New assault weapons ban

Discussion in 'Carry Issues' started by Netfotoj, Feb 21, 2007.

  1. Netfotoj

    Netfotoj Premium Member

    2,652
    2
    0
    Here we go again. And Hillary's not even back in the White House, yet.

     
  2. RangerM9

    RangerM9 New Member

    192
    0
    0
    I have already written my rep about this.

    my senators will be next just to head off this piece of crap
     

  3. Buzz

    Buzz Premium Member

    1,410
    0
    0
    While we must be ever vigilant this bill doesn't stand a chance of getting out of committee. The Dems themselves will kill it as they know that they will never carry the South in 2008 if this thing gets legs. I would bet dollars to donuts that Hillary is furious that it came up now.

    But, it is a very definite taste of what is yet to come.

    BTW, those restrictions on transfers of grandfathered weapons are disposable throw-ins for negotiating purposes.

    Buzz
     
  4. West01

    West01 New Member

    184
    0
    0
    Ah... the Aristocratic Party. Some of us actually believed that they cared about our boys and girls fighting in Iraq. Well, here is glimpse of the agenda.

    "Yet we were fooled again"

    Cheers!

    :D

    West01
     
  5. thelittlevoices

    thelittlevoices Guest

    4
    0
    0
    I think this is total crap. If something like this passes(God I hope not) the only thing it would accomplish is to create a true divison and distrust amongst people. just a though. And if this happened I would have to move to some small island and start a new country lol. :twisted:
     
  6. Netfotoj

    Netfotoj Premium Member

    2,652
    2
    0
    Contact your Congress-persons here

    Here's as link to contact your reps in Congress about the assault weapons ban.

    http://www.congress.org/congressorg/officials/congress/

    Here's some more details I just got from http://www.tgscom.com

     
  7. thelittlevoices

    thelittlevoices Guest

    4
    0
    0
    AR's, Mini 14's, M1's there can be no way in hell people would let that pass. And why is the frickin hipoint on there? I would have suspected my Beretta STORM CX4 befor a junk hipoint. This shit pisses me off. I have always loved guns, ever since I was a little kid watching GI Joe. I understan the power and responsibility they command and absolutly injoyed the toys I got to play with while I was in the Army. To have anyone tell me I Dont need/cant have/would missuse/or dont know what I am doing with a gun is a dumbass. And to tell me or anyone that you cant have something that is granted to you in the constitution shuld be bitch slapped. I have a responce to anyone who says that "the founding fathers dident have AR-15 in mind when they wrote it" there right. But the thing is at that point in history every army in the world had the same muzzle loaders. As I ahve read Jefferson statements he said that it was written in the intent that the people should always have the right to defend themselves angenst ANY opressors even if that means there own government. Im not saying topple the government and anarchy for everyone or any of that crap. Im just saying that I honestly wouldent feel totaly safe if they were the only ones with the guns. Gandi even said that the worst thing the british did was take away all the guns. I understand not letting every loose nut/fellon pick up a bgun out of the street but dont tell me I cant. cause if you say that makes me a criminal then i guess I will be a criminal. sorry for the long winded rant but I couldent help it.
     
  8. Getting The Facts STRAIGHT

    Getting The Facts STRAIGHT
    About Banning "Assault Weapons"

    FACT: "Assault Weapons" are RARELY ever used in crimes -

    Top 10 Most Frequently Traced Guns Used In Crimes In 1994 (BEFORE the '94 Federal "Assault Weapon" Ban):
    1) Lorcin P25 (pistol)
    2) Davis Ind. P380 (pistol)
    3) Raven Arms MP25 (pistol)
    4) Lorcin L25 (pistol)
    5) Mossberg 500 (shotgun)
    6) Phoenix Arms Raven (pistol)
    7) Jennings J22 (pistol)
    8) Ruger P89 (pistol)
    9) Glock 17 (pistol)
    10) Bryco 38 (pistol)
    Source: US Dept. Justice.

