America or his wingnut core is beyond me. I look forward to making my wingnut Republican incumbent explain over and over again to voters this fall why nutcases and criminals ought to be able to get their hands on assault weapons.

[DoNotRefill]

39. Heh...

"Why any real Democrat wouldn't want to hold the unelected drunk's feet to the fire on this issue and make him piss off either evry (sic) moderate in America or his wingnut core is beyond me."

Because it's a losing issue for us. It was in 1994, when we lost badly needed seats because of it, and it's a loser now, as demonstrated by the lack of people at this year's 50 mom march.

[MrBenchley]

45. Not even close to true...

"It was in 1994"
1994 was the Contract on America...and there's not a word about guns in that. Of course, gun nuts lied their asses off about Democrats then, just like they do now.

[DoNotRefill]

128. the elections were held right after Brady and the AW ban passed..

and those laws REALLY pissed off a lot of people. People like blue-collar Union voters, who also tend to be pro-gun, and USED to be a core constituency of the Democratic Party, until we pissed in their faces one time too many.

[BiggJawn]

11. It sure does, doesn't it?

Made it so I'll have to fight tanks and A-10 Warthogs with a pitchfork.

In the meantime, they got PLENTY of illegal weapons down in the open-air crack markets of Murka.

Does ANYONE with half a brain ACTUALLY believe that the AWB did one damn thing towards keeping "assault rifles" out of the hands of criminals? I don't think so. Look at it this way:
I need to carry firepower to ensure I get to hang around long enough to enjoy all this drug money I'm getting. That's gonna require killing off some of the competition. Do I GIVE a rat's ass that I'm gonna have a Federal weapons charge tacked on with the murder charges? Fuck. No.

And maybe some of these "Million Moms" are arming themselves, too.

"In Times of Peace, Prepare for War" Lao Tzu

[FeebMaster]

16. Have you read some of the replies to these gun threads?

"Does ANYONE with half a brain ACTUALLY believe that the AWB did one damn thing towards keeping "assault rifles" out of the hands of criminals?"

Oh, never mind, I just noticed the half a brain part.

[MrBenchley]

17. Wow...

Amazing how many "law abiding responsible gun owners" have this ridiculous "I need my popgun for the glorious revolution" fantasy...the sad thing is, every once in a while one of the darlings loses all touch with reality and shoots the postman...or blows up a Federal building with a day care center.

"Does ANYONE with half a brain ACTUALLY believe that the AWB did one damn thing towards keeping "assault rifles" out of the hands of criminals?"
Yeah. So does the gun lobby, since they've spent millions trying to get them back on the market.

[Catholic Sensation]

25. what about shooting down black helicopters?

I can't imagine the unbelievably inaccurate ak 47 will be enough. You'll need some kind of surface to air missile launcher or rocket propelled grenade launcher to get them down!

[MrBenchley]

6. Always exciting to see

"pro-gun Democrats" pimping for Tom DeLay's pet issue....

Guess they're all pro-gun and hardly at all "Democrat"...

[DoNotRefill]

8. Well, you must be awfully excited all the time then....

Here's another one of "Tom Delay's pet pimps":

http://www.uexpress.com/tedrall/?uc_full_date=20040427

[Catholic Sensation]

12. Ted Rall also said we should have no primaries

should we listen to everything Ted Rall has to say?

[DoNotRefill]

21. It depends on the mechanism to replace it....

the current system is more than a little screwy, though.

I think Rall has earned at least a hearing, don't you? Or should we dismiss everything he says out of hand? If so, doesn't that mean we'd be silencing one of the most vocal critics of the current misAdministration?

And my point was the stupidity inherent in calling everybody who doesn't support the anti-gun agenda "Tom Delay's pimps". Rall sure as shit doesn't pimp for Delay....

[Catholic Sensation]

27. no, he meant it as giving Howard Dean the nomination without primaries

which makes Ted Rall an idiot

[MrBenchley]

32. By the way

those Democratic gun owners and the NRA "A" rating sure made a big difference for Howard Dean, didn't they?

And Dean also supports the AWB.

[DoNotRefill]

41. We'll see if it was a wise choice by the party....

in November.

As for Dean supporting the AWB, so does Bush.

[MrBenchley]

46. Gee, refill...

WE already know gun nuts are lying their asses off about Kerry.

Yeah, even Chimpy supports the AWB because it's one of the few claims he's got to being a moderate. But Kerry's going to work to renew it....Chimpy's just toe-dancing around hoping not to have the issue come up.

