Ten years after it was born out of the carnage of three California mass shootings, the federal assault weapons ban is fading out of existence Monday.
While manufacturers look for a boom in business as people buy up previously banned weapons like AK-47s, Uzis and TEC-9s, police chiefs warn of an upsurge in crime.
They law basically does this:
It banned the sale of 19 specific semiautomatic weapons and ammunition clips of 10 rounds or more.
The criminals get full capacity clips and Americans who want to bear arms get sub-par guns and small clips. Who cares if an SKS has a 10 round clip or a 30 round magazine? One bullet is enough to kill someone.
man, this is a really tough call....and i don't want a political debate...but, i think it should be reworked. there are several weapons types that serve no real purpose in the civilian sector and shouldn't be available. i'm all for allowing people to have weapons, that is a choice and a right in our country, but on the same level, it is not part of the 2nd ammendment (It actually says you have the right to bear arma as part of an organized militia).
I am definitely for some type of regulation, but it needs to be done right and not from political motivations as the way it is now really only keeps law abiding citizens from getting the weapons. Instead, we need to really get the manufacturers to help out and stop producing weapons/ammo that cause the problems. i think that is the only way to approach it, and it can be done. then it just becomes a matter of collecting the weapons that are already out there and destroying them. Also banning the import of cheaper "Eastern Bloc" weApons would help
What would anyone need some of those for? I mean, who deer hunts wouldn't need an uzi! I have an sks semi automatic at home (It's the only one that fits my small shoulders and short arms) with a 10 round clip. If I can't hit a deer with that then I need some target practice and I shouldn't be in the deer woods!
I do believe that guns don't kill people -- people kill people. But I also believe that we don't need to put out so much temptation. Where do we draw the line? When you are letting people buy automatic weapons with a 30 round clip, why not just throw in a hand granade with it? I treat guns the same way I treat alcohol: they are good -- in moderation.
LMAO!!!!!! God, remind me to never go hunting with you.
the thing is in the wording, Amy, your SKS, although fine, can be considered an assault rifle because of the 10 round clip (you can get larger ones), and the fact it is a very cheap weapon, nothing wrong with that, its just in the Bill writers' eyes that cheaper weapons are weapons that are easier to get...which makes no sense.
Uzi's have been banned since the 1950 under the machine gun act, which few people realize, so the assault weapons ban had no affect on them.
And i know this will sound stupid, but how many people do guns in this country kill as compared to tobacco, drugs, and AIDS? Maybe we need to prioritize a little better
well as far as assault weapons for crime go, i think they're still going to sell mostly on the black market so they can't be identified. if you have an assault weapon registered in your name, it's too easy to get tracked down. a lot of people just like to own automatic weapons just to say they have one. i don't think most people want to kill anyone (i hope).
i do think it's cruelty to animals if you use a semi or fully automatic weapon on a poor deer. you might as well go fishing with dynamite if you're going to go that route. just my opinion. i'm no charlton heston, but i'm no moses either. wait, those were the same guy. oh well.
I actually saw a very interesting breakdown (that of course i now can't find) on violent crimes and firearms, i think people would be surprised at the statistics of it, if I find it again, i'll link it. there is nothing wrong with semi-automatic weapons, they are fine for hunting, and general shooting. The problem is that it is very easy to convert a weapon to automatic.
Also, you bring up a good point, i'd like to see the statistics of crimes committed by people with registered weapons as opposed to illegally owned weapons
capper5016 wrote:
Also, you bring up a good point, i'd like to see the statistics of crimes committed by people with registered weapons as opposed to illegally owned weapons
i can make up some good statistics if you'd like. for propaganda reasons or whatever. just let me know.
you know, 89% of all statistics are just made up anyway.
Yeah. There's no real reason to get an assault weapon except for the fact that it's "cool". While it may be true that the ban was ineffective, it was at least a step in the right direction. To just let it expire was irresponsible. Rather than letting it expire because of it's effectiveness, or lack there of, they should have used it as a reminder that even more strict rules should be enforced. Not getting rid of guns or anything that extreme but harsher punishments for possession of automatic weapons or something. I don't have a solution but as long as guns are accessible by the untrained, people will die.
If we ban terrorists from the US, will they stop coming over here and killing people?
Drugs are banned, people still use them.
The point is, if people want an assualt rifle to kill someone, they are going to get one.
My dad owns an AR15 (civilian model of M16) and it can be used for deer hunting. It is also a very fun gun to shoot (and expensive bullets are like 20 for $5).
the AR15 with a holographic site and floating barrle was the first gun i ever shot. My friend was military so he had the full sized clip from his m16 and i would be willing to bet that my tax's paied for our bullets. It was a fun gun, and freeking accurate to all hell. Having never shot a gun before i was supprized that i had a 8 inch spred at 300 yards.
"Don't open that! It's an alien planet! Is there air? You don't know!"
it's the whole "we live in america and we should be free to do whatever we want" thing. it applies to so many things. for example, there is no reason why you would need a motorcycle that can go 180+ mph. but you can buy one right now brand new for under $10,000. there is no reason why you need a giant SUV when you know very well you're not going to drive it off road more than a couple times, if ever.
people just want big and awesomely powerful things. guns are like the ultimate power trip. they give you the power to kill someone with little effort. you feel powerful just holding a gun in your hands. the solid metal feel, the force when you fire it, etc. if you've never held a real gun in your hands, i encourage you to try it sometime. it is kind of a weird at first.
anyway, i'm way off track here. the point i'm trying to make is that guns actually do kill people, but so does ice cream. but that doesn't mean we should ban those things. besides, the black market potential for ice cream would be out of control.
if Ice Cream is the root of all evil....I'm screwed, we have a Cold Stne Creamery right down the road. Add that to being italian, and i'm in real trouble.
capper5016 wrote: how many people do guns in this country kill as compared to tobacco, drugs, and AIDS? Maybe we need to prioritize a little better
Good point, but thos are all different topics that have programs in place that are trying to deal with them. Drugs are illegal already. Tobacco (which I feel should be illegal) has too many lobbyests, and can you really see the government trying to put a ban on promiscurity? The best they can do is to ban prostitution, but that is really hard to enforce.....
Wolfie brings up a great point and something i totally support. to buy any firearm, people should have to attend a comprehensive training course and have to pass it. No class, no weapon.
As to the law, i think, like alot of laws, it was good in theory, but the execution was terrible. We need politicians to start wording laws much better, leaving no loopholes, and not being influenced by special interests groups.
Likewise, the NRA is good in theory, but they need to stay out of politics. all of these groups need to work together. i also think we should do away with special permits for assault/automatic weapons and better define what they are. I don't think even collectors should have access to them, they should flat out be banned.
A10Pilot3 wrote:Hmm... my viewpoint goes like this...
If we ban terrorists from the US, will they stop coming over here and killing people?
Drugs are banned, people still use them.
The point is, if people want an assualt rifle to kill someone, they are going to get one.
My dad owns an AR15 (civilian model of M16) and it can be used for deer hunting. It is also a very fun gun to shoot (and expensive bullets are like 20 for $5).
Good points. However, if you use a banned weapon in a crime, it allows the prosecution to have a stronger case against you and allows for harsher punishment.
= 
= 
= :twisted: !!!11!!1!!