    FACT: "Assault Weapons" are RARELY ever used to kill police officers -

    Calibers Most Often Used To Kill Police Officers In 1994 (BEFORE the '94 Federal "Assault Weapon" Ban):
    1) .38 caliber handgun - 25.2%
    2) .357 magnum handgun - 12.1%
    3) 9mm handgun - 9.5%
    5) 12 gauge shotgun - 7.4%
    6) .22 caliber handgun - 5.4%
    7) .22 caliber rifle - 4.4%
    Source: US Dept. Justice.

    According to the most recent detailed report, Dept. of Justice; Firearm Use by Offender...

    FACT: "Assault weapons" are RARELY possessed by criminals during commission of a crime -

    State and Federal prison inmates armed during the crime for which they are being incarcerated: (table 2)
    * 9.9% of state and 7.3% of federal inmates possessed "single-shot" firearms.
    * 7.9% of state and 7.7% of federal inmates possessed conventional semiautomatic firearm.
    * 1.5% of state and 1.7% of federal inmates possessed military-style semi-auto or full-auto firearms.

    FACT: "Assault weapons" are RARELY involved in ANY crimes -

    State and Federal prison inmates who have ever possessed firearms during ANY crime: (table 2)
    * 14.2% of state and 10.6% of federal inmates possessed "single-shot" firearm during ANY crime.
    * 10.9% of state and 9.8% of federal inmates possessed conventional semiautomatic firearm during ANY crime.
    * 2.5% of state and 2.3% of federal inmates possessed military-style semi-auto or full-auto firearms during ANY crime.

    FACT: "Assault weapons" possessed by criminals during crimes are usually obtained ILLEGALLY -

    Of State prison inmates who possessed military-style semi-auto or full-auto firearms in crimes for which they are incarcerated: (table 10)
    * 48.5% obtained them through illegal sources (theft, drug dealer, black market, etc.)
    * 25.2% obtained them from family or friend.
    * 19.3% obtained them from retail sale.
    * 1.9% obtained them from gun shows. (so much for that supposed gun-show "loophole" being a major source of "assault weapons" used in crime)

    FACT: "Assault weapons" that are possessed during a crime are the LEAST LIKELY type of firearm to be actually discharged during the crime.

    FACT: "Assault weapons" that are possessed during a crime are the LEAST LIKELY type of firearm to be used to injure the victim.

    FACT:"Assault weapons" that are possessed during a crime are the LEAST LIKELY type of firearm to be used to kill the victim.

    "ASSAULT WEAPONS" HAVE NEVER BEEN A SIGNIFICANT FACTOR IN GUN-CRIMES.

    FACT: The "Assault Weapon" Ban Did NOT Reduce The Number Of Officers Killed In The Line Of Duty -

    Six years prior to "Assault Weapon" Ban:
    Year....Total LEOs Killed...By Handguns...By Other Guns...By Other Methods
    1988..................78.......................63......................13....................2
    1989..................66.......................40......................17....................9
    1990..................66.......................48.......................9....................9
    1991..................71.......................50......................18....................3
    1992..................64.......................44......................11....................9
    1993..................70.......................50......................17....................3
    TOTALS...........415......................295......................85...................35

    Six years after "Assault Weapon" Ban:
    Year....Total LEOs Killed...By Handguns...By Other Guns...By Other Methods
    1995..................74.......................43......................19...................12
    1996..................61.......................50.......................7....................4
    1997..................70.......................49......................18....................3
    1998..................61.......................40......................18....................3
    1999..................42.......................25......................16....................1
    2000..................51.......................33......................14....................4
    TOTALS...........355......................240......................92...................26
    CHANGE......(-14%).................(-19%)................(+8%)...........(-26%)

    Source: US Dept. Justice, Law Enforcement Officers Feloniously Killed
    * The number of police killed by non-handgun firearms (which includes "assault weapons") has NOT decreased since the passing of the "assault weapon" ban in 1994 but in fact has INCREASED since the passage of the AWB. And this comes despite the decrease in the number of LEOs killed by all other means INCLUDING handguns.
    THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THE "ASSAULT WEAPON" BAN REDUCED THE NUMBER OF LEOs KILLED. PERIOD.

