Posted on 05/16/2004 2:09:18 PM PDT by neverdem
Just under four months from today, Americans will be able to walk out of a gun store with an AK-47 rifle, an Uzi or other weapon of mass murder under their arm.
Unless Congress acts — and Republican leaders show no inclination to do so — the 10-year-old federal assault gun ban will expire Sept. 13. A word from President Bush would get a renewal before lawmakers, a majority of whom would probably approve it. But the president is silent.
Most people, including most gun owners, are properly alarmed. A survey released last month by the University of Pennsylvania's Annenberg Public Policy Center found that 71% of those surveyed and 64% of gun owners wanted Congress to extend the ban.
But congressional leaders, too accustomed to taking marching orders from the National Rifle Assn., have stymied the reauthorization bill that Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), John W. Warner (R-Va.) and Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) introduced last year.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Probably just polled registered CA Democrats.
Perfect...thanks fer sharing...MUD
LOL!
"by carrying 10 firearms with me 24/7"
...I usually carry 3 handguns, and a rifle...
....which makes sleeping a little "lumpy,"...somewhat.
But not TOO lumpy...!
I hope your friend is OK and the burglars are taking the long nap.
I'd rather walk out with an American-made weapon of mass murder under my arm.
The editor of LA Times claims I'll be able to step right in and buy an UZI? Is that a promise?? Because I'll sure be lined up to buy one.
They're correct, but the critical point they "forget" to mention is that the UZI (or AK-47) in question will be the CIVILIAN version, which is SEMI-automatic (i.e., one shot per trigger pull).
The gun-grabbers in the media like to leave that out in order to give the FALSE impression that it's the FULLY automatic (i.e. "machinegun") version of these firearms that will become legal to buy if the ban expires. Those will still be heavily regulated, just as they were before the AWBan passed in 1994. There is not a SINGLE machine-gun affected by the AWBan -- it deals SOLELY and EXPLICITLY with only SEMI-automatic firearms.
BINGO!
While we're at it, I've done an informal survey of "people on the
street" to see if they were adequately informed by the media about the
contents of the "assault weapon" ban, so that they could make
an educated decision about it and express an informed opinion to
their congresspeople. The results?
1. Belief: Most thought the rifles affected by the ban were
machine guns.
Truth: They are not. Not a single one of them.
Source: The text of the bill itself, which only affects
*semi*-automatic firearms. Fully automatic rifles have
been strictly controlled since 1934.
Media encouragement for this incorrect view: "Rapid-fire
military-style assault weapons." heavy references to the
"AK-47" and "Uzi" without mentioning that only the semi-automatic
versions were affected by the bill, and video clips such as the
favorite of CNN, wherein they repeatedly showed video of someone
firing a *fully automatic* machine gun while they talked about
the ban, despite numerous complaints over a several month period.
2. Belief: Most thought the rifles affected by the ban were identical
to those used by various militaries.
Truth: They are not; militaries use select-fire "machine guns";
the rifles affected by the bill are only the "neutered" semi-
automatic versions. These are similar in appearance but have
different mechanisms which are not capable of fully-automatic fire,
and fire only one round for each trigger pull, just like every
other firearm (including revolvers) which are legal for private use.
Source: The text of the bill itself.
Media encouragement for this incorrect view: "Military-style
assault weapons." and video clips of soldiers firing similar,
but not identical, weapons.
3. Belief: Most thought the ban only affected a handful of models.
Truth: The ban actually affects over 200 models.
Source: Analysis by the US Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms,
the agency which will be enforcing the ban.
Media encouragement: "19 types of assault weapons."
4. Belief: Most thought the rifles affected by the ban were not used
by hunters and target shooters to any great degree.
Truth: The vast majority (well over 99.9+%) of the 2 million+ such
rifles which are currently privately owned are used in exactly
that way, and are not used in crimes of any sort.
Source: US government figures.
Media encouragement: "Weapons with no legitimate use."
5. Belief: Most thought the rifles affected by the ban were somehow
different, more powerful, or more "evil" than regular hunting
rifles.
Truth: In fact, they are smaller caliber and lower power than
most hunting rifles. The rifles affected by the ban are barely
adequate for deer hunting, whereas various hunting rifles
are designed for deer or larger game. Standard shotguns are
far more deadly than any round from an "assault weapon".
Many popular hunting rifles are semi-automatic, and in fact
the "assault weapon" ban itself specifically exempts a
number of hunting rifles that differ from the banned rifles
in appearance only -- they have identical mechanisms from the
same factory.
Source: An examination of the rounds and rifles in question.
Media encouragement: "These powerful weapons capable of
mass murder."
6. Belief: Most thought that these rifles were the "weapon of choice"
of criminals.
