As a not very pro-gun person... I would like to declare the AWB..

[Endangered Specie]

useless, one of the most dumbest pieces of legislation Ive seen in some time.

It does pratically nothing to curtail weapons, as a matter of fact it HURTS the gun control advocates cause, it is a distraction, people, because of the name think it actually does what the title says... just like the Patriot Act :eyes:


just my

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

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

[Endangered Specie]

4. Would you prefer to discuss/debate, instead of just poke insults?

[OpSomBlood]

8. And that, my friends, is the funniest joke of the week.

Congrats, ES.

[MrBenchley]

9. Why?

Clearly you've already made your mind up...so I'll just comfort myself with the FACT that the Democratic candidates, most elected Democrats, most liberal pundits and writers, and 70% of the voters want it renewed...and that the folks opposed are mostly fuckwits like the Aryan Nation and Tom deLay.

enjoy your playmates.

[mstrsplinter326]

15. What's right is not always popular, what's popular is not always right.

And characterizing your political opponets as fuckwits and racists makes you seem extremely undereducated with not an iota of restraint or decency. Again - hurting your own cause.

70% of voters = less than 31 percent of the American population.

Add:
Bills like these are like treating AIDS with Dimatap.

[MrBenchley]

17. And what's both wrong and unpopular

is assault weapons in the hands of every thug and nutcase who can wander into a gun store.

"And characterizing your political opponets as fuckwits and racists makes you seem extremely undereducated"
Gee, can't think of a better way to characterize Tom DeLay or Larry Craig, or the members of the Second Amendment Caucus.

[Endangered Specie]

24. even with AWB, you can STILL get an assult weapon

so long as it doesnt have a fancy stock or something. You can still get a semi auto AR15 or TEC-DC9 with plenty of ammo and large magazines legally under the bill.

[slackmaster]

26. A little more data FYI

Converting a post-ban firearm to an "AW" configuration is generally very simple. None of the parts that define an AW - Folding stocks, bayonet mounts, etc. - are controlled or regulated in any way. They're just parts, available by mail order or at gun shows or sporting goods stores.

Although (at least until September 13) it is a serious crime to do so, there is nothing in place to physically stop people from making illegal AWs or even detect people who might intend to. That makes the law very difficult to enforce.

[Endangered Specie]

27. even if it could be enforced...

what good does not being allowed a bayonet lug have (I aint heard of any bayonet killings lately)

or a telescoping stock... Im sure people arent gonna stop shooting if the stock isnt in the most comforatble position.

WHy not regulate things like SCOPES! or special sights, or recoil reducers.

[slackmaster]

28. Hunters and/or target shooters use scopes and recoil reducers

You previously mentioned weights to reduce recoil. Those are very common on rifles configured for competitive shooting, as are high-quality optical sights.

Here in California we have a law banning "sniper scopes", defined as an infrared night vision scope with an on-board illuminator. If you have such a scope that's designed to be mounted on a firearm it's illegal. It sort of makes sense because night hunting is generally banned here, but even the "sniper scope" law has an exception for scientific or educational purposes.

As you know we have a lot of navigable waters and commercial and recreational boating in California. 37 millimeter launchers, similar in operation to shotguns, are legal as signalling devices whereas normally they would be considered destructive devices (e.g. 40 mm grenade launchers used by police and military.) Once again such a device is illegal IF it's designed to be mounted on a firearm.

[Endangered Specie]

16. You are clearly avoiding a civilized discussion...

your emotional rhetoric is like a parallel of "from my cold dead hands" NRA folk.

Most elected democrats voted for the USA patiot act, and I wouldnt be suprised if 50, 60% of voters want it renewed.

Have you read the bill? I was originally for it before another DUer convinced me to actually read the damn thing.

[MrBenchley]

18. Tee hee hee...

"your emotional rhetoric is like a parallel of "from my cold dead hands" NRA folk"
You're kidding?!? Well what could possibly be wrong with that...after all, they're the folks pimping for assault weapons at the top of their rancid lungs.

"Have you read the bill?"
The AWB? Yeah, I have....and I'm all for it.

[Endangered Specie]

20. Take this test...

Id hope youd agree with me that ALL the weapons probably should be banned, not just a select few on very shaky criteria.

http://www.ont.com/users/kolya/AR15/awc.htm

[MrBenchley]

21. Oh, I see....

So you want the AWB to be stricter...is that it?

