"Halt the Assault": Million Mom Marchers to Return to D.C. After 4 Years, Thousands of Lost Lives

http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=117-04062004 ^

[chance33_98]

"Halt the Assault": Million Mom Marchers to Return to D.C. After 4 Years, Thousands of Lost Lives; America's Landmark Assault Weapons Law Hangs In the Balance

4/6/2004 9:40:00 AM

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

To: National and Assignment desks

Contact: Rob Wilcox of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence United with the Million Mom March, 202-898-0792

WASHINGTON, April 6 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Across America, mothers and others are organizing buses, stapling flyers in the supermarkets, calling into radio shows and organizing local press conferences. They're securing entertainment talent, stuffing envelopes in church basements and calling their representatives in Congress.

The message to all: Mother's Day in Washington will be the kickoff of the mother of all grassroots efforts -- a relentless campaign to get President Bush and Congress to save the assault weapons ban and take other steps to protect our neighborhoods and our children from gun violence that takes the lives of almost 30,000 Americans a year.

In 162 days, barring Congressional action, military-style assault weapons now banned by law will be legal again. Just in time for America's children to go back to school, Uzis and AK-47s will be for sale legally again.

The chapter-based grassroots Million Mom March organization will demonstrate on the West Front of the U.S. Capitol on Mother's Day, May 9, to begin a national drive to save the law -- with a particular focus on getting President Bush to keep his campaign pledge to renew it. Among the notables who have agreed to speak are parents of children lost at Columbine High School, authors, law enforcement leaders, faith-based leaders and women's leaders. A detailed lineup of speakers will be released at a later date.

"The President's men keep saying 'the President's position is clear,'" says Shikha Hamilton, a single mother from Detroit, Michigan who is the official spokeswoman of the 2004 Mother's Day March to Halt the Assault. "Those of us who hear gunfire in the middle of the night would appreciate a little more clarity. There's no sensible, rational explanation to let this law expire."

The Mother's Day activities will begin at 10 a.m. with an interfaith service and continue at 11 with testimonials from victims of gun violence, remarks by other gun safety advocates, and entertainment throughout the afternoon. Details as available will be included in future media advisories and also posted at http://www.mmm2004.com.

The evening before Mother's Day (Sat., May 8), Million Mom March members and other supporters will gather at the first-ever "NRA Blacklist Ball" in Washington D.C., a fundraiser for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence united with the Million Mom March. The event's name plays off the blacklist of people and groups the NRA maintains on its website. (For more, see http://www.nrablacklist.com.)

The founder of the first Million Mom March, Donna Dees- Thomases, has just published a book about her experience. Looking For a Few Good Moms was just published by Rodale Press.

"If America's mothers fail to make themselves heard, then just around the time we're stocking up on back-to-school supplies next September, terrorists, drug lords, and the mentally unstable will be able to stock up on assault weapons that can wipe out a school yard full of kids in a matter of minutes," Dees-Thomases wrote in the book's closing. "As mothers, we cannot let that happen."

News media wishing to produce advance stories or packages on the March plans are invited to contact Rob Wilcox of the Million Mom March united with the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence at 202-898-0792. The organization can set up interviews with Million Mom Marchers in scores of cities around the country.

Credentialing for press who wish to cover the march will follow with a separate media advisory to be shipped to news outlets April 12.

As the nation's largest national, non-partisan, chapter-based grassroots organization leading the fight to prevent gun violence, the Million Mom March united with the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence is dedicated to creating an America free from gun violence, where all Americans are safe at home, at school, at work, and in their communities.

[GrandEagle]

The average American citizen has NEVER been allowed to own one.
Actually they are considered Class III firearms and, up until 1989 when Mr. Bush Sr. signed the law that made it illegal, a private citizen could own one. We still can but is has to have been manufactured prior to 1989. You must go though an ATF background check, pay your $200.00's to get your tax stamp, and wait for the ATF to authorize the transfer of the firearm.

[mudblood]

"How good a job did the Marines do of preventing..."

