1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

ABC News: Obama to reinstate so-called "Assault Weapons" ban

Discussion in 'U.S. Politics' started by Little-Acorn, Feb 26, 2009.

  1. Little-Acorn

    Little-Acorn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    2,444
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    What used to be the worst-kept secret in Washington, has now become documented public knowledge: President Obama will seek a new ban on so-called "Assault Weapons", similar to the ban that expired in 2004.

    The old ban, which ran from 1995 thru 2004, was a spectacularly ineffective piece of legislation. People who predicted a lowering of crime rates in the 90s due to the ban, saw them rise instead. And people who predicted "gunfights in the streets" as a result of its expiration, found none. No increase in crimes, and actually a lowering of crimes in many areas as some state and local govts cracked down on petty crimes, enacted three-strikes laws for more severe crimes, started to allow law-abiding citizens to carry concealed weapons, and otherwise started acting like actual governments. Criminals fearing that their victims might now be better-armed, probably also contributed to the decline in crime after the AWB expired.

    Some people have speculated that the reason the so-called "Assault Weapons" ban had so little effect, is because that kind of weapon was almost never used in crimes to begin with, either before or after the ban.

    They didn't even get the definition of an "assault weapon" right. The type was invented in Germany around WWII time, and was a small, light machine gun that could be held and fired like a rifle, but which would fire many shots as long as the trigger was held down. Different from conventional machine guns of the period, which usually had to be mounted on a stand on the ground or in a vehicle, and often served by a crew of two or more men. Other countries started making similar small automatic-fire weapons, such as the Russian AK-47 machine gun and the American M16. Some had a selector switch, that let the user choose between one shot per trigger pull, and continuous fire (machine gun) when the trigger is pulled.

    But none of the weapons described in the so-called "Assault Weapons" ban, were machine guns at all. All of them were only capable of firing one shot when the trigger was pulled. Functionally they were identical to many common hunting rifles and target guns. The only difference specified in the AWB, were that the guns had to have certain features that looked scary but didn't change how the gun actually worked - a hole in the stock, or a flash hider on the muzzle end, or a fitting to mount a bayonet knife on the end, etc.

    The AWB was the ultimate "feel-good" law for hysterical people afraid of guns: It banned scary-looking ones that were no different from not-so-scary-looking ones. Effects on crime were nonexistent, since such guns were almost never used in crimes anyway. And as many people pointed out, laws banning guns only affect people who obey laws. They disarm only the law-abiding, while criminals go right on getting all the guns they want.

    The AWB had only one real consequence: It set a precedent, by which the government claimed the authority to control and even ban guns for completely arbitrary excuses - in this case due to their appearance. And in total disregard of the 2nd amendment to the Constitution, which declared that since an armed populace was necessary, no government could ban or restrict guns in any way.

    Now, despite the AWB's demonstrated record of ineffectivity and uselessness, the Obama administration wants to put it back. They are well aware that it has no effect on the crime they claim to be concerned about - the facts are well documented and available for anyone to see.

    Instead, they want to re-establish the idea that they can ban guns at any time, for any reason, and don't have to worry about that pesky Constitution any more.

    ---------------------------------

    http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=6960824&page=1

    Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban

    by JASON RYAN
    WASHINGTON, Feb. 25, 2009

    The Obama administration will seek to reinstate the assault weapons ban that expired in 2004 during the Bush administration, Attorney General Eric Holder said today.

    Wednesday Attorney General Eric Holder said that the Obama administration will seek to reinstitute the assault weapons ban which expired in 2004 during the Bush administration.

    "As President Obama indicated during the campaign, there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons," Holder told reporters.

    Holder said that putting the ban back in place would not only be a positive move by the United States, it would help cut down on the flow of guns going across the border into Mexico, which is struggling with heavy violence among drug cartels along the border.

    "I think that will have a positive impact in Mexico, at a minimum." Holder said at a news conference on the arrest of more than 700 people in a drug enforcement crackdown on Mexican drug cartels operating in the U.S.