[Endangered Specie]

22. YES

very much so.

I call it stupid and useless becaus it bans some guns but completely misses others that are just as deadly, if not more so!

People think it makes them safer, but it really doesnt, it doesnt need renewing, it needs some serious rewriting, it has NO teeth!

[slackmaster]

23. Kudos to you for basing your opinion on real information

Rather than propaganda.

FWIW I disagree with you, but I do respect you for taking the time to study the real issue.

[Endangered Specie]

25. Thank you...

just trying to have a real discussion not based on emotion and dressing or who can say "fuck(er)( you)( off)( ing idiot)(...)" the best.

Some people will hurl insults at you for even the slightest misstep, even if your really on their side. (Friendly-fire)

[MrBenchley]

29. And isn't it swell to see how the gun lobby

is lying down to let us write those laws?

[mstrsplinter326]

30. You seem educated and reasonable

And I don't mean to incite you, but aren't weapon bans likened to treating malaria with tylenol?

It seems to me that countries with similar gun laws (or lack thereof) don't shoot each other the way we do.

Considering how much violent tendencies seem to be a problem in this country AND the black market that would arise from any serious weapon ban (which would only increase crime), shouldn't we address the violence first or at least at the same time?

I know what Mr.Benchley would say, that all he cares about is the Ban and it's my (or somebody elses) job to work on a long term, comprensive solution. And he'd say I am a bad person because I don't support this ban in favor of working toward a solution.

But with the lack of focus on the issue of how poorly americans treat each other on a daily individual level, aren't bans essentially irrelevent and possibly harmful?

[mstrsplinter326]

2. Agree, hurts dems by giving the NRA ammo against us

Pun intended.

[OpSomBlood]

3. Dems need to drop the "Assault Weapon" non-issue...

...and get on with the business of winning elections. I strongly believe that the impression of the Democratic party as the "anti-gun" one is really hurting us with voters in the middle.

Given a choice between someone you disagree with and someone who wants to take your rights away, people generally pick the former.

[FeebMaster]

5. It sure does hurt gun control advocates.

That's fine with me, though. As long as they're wasting money and time fighting for the AWB they aren't getting anything else passed either. Guess we'll all have to rely on the Republicans to give us more gun control.


If you want another law with a great name, probably the best ever before the patriot act, try the Firearms Owners' Protection Act of 1986. That's the one where Reagan banned the future civilian production of machine guns. Now that was some gun control.

[Endangered Specie]

6. Now that is a piece of legislation

I feel odd for saying this, but now I may have found something I liked about Reagan.

[FeebMaster]

7. He also banned the carrying of weapons while he

was governor of California. The Republicans all think he was some pro-gun Christ figure though.

[noahmijo]

10. As a pretty pro-gun person

I've always said before trying to pass more laws that we can't uphold, let's try upholding the laws that we already have.

[el_gato]

11. Sadly it was the gun control issue that cost Gore Tennessee

If it wasn't for this loser issue Gore would be our president right
now and we wouldn't be involved in an imperial death match with every other nations on Earth.

[MrBenchley]

12. Good thing your playmates in the gun lobby

lied their butts off, eh, gato.

Some swell pals our "pro gun democrats" have.

[el_gato]

14. too bad your big issue has cost us so much

Gun control has cost the democratic party way too much and
it's time to leave it behind.

[Romulus]

13. background please?

You just dive-bombed down here in the Dungeon with this provocative thread-starter, but some of us want more info on WHY you came to this conclusion . . .:shrug:

[Endangered Specie]

19. I read the bill.

And discussed it in GD
(Ive been lurking in the Gungeon and occasionally posting)

The bill doesnt even have to do with true "assault" weapons. It targets (no pun) semi auto rifles pistols and shotguns and makes them illegal if they have more than 1 of several characteristics.

The problem is, most of those characteristcs are really inconsequential, a semi-auto AR15 will be equally deadly with or without a folding stock or bayonet holder.

Even worse, the bill doesnt address some gun qualities and add ons that DO matter, like scopes or recoil reducing 'weights' added to the barrel, and special sights.

Also, Firearms manufactured and owned prior to the ban are still legal if you can prove to the ATF that the gun was built as an assault rifle prior to 1994. After 1994, no more assault weapons (as defined) can be manufactured.