What Happened to the Ban on Assault Weapons?(Jimmuh Carter)

New York Times ^ | 26 April 2009 | Jimmuh Carter

[TADSLOS]

THE evolution in public policy concerning the manufacture, sale and possession of semiautomatic assault weapons like AK-47s, AR-15s and Uzis has been very disturbing. Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton and I all supported a ban on these formidable firearms, and one was finally passed in 1994.

When the 10-year ban was set to expire, many police organizations — including 1,100 police chiefs and sheriffs from around the nation — called on Congress and President George W. Bush to renew and strengthen it. But with a wink from the White House, the gun lobby prevailed and the ban expired.

I have used weapons since I was big enough to carry one, and now own two handguns, four shotguns and three rifles, two with scopes. I use them carefully, for hunting game from our family woods and fields, and occasionally for hunting with my family and friends in other places. We cherish the right to own a gun and some of my hunting companions like to collect rare weapons. One of them is a superb craftsman who makes muzzle-loading rifles, one of which I displayed for four years in my private White House office.
But none of us wants to own an assault weapon, because we have no desire to kill policemen or go to a school or workplace to see how many victims we can accumulate before we are finally shot or take our own lives. That’s why the White House and Congress must not give up on trying to reinstate a ban on assault weapons, even if it may be politically difficult.

[Gorzaloon]

Eat Hearty, Jimmy.

[Names Ash Housewares]

“But none of us wants to own an assault weapon, because we have no desire to kill policemen or go to a school or workplace to see how many victims we can accumulate before we are finally shot or take our own lives”

Yeah, that’s it you idiot.
Anyone who wants a so called “assualt weapon” (BS terminology I will add), just wants to murder innocents with it.

Carter your sick of the mind. Utterly sick.

[VanillaBlizzard]

Same thing I was thinking....what’s the statistics for weapon deaths in the US? I would think pistols kill more people in the US than a AR does?

[kingu]

Umm, Jimmy, just so you know, the same people who are trying to spoon feed us the assault weapon ban is the same group who thinks that you've got an arsenal of firearms and are a gun nut. They'll even take that prized muzzleloader because there's no method for the hammer to imprint a serial number on the round ball. But that's ok, you won't be able to fire it, because they want to ban black powder, as it might be used as an explosive.

Those scopes they want to ban, because it's unfair for the animals, and a real hunter doesn't really need it, it's just there for killing cops and children. And should your friend want to apply modern technologies to make a futuristic muzzleloader, it too would be qualified as an assault weapon and again subject to the ban, simply because of certain features.

And those handguns - no one needs a handgun to go hunting.

This is why the ban is a bad idea, because the singular goal, as we found out over the ten years of the assault ban, is to simply ban guns. It is to expand what qualifies as a banned gun until no firearms are permitted at all.

Jimmy, you placed your hand on the bible and swore to defend the constitution. In few places is the constitution so absolutely and crystal clear, not limiting itself to congress, or the judicial, but making the absolute statement that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. That's owning it, that's carrying it, that's using it if need be, and in no way is it limited to hunting or plinking - it was because the framers of the bill of rights knew that there was every reason to put concrete protections in, because they knew that the worst enemy our nation could ever face was our own bureaucratic class who felt they were entitled to make all the rules, and protect their position. So they eliminated the power to restrict speech, to restrict the freedom of the press, to not use a state religion to place themselves above God, and forbade impinging on the people's right to be armed and ready to retake their own country if need be.

The government that holds the people in contempt has nothing to fear from a disarmed population. And at the core, the framers wanted nothing of that, they wanted a government that didn't put a yoke on the people, but instead made a common contract of identity and ideals. A government of the people, by the people and for the people, not of a privileged class who abused governmental power for their own gain.

I support only one ban, that of forbidding those who have broken the common contract, who have committed felonies and high crimes from ever owning and possessing firearms. Not that the criminal element would ever submit to such rules; by their very nature, they are against that common contract.

[stuartcr]

Yeah, and they can all be traced to an actual person that pulled the trigger...not a gun acting on it’s own.

[hoosierham]

Peanut Brain got out of the house again.

Shutup,Jimmuh,just Shutup!

