![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
weapons ban expiration
Sep. 14th, 2004 10:02 amFor those people who support Bush and believe he is doing a great job and love his policies: He's let the weapons ban expire. What do you think of that? Do you agree with this?
Now, some people might reason that he's protecting the right to arms. (I think he just wants that NRA backing.) I don't have a problem with people owning a shotgun or a hand gun. Don't like it, but it's your right to protect yourself or hunt for food. I do, however, have a serious problem with the average joe being able to purchase and use a semi-automatic weapon. The ban outlawed 19 types of military-style assault weapons, including the AK-47 and the Uzi. No, seriously, what the bloody helll do you need one of those for?
This site proclaims that the ban is basically unfair because well, hey, they're calling an Uzi an assualt weapon as well as certain rifles. Take a look at this:
Specifically, a rifle is considered an "assault weapon" if it can accept a detachable magazine, and possesses two or more of the following features:
* Folding or telescopic stock
* Pistol grip protruding conspicuously beneath the stock
* Bayonet mount
* Flash suppressor or threaded barrel
* Grenade launcher
Uhm, if your rifle features a grenade launcher, I think it should be considered an assault weapon. Remember all those crazies running around with rifles taking shots at people? Yeah. I particularly like the section of their site titled "Why Would You Want to Own One?" with one of the reasons being they're fun to shoot.
Look, I'm sure there are some really responsible gun enthusiasts who would love to be able to own and collect these sort of weapon, but there are also plenty of crazy people out there who don't need more weapons. Guns are designed to injure and kill - if not people then animals. So, yes, let's make it easier for people to buy things that kill.
That make as much sense to me as the guy who is a pyrotechnic/bomb afficianado wanting them to allow the private citizen to make dirty bombs or some such because they're a collector and it's "fun to blow things up."
From ABC News: Gun Enthusiasts Rejoice, But Police Fear What Will Happen When Assault Weapons Ban Ends
Chuck Payne, manager of Ray's Sporting Goods in Dallas, is upbeat about the situation. "If you got a high-capacity magazine you spend less time reloading," he said. "You shoot more, which is good for us because we sell more ammunition."
Wow... I'm.. really glad you can sell more ammunition.. ?!
"They're weapons of murder," says LAPD Chief Bratton. "They are not weapons for hunting or collecting. Why do we want to let the ban expire just so some nut can go running around with a gun and show off? And that's exactly what will happen."
In fact, in 1997 two bank robbers in North Hollywood armed with assault weapons, some of which had been modified to be fully automatic, held off 350 cops for more than two hours. They fired more than 1,100 rounds from their 75-round drum magazines.
I sure am glad that in the future, robbers won't have to worry about being charged with posession of an illegal firearm.
Now, some people might reason that he's protecting the right to arms. (I think he just wants that NRA backing.) I don't have a problem with people owning a shotgun or a hand gun. Don't like it, but it's your right to protect yourself or hunt for food. I do, however, have a serious problem with the average joe being able to purchase and use a semi-automatic weapon. The ban outlawed 19 types of military-style assault weapons, including the AK-47 and the Uzi. No, seriously, what the bloody helll do you need one of those for?
This site proclaims that the ban is basically unfair because well, hey, they're calling an Uzi an assualt weapon as well as certain rifles. Take a look at this:
Specifically, a rifle is considered an "assault weapon" if it can accept a detachable magazine, and possesses two or more of the following features:
* Folding or telescopic stock
* Pistol grip protruding conspicuously beneath the stock
* Bayonet mount
* Flash suppressor or threaded barrel
* Grenade launcher
Uhm, if your rifle features a grenade launcher, I think it should be considered an assault weapon. Remember all those crazies running around with rifles taking shots at people? Yeah. I particularly like the section of their site titled "Why Would You Want to Own One?" with one of the reasons being they're fun to shoot.
Look, I'm sure there are some really responsible gun enthusiasts who would love to be able to own and collect these sort of weapon, but there are also plenty of crazy people out there who don't need more weapons. Guns are designed to injure and kill - if not people then animals. So, yes, let's make it easier for people to buy things that kill.
That make as much sense to me as the guy who is a pyrotechnic/bomb afficianado wanting them to allow the private citizen to make dirty bombs or some such because they're a collector and it's "fun to blow things up."
From ABC News: Gun Enthusiasts Rejoice, But Police Fear What Will Happen When Assault Weapons Ban Ends
Chuck Payne, manager of Ray's Sporting Goods in Dallas, is upbeat about the situation. "If you got a high-capacity magazine you spend less time reloading," he said. "You shoot more, which is good for us because we sell more ammunition."
Wow... I'm.. really glad you can sell more ammunition.. ?!
"They're weapons of murder," says LAPD Chief Bratton. "They are not weapons for hunting or collecting. Why do we want to let the ban expire just so some nut can go running around with a gun and show off? And that's exactly what will happen."
In fact, in 1997 two bank robbers in North Hollywood armed with assault weapons, some of which had been modified to be fully automatic, held off 350 cops for more than two hours. They fired more than 1,100 rounds from their 75-round drum magazines.
I sure am glad that in the future, robbers won't have to worry about being charged with posession of an illegal firearm.