[DoNotRefill]

40. I think we're going to have to wait and see...

if Kerry crashes and burns in November.

I still think Dean was a better choice for a nominee....at least he didn't "pimp" for George W. Bush on the IWR...

[MrBenchley]

49. And we've got "Democratic gun owners"

doing all they can to prop up this unelected drunk and the GOP.

[MrBenchley]

13. Gee, a second rate cartoonist?

And a fuckwit like Rall besides?

"Washington, DC - Senator John Kerry (D-MA) has co-sponsored S. 1431, a bill that will renew and strengthen the federal assault weapons ban. The action reinforces recent comments he made promising that his would not be the "candidacy of the NRA. We stand up against that."
"Senator Kerry clearly means what he says about standing up for gun safety and saving lives," said Joshua Horwitz, Executive Director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. "We call on the remaining candidates to state their strong support for renewing and strengthening the assault weapons ban."
The 1994 ban outlaws specific models of military-style semiautomatic assault weapons. But in a willful attempt to violate the spirit of the law, the gun industry continues to manufacture "post-ban" assault weapons guns identical to those banned except for minor cosmetic changes. The Bushmaster XM15 used in last fall's sniper attacks, for example, is a "post-ban" version of the AR15 assault rifle, which is banned under current law.
S. 1431 and H.R. 2038, its House companion, will not only renew the ban, but also prevent the gun industry from manufacturing "post-ban" assault weapons such as the Bushmaster XM15.H.R. 2038 has 108 sponsors."

http://www.jointogether.org/gv/news/summaries/reader/0%2C2061%2C567766%2C00.html

[BiggJawn]

19. Say, bo, I'm PLENTY "Democrat"...

At least I don't go around whining "I'm gonna vote for Nader! I don't LIKE Kerry! he goes HUNTING!" like some people around here do.

Calling us "pimps" for DeLay puts you one notch from a "personal attack" alert cap.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[immoderate]

18. Wish our smart Dems could see the phoniness

I guess you can't repeat it too many times. Whether you're for guns or against, the AWB is a PHONY ISSUE!

Defining a gun as an assault weapon has nothing to do with its ability to fire bullets the differences are totally cosmetic. A so-called assault weapon has a bayonet mount, flash suppressor, skeleton stock and/or a pistol grip. The gun, it's ammo, etc. are usually not part of the definition. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

--IMM

[FeebMaster]

20. It's hopeless.

How are you going to convince people the AWB is a joke if you can't even convince them that it has nothing to do with machine guns?

[immoderate]

29. I fear a future...

...where only freepers have guns.

I was surprised, and heartened, that when I came to DU, I found that I wasn't the only liberal to see the wisdom of the IInd Amendment.

Bottom line: In a free country, no one should have the power to tell me, a citizen, that I can't own a gun.

--IMM

[MrBenchley]

26. Too TOO funny.

"Defining a gun as an assault weapon has nothing to do with its ability to fire bullets the differences are totally cosmetic."
Jeepers, then you poor gun nuts ought to be able to muddle along with plain old ordinary guns, oughtn't you?

[immoderate]

30. Why give the government...

...another reason to incarcerate people who have done nothing wrong, ala the Drug War?

--IMM

[MrBenchley]

33. Who DO you think you're kidding?

You mean you're so desperate to get these weapons that you'd break the law?

Yeah, now I sure believe they're just like ordinary guns, all right.

[immoderate]

36. Well, I wasn't intending to be humorous...

...and I wouldn't try to fool someone with the "four legs good, two legs bad!" steel trap mind like yours.

I guess you can take me literally.

If you've ever had your car dismantled because some strung out drug dog humped your fender during a traffic stop because of a burnt out tag light, while the officer made jokes and said, "I'm just doin' m' job." you might understand.

--IMM

[MrBenchley]

44. Well, don't try...

Because you're really not fooling much of anyone....

"If you've ever had your car dismantled because some strung out drug dog humped your fender during a traffic stop because of a burnt out tag light"
Gee, who hasn't had that happen? (snicker)

[immoderate]

63. If you would face the issue...

...and try to stop putting words in my mouth, you'd have nothing to say.

I'm not desperate for an assault weapon. I've said I don't want one. That leaves you without an argument. I'm against stupid laws that put innocent people at the mercy of over-zealous law enforcement. If you had been out to protest the Viet Nam War, you might have seen how that works.

--IMM

[MrBenchley]

84. I AM facing the issue

And I WAS out to protest the Viet Nam war AND to march for civil rights...and the same turds who were opposing us then are the ones pimping for assault rifles now.