Truth: They are used in fewer than 0.5% of all gun crimes,
and are actually underrepresented in firearms crimes, meaning
that one of these rifles chosen at random is actually *less*
likely to be used in a crime than most other types of firearms.
Source: US government figures.
Media encouragement: "The weapons of choice of criminals."
7. Belief: Most thought that the ownership of these rifles would now
be outlawed.
Truth: Actually, the "ban" only prohibits the sale of firearms
manufactured after the date the bill was signed. The
2,000,000+ such rifles already in the country may still be
legally owned, used, transferred, and sold until the end
of time with the blessings of Congress and the President.
Source: The text of the bill itself.
Media encouragement: "The ban [sic] on assault weapons" and
"getting these weapons off our streets."
8. Belief: Most were totally unaware of the bill's ban on the sale of
"large" magazines.
Truth: This magazine ban, which will affect far more people than
the actual weapons "ban", affects most modern pistols.
Source: The text of the bill itself, and knowledge of current
firearms technology.
Media encouragement: Dead silence on the magazine ban provision.
9. Belief: The Congress has the power to enact such a ban.
Truth: Even leaving aside the second amendment, Article
I, Section 8 of the Constitution enumerates the only allowed
powers of Congress. Nowhere in there is the Congress given
the power to implement a nationwide ban on the manufacture,
sale, or ownership of *any* item, which is precisely why a
Constitutional amendment was necessary to enact the Prohibition
of alcohol earlier this century. (One semi-humorous note: Rep.
Jack Brooks spoke on the floor of Congress about the bill, and
said "This bill violates the Constitution...but I encourage you to
vote for it." Thankfully, 40-year veteran Brooks was defeated in
the recent election, mostly due to his vote on the ban/crime bill.)
Source: The text of the US Constitution.
Media encouragement: Dead silence on the question of the
Constitutionality of the ban.
Still think the "majority" of those polled which were in favor of the
"assault weapon" ban actually understood it well enough to make an
informed decision about it? In other words, were they truly in favor
of the actual bill, or were they only in favor of what they *thought*
was in the bill?
Bullshit. Pure unadulterated Bullshit. Full auto has been banned if built after 1986, and it requires a Class III to get one. They have nothing to do with the so called assault weapons ban.
Actually, it's technically accurate, since the AWBan affects the sales of the *SEMI*automatic versions of those firearms, which are still technically "Uzis", etc.
The public confusion was entirely intentional. The following concerns efforts by Josh Sugarmann (head of the anti-gun "Violence Policy Center" to revive the gun control movement after its jihad against handguns had ground to a halt, since the public generally sees handguns as effective and useful for personal self-defense:
The AWBan was conceived as a propaganda tool for the anti-gunners -- and it worked very well.# Sugarmann concluded that some new ploy needed to be used to kick-start # the stalled gun ban lobby. Something sinister, terrifying, and # unfamiliar needed to be demonized. Thus was born the concept of # the "assault weapon". To quote Sugarmann's paper again: "Assault # weapons... are a new topic. The weapons' menacing looks, coupled # with the public's confusion over fully-automatic machine guns versus # semi-automatic assault weapons -- anything that looks like a machine # gun is assumed to be a machine gun -- can only increase the chance of # public support for restrictions on these weapons. In addition, few # people can envision a practical use for these weapons." # # Further quotes from the paper: "If police continue to call for assault # weapons restrictions, and the NRA continues to fight such # measures, the result can only be a further tarnishing of NRA's # image in the eyes of the public, the police, and NRA members. The # organization will no longer be viewed as the defender of the # sportsman, but as the defender of the drug dealer." # # He goes on to predict that "Efforts to restrict assault weapons # are more likely to succeed than those to restrict handguns." # And why is this? "... many Americans do believe that handguns are # effective weapons for home-defense and the majority of Americans # ...believe the Second Amendment of the Constitution guarantees # the individual right to keep and bear arms. Yet, many who # support the individual's right to own a handgun have second # thoughts when the issue comes down to assault weapons. Assault # weapons are often viewed the same way as machine guns and # `plastic' firearms -- a weapon that poses such a grave risk that # it's worth compromising a perceived constitutional right." # In Sugarmann's 1989 paper, he proposes legislation -- the recent # national "assault weapon" ban bears an uncanny resemblance to # Sugarmann's proposal.
Here's an even funnier one -- "the freedom hating politicans" *themselves* own rifles that have been labeled "assault weapons".
During the time
Congress was working on banning so-called "assault weapons". Gov.
Chiles of Florida was a big cheerleader for the ban, but then
things got silly when it was discovered that one of Chiles' own
hunting rifles met the "features requirement" of the law and
was thus deemed an "assault weapon". Chiles' clueless response
was priceless:
[From a newspaper article:]
[Chiles' spokesman said] "The facts are that the
governor is a sportsman and a hunter," he said. "The gun he
owns is legal and is used for hunting purposes."
