Join Draft Democracy and the MMM: Ban Assault Weapons!

[MrBenchley]

"When your kids go back to school in September, will assault weapons go too?

SUPPORT RENEWING THE ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN

Sign the petition at www.HaltTheAssault.com.
Write your Congressman today!"

Click through to find easy links...

http://www.drivedemocracy.org/assault_ban/

[taxidriver]

1. what's an assault weapon?

my 300 winchester magum deer rifle?

or my old, beat up SKS that i plink around with?

big, scary guns, going to kill us all.

[MrBenchley]

3. Gee, if you can't tell

you ought to leave the issue to those of us that DO.

[taxidriver]

5. the reason i ask

is b/c different people tell me different things. and if you are going to care about violent guns, you should know that a 180 dollar youth shotgun from walmart can kill as many people as an AK-47.

[MrBenchley]

8. You ought to keep an eye

on the sort of people who tell you "different things"...you'll find most of the folks wailing that the "assault weapons bill does nothing" are right wing loonies like deLay, Trent Lott, and NRA life member AshKKKroft.

[stavka]

4. Here's an assault weapon.

An M16 with bayonet, M203 40mm grenade launcher, and three round burst select fire. I don't want my kids bringing those to school...

First, I can't afford the ammunition.

Second, with already carrying a back pack and lunch box; I would prefer they bring a sack full of five round .380 Argentinian pistols they can trade with their friends.

[goju]

2. Its not effective, why waste your time

Rather than going after the guns we should be going after the gangs. Just seems like a more direct response.

[MrBenchley]

7. Funny...

the gun lobby sure as shit thinks it's effective...they shit-canned their disgraceful "immunity from liability" bill (The Bullseye Gun Shop Protection Act) rather than risk a renewal...

And that was great leadership from Kerry and Edwards too....


"WASHINGTON – Senate Republicans scuttled their election-year gun legislation Tuesday after Democrats succeeded in winning approval of amendments to extend an assault weapons ban and require background checks on all buyers at private gun shows. Advertisement
The 90-8 vote against the bill handed Democrats and gun control advocates an unexpected victory in the GOP-controlled Congress.
"Twenty-four hours ago, I knew of no one who would have said we would be sitting where we are right now," said Mike Barnes, president of the Brady Campaign gun-control group. "The NRA's highest legislative priority was just defeated."
Beginning in September, the gun industry can resume making, importing and selling military style semiautomatic weapons that were outlawed a decade ago. Nonetheless, Democrats say they now have the Senate on record as supporting the assault weapons ban by a 52-47 vote even though Republican leaders have vowed they won't allow the House to consider it this year.
Underlining the importance of Tuesday's events to next fall's election, presidential contenders John Kerry of Massachusetts and John Edwards of North Carolina broke away from the campaign trail to cast their first Senate votes of the year in support of the Democratic amendments. "

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nation/20040302-1804-congress-guns.html

[goju]

10. Is that really a reason to support an impotent law?

Who cares who supports it or not? I cant see propping up a useless law simply because a group or certainly people oppose it. Just go after the gangs and criminals so we arent chasing our tail and wasting time and money.

[MrBenchley]

12. It's good enough for me

I sure as hell don't think it's an impotent law....nor do Democrats I respect...nor does 70% of the voters, nor does law enforcement...nor does the gun lobby itself, for that matter, or they wouldn't have scuttled their ugly little bill.

[mstrsplinter326]

6. Not here to judge the importance of such a bill...

But society is what needs changed, not the gun laws. Guns cannot pick themselves up... Of course laws about minors need to be strongly enforced, but the general lack of morality* (see below) in this country is what kills. If people felt like they would benefit by helping others, maybe they would realize killing sprees are bad for everyone...

(the 'do unto others' kind of morality, not the bullshit they feed you at church about sex and drugs being wrong...)

[MrBenchley]

9. Gee, so human nature has to be changed

before we can decrease the risk to society in any way?

[mstrsplinter326]

11. It's a circle that has no end, though...

I am not saying to allow all guns to every adult right now.

And it has nothing to do with Human Nature: Most of the rest of the modern world has proven that they can handle having guns in countries without killing each other. Just look north!

At any rate, if you want the world to be safer, removing guns from the public is a half-assed attempt and does not get to the root of the problem. Not to mention black market trading always gets the guns in the hands of the people who want them and only serves to spur more crime. (Just look at our forefather's country: England)

You cant take away someones constitutional right and just say "We've got some work to do." What if Bush took away your right to free speech and said, "we need to clean up the airwaves. Sorry."

But since gun laws already are in place, NOW is the time to work on society rather than the gun laws.

