Proposed Assault Vehicle Ban

[OpSomBlood]

I was wondering how you guys felt about this new law that is being debated in Congress.

As a result of the senseless deaths caused by people who irresponsibly operate "military-style" SUVs, the "Assault Vehicle Ban" bill has been written.

This ban would make certain features on "military-style" vehicles illegal, such as:

- Puncture-resistant or auto-inflating tires which allow drivers to evade police spike strips.
- Large-capacity fuel tanks which make it possible for police chases to last longer.
- Four-wheel drive which allows police chases to be taken off the road.
- Brush guards which turn these vehicles into lethal battering rams.

These features make it possible for a criminal to cause catastrophic damage and evade police. What would a law-abiding citizen need these features for? They are clearly intended for military use only.

[FeebMaster]

1. I would support such legislation whole-heartedly.

It's time we show the corrupt car industry who's boss.

[OpSomBlood]

5. Absolutely.

The manufacturers of these assault vehicles need to take full responsibility for what criminals decide to do with them. I think that this bill will make our communities safer by taking these lethal military-style assault vehicles off the streets.

They were specifically designed for military use only! Civilians have no use for them!

[Gun Run Guy]

59. I see that someone...

likes to poke tongue-in-cheek humor at the Assault Weapons Ban ;)

[Wickerman]

2. Got a link?

Surely you jest - Congress, taking on a cash cow issue like this?

[FeebMaster]

3. Link?

That's just car porn details.

[BlueEyedSon]

4. I have 4 wheel drive on my soccer-mom station wagon....

am I an outlaw?

[flaminlib]

6. Hold on to your hats

Some nut jobs might just pick up on this and make it happen.

[BlueEyedSon]

8. Are you kidding, its a great idea

Splain me this:

Rich guy gets to WRITE off an SUV because it is classified as a truck. It can have crappy gas mileage and emission controls, for the same reason.

So why can he drive wherever he wants?

I say confine him to expressways, truck lanes and make him pay the higher truck tolls.

[OpSomBlood]

9. No, just ban them outright.

They are designed to kill people more lethally than regular SUVs. They serve no other purpose. Only the military should have vehicles that are capable of killing people so lethally.

[NoPasaran]

17. I concur

I hope Congress would consider legislation to require new SUVs be limited to those which kill people in a non-lethal manner.

[OpSomBlood]

18. Not SUVs...assault vehicles. Get it right.

Civilians just don't need this kind of extra-lethal killing power.

[NoPasaran]

21. I stand corrected

Ordinary lethality is good enough for this civilian.

[demsrule4life]

36. If you want to drive one

join the Army.

[OpSomBlood]

7. Can you pick the "assault vehicle"?

Just look at how the scumbag assault vehicle manufacturers are trying to circumvent this law:

[flaminlib]

12. tic tock, tic tock

waiting for the light bulb to go, somewhere :think:

[Superfly]

10. Can we grandfather my SUV?

It's on its last legs, anyways...

[TX-RAT]

24. If you can , I can

52 Willis truck
Hasn't been off the place in 8 years, just use it to haul feed and water.

[ConcernedCanuk]

11. Found 2 links

.
.
.

http://www.mnccrn.org/ptop/avban.html

Proposal: Ban assault vehicles

An assault vehicle is a vehicle which by its appearance and capabilities inspires the driver to behave as if the nation's highways were competitive racetracks. The following are dangerous assault vehicles and should be banned from production and importation:

1. Lamborgini Countach
2. Ferarri Testarossa
3. Toyota MR2
4. Chevrolet Corvette
5. Mazda Miata
6. Mercury Capri
7. Pontiac Fiero
8. BWM 735i
9. Acura Integra
10. Nissan 300ZX
11. Chevrolet Camero
12. Mazda RX7
13. Plymouth Laser
14. Dodge Viper
15. Dodge Stealth
16. Ford Mustang
17. Ford Probe
18. Honda CRX
19. Jaguar XJE

Also to be banned are any look-alikes of the listed vehicles as well as any vehicles possessing one or more of the following characteristics:

1. Capable of speeds over 70 mph
2. Ground effects
3. Dual exhausts
4. Performance tires
5. Limited to dual seats
6. Aerodynamic devices that protrude conspicuously from the rear of the vehicle
_____________________________________________________________

http://www.shalomjerusalem.com/funny/funny10.htm

With the tragic and senseless automoble-caused death of Princess Diana, ACI, the newly formed Automobile Control, Inc., herewith launches it's campaign to ban automobiles capable of exceeding 70 MPH. These automobiles shall heretofore be referred to in the mass media as "Assault Vehicles".

