Bush Backs Gun Ban

[corplinx]

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/news/nation/5613894.htm

Knight Ridder on Bush supporting the "assault" weapon ban.

For those who don't know, the extremely moronic "assault" weapon ban signed into law by Clinton and the gang sunsets soon. Apparently, Bush thinks renewing this myopic and largely token piece of legislation is worthwhile.

I thought the assault weapon ban was a good move on Clinton's part. It paid lip service to gun contol but in essence did squat. What very little it did do sunsets. Clinton was the master of making a bill that did nothing and appeasing all of the special interests.

I am sad Bush supports renewal of this. But what can you say. The newspeak crowd has won and people really believe the guns banned are "assault" weapons. They're more like junk weapons and the streets aren't any safer.

I only hope Bush is merely paying lip service to this.

[Richard G]

I'm already on this. Whipping up letters to my Reps and Senators already. This stupid goddamned ban made pistol magazines (PISTOL, not an assault weapon, whatever the hell that is) for my 9mm 92 Berreta impossible to find. When the spring wears out, it needs replaced. They used to cost 35 dollars, now they are over 100 dollars, if you can find them.

Tell me how that makes people safer? Its not an assault weapons ban, its a grab all the guns you can ban.

Oh, and an AR-15 (civilian version of M-16), perfectly legal, is ILLEGAL under this law if you put a bayonet lug on it. Whew! Don't have to worry about all those drive by bayonetings anymore.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Richard G
Oh, and an AR-15 (civilian version of M-16), perfectly legal, is ILLEGAL under this law if you put a bayonet lug on it. Whew! Don't have to worry about all those drive by bayonetings anymore.

Hey Richard, is a H&K PSG-1 sniper rifle illegal? What about the .50 caliber sniper rifle with night-vision scope?

There are so many laws against guns now I don't even know if the law-abiding public even knows them all anymore. What magazines are you looking for ragrding your 9MM Baretta? Are you looking for the 14 round magazine?

BTW, I don't own a PSG-1 or the .50 caliber sniper rifle with night-vision scope. I just heard some nutcase chick politician talking about banning the .50 caliber rifle because it could penetrate "armor vehicles", you know, the ones the proletariat drives around in lol.

How can a real democrat fear an armed citizenry?

JK

[Richard G]

"Sniper" rifles of any kind are not illegal. Its just a rifle with a scope on it. .50 cals are not illegal, but automatic ones are. Night vision scopes are not even a firearm, as such they aren't regulated at all.
There are so many laws against guns now I don't even know if the law-abiding public even knows them all anymore.
And this is what pisses me off the most. One weapons can be legal, but if the serial number, or date of manufacture on an identicle weapon is after the date of the ban, its illegal. Its so moronic, and stupid, only someone who knows nothing about firearms (most of Congress Demonrats) could have drafted it. The law is so complicated, and convoluted, one has to consult a firearms expert to make a legal purchase, or the ATF will be all over you as if your a terrorist. It's an unwanted, and unnescessary burdon on law abiding gun owners.

Its the 15 round magazines (9mm Pistol) that are too expensive now.

Illinois and California have been trying to outlaw .50 cals for some time, even though wealthy gun enthusiasts are the only ones who really can afford them or want them. Not to mention there has never been a crime commited in the history of the United States with a .50 cal. More fear mongering, sky is falling gun grabbers at work.

If you want to purchase one, the most reliable, efficient, and well made model is Barrett. They have bolt action and semi-autos. Good for those 1000 meter shots, and pesky low flying airplanes.

http://www.barrettrifles.com/

[jj]

Originally posted by corplinx
http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/news/nation/5613894.htm

Knight Ridder on Bush supporting the "assault" weapon ban.

For those who don't know, the extremely moronic "assault" weapon ban signed into law by Clinton and the gang sunsets soon. Apparently, Bush thinks renewing this myopic and largely token piece of legislation is worthwhile.


I'm not at all surprised he feels that way.

Just consider the other freedom-eliminating legislation he's signed.

You lunatics who claim that W is for freedom ought to think a bit, this does sum up his basic philosopy, only you'll never have the guts to admit he's not your guy, nor is he for freedom.

[Supercharts]

I'm sure the NRA will educate W. Without NRA support we'd have Gore now.

[EvilYeti]

I hold there NRA responsible for the current mess that gun control has become.

Their policy of opposing all forms of gun control, good and bad, has resulted in bizzare legislation like the current assault weapons ban.

If the NRA devoted their efforts to practical, realistic gun control America would be a safer, freer country.

[corplinx]

The assault weapon ban basically took a few scary looking guns and banned them. All of them semi-automatic, some of them of such dubious quality that you wish a street thug would have one instead of a high quality handgun (glock).

One or two of the guns could be easily converted to full-auto. If that was the case, they should have been reclassifed as class 3. Class 3 weapons are fully automatics.