[immoderate]

38. More than a gun nut...

...I'm a Bill of Rights nut!

--IMM

[MrBenchley]

42. Could have fooled me...

Tell us, what do the courts say about the Second Amendment? What does the ACLU say?

[immoderate]

47. You're too easily fooled

We've done this before. My reading of the IInd Amendment goes to the usage of the words "militia" and "regulated" in the time of the founders.

Court decisions are mixed. Sometimes they are wrong. Do you support SCOTUS in Bush v. Gore? Dunno what the ACLU says. They might have misread the second as well. Let's go to the source. I don't form my opinions by what Tom DeLay says.

--IMM

[MrBenchley]

53. I'm not fooled at all...

"Court decisions are mixed"
No, only one court has EVER even tried uphold the individual rights interpretation...and that was the most right wing court in the country...and to do that, they had to ignore two previous ruilings by themselves. AND they still found an excuse to take the loony's guns away from him because he was a public menace.

All the other courts have consistently ruled that the Second Amendment refers to state militas. So do the Federalist papers.

As for the ACLU...

"We believe that the constitutional right to bear arms is primarily a collective one, intended mainly to protect the right of the states to maintain militias to assure their own freedom and security against the central government. In today's world, that idea is somewhat anachronistic and in any case would require weapons much more powerful than handguns or hunting rifles. The ACLU therefore believes that the Second Amendment does not confer an unlimited right upon individuals to own guns or other weapons nor does it prohibit reasonable regulation of gun ownership, such as licensing and registration. "

http://archive.aclu.org/library/aaguns.html

"They might have misread the second as well."
Yeah, that's sure seems likely (snicker) The ACLU is wrong on the Bill of Rights, and John AssKKKroft is.

[immoderate]

56. The fact is...

...that I'm an individual, who owns a gun, and does so legally. I don't need a permit, and it's not registered, and it's still 100% legal. So I guess the court decisions you refer to are not so sweeping as you would imply.

Whether you're fooled or not remains to be seen. I don't run my life by the ACLU or the NRA. (Or Tom DeLay.)

--IMM

[MrBenchley]

93. Whoop-dee-fucking-doo

You sure are an individual who can regurgitate a lot of tired gun nut horseshit at the drop of a hat.

"I don't need a permit, and it's not registered, and it's still 100% legal. So I guess the court decisions you refer to are not so sweeping as you would imply."
Koresh only knows what you think you're babbling about.

[DoNotRefill]

129. Hmmm...I remember the NRA and the ACLU...

suing the government TOGETHER on a First Amendment issue not too long ago. I guess that means the ACLU is now "pimping for Tom Delay", too.

Damn...EVERYBODY seems to be "pimping for Tom Delay"...Ted Rall, the ACLU, all of the Democratic Congresscritters that are unwilling to be fired just to make you happy...

BTW, you keep trotting out this quote filled with "weasel words" like "primarily" and "mainly". If the purpose of the Second Amendment is PRIMARILY collective, then it has to also be PARTLY Individual too, doesn't it?

[Catholic Sensation]

43. i don't believe anyone has yet to explain the utility of assault weapons

why is an assault weapon useful?

[MrBenchley]

48. In fact, the claim is that they're no different

than ordinary weapons except for a few "cosmetic" features.

Of course that's horseshit...otherwise, these gun nuts could tape a sign that reads "this is an assault weapon" to their popguns and be happy.

[FeebMaster]

50. Certainly they're less useful than their full-auto counterparts

but machine guns have been heavily regulated since 1934 here in the United States and since the ban on manufacture of new machine guns for civilians in 1986 the prices have skyrocketed. So really it comes down to sacrificing full-auto fire for a much lower cost and less hassle involved in purchasing.

[Catholic Sensation]

51. that would answer my question if it were

"what type of gun is more useful than semiautomatic assault weapons?" but since it wasn't, I'd love to know what the utility of EITHER a fully automatic rifle or semiautomatic assault weapon is. Please, explain.

[immoderate]

54. Fully automatic is a machine gun as you know it.

Semi-automatic means that the back pressure of the gasses cocks the gun for the next shot, eliminating the need to use the bolt, lever, or slider to bring the next bullet into the chamber. Semi-auto guns, to my knowledge are illegal for hunting, to give the animals more of a sporting chance. Not totally sure here, as I don't shoot at living things.

Pistols, like my 9mm Browning, can be semi-automatic too. These are often misnamed "automatic."

NOTE: Being semi-automatic does not make a gun an assault weapon. It's external appurtenances that put it in that category. See my car spoiler analogy in another post.