    FACT: Studies demonstrated that the "Assault Weapon" ban "FAILED" to reduce gun-murders:


    From The 1997 "Impact Evaluation" of the "Assault Weapon" Ban -

    "We were unable to detect any reduction to date in two types of gun murders that are thought to be closely associated with assault weapons, those with multiple victims in a single incident and those producing multiple bullet wounds per victim. We did find a reduction in killings of police officers since mid-1995. However, the available data are partial and preliminary, and the trends may have been influenced by law enforcement agency policies regarding bullet-proof vests."

    5.2.3. Assault Weapons and Crime -
    "...assault weapons do not appear to be used disproportionately in violent crime relative to other guns"
    "Overall, assault weapons accounted for about 1% of guns associated with homicides, aggravated assaults, and robberies" and "only 2% of guns associated with drug crimes were assault weapons."

    5.2.4. Unbanned Handguns Capable of Accepting Large-capacity Magazines -
    "The ban on large-capacity magazines does not seem to have discouraged the use of these guns."

    6.2.1. Trends in Multiple-Victim Gun Homicides -
    "[Studies] failed to produce any evidence that the ban reduced the number of victims per gun homicide incident."

    6.3.4. Conclusions -
    "[Studies] failed to produce evidence of a post-ban reduction in the average number of gunshot wounds per case or in the proportion of cases involving multiple wounds."

    6.4.2. Assault Weapons and Homicides of Police Officers -
    "In sum, police officers are rarely murdered with assault weapons."


    From The 1999 "Impacts of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban" Report To Congress -

    "the weapons ["assault weapons] banned by this legislation were used only rarely in gun crimes before the ban"

    "The ban has failed to reduce the average number of victims per gun murder incident or multiple gunshot wound victims."

    "...the banned guns are used in only a small fraction of gun crimes; even before the ban, most of them rarely turned up in law enforcement agencies' requests... to trace the sales histories of guns recovered in criminal investigations."

    "The ban's short-term impact on gun violence has been uncertain"

    From The FINAL June 2004 "Updated Assessment On The Federal Assault Weapon Ban" Report To Congress -
    "AWs [Assault weapons] were used in only a small fraction of gun crimes prior to the ban"

    "...we cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation's recent drop in gun violence."

    "These analyses revealed no ban effects, thus failing to show confirming evidence of the mechanism through which the ban was hypothesized to affect the gun murder rate"

    "...there has been no discernible reduction in the lethality and injuriousness of gun violence... as we might have expected had the ban reduced crimes committed with AWs (assault weapons) and LCMs (large-capacity magazines)."

    "Thus, it is premature to make definitive assessments of the ban's impact on gun violence."

    THE DEFINITIVE CONGRESSIONAL REPORTS ON THE "ASSAULT WEAPON" BAN ALL SHOWED IT "FAILED" TO REDUCE GUN-MURDERS.

    FACT: "Assault weapons" are NOT "machine guns".

    They are "semi-automatic" meaning one pull of the trigger=one bullet discharged while the next bullet is then chambered ready for the next trigger pull. "Assault weapons" are not full-auto firearms and they do NOT "spray" bullets with a single pull of the trigger.

    "ASSAULT WEAPONS" ARE NOT MACHINE-GUNS.

    FACT: The "Assault weapon" Ban had NOTHING to do with silencers.

    One of the cosmetic features addressed by the "Assault Weapon" Ban included flash-suppressors which reduce the bright muzzle-glare ONLY in the eyes of the shooter in low-light conditions. Flash-suppressors do NOT "hide" the bright flash from any other observer and do NOT "silence" the very loud report of the gunshot sound.

