Marchers Demand Bush Extend Assault Weapons Ban

[Jimbo 0]

Yeah, another gun thread. Deal with it.

From a story found at Yahoo!.

Quote

At the head of the march, protesters held a banner depicting an AK-47 assault rifle, saying the president would be to blame for more violence unless he fulfilled a previous promise to sign an extension of the 1994 ban before it expires in September.

Yeah, uh huh. I'm sure that the killings will skyrocket the day after the sunset.

Quote

Gun control advocates said it would become easier for militant groups like al Qaeda to launch another attack inside the United States once the assault weapons ban expires.

"It is inconceivable at a time we have high terrorist alerts and homeland security that you would make available to the enemies of life and peace these high-powered rifles," civil rights leader Rev. Jesse Jackson (news - web sites) told the crowd in a speech immediately before the march.

Is there an agenda that can't be pushed these days by the threat of terrorism?

Quote

"Every day that's what our military are using in the war in Iraq (news - web sites) -- we need these guns on our streets? Are they crazy up there?" said Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (news, bio, voting record), gesturing toward the Capitol building.

Neat quote, too bad it's not true.

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[AggieDave 6]

You know, I hate reading all of these stories of perps using assault rifles to car jack, kill, hold up liquor stores, rob gas stations...

Quote

Gun control advocates said it would become easier for militant groups like al Qaeda to launch another attack inside the United States once the assault weapons ban expires.

Yeah, no shit, they have such a hard time now getting those weapons now, since it takes so long for their Class III to get processed for the hi-cap magazines for their newly purchased AR-15 from their local gunshop...waiting all that time for that application to go through, that must really really piss them off...oh, man, I thought those types bought all their stuff legal? They don't? Shit, my bad.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[b1jercat 0]

Given that Bush tends to do the wrong thing when it comes to average americans, if I was into guns I'd be worried.

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

Given that Bush tends to do the wrong thing when it comes to average americans, if I was into guns I'd be worried.

Silly me, I thought that new laws had to be proposed and passed by CONGRESS, not the president.

The so-called "assault weapons ban" is a useless, idiotic, wrong-headed piece of trash and MUST be allowed to sunset. There is absolutely no point to its continuation since it never went near to reducing crime or limiting the number of guns possessed by criminals.

-

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[Kennedy 0]

Thread about the Assault Weapons Ban with a great deal of information.

maybe a greenie could pull it out of TB and put it here in the Corner?
.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Thread about the Assault Weapons Ban with a great deal of information.

maybe a greenie could pull it out of TB and put it here in the Corner?
.

You don't need a greenie, it's in the "corner"... I bumped it...

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[billvon 3,131]

>Silly me, I thought that new laws had to be proposed and passed by CONGRESS, not the president.

Usually that's true. The one exception - the executive order - has recently gotten a lot of use, for doing things from keeping presidential records sealed to confiscating assets linked to Iraq to establishing a faith-based initiatives program.

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

From the story on CNN's website:

Quote

"We are working very hard in Iraq to get AK-47s off the street, to get Uzis off the streets. The president says we're fighting the war on terror by doing that," said Rep. Chris van Hollen, D-Maryland. "What about the terror right here on our streets at home."

He also decried a provision in the law that critics contend allows owners of legal firearms to replace the housing for the firing mechanism and turn them into illegal assault weapons. He tied the loophole to October 2002 sniper attacks that killed 10 people in van Hollen's Maryland district, Virginia and the District of Columbia.

Can anyone tell what the hell this guy is talking about?? "...Allows the owners of legal firearms to replace the housing..." WTF?! This guy sounds about like I would if I tried to talk about nuclear power reactors.

There can be no question when an anti-gun legislator speaks gibberish like this that his position is absolutely intellectually bankrupt.

If anyone took a post-ban firearm and added to it any of the accessories or attachments that are banned, that would be illegal. What is this bullshit about replacing a housing whoosamawhatchits, and turning a legal gun into an illegal one? And DUH, turning a legal gun into an illegal one is.... ILLEGAL!

This idiot must be talking about the changes that manufacturers made to their models in order to make them LEGAL UNDER THE LAW THAT WAS PASSED. There is no "loophole" there: the law outlined what was illegal, so anything else that didn't meet those standards was legal. End of story.