Again, I don't want or need an assault rifle. But I have shot rifles that are ballisticly the same as assault rifles. I don't see the need for these laws.

A semi-auto version of an AK-47 is a damn good rifle and shoots the same ammo as guns that are legal. It looks different so it is illegal. Is this a good basis for a law?

--IMM

[Catholic Sensation]

57. are you replying without answering my question just to annoy me?

seriously, you didn't explain WHY the guns are useful, only what you think about them

[DoNotRefill]

131. Well...

they're good for anything that a regular rifle that fires an intermediate cartridge in a semi-automatic mode is good for. That can be hunting, plinking, self-defense, driving very large nailholes, recreationally shooting up 55 gallon drums of deisel fuel with dynamite strapped to them, or whatever use somebody wants to put them to.

[FeebMaster]

60. Your question was "Why is an assault weapon useful"

As I said, they're less useful than their full-auto counterparts. As for the utility of a real machine gun, it's the same as with any other gun, self-defense, target shooting, hunting. Maybe their owners just think they're fun. What does the utility of something have to do with anything?

[Catholic Sensation]

62. hunting

what the HELL would you be hunting that required a machine gun? Self defense? You can use a hand gun.

[FeebMaster]

68. I didn't say it required a machine gun.

Many machine guns are select fire, meaning they can fire either full-auto or semi-auto. Plenty of them would make perfectly serviceable hunting rifles when used on the semi-automatic setting.

Handguns are good for self defense especially when carried concealed but a rifle, shotgun, or machine gun would be much better at stopping someone than a handgun if the situation permits having one handy. Why do you think the police carry shotguns and rifles in their cars instead of just handguns on their belts?

Again, what does the usefulness of a particular gun have to do with anything?

[Catholic Sensation]

72. a. it would make the "awb is bad" argument have some kind of substance

b. it would maybe convince people that banning these types of weapons is stupid since the guns can be used for purposes other than homicides.

Hunting with a "machine gun" means two things: 1. the person using it sucks at hunting 2. they also have a small dick, and think a big gun will cure their insecurity

[FeebMaster]

77. Does the "AWB is Good" argument have any substance?

"a. it would make the "awb is bad" argument have some kind of substance"

The "awb is bad" argument does have substance. The AWB is a joke because all it really manages to ban are bayonet lugs and flash suppressors.


"Hunting with a "machine gun" means two things: 1. the person using it sucks at hunting 2. they also have a small dick, and think a big gun will cure their insecurity"

Ahh penis references. Where would the gun control movement be without them? As I said, many machine guns are select-fire and there is nothing unreasonable about hunting with one. What if someone owns a small machine gun? What are they compensating for?

[Catholic Sensation]

81. awb good arguments

a. since it works in conjunction with the national firearms act of 1968, it continues to make semiautomatic assault weapons illegal, despite whatever crap continues to be posted here. Unless you're fighting a war, you don't NEED a military rifle like an AK or Colt M16.

b. how many more people would be accidently killed by family members if people had easier access to military rifles?

Wes Clark had a good line about this: Join the military if you want to use these guns. We have them there.

Hunting with a machine gun is incredible overkill and simply proves the hunter using it is worthless at his hobby. It requires zero skill to "spray and pray" at a bunch of deer with an ak than it does to kill a deer with a hunting bow or real hunting rifle.

And I'll continue to question the penis size of anyone who feels they need to own some massive rifle just to feel "secure."

[FeebMaster]

89. Good arguments?

a. since it works in conjunction with the national firearms act of 1968, it continues to make semiautomatic assault weapons illegal, despite whatever crap continues to be posted here. Unless you're fighting a war, you don't NEED a military rifle like an AK or Colt M16.

It was the National Firearms Act of 1934 and the Gun Control Act of 1968, but the AWB has nothing to do with either of them. In fact whoever wrote the AWB dreamed up the definition of assault weapons, you linked to the definition of an assault weapon is further up the thread. The AWB didn't make the assault weapons it defines illegal. You can still own a pre-ban assault weapon perfectly legally. It banned new assault weapons from manufacture. Of course, as has been mentioned, the guns sold after the ban are the same as the ones sold before the ban only they lack enough of the offending parts (bayonets and flash suppressors on most of them) to make them legal to manufacture.

"b. how many more people would be accidently killed by family members if people had easier access to military rifles?"

Probably not many. There aren't many accidental firearms deaths as it is in the United States.


"Wes Clark had a good line about this: Join the military if you want to use these guns. We have them there."

Actually, the US Army doesn't issue any of the weapons covered by the assault weapons ban. The US Army issues its troops machine guns.


