Subscribe to
Posts
Comments
NSLog(); Header Image

Assault Weapons Ban

Jeff's notes on last night's debate (I watched the Yankees/Red Sox and unpacked some more before Carey came over) include this snippet:

16th: Assault weapons ban. Why not extend? Bush: "I thought we oughta extend it. But the bill would never move because people of both parties were against it." (Obvious question: Why didn't you try anyway? Obvious answer: Other priorities. At this point, debate in my head better than one on tee vee.) Law abiding citizens oughta be able to own a gun, but I believe in background checks. Best way to protect citizens is to prosecute gun crimes. I built a task force. Prosecutions are up by 68%. Kerry: Failure of prez leadership not to reauth. I am a hunter. (What did he say about bagging a 16-point buck? How many people have ever actually seen a 16-point buck??) I know something about prosecuting. Most law enforcement agencies wanted AWB. Drug bust in Iowa, guy had AK-47. Yeah, he ran out and picked it up week after ban expired. He didn't have it in his closet long before that, Senator. Would you be interested in buying some beach-front property in Florida, Senator? Terrorists can buy AW at gun shows. (Bush just said he supports background checks at gun shows, duh.) Good Kerry answer, stupid about the "I am a hunter" and the-old-shack-in-the-woods things, though.

Kerry ain't no hunter, and the NRA has backed Bush. When the Democrats get their heads out of their asses and stop treating the American public like a bunch of idiots ("No, really, I'm a hunter. See this photo of me [incorrectly] holding a shotgun [without ear or eye protection]?!?"), then perhaps they'll earn my confidence.

It's not that I'm very much "for" Bush, but I'm very much against Kerry. That runs opposite of the way many people think these days, but then again electoral-vote.com has Bush up 284 to 228 today.

18 Responses to "Assault Weapons Ban"

  1. Yah know, I didn't really think much of the 'assault weapons' ban, but building a straw man by putting words in Kerry's mouth goes a little over the line in my book. The way I see it, Kerry has used assault weapons in practice. He shot at and most likely killed people with them. He deserves better than to have words put in his mouth about firearm handling.

  2. There's no straw man, and nobody's putting words in anyone's mouth, Gary.

  3. "No, really, I'm a hunter. See this photo of me [incorrectly] holding a shotgun [without ear or eye protection]?!?"

    So, Kerry really said that? Or is that your generic Democratic Strawman?

  4. Gary, dude, c'mon. You're making yourself look silly here by taking that as an actual quote. Kerry has lied and said that he's a hunter. Kerry has posed for phony photos holding a shotgun (incorrectly and without ear or eye protection). Gun owners, hunters, and actual sportsmen aren't that stupid. I can't say the same for anyone who thought I was actually quoting anyone above…

  5. Anyway you slice it - pro-Bush, pro-Kerry, pro-guns, anti-guns - letting the assault weapons ban expire was a foolish and life-threatening move on Bush's part. No citizen has ever needed an AK. Period.

  6. Phil, that's a pretty stupid thing to say. It was neither foolish nor life-threatening.

    The Clinton Gun Ban was a stupid law that cost taxpayers money and did nothing to protect or in any way save lives. You're off your rocker (or painfully unaware of fact) if you think otherwise.

    Bush said he'd sign it if it got to him, but frankly, he had more important things to do than push Congress to renew a lame-ass law. Congress knew it was a piece of junk and didn't renew it.

  7. AKs are still banned. The automatic version since 1939 (I believe) and the semi-automatic version since 1989. The assault weapons ban of 1994 isn't the only act on the books restricting weapons.

  8. Or, rather, it wasn't the only law before it expired. The next person who complains about the expiration of the AWB law allowing people to use AK-47s blithely in the streets ought to have to spend the next week studying gun law history with an extension if they fail a hard test at the end.

  9. woah eric, ease off buddy. no need to get personal. Phil seems to have a different opinion on guns. This is an issue that people are split over. Do you really think it's that black and white?

  10. The AWB was a joke. It didn't ban them at all. All it caused was a slight modification in the way they worked. You could still go down to a gun shop and buy an AR-16. Plus, it didn't make any of of the pre-ban guns illegal. So if you open the paper or hit a gun show you could easily buy a pre-ban version.

    And some of the modifications where an even bigger joke. One of the biggies was that bayonet mounts were made illegal. How is that making us safer? I can honestly say I've never seen a bayonet charge by a group a criminals. But I do know a couple of collectors that had to modify their WW2 period pieces.

  11. Ryan, the name is Erik. I didn't get personal, and yes, the issue is that black and white: there are those who have educated themselves on the issue, and those who have not. The uneducated rely on false beliefs and heartstrings to make their case. They're also typically Democrats.

    The AWB was a stupid, stupid law that did nothing but cost taxpayers money.

  12. "Kerry ain't no hunter, and the NRA has backed Bush."

    Erik, there is certainly nothing new about that. As far as I know, the NRA has always backed Republican candidates - btw, it seems Charlton Heston is _still_ alive? Gotta love that shaking old man - also because I think his image is also kinda "virtual"... Why did your NRA choose him to represent them publicly - maybe because of the characters he played?

    Come on, Americans seem to like placative characters - Texas cowboy Bush, Kerry posing as a hunter in order to attract the gun fanatics among the voters, etc. Just look at all those debates - is that really more than one big fake? Aren't the two of them just trying to show off what people want to see? I hear some people still believe in the economic competence of the current president despite the fact that his record deficit is reaching historical dimensions. Ain't it funny? I could laugh my ass off about this entire show if it wouldn't have such a great impact on the rest of the world. The majority of the USA's longtime allies want to see Bush disappear - he's dangerous, but they can only sit and wait for this tragedy to end.

  13. But I do know a couple of collectors that had to modify their WW2 period pieces.

    You may want to advise those collectors to actually read the law then, since they were complying with non-existent requirements (HR 3355 for your reference):

    (B) a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to accept a detachable magazine and has at least 2 of--

    (i) a folding or telescoping stock;

    (ii) a pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;

    (iii) a bayonet mount;

    (iv) a flash suppressor or threaded barrel designed to accommodate a flash suppressor; and

    (v) a grenade launcher;

    I'm not aware of any WW 2 period pieces that have the ability to accept both bayonet mounts and flash suppressors or grenade launchers. Of course, that aside, the law didn't apply to antique firearms in the first place. I know NRA people like to spread the WW 2 collectors myth but it is legally incorrect.

  14. Responding to Phil by calling his comments "stupid" isn't a personal attack?

    And then you follow up by saying all those in favor of the ban are "uneducated" and "rely on false beliefs". I think there are better ways to get your point across. In fact all you've said so far is that it's stupid, I think that makes it easy for people to dismiss you.

    A question: Is it possible to be pro second amendment but antigun?

  15. I didn't call Phil stupid, I called his comment stupid. There's a big difference.

    Yes, it's possible to be pro second amendment and anti-gun. Just so long as you're only anti-gun for yourself, and not for everyone else in the country.

  16. Erik, jesus, dude, do you attack everyone who disagrees with you? Presumably using assault weapons if they're available?

  17. No, I don't. Do you have anything of substance to bring to the discussion, or are you just looking to call people names without leaving a real one of your own?


Trackback URI | Comments RSS

Leave a Reply

Please abide by the comment policy. Valid HTML includes: <blockquote><p>, <em>, <strong>, <ul>, <ol>, and <a href>. Please use the "Quote Me" functionality to quote comments.