Support for semi-auto ban now featured on whitehouse.gov website

[derby378]

Uh-oh.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/urban_policy/

Address Gun Violence in Cities: Obama and Biden would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law enforcement to access important gun trace information, and give police officers across the nation the tools they need to solve gun crimes and fight the illegal arms trade. Obama and Biden also favor commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals. They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent.

[mzteris]

1. 'bout damn time

. . . Obama and Biden also favor commonsense measures. . .


Common sense, there's a breath of fresh air.

[krispos42]

4. As we've learned from the Bush Administration

Simply calling something a positive adjective doesn't make it so. In fact, it can and often is used to deceive. See "The Greatest Story Ever Sold" for details.

"Common sense" on this issue is extremely subjective.

[friendly_iconoclast]

15. We've had 8 years of 'commonsense' and UNCONSTITUTIONAL laws

Little gems like the Patriot Acts and the Military Commisions Act.

I say: No Mas!

YOU may have been buffaloed into believing Constitutional rights are fungible
when 'necessary' for 'safety', but *I* sure as hell haven't- and neither have a lot of other people.

[mzteris]

21. if you think the last 8 years had

one iota of commonsense, I sincerely doubt your opinion on much of anything.

You don't need an assault weapon to go hunting. Unless you're a damn poor shot, of course.

[X_Digger]

23. Right to Keep and Bear Arms (RKBA)..

.. isn't about hunting. Where does one find hunting in the 2nd amendment?

[jmg257]

30. So then it is just about Militias? Careful now, as the 2nd is about a few things,

and I think hunting would be inferred, as in "the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and their own state, or the United States, or for the purpose of killing game,...".

On a side note, it gets really interesting with regards to "reasonable restrictions" that the rest of this recommendation from the Pennsylvania Minority Convention continues "...and no law shall be passed for disarming the people or any of them, unless for crimes committed, or real danger of public injury from individuals." Hmmm...of course this is NOT what it says in the 2nd, but...


Anyway, so no, the 2nd "isn't about hunting", it is primarily about Militia service, but "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" was not secured for that reason alone, or for defense alone - but for all lawful purposes. Of course when discussing ownership in light of the 2nd amendment, & especially when considering the militia purpose, the "need for an "assault weapon" for hunting" is trivial.

Which is cool - 'cause I don't hunt any more (though I have used an Ar-15 to shoot woodchucks in a buddy's orchard way back when, a nice bolt action would have wprked fine too, but I didn't have one then in an appropraite caliber).

[X_Digger]

38. True..

My reply was just a quick one to wipe out the 'hunting' = RKBA meme. Only 1 in 5 gun owners hunts, so it's not even the most prevalent legal use of a firearm.

[jmg257]

41. Understood! ;) nt

[friendly_iconoclast]

26. Nothing 'commonsense' about violating the Constitution

And it doesn't smell any better when it is tried by, and gets supported by, some Democrats.

Claiming to do so for 'public safety' reasons is of course the same bullshit that
the Bush administration peddled to get *their* un-Constitutional laws passed.

[friendly_iconoclast]

27. Restricting speech to movable type, public speaking, or handwriting is only commonsense

You don't need Internet access or other electronic media to express yourself.
Unless you're a damn poor speaker, of course.

[mzteris]

28. so I guess you're sayin'

you can't hit the broadside of a barn with the doors closed and you inside, eh?

Thought so.

[jeepnstein]

29. I hit where I aim...

It's none of your business what I own or shoot as long as I'm not committing crimes with it. Why is that so difficult to understand? Lawful citizens exercising their Constitutional Rights are not the problem here.

[friendly_iconoclast]

32. You'd be wrong. The last time I went rifle shooting I was pretty good

And the (current) Constitutional standard for suitability "to keep and bear" is "common usage", BTW-
not hunting. You *did* know that there's no mention of 'hunting' or 'sporting'
in the Second Amendment, right?

So how are you going to 'nullify' the Heller decision?
If incorporation makes it to the Supreme Court and wins, your AWB is toast.

Added on edit: And WHY do you think it's OK to fuck with people's Constitutional
rights for a purportedly 'good' reason? I didn't buy it from Bush, and I won't
buy it from Obama.

[benEzra]

40. You realize you're talking about the most popular civilian target rifles in the United States?

And that more Americans own them than hunt?