[Malone LaVeigh]

It's interesting that since zero's coronation, the demand for firearms, especially the so-called assault rifles, has far exceeded the industry's ability to produce them.
Using mr. peanut's logic, now is not a good time to be a police officer.

[CholeraJoe]

I own assault rifles because that’s what the JBT’s carry and I want to be equally equipped.

[Domandred]

Presidents Ronald Reagan....supported a ban

Is this true? I've seen it said by gun grabbers a few times but haven't been easily able to find corroborating evidence.

[bruoz]

Jimma, the original AWB didn't really ban even one gun. It only stopped domestic production of certain firearms based upon appearance (not function) for the general public. Post-ban semi-auto firearms lost their detachable flash hiders, bayonet lugs and folding stocks but their performance was unchanged. There never was a shortage of high-cap mags available either. It never would have passed without the sunset provision. It caused the Democrats to lose their majorities in both the House and Senate. It had no effect upon crime other than causing The ATF funding raid at Waco and the resulting OKC bombing.

What it did do was make a lot of money for those that had stockpiled pre-ban guns and mags. It also wiped out the senior pro-gun Democrats at that time and left the bottom feeders that are now in control of the Congress.

[dirtboy]

But none of us wants to own an assault weapon, because we have no desire to kill policemen or go to a school or workplace to see how many victims we can accumulate before we are finally shot or take our own lives.

Tell you what, Jimmah. Write Obama and request that all members of the Secret Service are only allowed to posess revolvers and shotguns before you call for an assault weapons ban for the citizenry. Lead by example.

[Gritty]

But none of us wants to own an assault weapon, because we have no desire to kill policemen or go to a school or workplace to see how many victims we can accumulate before we are finally shot or take our own lives.

Plains, Georgia, clearly has a village idiot in residence.

This is slander and demagoguery of the highest order.

[WackySam]

Instead, the N.R.A. is defending criminals’ access to assault weapons and use of ammunition that can penetrate protective clothing worn by police officers on duty.

Does this mean that you're willing to give up your "three scoped rifles", Jimmuh?

[Greystoke]

Why oh why couldn’t that killer rabbit get the job done?

[Charles Martel]

Jimmy's probably extrapolating that from Reagan's signing of the bill that killed manufacture of *real* assault rifles. Whether Reagan was even aware of that provision remains open for debate. As for semi-autos, I do not recall Reagan being opposed to them. Military-style semi-autos just weren't a big deal during the Reagan years.

Even Bush the Elder moved to ban import of foreign semi-autos only when the American gun manufacturers *asked* for that action.... it was an economic, protection of domestic industry issue, not a "stop the evil, ugly weapons" issue. Remember, companies like H&K made a number of fine sporting semi-autos which were barred from import back then.

[mad_as_he$$]

Cater you sucked. You sucked when you were president and you suck now.

The Second Amendment is not about the right to shoot. It is about the right to shoot back.

[VeniVidiVici]

[Hardastarboard]

Mr. Carter might want to take note of the fact that anyone of those hunting rifles he owns is much more capable of killing a police officer than a puny little assault rifle, merely for the fact that it can penetrate a bullet proof vest more readily.

For all those of you who have already pronounced 0bama the worst President ever, I hold out Exhibit A of why the hillbilly douche bag from Plains, GA has set the bar for "Worst President Ever" to a nearly unreachable level. Actually, calling Carter a hillbilly insults hillbillies. Y'all have my apology.

[bruoz]

"I have used weapons since I was big enough to carry one, and now own two handguns, four shotguns and three rifles, two with scopes."

Jimma, you got a few years on me but so have I.

BTW Jimma, I know the difference between freedom and illusion of freedom: Only a free people own guns.

[Lee N. Field]

But none of us wants to own an assault weapon, because we have no desire to kill policemen or go to a school or workplace to see how many victims we can accumulate before we are finally shot or take our own lives. That’s why the White House and Congress must not give up on trying to reinstate a ban on assault weapons, even if it may be politically difficult.

I have no desire to " kill policemen blah blah blah". If my EBR stays in it's closet for the rest of my life because it's not needed that'd be OK. But not having the capability it give me, well, "Not Gonna Do It...Wouldn't Be Prudent At This Juncture."