Had the "Assault Weapon ban" discussion last night with a couple of buddies. They're behind the bill and have no problem blurting out all the canned BS about how crime will go up now or why to you need a bazooka to kill a deer? One says " Seriously, what do you need an automatic weapon for?"
I respond "Sorry automatic weapons have been unavailable to (most) civilians since the 30s." They were surprised that "Assault Weapons" were not full auto......

...and these are the people that vote on issues like this.

I think a Tommy gun would be my first choice, although I've heard it's tough to hold on to.

Rick,

That's part of the game Feinstein (and many others) are playing. First, they get you to believe that 1) all weapons that look like military assault rifles are indeed assault rifles, and therefore no one except the military needs them. Then they 2) propose a "ban" which really isn't a ban at all (California state law being a notable exception) except for the manufacture of new "assault" weapons (see #1) and keep shilling it to anyone who will listen.

Of course, no one bothers to point out that all the weapons and high-capacity magazines available before the "ban" were still available after the "ban" was enacted.

As you pointed out, however, the average citizen doesn't recognize this fact, because our elected representatives haven't belabored the point.

Oh well...

It's also very heavy, especially with the wooden stock and drum mag.

Serious question (although I admit I'm against them).

What are semi-auto assault weapons good for?

You 100% right. After describing the features that qualifies the banned weapons from legal ones they thought it to be an empty effort. I firmly believe that existing laws should be enforced....to the fullest. If that fails then on to another tactic.

Amen Rick! If we can enforce the laws on the books, then we might actually make some progress.

Whats a street legal 450 hp 930 good for?

What's a 400 hp 944 good for, as a matter of fact, if it goes over 65 mph, why should we be able to have it?

Cars kill far more people daily than guns do, but you aren't advocating a "sports car ban" are you?

Don't tell me what my hobbies or interests should or shouldn't be. I have a basement full of "evil" guns and enough ammo to feed them for quite some time. I have had a carry permit for many years and I have been shooting for over 30 years on and off competitively for many of those. I have hunted exactly twice and was unsuccessful both times (didn't even get the chance to get a round off). Right now, I shoot 3-gun and I am leaning towards 1000 yd competition.

Why "asault weapons"? Nothing can touch my sub moa remmy 700 pss, (although I am looking at a serbu .50), but my FAL (which I built on a STG58) is my favorite gun to shoot. I like it better than the M1A and much better than my AK derivatives (wasr-10 and AMD-65). I refuse to shoot .223 (may as well throw the bullet at them as far as I am concerned) so I don't have any mouse guns.

If you have ever have the opportunity to shoot a squirt gun (fully auto) you might get a kick out of it. I want a supressed MAC 10. Wholly impractical, but a helluva lot of fun to shoot.

Don't be so quick to trash things you don't understand.

Pete

Re: More lies from the Big Three
 

In fact steve - in Faluja (sp) the failed attempt at militia control supported by Iraq/US forces GAVE them US Arms to assist them in their efforts. Since they STILL support the terror element now we have Iraqi insurgents armed with US made weapons.

Freaking great eh?

I don't really have a problem with responsible people wanting guns for fun. I feel the attraction of them as well. Hell, I even did shooting at school (at 13/14yo) for a while (I was average, and didn't in the end find it that interesting). But I do understand.

It's interesting you bring up the car analogy. No-one complains about being required to have a car licence, or being required to be TESTED to get that licence. I'd like to see the same for guns.

Further, different types of vehicle require different licences (which generally no-one objects to). These licences are much harder to get and require further tests etc. Likewise, different guns should be harder to get.

I guess I'm not suggesting that assault weapons should necessarily be banned, but they should at least be somewhat hard to get.

"Them", eh?