You've been spun, and badly.

Dems and the Gun Issue - Now What? (written in '04, largely vindicated in '06, IMO)

[rl6214]

46. I can put a 5 round magazine

into my "assault weapon" to go hunting. It does NOT have to have a 30 rd magazine. It is light weight, durable and VERY accurate for hunting small game and predator animals.

[DrCory]

61. Perhaps you should re-read the post...

If you still believe the OP is suggesting such a thing:

"if you think the last 8 years had one iota of commonsense"

Might I suggest you look this fellow up, perhaps he can help. Oh, and don't panic, it's just a model.

[f the letter]

69. That's not how rights work:

It's not the citizen's duty to explain their need to exercise their right. It is the duty of those who would abridge them to explain their need to throw the Constitution out. So whether or not i need my "assault rifle" (Can we at least agree that this term is ridiculous? What is an 'assault' weapon??) to hunt, i have the Constitutionally protected right to own it.

[jmg257]

35. Why would you consider banning 'assault weapons' common sense? nt

[benEzra]

39. So, how'd that work out in 1994?

Given that only 3% of U.S. murders involve ANY type of rifle, wasting immense amounts of political capital trying to outlaw rifle handgrips that stick out is wrongheaded and counterproductive, particularly when the rifles affected are the most popular civilian rifles in America.

Not "commonsense" at all.

[rl6214]

45. In his inauguration speach yesterday

He said he would not trample on the constitution like has been done in the past. Why, in your eyes is it OK to trample on this part of the constitution? Just because YOU are anti gun? "The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." You can't pick and choose which part of the constitution we will abide by.

[slackmaster]

47. Appeal to "common sense" is just a chickenshit way of saying anyone who disagrees is not sensible

How about providing something more substantial to support your position?

[DrCory]

60. Who Defines Common Sense? N/T

[Ganja Ninja]

2. It doesn't say they want to ban Semi-Autos

just Assault Weapons.

[derby378]

3. So what's an "assault weapon?"

I have yet to see a concise, technical definition for the term. And believe me, I've looked.

[thetoad45]

8. Blame the causes, not the gun.

I own a few guns. I am a hunter as are a lot of people. I have noticed that since it was announced that Mr. Obama would be the next president the gun stores have emptied their stock. Most are back ordered for months. Even the racks of old crappy SKS and AK rifles are gone. There is a frantic fear among gun owners that the Democratic Party will ban not just Assault Weapons but eventually all firearms. The argument that disarming America will solve the crime problem is ridiculous. One has only to look at cities such as Chicago. When Australia banned some forms of weapons, crimes against the elderly jumped over 100%. England and Canada have more violent crime per capita than the USA and they both have very restrictive gun laws. I live in an "Open Carry" state. I can put my gun on my hip and walk down the street. I have seen people wearing their guns while shopping in Walmart. I don't fear my neighbors. I fear the drug dealers, crack heads and the massive influx of crime that comes across the Southern Border. While I see no need for anyone to own an "Assault Weapon" I fear what will happen when the government feels that it knows better than I about how to defend my home and family. My brother has been a policeman for 30 years. He does not blame guns for crime but rather the underlying causes which contribute to crime. Poverty, drugs, loss of moral and family values, and so on. This is what we should be dealing with. When I was a teenager I could lose count of the number of rifles and shotguns in the racks of my fellow students vehicles in the school parking lot. I could bring a knife to school. It was quite common. Every boy had a pocket knife. Nobody was shot or stabbed. I believe that people need to re-evaluate the underlying causes instead of just blaming the tool. Some cracks in the UK are trying to propose that all knives in that country be sold with round tips as too many people are being stabbed. As the country/world teeters on financial collapse, thanks for the most part to the "globalization" policies of Mr. Bush, I plan to keep my guns and perhaps buy a couple more. Thank you...

[derby378]

10. While you may see no need for me to own an AK...

...if you do not wish for my owning one to be criminalized, it's all good.

And yes, we definitely need to take a look at root causes of violent crime in America. Here in Dallas, we've been able to produce a sharp drop in violent crime overall in the past year. Aggravated assault is down 20%. Murder is down at least 10%. And none of it required any new state or municipal gun laws - just an increased community policing initiative.