Although the Ruger is not among the 19 weapons specifically
banned by the bill, which passed in the U.S. House last
week, the measure also bans the manufacture of any
semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines, folding stocks
and protruding pistol grips. Those are included on Chiles'
camouflage-painted Ruger.
"I've supported a ban on assault weapons," Chiles said.
"It's not an assault weapon. It's a rifle I got for turkey
hunting. It folds up."
"I've got all kinds of guns. The way you've portrayed it
is I'm sitting there with an assault weapon."
Welcome to the f***ing club, Chiles.
While I do love my Bushmaster, and all of my other American made guns, there is just something fun about paying around 300 bucks for a semi-auto SAR-1 (Romanian AK-47 clone), and being able to shoot for a day without breaking the wallet (I pay about 2.5 cents/round). Sure it's not as accurate as my AR, but it sure is a helluva lot of fun, and it isn't as picky about ammo as the AR either.
I saw Bill O'Reilly interview Larry Pratt (of GOA) a few months ago and when the latter tried to inform him that the AWB was not about machine guns Bill blew him off by saying "yeah, yeah, we've all heard that nonsense before." (Unfortunately Pratt let the host walk all over him).
So here's a (supposedly) pro-gun journalist whose business it is to keep up with the hot topics of the day and not only did he not know squat about the AWB, he didn't want to know.
I'm convinced that 99.9%+ of the electorate is completely ininformed about the issue. ....And that includes many here on FR, unfortunately.
ininformed = uninformed
Excellent survey. Thanks for posting it.
"carrying 10 firearms with me 24/7...."
...did I mention the little red wagon I pull around and all the ammo boxes, magazines, bayonets, extra raccoonskin caps....?
Hey...hopper-fed Gattling Guns are not considered "magazine-fed," are they..?
RATS! I shouldn't type while I'm loading (...but then I'd never type). Was that 10 rds. or 50..?
Never mind.
Stay Safe PM........
I've never seen O'Rielly as pro-gun or very conservative. He's definitely not libertarian. He calls himself an independent. I believe others call him conservative because he's on FNC. I think it shows how far left they are on the political spectrum that they call O'Rielly a conservative.
I think he's a bigtime moderate statist blowhard. He seems to propose a government solution for every problem. I can't take him most of the time unless he has an interesting guest. I liked it better when Chris Matthews had the same time slot, despite the fact that Chris is a rat. Usually one of them would have someone or something interesting.
Kieth Olberman wears his politics on his sleave. To call him smarmy is too good a compliment. CNN is usually last call. Please pardon my digression.
Isn't "south" for you the Gulf ?
Hard for "them" to sneak up out there (good), but hard to hide if they do (bad).
I'm a "head for the hills"-type. Lots of potential burrows there...as well as "oops"-type landslides, to save ammunition.
How true about the M1911A1's. I've been in touch with Novak's a lot lately, and have to change the Hi-Power recoil spring to not beat it up inside with +P ammunition...which I need to compensate for the sub-.45 cal. 9mm...if I want a proper stopper...which surviving Muttlys always do. They also characteristically check out advice...and Novak's, who would know, said Recoil Buffers on Brownings can cause real nasty problems with lockup and safety engagement. Gulp. O-tay...no Buffers.
Our gendarmes use Speer Gold Dot 124+P..so now so do I. In court (double gulp), they'd have to condemn the town and county for their use of Rambo Dum-Dums too. Muttly rather hide behind authority when authority attacks him. Hey, I figured they tested it, and "it only hurts bad people !"
Hey...since we seem to be the only two left on this thread..
Threadkiller Muttly (my Indian name) ate lunch near a GOLDFINGER poster...so he's all supressed P-38 and Sean Connery'd up again...:
...been internally singing "GOLD-DEWCLAW (Da-Daa-Da) he's the dog, the dog with the perforated keyboard..."
GoldMuttly sounds better though.
Bought some Hornady TAP (Urban Tactical Ammunition) for ol' Mini. 55gr. Ballistic Tip. Expensive for 'yotes...but the nice man said they would extend my effective range.
Going out now to see if these Speer +P 124s work better than 115 and 135. I guess Muttly was a bad boy, and kept his magazines loaded and unused for too long. Just demonstrates my point about defensive revolvers for beginners, though. Hoping Wolff +5 mag. springs solve my "failure to feed" problems. Good thing my pistols have bayonets. Who's laughing NOW!
Well, time to go home and separate Mr. Squidward from my Kibble.
Good! It's about time Americans were allowed to exercise their God-given right to keep and bear arms and further exercise the ability to use such instruments responsibly.
And the LA Times can kiss my M1A if they don't like it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.