The assault weapon ban is bogus anyway because it only bans guns that have been deemed scary (and therefore some how more dangerous). You can still buy guns that shoot just as fast as the "assault" weapons, just as long as they don't fall into the 'scary' catagories.

[MrBenchley]

13. That seems like just facile rationalziing

"if you want the world to be safer, removing guns from the public is a half-assed attempt "
Not hardly. Most civilized countries have gun control much more stringent than we do.

"black market trading always gets the guns in the hands of the people who want them"
So why not let the gun industry cash in?

"Just look at our forefather's country: England"
What about it? Despite the lies of folks like the NRA, the entire United Kingdom has less gun crime than a moderate-sized American city like Birmingham, Ala in a typical year.

"You cant take away someones constitutional right"
The assault weapons ban has been challenged in court and is perfectly constitutional. In fact, the courts have ruled again and again that the Second Amendment does not confer anything but a collective right to join a well regulated state militia. And it is worth noting that whenever gun groups sue to over turn gun control, they stay safely away from any claims about the Second Amendment and any supposed "individual right." You'll notice this bunch is pretending their "free speech" is being infringed.

http://www.trivalleyherald.com/Stories/0,1413,86~10671~2257292,00.html

"The assault weapon ban is bogus anyway because it only bans guns that have been deemed scary"
Says who? (Besides the sort of Tim McVeigh wannabe creaming his jeans over the prospect of getting his hands on one?)

"You can still buy guns that shoot just as fast as the "assault" weapons"
Then there's no reason to put assault weapons back on the market, is there?

[mstrsplinter326]

14. Cause and effect.

Basic disagreement:

You some how believe that the guns are the root of the problem. That's insane, but you can't convince me of such, no matter what.

Your priority is to rid the streets of AKs. Mine is to make the conditions and reinforcements of this society such that a less-violent community is possible.

We all have our priorities.

You may say I'm a dreamer...

[MrBenchley]

17. I may also say

that the politicians trying to make this society better all support this ban...including our Democratic ticket.

[mstrsplinter326]

19. I didn't say not to support the ban

I don't care about the ban without a real solution.

But you've got the wrong cause and effect when you believe guns are the root cause.

[MrBenchley]

20. Of course...

nobody but you said that they WERE the root cause...

Myself I think it's worth getting rid of the symptoms while people of good will are trying to cure the disease...

Of course, it's amazing how many people of bad will are lined up against the ban, chanting that "assault weapons aren't the problem."

[mstrsplinter326]

21. I'm not chanting anything.

nobody but you said that they WERE the root cause...

You order your priorities to make your actions speak loudly that guns are the root cause. You don't have to say it, your intentions and actions allude to it well enough.

[MrBenchley]

22. Play "let's pretend" with somebody else...

"your intentions and actions allude to it well enough"
As do yours...but then mine aren't at odds with the Democratic platform, the Democratic presidential slate, most elected Democrats, pretty much every liberal organization around, pretty much every liberal writer around, and 70% of the electorate.

[mstrsplinter326]

25. The democratic platform

Also doesn't include real plans for election reform or a sustainable economy. And it's not the Bible, and Kerry and his 'elected Democrat' cohorts are not God.

I don't know what you consider a liberal organization, but the ones I belong to recognize that scary gun bans are not the answer.

Gun bans are like tire patches: you spend hard earned money on them, you spend good time on patching the tire, but in a couple 100 miles you've got to do it again, all the while you might drive over another nail, adding another hole.

Why not really make sure the tire is worth patching first.

[MrBenchley]

26. Too frigging funny...

"the ones I belong to recognize that scary gun bans are not the answer."
Well, then you're welcome to them...but its funny, the only groups I ever see spouting rubbish about "scary gun bans" are right wing piueces of shit like the NRA or GOA.

Here are some of the groups that back the assault weapons ban...