Welcome to DU! :hi:

[iverglas]

13. wow

My head's a-spinnin! So many talking points crammed into one paragraph.

When Australia banned some forms of weapons, crimes against the elderly jumped over 100%.

Really? Where did you read that? Will you not cite your source? How about giving your interpretation of the relationship between these (alleged) facts?

Did all the old folks in Australia own guns before, and now they've turned them all in? They sure are funny down under ...


I believe that people need to re-evaluate the underlying causes instead of just blaming the tool.

I believe you would find a more appreciative audience for this kind of deceitful demagoguery somewhere other than here.

Oh wait, I'm forgetting. This is the Guns forum.

[Tejas]

19. "crappy AK rifles" ?

Great post and welcome to the Gungeon, but keep in mind that some of those crappy AK rifles are selling for over $2,500 at the moment. Yes, not just priced that high but actually selling, and it sure isn't because they're crappy rifles. Take a PolyTech to the range, you'll find new respect for the AK platform.

:)

[derby378]

31. In Texas, basic Romanian "G" AKs sell for about $800 each

That's around double what they went for in September. The pricier Polish and Bulgarian models experienced a more modest increase.

[gorfle]

33. Well the good news is

Well the good news is since I can hardly afford to go shooting anymore, I've decided to switch to black-powder shooting.

When the ban comes I'm going to sell my SAR-1 for double or triple what I paid for it and get myself an 1853 3-band Enfield.

[Tejas]

62. Some would call BS, but you speak the truth

Laughed at the prices on Romanian AK's at the George R Brown show in Houston recently but as the day wore on witnessed those rifles actually selling at those prices.

Why? Because they were all that were left to choose from.

Lot of AK's sold that day.

[Deep13]

11. That's because there isn't one.

It's a made-up term used for political purposes. And true military assault rifles are fully-automatic and already illegal without special licensing.

[friendly_iconoclast]

14. An "assault weapon" is what someone points at when they say "We need to ban assault weapons!"

It's a very precise definition, don't ya know?

[derby378]

16. Sweet Susan Sarandon! I think you just nailed it!

:rofl:

[enfield collector]

51. I think it's one that has "that shoulder thing that goes up" or some

other such arbitrary definition to it.

[krispos42]

5. Under the 1993 definition of "Assault Weapon", per the federal government

The first condition for a gun to be a arbitrarily-defined "assault weapon" is that it's semi-automatic. After that, there's a list of combinations of cosmetic features.

Not all rectangles are squares, but all squares are rectangles.

Not all semi-autos are assault weapons, but all assault weapons are semi-autos.





At least, according to the now-expired federal law.



California, now, California does things differently.

[PatrynXX]

74. Semi auto shotgun

Yeah my brother became one of those paranoid loons who think this ban applies to all semi auto's. So he went out and bought a used Beretta semi auto shotgun. (limited edition) Think it was $2000 originally but now $800 or so.

Said he was buying it before Obama banned them. I said he's allowed to buy the gun whenever he wants. But why now, certainly isn't going to be going after hunting weapons. He's looking for a gun that matches the guns in Under Siege and out little Miss July having the discussion read to her from Seagal :P

[tburnsten]

77. Paranoid loon doesn't sound like the right word for someone who just saved $1200

Sounds like he timed his buying of it perfectly, normally guns don't dropthat much in price when they are sold used, but since everyone and their mother is out buying more aggressively styled guns right now, he probably saved some hundreds of dollars on the beretta.

[tburnsten]

6. assault wepaons bans tend to hinge on the firearm being a couple of things

Semiautomatic is generally at the top of the list, as well as using detachable magazines. Typically, there is some arbitrary limit set on how many rounds a magazine can hold before it makes "assault weapon" capacity, ten was the limit on the last federal ban. Newer bans might see a change of wording to make any semiauto capable of accepting a magazine over ten rounds assault weapons, which would effectively ban all semiautomatic firearms since magazines can be any size. There are generally a couple of common capacities for a specific make and model of firearm, for instance 20 and 30 rounds are the typical size of 5.56/.223 AR-15 rifles, but the rifle itself has nothing to do with magazine capacity. There are 40 round magazines, drum magazines that hold well over 100 rounds, smaller 90 round drums, basically the only thing a magazine needs to work with a rifle is proper dimensions where it locks into the magazine well.