My point, at the time, was not that marines handle the rest of the problems, but that they handle the rest of weaponry technology (machine guns, grenades, howitzers, etc.). Regarding armed terrorists on planes, an unarmed citizenry in the sky: I like the idea of air marshals. They know that if you start firing away like mad then you can decompress the fuselage (totally misspelled, I'm sure), hurt people, etc. I also like the idea of arming pilots.

[Hacksaw]

LOL! Man they sure have a way with words don't they!

Yes - I am sure you remember as well as I do how people would tote their Uzis around like fishing rods before the ban went into effect.

At least in 2nd amendment rights I think we can say that we have been moving slightly forward.

[dirtboy]

Ok, before I get flamed about the guy with the rifle up in the tower: my point about him wasn't his weapons of choice, it was his diseased mind/soul. I picture a guy like that with an automatic weapon. Further flame protection: pistols can wipe out school yards too - just slower, less effectively.

The Scary-Looking Gun Ban, otherwise known as the Assault Weapons Ban, has nothing to do with the actual physical workings of the weapon - it simply bans weapons on physical appearances, and serves absolutely no real legal purpose. It was meant as an incremental step towards a larger gun ban by conditioning citizens that it is OK to ban a certain class of weapon. And with the steady retreat from gun control over the last few years, the gun-grabbers are putting up a half-hearted fight to preserve this incremental step.

[GrandEagle]

These folks are delusional.
Need to continue a bit here...
I agree though that they are using these descriptions as a "hot button" with the insinuation being that the so called "Assault Weapon Ban" had something to do with these. It did not even address them. As mentioned before, fully automatic weapons for non-law enforcement agencies were outlawed back in 1989. Since then the price for one of them has skyrocketed. For example a M-16 in good condition will cost you upward of $12,000 dollars. An AK probably goes for about the same. You can get a "cheapie" like a "Fire from open bolt" MAK-10 type for $1200.00 - $1500.00 IF you can find one.
Their literature is written such that someone who is uninformed about firearms would think that without this "law" the streets would be filled with machine gun "totin'" drug addicts tomorrow.
Since 1938 (I think it is) fully automatic firearms have been very tightly controlled by the ATF. I can't remember the exact number but there has been less than 8 or so engagements since that time where "machine guns" were used.

[dirtboy]

I've been trying to convince my wife to let us get a gun for the house for over a year now. She's just about ready to do it.

Are you looking for a weapon solely for home defense, or do you also want it for concealed carry outside the home?

[GrandEagle]

I am sure you remember as well as I do how people would tote their Uzis around like fishing rods before the ban went into effect.
LOL! Yep! I really miss the couple of hundred that I turned in. (/Sarcasm)
I think that we can thank Florida for passing their concealed carry laws many years ago. That gave us some irrefutable, statically reproducible information that firearms are not the problem. SOME people who don't own firearms finally realized that it is a waste of time and money to continue pounding on the firearm issue when eliminating them produces the opposite results than what they were looking for.

[GrandEagle]

forceps and suction devices
The REAL assault weapons.

[mudblood]

"Are you looking for a weapon solely for home defense, or..."

I'm primarily wanting it for home use. Literally, I'm just trying to get it in the door :) After that, I can get a concealed carry on my own and exercise it at my disgression. I live in VA and it is legal here, so why put limits on my rights to carry?

[dirtboy]

I'm primarily wanting it for home use. Literally, I'm just trying to get it in the door :) After that, I can get a concealed carry on my own and exercise it at my disgression. I live in VA and it is legal here, so why put limits on my rights to carry?

Well, when you get the wife convinced, come to FR for advice as to which weapon to buy. You've got probably the most knowledgable firearms experts on the Internet on this site.