    "FLASH-SUPPRESSORS" ARE NOT "SILENCERS" AND DO NOT MAKE THE SHOOTER "INVISIBLE" AT NIGHT.

    FACT: The Columbine-Killers did not violate any provision of "Assault Weapon" ban.

    The firearms used in Columbine included two sawed-off shotguns (already illegal), a pistol and a legally-produced TEC-9 "assault weapon". The "assault weapon" ban did not stop those two UNDERAGE killers from illegally acquiring the guns, illegally modifying the shotguns, illegally bringing them to school or illegally murdering 13 people.

    THE "ASSAULT WEAPON" BAN DID NOT TAKE GUNS OUT OF THE HANDS OF CRIMINALS.

    FACT: The 1994 Federal "Assault Weapon" Ban did NOT actually ban "assault weapons".

    The ban only prohibited the NEW PRODUCTION of certain firearms based on cosmetic features. There were hundreds of thousands of "assault weapons" legally owned, bought and sold BEFORE the ban was implemented and, DESPITE the overall drop in crime rates during the ban, there were STILL hundreds of thousands of "assault weapons" being legally, peacefully and safely owned, bought and sold during the 10 years of the ban's existance.

    HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF EXISTING "UZIs, AR-15s AND AK-47s" WERE COMPLETELY LEGAL TO OWN, BUY AND SELL FOR THE ENTIRE DURATION OF THE FEDERAL "ASSAULT WEAPON BAN" - AND YET CRIME RATES STILL DECREASED.

    FACT: The 2nd Amendment is NOT about "duck hunting".

    Military-style firearms (like "assault weapons") are specifically protected by the 2nd Amendment according to the U.S. Supreme Court rulings in U.S. v. Miller (1939) and Lewis v. U.S. (1980).

    * In the Miller decision the Supreme Court stated, "In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession of [a particular gun] has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument".

    * In the Lewis decision, the Supreme Court stated, "the Second Amendment guarantees no right to keep and bear a firearm that does not have 'some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia'".

    SO ACCORDING TO THE SUPREME COURT, MILITARY-STYLE FIREARMS ARE EXACTLY THE TYPE OF FIREARMS THAT ARE PROTECTED BY THE 2ND AMENDMENT.

    FACT: Nobody NEEDS to infringe on the 2nd Amendment in order to reduce crime.

    Our RIGHTS do not ebb and flow or come and go with the annual crime reports.

    Our RIGHTS do not depend upon what today's gangbangers or psychopaths decide to do to get their next thrill or rage out.

    Our RIGHTS are not contingent upon, qualified by nor based on what CRIMINALS use to commit crimes!

    Our RIGHTS are derived from natural law, specifically protected by the Constitution and are NOT dependant on the findings in any crime studies!!!

    Banning the possession of "assault weapons" because of some crime statistics is like banning the possession of sports cars because of drunk driving deaths or like banning the possession of the boxcutters because of 9-11.

    OUR RIGHTS ARE NOT DERIVED FROM NOR DETERMINED BY THE MOST RECENT CRIME STATISTICS!
     
  9. Netfotoj

    Netfotoj Premium Member

    2,652
    2
    0
    NRA-ILA is a bit slow on the trigger this time, but here's their email alert on the new gun ban bill.

     
  10. smores

    smores Guest

    289
    0
    0
    Yeah this is total BS. I'll go move to Mexico or something if this happens. Like in Terminator 2. I'll just have a cache somewhere out in the desert...
     