I think that will be the next nonsense approach because it is incredibly arbitrary and broad, and the approach has already been attempted by D.C. when Dick Heller tried to register his Colt 1911, and they told him it was a machine gun under D.C. law because it was capable of accepting a magazine that holds more than 12 rounds. That design is normally seen with seven round magazines, though advances in magazine design have made reliable eight rounders relatively common as well. They effectively classified his seven-shot pistol as a machine gun because aftermarket, third-party manufacturers have made magazines that swell out into a drum magazine that can hold 25 or 40 rounds below the grip. I have never seen one in person or heard of anyone using one, and it seems like it would be of dubious quality, but that didn't stop D.C. from classifying a ubiquitous pistol design as a machine gun.


That would be like classifying any vehicle that could accept a spoiler as an illegal racecar.

[jeepnstein]

42. "That would be like classifying any vehicle that could accept a spoiler as an illegal racecar."

It isn't a race car until the loose nut at the wheel makes it one. I once knew an old man who did business with our garage, he owned a GTO Judge because he liked the color. I seriously doubt that car ever went over 45 miles an hour and we were constantly putting new spark plugs in it. He found it cosmetically appealing even though it wasn't practical. If ever a car was built for breaking the law that Pontiac was.

The AR is so much more common today than it was before the first ban I just don't see how they're going to pull off a ban without killing whatever support they have for the Domestic Agenda we all so sorely need. The voters will turn on Obama and the Democrat Party quickly if they get mired in some kind of social experiment that just plows the same ground with the same results. Members of the House know all too well how short their careers can be if the folks back home become unhappy.

There are plenty of laws that are on the books that can be used on criminals with guns if the judicial system takes such things seriously. Benign Neglect is the best way I can describe the judicial system's attitude towards poor inner-city populations. Maybe a dose or two of accountability and change directed towards the thugs and gangstas who make life miserable for the honest folks who live in the cities would be a better strategy?

[PatrynXX]

75. Bout as silly as 3rd parties making tweaks to video games

like say Grand Theft Auto and it's hot coffee tweak or other games that never were meant to be adult. Like making all the Sims nude. Which would require Sims to have an Adult rating instead of Everyone :P Was a hilarious tweak though :P

[X_Digger]

7. And 'assault weapons' are..

As defined in the previous AWB, all 'assault weapons' are semi-automatic, but not all semi-automatics are 'assault weapons'- only those semi-automatics that have cosmetic features like a barrel shroud, a bayonet lug, pistol grip, or a collapsible stock.

*eta: and detachable magazines

It's not about the power of the weapon- many "assault weapons" are underpowered for hunting large game, and more powerful guns are used by hunters every year.

It's not about concealability. A collapsible stock only adds or removes 4" to a rifle, which still has to have an overall length of 26" and a 16" barrel.

It's not about capacity. This thing called duct tape will make two 10 round magazines into what is functionally a 20 round magazine, with a 3 second pause between 10 round bursts. With a little practice, anyone can switch magazines in under 5 seconds, regardless of capacity.

Things like pistol grips and barrell shrouds have no effect on power or dangerousness. The fact that they had to rely on cosmetic characteristics to define this class of weapons, as well as banning by name tells me that the ban was more about feel good legislation rather than crime.

All rifles (hunting or otherwise) account for less than 3% of all firearms used in crimes, so to me, it seems like a solution looking for a problem.

[Hangingon]

9. Assault weapons will be anything they want them to be.

The law will be a mess and will then be implemented thru ageny regulations. There go your bb guns.

[bossy22]

18. whats an assault weapon ban?

well it bans 98% of semi-automatic long guns by using this simple process


first they find a certain set of cosmetic attachments that are present on 90% of semi-auto long guns and ban those attachements.

Then with the 10% that don't fit into this catagory they ban 8% by name


its a backdoor attempt at banning semi-auto rifles...they know most semi-auto rifles have pistol grips, some muzzle attachement, can take a detachable mag, and have some relation to a miliitary design at one point.

its like saying you can legally own a car, as long as it doesnt have a steering wheel, a transmission, or a left rear tire.....try to find many cars that fit that description

[hack89]

24. What's the real difference? nt

[Ganja Ninja]

34. I can't tell you how they'll define an assault weapon.

But there are lots of semi-auto's that weren't banned in the last assault weapons ban. Semi-auto pistols, semi-auto shotguns being a couple of them. The definition is really more about appearance than function.