[GrandEagle]

I actually don't understand the 2nd amendment that well. Just how far does it go? We started with muskets, and now we're up to assault weapons (technologically), where does it end? Does "keep and bear arms" allow for rocket launchers, grenades, landmines, bazooka's, etc? I'm sure that there's probably a point at which some folks in this forum would raise their hand and go "the 2nd ammendment stops about there", each at various stages I'm sure. For my part, it stops at automatic weapons. Many of the folks here have already claimed that the bill is against semi-auto's that LOOK dangerous, which sounds silly. I'm not really an expert in these issues, I'll keep listening and reading. But I don't care if the founding father's showed up and said "yep, it includes fully auto uzi's" I'll be damned if I vote to allow people to purchase them.

Very interesting and very relevant comment. I'll throw in my 2 cents worth. First of all, the 2nd amendment does not grant us any right, we the people have all the rights. We wrote our Constitution to grant the federal government its rights. The 2nd amendment specifically states that the federal government cannot infringe of our right (that we are endowed with by our creator) to own firearms. Please note that the source of our rights is from our Creator, not the government. The government cannot remove that which it did not grant. Now for you second point about owning rocket launchers, grenades, landmines, bazooka's, etc. Yes the 2nd amendment would prohibit the federal government from infringing on our right to own these items. Do I think anyone should be able to own them, no. The problem exists that our government failed to address these issues in a legal way. As times and technology changed, and weaponry became more and more devastating, a constitutional amendment should have been added where we granted our government the authority to “infringe” with regard to these weapons.
When the first firearms act was passes back in 1938 (I think), to get control of the gangsters having true machine guns, the proposes of the bill couldn’t believe that it passed. They went around the Constitution by not refusing to allow automatic weapon ownership, but by taxing them. By requiring proof of paying the tax (now called the class III firearms tax stamp), they could simply fail to issue the tax stamp. It was not until 1989 that then president Bush made ownership of a “machine gun” illegal. It is still legal to own a pre 1989 machine gun provided you get the tax stamp. As with anything that has a limited supply, they are pretty much price prohibitive.

[mudblood]

This is very interesting reading. I'd not considered the relationship between our creator-endowed rights and the constitution. Also, the topic of tax stamps and machine guns is very interesting. So it would be beurocrats that enforced society's wishes - by not issuing a stamp - not the constitution. Fascinating. Didn't know or think about any of this. And I'm glad you don't think my neighbor should be able to purchase stinger missiles :) Thanks for the reply.

[jjm2111]

[GrandEagle]

I'd not considered the relationship between our creator-endowed rights and the constitution.

It was a pretty astounding revelation to me also when I finally understood this very point. When I re-read the Declaration of Independence and our Constitution with this in mind I truly began to understand just how wise the Founders of our nation were.
The Declaration of Independence states that it is "self evident" that we are endowed by our Creator with these rights; then goes further to explain that "governments are instituted among men to secure these rights". That would be our Creator endowed rights.
This one point sets us apart from all other governments on earth; that WE grant our government its rights. Anything that we have not addressed in the Constitution is not the business of the Federal Government, nor do they have any authority to even legislate on those matters.
Unfortunately our government operated public school system has log taught that we the people get our rights from our Constitution. Once this thought took root in the minds of our citizens then the Federal government was free to interfere in any area not specifically prohibited by the Constitution; a complete reversal of the roles of the two party’s bound together by our Constitution.
We have long sense abandoned even the reasonable appearance of a Constitutionally functioning government and I don't see any recovery in sight. An unlimited government is why we have such a tax burden, and a high deficit. I could go on an on, but when you get time re-read both Documents with this in mind. You will be surprised I think.

[Jimmy Valentine's brother]

gun violence that takes the lives of almost 30,000 Americans a year.

Do these weenies have a source for this statistics or is this just another leftist lie?

[chance33_98]

or is this just another leftist lie

Leftist Lie is redundant, if a leftist said it it is a lie or put nicely 'a distortion of the truth'

Example: they may count gun violence as iraqi's shooting american soldiers, afterall the sentence says 'takes the lives of...Americans'. They might also throw in suicides by gun, then just for fun they may throw in how many were shot in tv shows because they have no grip on reality anyway.