So the ban is bad because it will make people have to pay more for guns?

__________________
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

No, it's a political issue, nothing else. More false promises of your government will protect you at any cost including your civil rights.

thanks

So what is the line for you as to what weapons we should be allowed to own? How is it not my right to own a dirty bomb or grenades?

__________________
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

How many of these features would a gun have to to be banned? Just one?
Also, how absolute is this proposed ban? Can one obtain a license to have a "banned" gun?

It seems kind of stupid to label something an "assault weapon" because it has a bayonet lug, might as well ban pointed sticks. "Military-style appearance" also seems pretty vague and subjective.

The only I think I could get behind would the ban on grenade launchers.

Bingo.

Under the old AWB, the exact same rifle, minus the evil bayonet lug, was legal.

It was a useless ban. Completely useless.

They are already banned - you cannot own an actual grenade launcher without special ATF licensing. This is just an example of the scare tactics used by the supporters of this sort of feel-good, do-nothing legislation.

Matt

__________________

I wouldn't mind having some grenades on hand for the gophers, but dirty bombs don't interest me as a personal possession. Maybe if I lived in one of the many socially defunct US cities I'd cost it out to conventional security systems, but not now.

They all count and I believe you would have to have a job in law enforcement or the military to have one and probably never could one be taken home although I haven't experienced that personally so I can't be sure. While I agree that the law isn't perfect and a couple qualifications seem silly I still think agree with the main purpose of the law. I think the idea of Military-style appearance is because a weapon that looks like a weapon for combat and nothing else could be used much more effectively for intimidation in a crime although I do not think that part or the one about a bayonet lug is necessary. The idea is to ban guns that have features that would not be needed for defensive purposes but for offensive ones such as shooting a large number of targets in a small amount of time. Defensively you would have to be attacked by a mob to need it rather than a few robbers or somebody breaking in and as far as hunting goes I guess it would help if you wanted to both kill the animal and mince the meat at the same time or you think you could take out a whole group of deer at one time.

__________________
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

The "Assault Weapons Ban". You know, the one he specifically mentions by name?

Er, he said he supports the "Assualt Weapons BAN". Gosh, how silly of me to think he is referring to a ban there, eh?

I see you are one of the folks who think that we should not be permitted to speak our mind, because we happen to volunteer to keep the spammers and whatnot off the forum.

Your attempt at censorship is not appreciated.

I guess you missed the part where I said I would have considered voting for him, before he jumped on the gun-ban bandwagon.

Matt

__________________

I was looking to see if you understood what you supported in terms of the ban, or if you were just responding to the scare tactics.

Sadly, I see it is the latter.

Can you tell us what a "barrel shroud" is, and why it should be banned?

I am not trying to pick on you - I am just trying to find out why you support this legislation.

Matt

__________________

Even if I do not know what it is I can look it up in a heartbeat so it doesn't prove anything. I am not responding to scare tactics but I am concerned about weapons that people own that are not used for basic defense of hunting. Everybody has a limit as to what weapons should be legal and mine it just not at the same point as yours. I find this idea of a pop quiz to be insulting and frankly I do not know anybody that memorizes every portions of the laws they support. Next time you advocate any legislation how about you take a quiz on it and see if you can name every part of it without looking it up. Did you read all the intelligence reports before supporting war with Iraq? Apparently nobody is allowed to take part in a discussion until they read all of the bills and get briefings on the subject. I said in a previous post responding to somebody else that I do not think it is perfect but nothing usually is and that the core idea is a good one.

__________________
"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

I guess, I just don't get riled up at the proposition of an assault weapons ban which would still allow Americans to own rifles, handguns, and shotguns.

The right to bear arms has to be qualified. You shouldn't be able to own WMD or explosive munitions and it's pretty debatable whether or not there is any need for a citizen to own an AK-47.

This is all just redneck NRA bullshit. I need no further explanation from you Matt.

__________________


Screw Change!! Let's have a Seamless Transition of Power and Policy.. John McSame in 2008!

Have you read HR1022? Every single semi-automatic shotgun on the market becomes contraband. Every single one.

Yes, it does. But the idea that a gun looks too scary for a civilian to own is just nonsense. That's what the majority of the AWB was about - cosmetic appearance.

Oh, I see. Since I disagree with you (probably less than you think, but that's irrelevant), I must be a "redneck".



Matt

__________________

Wow... I can't wait to see his "Hugs for Thugs" plan in action...

__________________

Say I'm going to get a Mac-10. If that's what I believe I need to defend myself, then that's what I should be able to get, as long as it isn't a weapon that could harm someone other than the target (like an rpg, bomb, or any sort of explosive or chemical weapon).

__________________