Hunting with a machine gun is incredible overkill and simply proves the hunter using it is worthless at his hobby. It requires zero skill to "spray and pray" at a bunch of deer with an ak than it does to kill a deer with a hunting bow or real hunting rifle.

How nice of you to ignore everything I've said on the subject. As for "spray and pray," well there's more to hitting a target than pulling the trigger and hoping you hit it, even if you have a machine gun.


"And I'll continue to question the penis size of anyone who feels they need to own some massive rifle just to feel "secure.""

Without penis references all the gun control movement would have is "What does a person need with _insert gun type here_."

[immoderate]

99. Oh no! Not the PENIS SIZE argument! HHEELLLLPPPPPP!!!!!!

--IMM

[slackmaster]

101. I'm sorry to see that you have no idea what you're talking about

Assault weapons are not machineguns.

Assault weapons are semi-automatic, not fully automatic.

A Colt M16 is a machinegun, not an assault weapon.

Expiration of the AWB will not make the M16 or any other machinegun any easier to obtain.

Nobody has suggested hunting with automatic weapons but you.

Sexual put-downs make a poor substitute for reasoned debate.

[DoNotRefill]

133. You REALLY need to do some reading...

the AW ban banned certain FEATURES on guns. If those features are removed, it's not legally an assault weapon any more. Removing the bayonet lug and flash supressor satisfies the law, rendering an "assault weapon" into a "post-ban" gun, which is still legal to manufacture.

Tell me, how does removing the bayonet lug and substituting a muzzle break for a flash supressor make a post-ban gun LESS lethal than a pre-ban "assault weapon"? They use identical replacement parts for everything except the bayonet lug and flash supressor. They take the same capacity magazines. They hold the same number of rounds. Their rate of fire is identical. Their muzzle velocities and foot-pounds of energy delivered are identical. The ONLY difference in lethality is that one can be used as a 4 foot long pole with a knife attached to the end of it by means of a bayonet lug, and the other one can only be used as a 4 foot long pole with a knife attached to the end of it if you duct-tape the knife there.

[FeebMaster]

134. Now that brings up some interesting legal questions.

Would duct-taping a knife to the end of a post-ban rifle be in violation of the AWB? Does simply owning a post-ban rifle and a roll of duct-tape at the same time make you guilty of conspiring to violate federal firearms laws?

[slackmaster]

138. I wouldn't worry about it unless you live in California

That issue will go away on September 13.

[DoNotRefill]

139. Yes....

duct-taping a bayonet would be adding a bayonet mount under (b)(3), and would turn it into an assault weapon under Federal law.

I don't think that having duct tape would be enough evidence to show conspiracy, however, if they could detect duct-tape residue on the barrel, that would probbly be enough.

[immoderate]

75. Useful is subjective

I could say that you are not useful to me. That does not mean I would ban you, and arrest people like your family that would find you useful.

I believe that semi-automatic, as well as full-automatic guns are illegal for hunting. Not sure, as I don't hunt.

By your logic, something like skiing could be banned. It's not useful, especially here in Florida. And people get killed doing it.

You want me to defend shooting targets with a semi-automatic pistol? if you're serious, I could claim "pursuit of happiness" and that it makes me part of a "well regulated militia."

--IMM

[DoNotRefill]

132. massed waves of rodents?

a beltfed would be pretty effective for that.

Of course, "assault weapons" are NOT machineguns, they're "semi-automatic" instead of "automatic", which are two entirely different beasts. You know this by now.

BTW, hunting with a machinegun is "unsporting". It IS, however, VERY effective.

[immoderate]

52. An "assault weapon" is just another gun

Its utility is the same as any other. What makes it an assault weapon are things that affects its looks. It's like having a spoiler on your car. It doesn't DO anything below 150 mph except make it look cool (to some.) Would you support a law that made spoilers or painted flames on cars illegal?

I don't own, or want, an assault weapon. I have a conservative 9mm hand gun. I use it to shoot clay pigeons and rotten fruit out in the desert because I have fun doing that. I do resent the fact that I can't get full capacity magazines for it anymore, so I have to reload more often. I can't see that the rotten fruit considers this some respite.

--IMM

[MrBenchley]

55. Then you don't need one, do you?

"Would you support a law that made spoilers or painted flames on cars illegal?"
Gee, I would if they represented a public menace, as assault weapons do.

[immoderate]

59. What is it about assault weapons...

...as opposed to other legal weapons, that bothers you? Please answer this question as posed.