ONE GLARING THING I NOTICED:
In the story on CNN, there are two groups mentioned: those for the ban and those against it. The CNN writer says that the Second Amendment Sisters were several hundred strong at this rally, and were any of them quoted?! OF COURSE NOT. THIS IS CNN. They have an unabashed axe to grind against gun ownership in their left-wing agenda. I challenge any DZcommers who don't believe that CNN is leftist and anti-gun to explain why no PRO-gun people were quoted in the story, and why the PRO-gun side's arguments and agenda were not mentioned at all. There is not a trace of a statement like, "We're here to fight for a woman's right to be armed for her own defense against a rapist, robber or murderer. The assault weapons ban doesn't protect anyone, and it leaves civilians defenseless and chips away at our right to keep and bear arms."

No, instead we got ONE SIDE and ONE SIDE ONLY in this story -- the ANTI-gun side.

These people at CNN are not reporters, they're activists.

-

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

In the entire story, THIS is all the mention that the other side got:

Quote

Several hundred gun rights supporters also held their own rally, organized by Second Amendment Sisters, at Freedom Plaza near the White House.

That's unbiased reporting, yes sir.

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[Kennedy 0]

Or they could've actually mentioned that the AWB doesn't ban rifles, and has nothing to do with full auto, and only affects cosmetic features.

Let's see how many people support the ban when they find out it's only about flash suppressors, pistol grips, and bayonet lugs.

Just read the CNN article. It makes people think AK-47s and UZIs will be available to anyone if the ban sunsets.

NEWSFLASH to the news people: Full Auto is heavily regulated and not easily available. Full Auto IS NOT COVERED BY THE AWB.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[PhillyKev 0]

For once I'm glad GWB doesn't give a crap what anyone thinks except himself.

If it does get renewed by Congress, and he vetoes it, I'll actually have something good to say about him.

[Jib 0]

Quote

For once I'm glad GWB doesn't give a crap what anyone thinks except himself.

If it does get renewed by Congress, and he vetoes it, I'll actually have something good to say about him.

That's a big IF. GWB smells like a rose on this one. Congress killed the bill which tried to add it on to a gun manufacturer protection bill. W said he'd sign it, but he never got to cause Congress killed it. LOL

--------------------------------------------------
the depth of his depravity sickens me.
-- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt

[Nightingale 0]

yup.

[Jib 0]

Quote

Yeah, no shit, they have such a hard time now getting those weapons now, since it takes so long for their Class III to get processed for the hi-cap magazines for their newly purchased AR-15 from their local gunshop...waiting all that time for that application to go through, that must really really piss them off...oh, man, I thought those types bought all their stuff legal? They don't? Shit, my bad.

Yeah and ban match sticks cause I hear you can turn some guns fully auto with them.

--------------------------------------------------
the depth of his depravity sickens me.
-- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

Yeah and ban match sticks cause I hear you can turn some guns fully auto with them.

Damn, that's a new one even for me, and I thought I'd herad them all (being from NJ and DC and all). Which idiot/group of idiots is spewing that trash?

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[kelpdiver 2]

You'd think they learned their lesson in 2000.

Gun control was one of many last straws that cost Gore the election - he lost some union votes in a couple of the close states. That's why you see Kerry toeing the line with his hunting BS. If HCI and company want to push the issue, it's going to hurt them far more than it helps, which seems silly for what was symbolic, ineffective legislation.

[burbleflyer 0]

Quote

Quote

Given that Bush tends to do the wrong thing when it comes to average americans, if I was into guns I'd be worried.

Silly me, I thought that new laws had to be proposed and passed by CONGRESS, not the president.

The so-called "assault weapons ban" is a useless, idiotic, wrong-headed piece of trash and MUST be allowed to sunset. There is absolutely no point to its continuation since it never went near to reducing crime or limiting the number of guns possessed by criminals.

-

I believe the import ban was an executive order signed by Bush 1.
Thats why you cant buy cheap Polytech M1s. Or Polytech anything for that matter. I'm no fan of the chinese but it was an executive order.

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Given that Bush tends to do the wrong thing when it comes to average americans, if I was into guns I'd be worried.

Silly me, I thought that new laws had to be proposed and passed by CONGRESS, not the president.

The so-called "assault weapons ban" is a useless, idiotic, wrong-headed piece of trash and MUST be allowed to sunset. There is absolutely no point to its continuation since it never went near to reducing crime or limiting the number of guns possessed by criminals.

-

I believe the import ban was an executive order signed by Bush 1.
Thats why you cant buy cheap Polytech M1s. Or Polytech anything for that matter. I'm no fan of the chinese but it was an executive order.

I bought a cheap Norinco SKS in 1994 or '95. That was well after Bush I.

I do recall an "executive odor" that Clinton made that banned more imports, sometime in about '99 or so.

-

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"