[Statistical]

36. The AWB banned semi-auto rifles, shotguns & pistols (based on cosmetics)

So you are right that it is based on cosmetics however the one "universal rule" was that it banned semi-autos.

Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:
* Folding stock
* Conspicuous pistol grip
* Bayonet mount
* Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
* Grenade launcher (more precisely, a muzzle device which enables the launching or firing of rifle grenades)

Semi-automatic pistols with detachable magazines and two or more of the following:
* Magazine that attaches outside the pistol grip
* Threaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppressor, handgrip, or silencer
* Barrel shroud that can be used as a hand-hold
* Unloaded weight of 50 oz (1.4 kg) or more
* A semi-automatic version of an automatic firearm

Semi-automatic shotguns with two or more of the following:
* Folding or telescoping stock
* Pistol grip
* Fixed capacity of more than 5 rounds
* Detachable magazine


The clear goal was to make semi-autos illegal. The ban can be expanded modified to include more and more semi-autos as political support allows. To say it wasn't about function is not true.

[pipoman]

37. So then you agee it is stupid to enact this type of legislation? n/t

[Ganja Ninja]

43. Politically yes.

[Deep13]

12. How will disarming noncriminals make anyone safer?

"making guns in this country childproof"

That's a techical impossibility. The better approach and only truly feasible approach is for parents to be responsible for teaching children to stay away from them.

[Tejas]

20. \Hey, it worked in Germany

Well, for the chosen ones it did, not so well for others.

[Xela]

67. BBC News - Burglaries and knife robberies up

"...knife or sharp instrument-related violence..."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/uk_news/7844455.stm

Interesting choice of words there.

Xela

[Name removed]

17. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[slackmaster]

22. That's unfortunate and misguided

And if push comes to shove I will fight against it with at least as much energy as I put into the election last year.

[rangersmith82]

25. On day one he is not living up to his oath...sad...

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."


The 2nd amendment of the constitution...

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The Supreme Court has declared this means that Americans have the individual (not collective/militia use)right to own firearms.

In the Heller decision it was declared that no class of weapons in common use will be banned.

The most popular weapon in the United States is the AR-15, This proposal by our President will ban this particular weapon.


From our Presidents acceptance speech today...

So let us mark this day with remembrance, of who we are and how far we have traveled. In the year of America's birth, in the coldest of months, a small band of patriots huddled by dying campfires on the shores of an icy river. The capital was abandoned. The enemy was advancing. The snow was stained with blood. At a moment when the outcome of our revolution was most in doubt, the father of our nation ordered these words be read to the people:

"Let it be told to the future world...that in the depth of winter, when nothing but hope and virtue could survive ... that the city and the country, alarmed at one common danger, came forth to meet ."

America. In the face of our common dangers, in this winter of our hardship, let us remember these timeless words. With hope and virtue, let us brave once more the icy currents, and endure what storms may come. Let it be said by our children's children that when we were tested we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back nor did we falter; and with eyes fixed on the horizon and God's grace upon us, we carried forth that great gift of freedom and delivered it safely to future generations.


These were Americans...Militia men....Citizens who with their firearms fought and trumpeted against tyrany....

Millions of Americans have died to preserve the rights guaranteed by the constitution, the Constitution today he swore to defend along with Vice President Biden.

Today I pray to god that they keep their oath.

[Raskolnik]

44. While I think their gun policies are both unwise politically and practically, I don't agree

that they are or likely will be seeking a ban of semi-automatic firearms.

[FLAprogressive]

48. Unless we WANT to lose, congress better not TOUCH this.

Not to mention that it is unconstitutional and completely misguided.

[RamboLiberal]

49. Sorry - this is a loser for Democrats

Was a do nothing but ban cosmetic features law that pissed off gun owners and gave the NRA a big tool against Democrats. I just sent an email on the Whitehouse.gov website saying this Obama voter wishes they'd drop this.

[dairydog91]

57. Gotta agree with you there.

Then again, Obama may just be tossing off that line to appease some of his supporters. Someone in the White House has to remember the joys of the 1994 fiasco, and I find it hard to believe that smart political operators would repeat the exact same errors that lead to that debacle.