--IMM

[MrBenchley]

71. Gee, they're a public menace

and don't belong on the market.

[immoderate]

79. How are they more of a menace...

...than other guns that are legal and shoot the same ammo in the same way?

Again, answer the question, if you have an answer.

[MrBenchley]

86. I'll be happy to let the cops answer that one

since almost every law enforcement group (with the exception of the NRA's phony one) all support a ban on assault weapons.

[immoderate]

100. And what would those good officers say?

You could say, "I'm sorry Mr. IMModerate, I don't really have an answer."

--IMM

[MrBenchley]

121. They'd say "ban assault weapons now" of course...

[slackmaster]

102. Funny, every cop I've spoken to agrees the AWB is pointless and silly

I meet them quite often at shooting ranges.

[slackmaster]

95. I use some of mine for target shooting

Others are part of a gun collection that is a segment of my retirement savings.

[DoNotRefill]

130. Since when has need or use...

been a basis for the exercise of a right?

I don't NEED to file a FOIA request. I don't NEED free speech. I don't NEED to not have the government quarter troops in my house. I don't NEED to be tried by a jury of my peers, or not have a confession beaten out of me. I don't NEED to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. That doesn't mean I shouldn't be able to, does it?

[IHaveADream]

58. I think it is a sad state of affairs

that we sit in front of our computers typing away our indignation at all the evil this administration has created, but we don't do anything more than masturbate at a keyboard and smile in the smugness of a post well articulated.

[FeebMaster]

61. Thanks for sharing. (nt)

[immoderate]

67. Hi IHaveADream...

...and welcome to DU!

Having said that, might I enquire, "Don't you want the anti-masturbation thread?"

--IMM

[IHaveADream]

115. LOL!!!

[Catholic Sensation]

76. yeah nobody at DU ever goes to protests, writes effective LTE

has an incredibly popular progressive opinion site (will pitt, not me ;)), or is running for office to change the regressiveness we're seeing in modern politics...

wait, we do all that, and more.

[matcom]

64. Which Message Board Am I On?

i am somehow confused.

yeah, AWB is a BAAAADDDDD THING!?!?!?!? :eyes:

[Catholic Sensation]

65. Democratic Underground has a new rss/xml feed from fr.com

some of the posts over there end up here or something. It's all complex so I won't confuse you with all the techincal details ;)

[matcom]

66. thanks. I'll alert EarlG right away

at least this isn't bizzaro world

[FeebMaster]

69. Oh no! People who disagree with me!

They must all be Republicans!

[matcom]

73. seems to me you need to masturbate more

see if your hands were stronger, you could 'rapid fire' using your trigger finger alone. you wouldn't need to be able to pump 30 rounds a second into that squirrel as you would be able to without that coveted automatic feature.

so friend, i suggest you go upstairs, grab a wad of your favorite TP, pick up a magazine (the kind with pictures) and get to practicing. strengthen those hands and you'll be on full auto in no time

[FeebMaster]

78. Thanks for the advice

"seems to me you need to masturbate more see if your hands were stronger, you could 'rapid fire' using your trigger finger alone. you wouldn't need to be able to pump 30 rounds a second into that squirrel as you would be able to without that coveted automatic feature.

so friend, i suggest you go upstairs, grab a wad of your favorite TP, pick up a magazine (the kind with pictures) and get to practicing. strengthen those hands and you'll be on full auto in no time"

but I'm not a gun owner so I really have no need to work on my trigger finger speed.

[Catholic Sensation]

85. hmmm

i suggest you go upstairs, grab a wad of your favorite TP, pick up a magazine (the kind with pictures) and get to practicing

what about those of us who like Penthouse Forums, or the equally hot columns in The Nation? :D

[Name removed]

87. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Columbia]

97. Seems to me, you've fallen for the big LIE

The AWB has nothing to do with automatic weapons. I suggest you do a little research.

[slackmaster]

105. People have strange ideas about what "semiautomatic" means

I guess an automatic firearm must be one that fires all by itself, without the need for anyone to touch the trigger.

:freak:

[matcom]

106. your right. i was an expert marksman in the U.S. Army

i know NOTHING about weapons :eyes:

[slackmaster]

107. Then WHY did you mention the "automatic feature" in #73, matcom?

The discussion was about assault weapons, not machineguns.

[matcom]

109. funny, my M16 had a switch that put in in full auto mode

[slackmaster]

111. Thanks! The M16 is NOT AN ASSAULT WEAPON!!!

It's legally a "machinegun" and will not become easier to obtain when the "assault weapons" ban expires in September.

