Forget the idea of an assault weapon ban. UBCs are the way to go.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

First, any AWB is predicated on being able to define an assault weapon. The time and political capital expended in negotiating that definition is better spent elsewhere.

Second, any legislation named, containing the words or identified as equivalent to an AWB will be fought against long and hard by almost every Republican and almost every pro-gun lobbying organization.

Third, which I consider most important, attempts at an AWB will perpetuate the idea that such a thing as an "assault weapon" actually exists. This will also convince those against such a ban to focus, in contributions, efforts and media, on the defeat of those Democrats most vulnerable who are in favor of it. This would also rally any friendly anti-gun folks and give them hope that a federal AWB was possible.

Just a reminder of the 1994 efforts:

Those in favor of the measure were able to secure the votes they needed by letting the people who already owned these weapons keep them. There was also the "sunset provision" that was accepted by sponsors of the bill. Even with these provisions, the bill was passed in the Senate with a slim majority of 52 votes before being signed by President Bill Clinton.

After the ban was put in place, there was a large increase in the prison population, which disproportionately affected African Americans. This fact, along with some higher taxes, a House banking scandal, and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), were some problems that the Democrats were facing. In the elections which followed, the Republicans gained control of the Senate and the House. Republicans had not had control of the House in 40 years.

There is now a bipartisan precedent for cooperation on meaningful legislation. H.R.7910 - "Protecting Our Kids Act" made a difference. A further accomplishment that would also make a difference would be to enable Universal Background Checks (UBCs).

[Martin68]

1. I agree that the impossibility of defining assault weapons in a meaningful and effective way makes

it a huge stumbling block to banning assault weapons. I personally would support a ban of ALL semi-automatic weapons of any kind for public use. In my opinion, revolvers and bolt-action, lever action, or pump action weapons are just as effective for home defense or hunting, but slow enough to significantly lower the damage a mass shooter can inflict. That would end the debate over what size clips/magazines to allow.

I agree that UBC should be our primary focus.

[AndyS]

2. Yes! We agree that an assault weapon ban based on some definition

can't be done. Gunners are endlessly creative when it comes to minutea. As you said, ban all semi autos with removeable magazines. Ban the thing that is leathal not some unicorn.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

3. Excellent idea!

Since it's been demonstrably impossible and agreed as unwise to try banning "assault weapons", which are a fraction of the overall family of semi-autos, let's ban the whole group, all semi-autos. Semi-autos account for about half of all guns sold today. Excellent idea!

[AndyS]

4. Yeah and we're supposed to listen to all that shit like it's a force of nature

or an immutable law of the cosmos.

BULLSHIT.

For 30 years no progress on gun violence was made at all. Then we got fucking tired of it, we marched, we made a stink and suddenly Mitch McConnell said to Cornyn, "Offer some kind of stop gap to make 'em happy enough to shut up."

No way I'm being complaint and I'm not shutting up. We have asked for 'reasonable' and 'common sense' solutions for too long. Fuck it. Make THEM compromise with us.

If we don't ask we get nothing. Ask for everything and negotiate down. Those gun hugging fuckers have had it all to themselves for too long.

🖕

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

5. Maybe you missed it, UBCs were kind of the point.

As you were.

[AndyS]

6. No. UBCs were YOUR point. Not THE point. THE point is reducing gun violence. That means

reducing the shear number of guns. Period.

MY point is fuck letting somebody else set the agenda. Fuck letting somebody else set the bar. Fuck taking the offerings.

Take our point and shove it up the asses of all those who have had the playing field to themselves for the last 50 years.

We are mad. We have had a taste of Mitch McConnell's fear. There is softness there and now is the time to push as hard as we can. Get all we can, not what some dimwit gunner (not a personal comment, editorial) has finally decided to give up out of weakness.

If you don't ask, you won't get. Ask, no DEMAND, it all and negotiate down.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

7. Pure negotiating wisdom. Getaway car...

By all means ask. Ask for anything. I mean you're not in the legislative department store where all the possible laws have fixed compromises (prices) attached to them. This is horse trading. The only real deal breaker is when ask for the moon and the other side takes that as an insult and stops talking.

Considering a semi-auto ban, now is that a "ban on new sales" or a "turn 'em in or go to jail ban"?
Between you and me, I'd ask for the letter "M".

[AndyS]

8. Oh, we can't get that. Lets just plead with the gunners, May I have more Sir?

Australia did it. I'd follow that lead.

"Oh but nobody would really turn their guns in! Nobody knows they have them, there's no registry!"

Here's the deal: all those guns fall into three categories, 1) they are surrendered (for recompense). 2) they aren't turned in but show up at a crime scene and are destroyed never to harm another. 3) They are hidden in the bottom of the closet and harm nobody until the owner dies and they are either surrendered because the heirs aren't interested in them or they revert to #2 or stay in the closet.

Reduce the number of guns and you reduce gun violence. You save lives.

[oneshooter]

9. Will that also work with automobiles?

They kill a LOT more "innocent people" than all guns combined.

[AndyS]

10. It has already worked. Guns kill more people every year than cars

and there are hundreds of times more cars than guns. Have you not been paying attention? Guns surpassed cars in deaths last year and the numbers for guns are still growing while the numbers for cars are still shrinking.

[Kaleva]

17. There are about 230 million registered vehicles in the US

Last edited Sun Jul 17, 2022, 06:55 AM - Edit history (1)

and close to an estimated 400 million civilian owned guns in this country.

[AndyS]

18. That's just fucked up . . .

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

11. "Yeah, Ramon, that'll happen." - Romy White

If ye love (well anything) better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen. ― Samuel Adams (sort of)

Benjamin Franklin said: Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

Somethings deal makers know:
You've got to be able to walk away. Point pro-gun.
Never give the first number. Point pro-gun.
Never have a harsh negotiation.

[Hangingon]

12. See why negotiations are futile?

It always ends in the old “that’s a good start, but we must get rid of guns”.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

13. Well yeah.

Not much point.

[Paladin]

14. Great. Let's just keep screaming at each other, as always.

I'll just say a few prayers that none of my grandchildren end up as lifeless sacks of flesh in the next few hundred mass school shootings in this country.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

15. How are you feeling about UBCs?

I'm good with them.

[yagotme]

19. From the BBC, 2018:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-44105129

# of guns increasing, gun owners decreasing.

"Reduce the number of guns and you reduce gun violence. You save lives."

Obviously, Australians aren't following your overall plan.

[Kaleva]

16. Years ago, I proposed a method to define based on the cartridge and not the gun itself

If the cartridge fell within a certain range of specs, any semi auto
long gun that used detachable magazines that was chambered to fire such a round would be classified as an assault weapon. The color of the gun or if it had any so-called military features would be irrelevant.