  11. thelittlevoices

    thelittlevoices Guest

    4
    0
    0
    :roll: this is going to cause me to do what im sure everyone else is going to do. In fear of ban/elimanation I plan on going out and buying extra AKs a few glocks maybe a keltec AR pistol an a WHOLE LOT OF HI CAP MAGS!!!! Something of that sweeping magnitude would truly create a underground gum market and crate a veary jagged rift between lawmakers/Civilian enforcement and people who feel they were granted a right to arm them selves for a reason. Plus it would cause almost anyone who owned a gun to distrust anyone in a position of athority. I know I might sound like an alarmist but guess what THIS SHOULD ALARM EVERYONE!!!! I belive that everyone should and has the right to defend and protect themselves. I will not give up that right and rely on "someone else" to do it for me. I also do not an will not give up these given freedoms for a FALSE sence of security. Because if someone is going to commit a crime they already dont care about the law. It only punishes the law abiding people in this counrty. I thought we fought wars to rid are selves of communist oppisition. Aparently they are in congress trying to elect there leader Hillary to presidency.
     
  12. smores

    smores Guest

    289
    0
    0
    In my state I'm limited to buying 1 gun every 30 days. We have an imminent AWB for this state, which if enacted will take effect on October 1st 2007. I plan on buying a gun a month until then :twisted:
     
  13. babj615

    babj615 Premium Member

    4,188
    32
    48
    How much of this BS will "We The People" have to take before we finally revolt against the government claiming to be ours????????

    I am appalled. I am disgusted. I am offended.

    I love my country. I am a patriot. I find it increasingly difficult to call myself a proud patriot.
     
  14. mugdava

    mugdava Premium Member

    427
    3
    18
    Hello All!

    These are grim times, that such a thing would be given any weight at all!
    I pray for Us and Our remaining Freedoms!
    _______
    mugdava
     
  15. fossten

    fossten Guest

    6
    0
    0
    I've been predicting lately that there will be some sort of incident that will spark another Revolutionary war between the citizens of this country and our federal government. Who knows when that will happen. Ruby Ridge or Waco could each easily have been the spark. When it happens, the feds will have to come to grips with the fact that they are outnumbered by at least 5 million serious gun owners.

    History shows that 170 million people have been murdered by their governments in the last hundred years thanks to gun control. Will America suffer a similar fate as that of China, Russia, the Jews, Cambodia, and Rwanda? Are we still in that awkward stage where it is too late to fix the system, but too early to shoot the bastards?
     
  16. Revolution?

    I don't know about that.

    Only a little over 30% of Americans are even engaged enough to vote and fewer still take the time to educate themselves about issues.

    How many firearms owners would take time off of work to travel to DC for a protest if this bill came to a vote on the floor of the House of Representatives? Not many I'm afraid as I keep hearing from folks that they can't afford to take the time off of work...to defend the Constitution no less.

    Our Founding Fathers risked it all in protest of taxation without representation, remember the Boston Tea Party, and today we've got people too lazy to get off their couches to get out and vote or who wont pay for a basic NRA or GOA membership.

    Pretty sad if you ask me.

    So, Revolution? I don't think so.

    More than likely we'll see just a lot of Rubby Ridges and Wacos or maybe worse of a few folks here and there being painted as nut jobs who deserved the Government jackboots by the left wing media.

    As for me, the last thing I want to do is face off with fellow Americans in some sort of armed conflict. I'll do everything in my power to keep this bill from going through like emailing my reps (which I've already done although my Senator is a liberal nut job) and of course I'm a member of the NRA. I keep up-to-date on this bill and other Second Amendment related events and if it comes down to it I'll drive to DC and sleep in my car to protest this bill. If the bill is signed into law than I will as an attorney fight it in the courts myself if I must. Should the courts fail us and there is no other action left than I guess I go out in a burning building or victim to an FBI sniper, but I will not have to face the founding fathers in Heaven and say that I traded the Constitution for comfort.

    If the type of firearms intended by the Second Amendment to be owned by civilians are banned than there is no legal protection to so called sporting firearms of any type within our Constitution. However, thats not the real scary thing in my mind the real scary thing is that our Congress will have just null and voided a Constitutional Amendment and at that point the whole Constitution is up for grabs as more of a suggestion rather than rule of law. I like our form of Constitutional government with protections for individuals including minorities and I do not wish to see a pure democracy, which the founding fathers knew could be its own kind of tyranny.