You did know that, didn't you?

:shrug:

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/921.html

Once more slowly:

ASSAULT WEAPONS ARE SEMI-AUTOMATIC ONLY; NOT FULLY AUTOMATIC; NOT BURST-FIRE. THEY FIRE ONE AND ONLY ONE ROUND PER TRIGGER PULL.

[matcom]

113. actually i DID know that

and i am FOR the AWB because my old M16 will be EXACTLY what you gun nuts will fight for next.

your NRA buddies have said as much.

[slackmaster]

114. Oh, puh-LEEEEEEEEZE tell me where ANYONE has suggested

Gutting the National Firearms Act, and just how seriously you think such a proposal would be taken even in a Congress massively dominated by the GOP.

:shrug:

I call that a "slippery slope fallacy".

[Columbia]

117. Actually, machine guns are not illegal to own

You just have to get a background check and pay for a $200 tax stamp. Your state/local laws may vary, but if you have the cash you can go out and buy one right now legally.

Of course, it's a lot easier/cheaper to obtain one illegally, but that's for another thread entirely...

[DoNotRefill]

136. Too late...

§922(o) was struck down as unconstitutional by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals a few weeks ago in U.S. v. Stewart, on Interstate Commerce Clause grounds. In case you're not familiar with the 9th Circuit, it's by FAR the most liberal circuit court of appeals.

[Columbia]

108. You were in the Army?

Now I know you really do know nothing about weapons.

[matcom]

110. right asshole

diss my military service. THAT is productive

[Columbia]

112. I'm not dissing your military service.

Just dissing your weapons knowledge.

And a little inter-service rivalry.

Marine Corps vet here. :)

Although, I don't fancy the name-calling much.

[DoNotRefill]

135. Just as all soldiers are taught about the Geneva Convention...

Having gone through training doesn't mean you're necessarily competent in all areas of the subject.

[Catholic Sensation]

74. no it's people who "argue" without providing one bit of evidence

to support their case. All I've gotten is that assault weapons are "necessary" because they can be used by penis-envy suffering hunters who think mowing down a family of deer with an m16 will increase their dick size up to three inches hard, or self defense since criminals won't stop if someone has a Desert Eagle pointing at them :eyes:

that's arguing like a republican.

[FeebMaster]

80. More penis references.

"no it's people who "argue" without providing one bit of evidence to support their case. All I've gotten is that assault weapons are "necessary" because they can be used by penis-envy suffering hunters who think mowing down a family of deer with an m16 will increase their dick size up to three inches hard, or self defense since criminals won't stop if someone has a Desert Eagle pointing at them :eyes:

that's arguing like a republican."


Where would the gun control movement be without them. The AWB issue has been explained to you multiple times in this thread. You even posted a quick run down of what the law does. Maybe you should try reading it and understanding exactly what the AWB does or read the actual text of the law. It's not very long.

[Catholic Sensation]

82. people who need big guns to feel secure are obviously insecure people

whether it's a gang member in south central LA, or some "hunter" in Arkansas

[FeebMaster]

90. What about people who like small guns? (nt)

[immoderate]

96. The way you phrase that...

...is called a truism. Stripped down, you are saying, "People who need to feel secure are insecure." No argument there.

But like brother Benchley, you need to brush up on your logic.

You like to do the "straw man" thing.

--IMM

[slackmaster]

103. "obviously"???

No sign of intelligent conversation here, Captain.

Beam me up.

[immoderate]

83. Now who's arguing like a Republican?

You proffer the classic ad hominem.

My argument is that so-called "assault weapons" are not different from guns that are legal, except superficially. I could go on to say they are rarely used and banning them would have no effect on the crime rate.

If you would want to ban all guns, and present your arguments, we could discuss that. But as I have pointed out elsewhere this is like banning spoilers from cars to prevent traffic deaths. It won't accomplish what you want.

If you want to ban all semi-auto .223 caliber weapons, then say so, and we can argue about that. But you don't. You want to ban weapons that look a certain way, and I don't see how that is constructive.

--IMM

[slackmaster]

122. I'll try one more time to give you the straight argument against the AWB

It limits peoples' choices without any measurable offsetting gain in public safety. In a society that values individual liberty, such a pointless restriction is inherently bad law.

[MrBenchley]

70. Didn't you know?

It restricts the freedom of loonies and criminals to shoot a lot of people...

Besides, according to gun nut "logic" or whatever the fuck it is...actually opposing what Tom DeLay wants hurts the Democrats...the only way to HELP Democrats is to bend over and spread cheeks for the GOP's ugliest and stupidest special interest group.