    Mexican government officials have complained that the availability of sophisticated guns from the United States have emboldened drug traffickers to fight over access routes into the U.S.

    A State Department travel warning issued Feb. 20, 2009, reflected government concerns about the violence.

    "Some recent Mexican army and police confrontations with drug cartels have resembled small-unit combat, with cartels employing automatic weapons and grenades," the warning said. "Large firefights have taken place in many towns and cities across Mexico, but most recently in northern Mexico, including Tijuana, Chihuahua City and Ciudad Juarez."

    At the news conference today, Holder described his discussions with his Mexican counterpart about the recent spike in violence.

    "I met yesterday with Attorney General Medina Mora of Mexico, and we discussed the unprecedented levels of violence his country is facing because of their enforcement efforts," he said.

    Holder declined to offer any time frame for the reimplementation of the assault weapons ban, however.

    "It's something, as I said, that the president talked about during the campaign," he said. "There are obviously a number of things that are -- that have been taking up a substantial amount of his time, and so, I'm not sure exactly what the sequencing will be."
     
  2. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Hey Bunz? Where are you now?
    Hey Shaman? Thought you said he wasn't about gun-control?
    Hey Pocket? Where's your lippy response this time?


    Come on all you leftist, where's that "Obama isn't going to take away guns" theory?
     
  3. Popeye

    Popeye Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Messages:
    3,023
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Washington state
    Why don't you guys chill and stop posting stuff that's not true..


    http://thehill.com/leading-the-news...n-reviving-assault-weapon-ban-2009-02-26.html
     
  4. pocketfullofshells

    pocketfullofshells Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Messages:
    12,009
    Likes Received:
    203
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    land of 10,000 lakes and 2 senators again
    Hey andy....how about I was at Work? sorry did not know I need to respond on your timeline...I will not go to work anymore so I can sit and wait for new posts.

    1. If the ban was ineffective before..I would like to see how...was there a rash of fully auto guns sold to anyone someplace?

    2. I am going to count how many major crimes I can recall that used fully auto weopons....1....well thats it I am out...ak-47's with 100 rd clips...Bank robbery in cali.......so am I realy worried about them? nope

    3.Give me a croud of people....you take a fully auto....I will take a semi Auto....bet I can kill just as many if not more then you with it....so again does not do much

    4. what the hell do you really need a fully auto for? going to fight the black choppers that are taking over....passed foil hat....trust me, if we have to fight the government....the army will win...unless the army splits and half side with us...in such case army will provided the guns needed. Go play army in the woods with your friends...on your "compound"

    5. I do not support this bill...also I supported our states conceal and carry laws being added...I have the card for a guy who was a marine and now teaches conceal and carry and gun safety in my wallet , use to talk to him all the time ...he use to go to my work just to talk with me...hardcore republican...went in shock when I told him I voted Nader and was a green.
     
  5. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    The comment was meant sarcastically, not to be taken as a demand for timely response. Especially since I didn't think you would dare to respond since you've been proven so completely wrong by Obama.

    There was not a 'rash' of fully auto guns sold before the ban either.

    Ok now you are proving OUR point that the ban was useless and ineffective at stopping anything but law abiding civilian buyers.

    So you admit Obama's policies are useless as well?

    If we are going to make laws based on whether or not you need something, I can eliminate a million things you do not need. You don't need a house that big. You don't need a TV set or cable. You don't "need" a computer or internet. You don't "need" an SUV or full size sedan. You don't "need" a car at all.

    This is the difference between totalitarianism, and freedom. Freedom doesn't ask if you need it. Totalitarianism does.

    You don't NEED to carry a gun around with you. You don't "need" to protect yourself, that's what police are for. You don't need freedom at all.

    At any rate, the main point was, you claimed Obama wasn't going to do anything about guns, and he already has.
     
  6. pocketfullofshells

    pocketfullofshells Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Messages:
    12,009
    Likes Received:
    203
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    land of 10,000 lakes and 2 senators again

    actuly geinus, he has not done anything at all has he? no one report said something may be done....others said the report was wrong....but you take that as action has already been done.

    is making retarded claims even on issues I agree with part of some great plan you have to win a debate?