These assault vehicles are responsible for the needless deaths of thousands of innocent Americans each year -- far more in a single year than all the victims of gunshots in the past ten years! There is no reason for anyone to own a vehicle that is capable of exceeding the legal speed limit in America, except for those elite and highly trained members of our Emergency Response Agencies and registered race car drivers while operating their vehicles exclusively on a registered race track.
______________________________________________________________

Nice try!:hi:

.

[OpSomBlood]

13. I agree.

These are all assault vehicles and should be banned. If the speed limit is 70 MPH, then there's no reason to have a car that is capable of going 75.

If you're not a violent reckless criminal, then this ban won't affect you. You shouldn't be driving 75 anyway.

[Superfly]

14. Nobody *needs* to drive 70 mph

[OpSomBlood]

16. Strengthen the AVB.

In fact, I think the AVB should be strengthened. Nobody really needs their own vehicle anyway. Our government provides great public transportation that will get us where we need to go.

[slackmaster]

15. I think 80 would be a more appropriate upper speed limit

I believe that's the speed limit on the Kansas Turnpike and a few other special, though public, highways.

[Maurkov]

22. I expected as much from the gasoline for brains crowd (n/t)

[DavidMS]

26. Got a few more to add...

"Nitro" systems
Tinted windows
Performance suspentions
Gets under 25 MPG (City).

[slackmaster]

38. You've all forgotten the most DASTARDLY of all!

Rotating Wheel Covers.

[OpSomBlood]

39. Yes.

I'm in favor of requiring bling suppressors on all such assault vehicles.

[hangar18]

19. Good plan, you need some modifications though

- You need to add pistol-grip style 4x4 shift levers to part of the ban
- You need to change the name to high-capacity fuel tanks
- You need to make sure to keep the cheap SUV's off the street altogether, such as well-used Jeep Cherokees and Chevy Blazers.

[OpSomBlood]

20. Ban the pistol grips...

...but only if they protrude conspicuously from the vehicle's frame.

[OpSomBlood]

23. Nay-sayers.

Some claim that this ban wouldn't make much of a difference because assault vehicles (called "SUVs" by the gasoline for brains crowd) only account for anout 8% of the cars on the road.

This means our work is almost done! Once we rid the roads of this extra-lethal menace, we can move on to banning assault personnel carriers (also known as "minivans").

[FeebMaster]

25. Wow, you're good at this.

You should run for Congress.

[billbuckhead]

27. Reality check about guns. What about the required insurance? Higher taxes?

It's long past due that gun owners pay for the mayhem their weapons cause society boith in terms of insurance and user fees for gun violence. Lioke gunners should kick in for the county hospital's costs for treating gunshot victims and police hazardous duty pay.

[FeebMaster]

28. What the hell are you talking about?

We're talking about cars here.

[OpSomBlood]

29. Not cars. Assault vehicles.

We have to keep repeating this so that the mainstream starts calling them that, too.

[FeebMaster]

30. I was just speaking in general terms.

Assault vehicles are after all a subset of cars, just a more lethal subset.

[slackmaster]

31. I asked my insurance company about that

Whether they would charge me higher premiums for my liability coverage because I own guns. They didn't care, nor do they offer a gun-free home discount.

They said that if my gun collection ever becomes worth more than a certain amount I should catalog it and get a policy rider (at a small extra premium) to ensure that they are fully covered in case of loss from fire, theft, flood, etc.

Lioke gunners should kick in for the county hospital's costs for treating gunshot victims and police hazardous duty pay.

Gunshot victims suffer from the effects of violent crime, not from MY gun ownership. I don't mind paying higher property taxes so everyone else's kids can get an education, but I will not be responsible for misdeeds of violent criminals.

[MrSandman]

32. Hey, I already pay insurance premiums...

To cover my negligience. Firearms, auto, property, professional, et al.

I do not stand responsible for the actions of others.

[OpSomBlood]

33. Oh, but you're wrong!

The people most responsible for your actions are the ones who manufacture the items you own. Didn't you know that?

After all, if you grind your hand up by sticking it into a blender, shouldn't you be able to sue the blender manufacturer? Their product caused the injury!

The same goes for assault vehicles. If someone drives one of these extra-lethal military-style vehicles over a pedestrian, the one at fault is obviously the scumbag manufacturer of the vehicle.