"American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
American Association of Suicidology
American Probation and Parole Association
American Jewish Committee
American Jewish Congress
Americans for Democratic Action
Anti-Defamation League
Association of Clinicians for the Underserved
Central Conference of American Rabbis
Child Welfare League of America
Children’s Defense Fund
Church of the Brethren, Washington Office
Church Women United
Coalition to Stop Gun Violence
The Consumer Alliance
Consumer Federation of America
The Episcopal Church, USA
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
Family Violence Prevention Fund
Freedom States Alliance
Hadassah, The Women’s Zionist Organization of America
Handgun-Free America
HELP Network
The Interfaith Alliance
Jewish Council for Public Affairs
Justice Policy Institute
Legal Community Against Violence - Firearms Law Center
Mennonite Central Committee US, Washington Office
Mid-Atlantic Coalition to Prevent Gun Violence
National Alliance to End Sexual Violence
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)
National Association of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners (NAPNAP)
National Association of School Psychologists
National Black Police Association
National Coalition Against Domestic Violence
National Council of Churches of Christ in the USA
National Council of Jewish Women
National Domestic Violence Hotline
National League of Cities
National Network to End Domestic Violence
National Organization for Women (NOW)
Physicians for a Violence-free Society
Physicians for Social Responsibility
Presbyterian Church (USA), Washington Office
Society for Public Health Education (SOPHE)
States United to Prevent Gun Violence
Trauma Foundation
Union of American Hebrew Congregations
Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations
United Church of Christ, Justice and Witness Ministries
The United States Conference of Mayors
Violence Policy Center
Voices for America’s Children (formerly National Association of Child Advocates)
Washington Ethical Action Office / American Ethical Union
Women Empowered Against Violence (WEAVE)"

http://www.banassaultweapons.org/who_we_are/

[mstrsplinter326]

27. Names...

Mean nothing!

So people don't want to die, that's good. I like that, keep up the good fight, but I still contend that your priorities are backward.

You said it best: your fighting the symptoms. But obviously that seems more important than the disease to you, which I can partially understand because here in America the symptoms are so bad.

But you must realize your are alienating otherwise good people: mostly rural community families and farmers. They don't like Bush, they like things like clean air and are anti-corporation. But they vote Republican for two reasons: They hunt and protect their animals!

And people like you, with your ten thousand organizations are doing nothing to include the voices and ideals of these people. Owning a gun doesn't make you a bad person, and sure the NRA puts a good scare in these people, but your not doing much to help your own image. They believe you want to take away their right to hang a shotgun above their door, which they probably use to protect their livestock. Can you not see how your hurt your own cause??

You want to fight the Real American Killer? Make the streets sage to walk on again by fight against the automobile! There is so much else you can do to achieve your ends without alienating and stepping into constitutional grey areas!

I know that all of this may not mean anything to you, but you've heard my two cents.

[MrBenchley]

28. What a pantload...

"you must realize your are alienating otherwise good people: mostly rural community families and farmers"
None of whom are creaming their jeans for assault weapons.

"Can you not see how your hurt your own cause??"
I see...I'm supposed to allow nutcases and criminals to run around with assault weapons for my own good.

"You want to fight the Real American Killer? Make the streets sage to walk on again by fight against the automobile! "
Why don't YOU do that...since you think it's such a hot-shit crusade.

[mstrsplinter326]

29. Anger

Is also certainly only going to turn off people from your cause.

I've been reasonable and enjoyed the good debate while it lasted, but this will be my last post on the issue.

[MrBenchley]

30. Sometimes it's the only response that's warranted

especially to someone who seems utterly devoid of fact or good faith.

[derby378]

31. This is wild...

I can't find a single Quaker organization on that list that signed on to this initiative to keep the ban in place. And Quakers have the same reputation as Mennonites, Unitarian Universalists, and certain Brethren as peace activists.

[Sandpiper]

15. You sir, are correct

"You cant take away someones constitutional right"
The assault weapons ban has been challenged in court and is perfectly constitutional. In fact, the courts have ruled again and again that the Second Amendment does not confer anything but a collective right to join a well regulated state militia. And it is worth noting that whenever gun groups sue to over turn gun control, they stay safely away from any claims about the Second Amendment and any supposed "individual right." You'll notice this bunch is pretending their "free speech" is being infringed.

If there was any legal precedent that the Second Amendment conferred an individual right to firearm ownership, Nuts Ruining America would be challenging every gun law ever written.

Meanwhile, in the real world, the NRA sticks to bluster and stays out of court because they know they'd be humiliated if they ever went there.

[mstrsplinter326]

16. Priorities

Response here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=106&topic_id=8758&mesg_id=8773

[MrBenchley]

18. Exactly so...

"in the real world, the NRA sticks to bluster"
And all their claims that the AWB is ineffective or deals only with cosmetics were shown as the crap they are when they yanked their bill rather than accept the Senate's renewal.

It's a win-win issue for Democrats.

[truthspeaker]

23. yeah, we don't want to see a return of drive-by bayonettings!

[MrBenchley]

24. But some obviously want to see more drive-by shootings

and want to reduce this issue to some gun nut rubbish about bayonet lugs...wonder why?

[truthspeaker]

32. is their a relation between "assault weapons" and drive-by shootings?

If so, post the evidence, because I haven't seen any.

The only part of the AWB that makes sense is the limit on magazine capacity.