    But yes just ignore that the speaker of the house stated that there was no plan to do anything....only listen to what you want.
     
  7. PLC1

    PLC1 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Messages:
    9,921
    Likes Received:
    490
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The Golden State
    Obama wants to take our guns away!

    Townsfolk come to save the little shepherd boy's gun, so he can protect the flock from the big bad wolf, but no Obamas in sight. False alarm.

    Obama wants to take our guns away!

    Townsfolk come again, somewhat more slowly this time, to find the boy was just lonesome.

    Obama wants to take our guns away!

    No one comes this time. No response.

    Obama wants to take out talk radio away!

    Townsfolk come ready for battle, to find yet another false alarm.

    What I love most about this sort of thread is seeing all of the strawmen go flying. Look! There goes another one!

    The real big bad wolf is out there, BTW, hiding somewhere in a huge pile of federal money. Look out! He is real!

    But he isn't threatening either our radios or our guns. Hang on to your wallets, though.
     
  8. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48

    He's promising to do it. Then when he does it, what will you say? "oh well he didn't at the time that you said he would, so that means that...."

    Grow up.

    Of course you agree with it. Everything that doesn't work, you seem to agree with. Moving on.

    Yeah, and Bill Clinton promised a tax cut. Yeah we should listen to the leftists out there who are consistently liars.
     
  9. pocketfullofshells

    pocketfullofshells Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Messages:
    12,009
    Likes Received:
    203
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    land of 10,000 lakes and 2 senators again
    ummm yea he said that in 1996.....when he says it today, when in office, or actually takes some action to make it law...let me know. till then keep fighting the battle of 96....

    ever wounder why people think of the NRA is filled with Gun Nut loonies? this is why....

    last year it was , the UN was going to ban guns in the US.....you being crazy and yelling you want guns...does not go over well often.
     
  10. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Reminds me of some of the public reaction prior to the Holocaust. Hitler isn't a threat to freedom of speech. Hitler isn't going to disarm the people. Of course the people trying to warn everyone what Hitler was about, were ignored. By the time they saw the truth, it was too late. He has already captured the media of the day, and indoctrinated the youth, and disarmed the public. In a very short amount of time, the population was brought to complete tyranny at the hands of the Nazis.

    But here in America, that could never happen...
    [​IMG]
    Ron Clark Academy students singing their newest song, "Dear Obama," in Washington.



    It's just amazing how far people will go ignoring what's going on and not realizing these are not isolated coincidences.
    http://darwen.us/southcon/2008/09/children-singing-for-obama.html
     
  11. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Neither does supporting tyranny. Idiocy is what got us to this point. I have no reason to suspect Obama supporters are going to get any brighter anytime soon.

    And no, he said it in 1991 during his first presidential run, while speaking at Georgetown University. Of course he didn't follow through, even though he had a democrat majority in both the House and Senate. Like all democrats, he lied.

    I don't care what liberal idiots think about the NRA. I'm considering join just to support their cause, and tick off more liberals. Heck I need to get a gun, just to protect myself from democrat stupidity at this point.
     
  12. pocketfullofshells

    pocketfullofshells Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Messages:
    12,009
    Likes Received:
    203
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    land of 10,000 lakes and 2 senators again
    the quote by Obama , 1996...not Clinton....( who again I voted against 2 times)
     
  13. Depeche Toad

    Depeche Toad New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    91
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    More black people kill other black people in this country than anyone of any color killed by assault rifles.

    Useless liberal outrage at its finest.
     
  14. pocketfullofshells

    pocketfullofshells Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Messages:
    12,009
    Likes Received:
    203
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    land of 10,000 lakes and 2 senators again
    thank you for your pointless info.....look a sandbox....now go play
     
  15. Depeche Toad

    Depeche Toad New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    91
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    My pleasure.

    Liberals don't care about reducing crime.

    They just want to be empowered by it, like almost anything else.
     
Loading...

Share This Page