The part of it that really has gun enthusiasts miffed is the full capacity magazine ban. My glock handgun originally came with a 15 round magazine. For self defense purposes, 15 rounds is a good number since you most likely to be attached my 2-3 attackers in an urban area. For target shooters, it means less reloading (the most mundane part of target shooting). For people who don't care about guns, it also means nothing. Why? Because the ban has had no effect on crime. Does limiting a 13 round magazine to 10 rounds really have an effect on crime? of course not.

[corplinx]

Originally posted by EvilYeti

Their policy of opposing all forms of gun control, good and bad, has resulted in bizzare legislation like the current assault weapons ban.


You must be confusing them with another organization. The NRA has lobbied _for_ efforts including automatic background checks. They took the innefficient brady system and lobbied for making it accurate and better.

[Richard G]

I hold there NRA responsible for the current mess that gun control has become.

I do to. They are not pro gun enough for me. I refuse to join until they stop making concessions to gun grabbers. The CCW lawsuit, and legistlation being debated in my state at the moment is a perfect example.

While all of the pro-gun majority in the House was arguing against, and overwhelmingly defeating an amendment to prohibit CCW in a vehicle, the NRA was backdooring them and trying to ram it through, just so they could say they helped pass a CCW bill. Even though it would have been so restrictive as to be almost useless.

NRA can KMA.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Richard G


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I hold there NRA responsible for the current mess that gun control has become.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I do to. They are not pro gun enough for me. I refuse to join until they stop making concessions to gun grabbers. The CCW lawsuit, and legistlation being debated in my state at the moment is a perfect example.

While all of the pro-gun majority in the House was arguing against, and overwhelmingly defeating an amendment to prohibit CCW in a vehicle, the NRA was backdooring them and trying to ram it through, just so they could say they helped pass a CCW bill. Even though it would have been so restrictive as to be almost useless.

NRA can KMA.

NRA not pro-gun enough! Ha, that made my day. Ha, ha, ho, ho.

[Checkmite]

I'll leave it to you all to fight the "good fight". Wake me when my compound bow is under threat of being made illegal.

[peptoabysmal]

Originally posted by Richard G

Oh, and an AR-15 (civilian version of M-16), perfectly legal, is ILLEGAL under this law if you put a bayonet lug on it. Whew! Don't have to worry about all those drive by bayonetings anymore.

After the Vietnam war, there were a bunch of these things around. Seemed like everyone had one. The army was selling them off by the case full. I saw one that was confiscated and had the night scope with the rubber closure, (so snipers couldn't see the dot of light around your eye), and this baby had a silencer on it that was good enough that he had been using it to kill rats in the backyard of his tract home and no one was the wiser. If he hadn't been selling drugs, he probably would have never been caught with it.

[EvilYeti]

Originally posted by corplinx


You must be confusing them with another organization. The NRA has lobbied _for_ efforts including automatic background checks. They took the innefficient brady system and lobbied for making it accurate and better.

News to me. I don't really keep up on gun politics, last time I did the NRA had an "oppose all gun control" policy.

Actually, your example doesn't count, as they lobbied to modify existing legislation, one which I'm sure they would repeal if they had the power.

Has the NRA ever actually lobbied FOR "new" gun control? I.E., not reducing the scope of existing legislation?

[Andalyn]

Originally posted by Richard G


Oh, and an AR-15 (civilian version of M-16), perfectly legal, is ILLEGAL under this law if you put a bayonet lug on it. Whew! Don't have to worry about all those drive by bayonetings anymore.

Only illegal to manufacture NEW "pre-ban" weapons unless sales are restricted to law enforcement. In other words, the weapon must be stamped "law enforcement only".

AR-15 rifles that were made before the ban, complete with bayonet lug and flash supressor - are completely legal to own. They are just now much more expensive, as they are not making them anymore.

I own one in the pre-ban configuration. Bayonet lug, supressor and all. It's not illegal to possess. Now, it is illegal to take a "post-ban" weapon and modify it with "pre-ban" parts, such as bayonet lugs and supressors.

Yep, I think these laws are fairly stupid.

What you said about the mags for pistols is very true. Non - LE only mags are extremely expensive.

[EvilYeti]

Originally posted by peptoabysmal

I saw one that was confiscated and had the night scope with the rubber closure, (so snipers couldn't see the dot of light around your eye), and this baby had a silencer on it that was good enough that he had been using it to kill rats in the backyard of his tract home and no one was the wiser.

Not to drift off subject, but why do so many people think it's possible to put a silencer on an assault rifle? Too many movies maybe?

[corplinx]

Most people dont even realize that "silencer" is a misgnomer. Noise suppressor is the technical term. And any concealable noise suppressor will merely allow the shooter to shoot without ear plugs.