[CarinKaryn]

50. Ha ha!

:loveya: :loveya: :loveya: :party: :loveya: :loveya: :loveya:
Finally...

[ManiacJoe]

53. Please explain why you think this is a good thing.

[The Rubicon]

71. Please for the love of God

do yourself a favor and watch this short 9 minute video from across the pond so you can see the tragic results of irrational fear trumping reality:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTq2NEUlhDE

[jody]

52. Looks like many gun-owners who wanted to believe Obama would honor his promise to not take firearms

and voted for him now recognize he betrayed them.

[CarinKaryn]

54. Then they are suckas!

He promised common-sense laws and that is what we expect him to deliver. The country has finally turned the corner and we have a chance to rebuild and the gun-lovers are going to try and pull us back to the dark ages with their friend the resident shrub.

[ManiacJoe]

55. Please define "common-sense gun laws".

[dairydog91]

56. "Common-Sense"

...equals "What I think makes sense, based on gun knowledge gleaned from watching Predator once".

Interesting how the people who have the least technical knowledge of firearms have the best "common sense" concerning them. I guess my total lack of knowledge about Sub-Saharan Africa would also make my "common sense" policy suggestions about the region worth listening to.

Seriously, "common sense" is often just accumulated, uninformed prejudice on a mass scale. If one person believes something dumb, it's just a dumb idea; If 1,000,000 people believe something dumb, it's common sense.

[bossy22]

58. well luckily

its not totally up to him....he has to content with harry reid (who is no fan of gun control)and the other pro-gun senators in the senate.

also he has to deal with the supreme court and the fact that there is a true individual right under the second amendment

[friendly_iconoclast]

59. And the lefty version of "Jesus Camp" is heard from again

Otherwise known as the Society For The Propagation Of The Gun Control Faith

The Gospel of course being "Gun Owners = Bush Supporters".

A deeply held belief by the Propagandists here at DU.

I guess that would make the plaintiffs in Heller Vs. DC the equivalent
of Minnie and Roman Castavet in "Rosemary's Baby"

[jody]

63. Agree, voters who believed Obama "are suckas!". n/t

[jmg257]

64. Can you explain why you think an 'assault weapon' ban is a 'common sense' gun law?

[friendly_iconoclast]

76. "Brady Said It, I Believe It, And That Settles It"

That's the mindset, more or less. I told you it was a religious meme!

[Abq_Sarah]

72. If and when a new AWB hits his desk

And he signs it, then he will have betrayed his oath of office.

I suspect it's on the website as a way to pander to the cafeteria constitutionalists. I do not believe there are enough votes in the Congress to pass an AWB.

[Xela]

65. Damn...

...just when I was following Suzanne Orman's advice to pay up all my credit cards...

...shoot...

Time to max them sometime in the near future.

Maybe I'll finally be able to complete my battery.

-2 rifles
-2 carbines
-2 shotguns

I'm thinking FAL or M1A for the rifles and AR or AK type for carbines. Shotguns I'm thinking Remington's Marine 870.

Thank you very much Mr. President.

Xela

[Tejas]

73. What?

No handguns?

Got to at least have a semi and a revolver!

;)

[chrisa]

66. Why?

Obama has all of the support in the world right now. Why would they want to screw it up by proving the paranoids right? In a country that has more guns than people, how could anybody possibly believe that banning certain types of firearms that are already in wide circulation would actually matter?

These bills are also often poorly made, and written by people who aren't experts in guns, or even know about guns at all.

[anonymous171]

68. If democrats want to lose in 4 years, they will push this to the front of the agenda.

[jimmy_duncan]

70. Dems have control why lose it over this?

I absolutely agree with the above poster's statement, it is clearly what happened to a Democratic controlled congress last time a ban was put through, even Bill Clinton readily admitted it as such. If the Brady campaign really wanted to be effective they would stop using terms like, "Assault weapons." There is a major difference between what the military uses and what the general public can purchase; that is the fact the mil. firearms are fully automatic, or capable of burst shooting (3 shots with one trigger pull), both of which are strongly regulated by GCA legislation dating back to 1968, and civilian models are semi-automatic. If this key difference is brought to light during the course of intelligent discussions, which it most certainly will be, it casts doubt on the rest of their argument.