I Agree on the Uzi being an Ammo waster. Just like a MAC 10. Indoors gimme a shotgun.....you can't run from a 12 GA in a building. The whole gun ban thing is stupid anyway. I mean Bin Friggin Laden AINT goin to the Sporting goods stores and buying his AK47. As far as crime goes, you're just as dead with a single shot from a 45 as you are if it comes from and AK... The Terrorist groups have connections to obtain full auto weapons regardless and most likely have the knowldege to convert semi auto to full auto and manufacture the parts required to do so...... don't punish me and my fellow gun owners by taking away our rights to own legal firearms just because somebody thinks it looks scary...

The car license analogy is always brought up. It's apples vs. oranges though. In the United States, it is a <u>right</u> to own a gun. There is no right to drive a car in the USA. I'm sure it's difficult to comprehend the difference for somebody who was not born here - hell, it's hard for 1/2 the population who <u>were</u> born here to understand the concept of rights and personal freedom ...... :cool:

Competitive shooting, varmint hunting, plinking, whatever.

There is a good writeup of the AW ban, and how useless it really was here:
http://www.awbansunset.com/whatis.html

You can also go here, learn a bit and take the quiz at the end:

http://www.ont.com/users/kolya/

Tom

I'm partial to German metal...Heckler & Koch...specifically the HK91

http://www.calssportingarmory.com/Gu...93A2030404.jpg

Actually even during the gun ban you could buy "assault rifles" made before the ban...else you could buy modified versions of the same guns legally.

I'll have to check MD's gun laws to see if the expiration of the federal ban will make a difference for me.

I've already had a go at the "right" to own a gun. It is crap, quite simply, in my mind - no amount of pointing at the second amendment will convince me otherwise.

I'll remind you that once upon a time there was a constitutional amendment banning alcohol - I don't see the average 2nd amendment campaigner stepping in to vigorously campaign for reinstatement of that.

Further, does everyone have the "right" to own a gun? When would you take it away? Do you not approve of any of the restrictions on gun ownership in place? Would you prefer it was unrestricted? What about age restrictions?

Written into the constitution or not, IMO you don't have a uncontrolled "right" to own a dangerous weapon.

The stuff about the AWB and what it controls simply demonstrates that the government (for whatever reason) did a crap job of implementing the ban. This shouldn't be used as ammunition for removing the ban - it should be the starting point for making it better.

Me? I'd make anything military looking hard to get. Basically, I disapprove of any weapon designed primarily to kill people - regardless of whether it is modified to do so less efficiently.

Well, Cam, the Amendment banning alcohol is a fine example. The government, in its infinite wisdom, decided alcohol was just plain unnecessary for the average citizen. It didn't take too long to overturn that.

There are certain restrictions already in place, but as long as you're an average, upstanding citizen in this country, you have the right to own a firearm. Your interpretation of the 2nd Amendment does not change that.

So if I make a semi-automatic firearm that looks "friendly", then that's OK with you? What do the looks of a weapon have to do with its lethality?

If you disapprove of a particular item, fine, don't own it. Pretty simple, isn't it?

So Cam, is this one OK?
http://www.ruger.com/Firearms/images/Products/32L.gif

How about this one?

http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/~stratton/GRNo5.gif

Tom

Cam: I empathize with your feelings about semi-automatics, etc. What are they good for? Well, I imagine they are good for the collector or the person who wants to shoot high-powered firearms. I wonder, though: if those in NZ had the opportunity to obtain AWs, would they? I'm not uncertain that percentage wise, you (wouldn't) have as many Kiwis owning AWs as Americans.




edit: wouldn't

<i>" .... It is crap, quite simply, in my mind - no amount of pointing at the second amendment will convince me otherwise."</i>

Cam, I understand your point of view. But if you're not going to acknowledge our right to gun ownership, it's not possible to have a debate on the subject. The United States is very much different from all other countries.

Cam, do you guys get to own any guns? I live in the Midwestern/Southeastern part of the US. Outside of urban environments, guns are as common as cars and horses. Like cars and horses, guns are good when used responsible.