Normal people ought to wander down into the gungeon once in a while and see the amazing right wing horseshit being posted there on a daily basis.

[immoderate]

88. Back to school...

I have seen you use "logic" but I haven't seen you use any logic.

--IMM

[MrBenchley]

94. Gee, ask me next

if I care what you think logic is.

[immoderate]

98. See above...

...where you adeptly perform the fallacy of the undistributed middle.

Indeed, why should you care, it would destroy your "arguments."

--IMM

[slackmaster]

104. Point out one fallacy and you'll just get another one thrown at you

Most likely a Red Herring or a Straw Man.

[immoderate]

116. Thanks

I pointed out a "straw man" violation in a post above. What do you do? Last time I said, oh good grief, who am I arguing with?

As the late, great, Sam Kinnison once said, "I just want to help."

--IMM

[slackmaster]

118. My whole intent for posting on DU is to help as well

But few people believe me. I have one heck of a Cassandra complex.

[immoderate]

124. Don't want to ruin your rep-

I agree with your posts here.

I guess it's a law of nature that the issues which actually affect people's lives the least will get the most virulant debates.

Like death penalty. Admittedly, to a very few people, it's directly important. To most of us, it will not change our lives. But it leads to some long and acrimonious threads.

--IMM

[moondust]

119. <snicker>

Last time they had 3/4 million. What were the numbers at the latest gun monkey march?

[slackmaster]

120. Judging by the conspicuous lack of video coverage on cable channels

It must have looked less impressive than a handful of Iraqi militia dudes fighting with US soldiers, or the Iraqi prisoner abuse photos, or talking heads discussing either of the above.

[MrBenchley]

123. The last NRA convention drew 40,000 or so...

and they were the scum of the earth, too....

"PITTSBURGH -- A man whose son was killed in the Columbine High School shootings literally walked in his child's shoes to the National Rifle Association convention, where he hoped Vice President Dick Cheney would address the federal assault weapons ban set to expire in September.
Tom Mauser, whose son Daniel was killed with an assault weapon in the Littleton, Colo., killings five years ago Tuesday, said continuing the ban is common sense.
Assault weapons "are the weapons of gangs, drug lords and sick people," Mauser said before his three-block march to the convention, which runs through Sunday. "It is a weapon of war and we don't want this war on our streets."
Mauser entered the convention hall where the NRA was meeting, but was turned away by a security guard as several conventioneers applauded. A couple of conventioneers yelled "Get a life" and "Vote for Bush." "

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/3015989/detail.html

[alarimer]

125. "Don't forget the gun"

THis song by Cheryl Wheeler is meant to be humorous I think but it sums up the attitude of gun nuts.

"Don't forget the guns, you know exactly what I mean/
Bring the pistols, bring the Uzis and the old AR-15/
We don't look for trouble but by golly if we're in it/
It's nice to know we're free to blow 900 rounds a minute".

Why this country is so gun-crazy is beyond me. Everyone thinks they're still living in the wild west or something I guess. Violent crime is a lot less common than the TV news would have us all believe. I am absolutely terrified here in Texas to think that everywhere I go people are carrying concealed weapons. Bunch of vigilantes waiting to save the day I guess when in fact they will only make a situation worse in all likelihood.

[Columbia]

126. Quite a double consciousness you have there

"Violent crime is a lot less common than the TV news would have us all believe. I am absolutely terrified here in Texas to think that everywhere I go people are carrying concealed weapons."

You are absolutely terrified of law-abiding citizens, yet you scoff at violent criminals? Very interesting...

[MrBenchley]

127. Gee, columbia....

Maybe she reads the screwloose and dishonest ramblings of the gun nuts here and realizes what sort of goofball wants to lug a pistol around....

[Hekate]

137. Most people can't afford to go to 2 Washington events back to back

C'mon. The events have to be staged separately. I, for one, support both causes, but have not "marched" for MMM.

When it comes to the assault weapons ban and all the handguns used to shoot up the inner cities, please don't anyone bother telling me that there is a rational civilian use for them. When it comes to hunting animals, my motto is: If you eat it after you kill it I won't argue with you unless it's an endangered species. Live and let live -- so to speak.

I flew 3,000 miles to Washington for the Women's March (and my sister and daughter joined me) because the assault on all issues relating to women's health care is just too overwhelming to ignore. Apparently 1.15 million other women and men agreed with us.

The VRWC is such a juggernaut that none of us can keep up with all of it; all we can do is support each other and keep trying to get the Bushes the hell out of the White House.

Hekate