[MrSandman]

34. Then, I revise and amend my statement:

"I do not stand responsible for the actions of others."
to
I do not stand responsible for the actions of myself or others.(including grammar)

[OpSomBlood]

35. But never fear...

We always have the government to protect us from ourselves!

[demsrule4life]

37. Cops dont get Hazardous duty pay

they get paid for shit.

[name not needed]

40. This is stupid

Assault vehicles? Banning vehicles that go over 75 mph? Have you people gone nuts? This is why I hate it in here.

[FeebMaster]

41. These vehicles are a threat to society.

What need could a regular citizen possibly have for one of these death machines?

[name not needed]

42. Define "death machine" clearly

[FeebMaster]

43. That's just car porn details. (nt)

[name not needed]

44. Answer the fucking question.

I'm sick of some of the people in here dodging them.

[FeebMaster]

45. Been there, done that.

Actually I don't want to ban assault vehicles, whatever they might be. This thread is a hilariously good parody of the whole assault weapons ban argument. I thought I'd argue the authoritarian side for a change, but I don't want you to flip out and start getting posts deleted or anything. There'd be nothing funny about that.

[name not needed]

46. Oh ok.

[CO Liberal]

47. A Basic Debate Primer for OpSomBlood

These are apples.


Thhese are oranges.



Make sure you know the difference.....

:-)

[OpSomBlood]

48. Okay...

So explain to me how a semi-automatic hunting rifle is different from a semi-automatic "assault" rifle.

Since we're doing comparative studies on fruits now.

[CO Liberal]

49. You're The One Who Started the Illogical Comparison....

...with the old "guns vs. cars" ploy the pro-gunners drag out from time to time.

AFAIK, any weapon designed to shoot as fast as possible needs to be controlled. Whether its a so-called "hunting" rifle or a so-called "assault" rifle.

Bear in mind that when they're in the wrong hands, hunting rifles can also be used to hunt people.

[OpSomBlood]

50. Semi-automatic is not "as fast as possible".

Again, the faulty assertion that "assault weapons" somehow fire faster than "conventional" firearms.

The AWB deals only with semi-auto rifles which resemble their military counterparts. Semi-auto means one shot per trigger pull.

The exact same rate of fire as any other semi-auto. To call semi-auto "as fast as possible" demostrates a lack of knowledge on the topic.

[CO Liberal]

51. Not Lack of Knowledge -- Just a Lack of Interest

I have far better things to do with my life than to obsess over inanimate objects......

[OpSomBlood]

52. If you don't know or care about the topic being discussed...

...then perhaps you should spectate and maybe you'd learn a thing or two. But don't dispense false anti-gun propaganda then say, "well, it's not like I care about it anyway."

"Assault weapons" as defined by the 1994 AWB do not fire faster than any other semi-automatic firearm. It is patently false to even suggest that they do.

[CO Liberal]

53. Then Answer Me This:

Why are some of you you pro-gunners so excited about the ban being lifted???? If the banned guns aren't that different, why do so many pro-gunners act like they can't wait to get their grubby little paws on them? :shrug:

[OpSomBlood]

54. You can use that logic for other things too...

...like this faux "assault vehicle" debate:

"If Hummers are just like other vehicles, then why do people want them so bad?"

"Because they are Hummers."

If the government is going to ban something for the sake of public safety, the onus is on them to present evidence as to why they are a menace to the public. The onus is not on the law-abiding citizen to justify why they want to own them.

I still have not yet heard a convincing argument on why semi-auto rifles are more lethal than any other semi-auto firearm (i.e., why rifles should be banned but pistols legal). And that is the matter at hand...what was the statistical jusitification for passing the AWB?

Or is the argument that all semi-auto firearms should be banned? And if so, why now instead of 100 years ago when they were first developed?

[MrSandman]

57. I don't ever plan to have an AW...

As currently defined.

Since there is no difference other than cosmetics between AWs and other semi's, I view the AWB is the camel's nose, so to speak.

[MrSandman]

60. If the ban is not effective...

To renew it would be equivalent to saying, "Even though it doesn't affect crime, we agree that banning weapons is an intrinsically good thing to do."

[DoNotRefill]

55. "guns vs. cars" ploy the pro-gunners drag out from time to time"

Ah. So, the anti gunners never drag out this ploy? What about the "you register your car, you should register your guns" crowd?

I guess it pinches when the shoe is on the other foot, eh?

[CO Liberal]

56. The Pro-Gunners Use Apples & Oranges So Often.....

...they should sell produce.

[MrSandman]

58. Urban assault vehicle loophole for...

CAFE standards and "luxury items" taxes.