Posted on 12/22/2006 10:15:46 AM PST by neverdem
It is long past time for the state Legislature and Congress to enact more effective bans on high-powered, military-style assault weapons.
New Bedford police were overpowered and outgunned when they went to the Foxy Lady strip club last week to respond to a domestic violence incident that turned into a deadly and frightening rampage.
The gunman, Scott Medeiros of Freetown, had obtained a Class A license more than a decade ago that allowed him to purchase any legal gun in the state, including the AR-15, a military-style semiautomatic assault rifle that is banned in California.
It is true that without the AR-15 rifle, Mr. Medeiros still might have used deadly force to kill the two Foxy Lady employees he apparently intended to murder. But he would not have overpowered police on patrol. And as one letter writer pointed out this week, "He definitely would not have been able to accomplish the life-threatening terror that took place outside the club."
We applaud New Bedford Mayor Scott W. Lang for urging legislators from SouthCoast to push for a more effective assault weapons ban in the state, and we urge him to use his influence with our congressional delegation to revisit the federal assault weapons ban that was allowed to lapse in 2004 under the Republican-controlled Congress.
Massachusetts is such a small state and so near states with much weaker gun laws that a stronger federal policy on assault weapons is necessary to protect the Bay State.
The 10-year federal ban halted the manufacture of 19 of the most deadly military-style assault weapons and banned their sale across the nation. Critics say there were significant loopholes in that ban. For example, the weapon used by Mr. Medeiros was banned only when it included certain components, such as a bayonet, flash suppressor and other devices, according to Freetown Police Chief Carlton Abbott. The basic weapon designed to replicate the military M-16 was still for sale across much of the nation.
Chief Abbott agrees with Mayor Lang that it is time to revisit regulations on assault weapons. He also suggests that the state re-examine classifications of gun licenses. Under current law, anyone with a Class A or Class B license can purchase a military-style assault weapon.
Weapons bans open up a raging debate about the meaning of the Second Amendment "right to bear arms." But this debate should not keep us from looking at the disturbing reality that it is too easy for civilians to purchase and use weapons designed only to kill and terrorize people, weapons that provide a civilian with more firepower than local city and town police. We must then enact sensible regulations to protect all law-abiding citizens, whether or not they choose to own a gun.
Speaking from New Jersey, where we still have an "assault weapon ban" in place, the definition is a loose one.
The people who designed the original concept in law (in the US anyway) didn't really know anything about firearms, so instead of using the technical definition of the term from military parlance, they decided to come up with a new definition of the "assault weapon". To gun owners, or really anyone who understands how guns work, the distinctions they chose seem arbitrary because they have no effect on either the power, effectiveness, or practical use of the firearm, but to people who don't really know about those things, they seem to be important differences.
They broke weapons into 2 classifications (assault, and non assault), and did so primarily by appearance. Seemingly arbitrary and cosmetic features like the ability to add a bayonet, or a pistol grip stock became crucial, while functional issues were ignored. For people concerned primarily with the function of a firearm, basing restrictions on these differences are silly, and the manufacturers have responded to that by carefully removing the non assault features to make their products legal again, but to the people who wrote the law, these seems to be side stepping the intent of the law which was to make the most dangerous weapons unavailable to the public.
The problem with that logic (forgetting for a moment the problem with the intent) , is that since they don't really know anything about firearms, they are wholly unqualified to determine which weapons are more dangerous than others, and if they leave it to people who do understand the differences, then are quickly put in the politically uncomfortable position of having to ban all firearms or none.
So in short, it's all just feel good legislation designed to give the appearance of "doing something" to those who don't understand the issue, while actually not accomplishing much at all. The guy in the article could have shot up the place with a browning blr rifle which doesn't come under the assualt weapons ban but still delivers the exact same firepower, and in fact, could potentially deliver substantially more.
As for the issue of intent, I think the people who design these laws are simply too short sighted, and ignore the role that these firearms play in our current politically system. The threat of armed uprising is a great deterrent to tyranny, and the framers of the constitution clearly knew that. But the people promoting gun bans would prefer a little more tyranny than liberty all the same.
"So the paper alludes to the fact the the "expired" federal ban would not have helped the situation with this nutcase and his AR-15."
The argument will be that the Democrat sponsored 'Assault Gun Ban' was a reasonable and moderate attempt to solve this problem that didn't work because of the 'loopholes' that must be eliminated in the "New Assault Gun Ban" that prohibites civilian possession of any gun that the Democrats think is 'unfit for civilian possession'.
Well--usually Class III armor covers 'the package.'
That's why I went top-down...but your ordering is fine with me, assuming Class III's are not a factor.
A very nice and factual reply, t.
Here's the short version: "If it is painted black, is a long-rifle, and looks mechanical rather than pretty, it's an 'assault weapon.'"
IOW, does it look scary to Nancy Pelosi? Then it's illegal.
Exactly, where does the verbage "sporting use" appear in the constitution?
"... an 'assault weapon' would be anything these gun grabbers decide it should be."
mak5
I love that.
Cordially,
Good point. Now may be a good time for getting a Barrett too.
What makes you think the 'New Assault Gun Ban' would allow you to keep your Barret? As Senator Feinstein said: 'If we'd have had the votes, we'd have made you turn them (semi-automatics) in.' Rough quotation of her remarks following the passage of the Assault Gun Ban.
Actually, I don't expect the 'New Assault Gun Ban' will require you to turn them in. But, you will have to register them. It's the 'Improved New Assault Gun Ban' that will require turn-in.
I think a lot of Barret's would get stolen prior to the registration process.
Get a bucket ready....
Other weapons cannot be used for assault, of course.
If a bullet issues from the barrel when you pull a trigger, that is "automatic" to some of these folks and that definition seems to be getting more common. A non-automatic would be one where you have to manually extract the bullet from the weapon and throw it.
So I can keep my 30-06 but I have to give up my SKS? Cool. /s
Arms. That would include swords and spears. Most populations have given up their right to sharp instruments with blades long enough to cut an apple in half at one stroke.
I knew about getting them from odcmp and eligibility. I didn't know about the other info you gave me, especially Northridge. On the barreled receivers, which is better Springfield or H&R?
You better hide it good. I imagine the penalties for possession of 'stolen' property will be severe.
Check one of the on line gun auctions like GunBroker.com
Is the one you named a .308 or a .223 ? I'm awaiting delivery of an AR in .308, 20" bbl, flat top, collapsible stock, takes FN/FAL mags. Got the mags, ammo and sights, just no *^#@ weapon yet!
I saw a Napoleon a couple of years ago advertised for about 24K, think it included caisson, harness for the team and all the accoutrements for the gun; rammer, sponge, worm, etc.
Now all you'd need would be the team, the rest of the gun crew, ammo....
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.