Skip to comments.
Bush Backs Renewing Assault Weapons Ban
Washington Post ^
| April 12, 2003
| Unknown
Posted on 04/12/2003 7:50:38 AM PDT by Mini-14
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 361-380, 381-400, 401-420 ... 621-633 next last
To: Technogeeb
Best post of the thread.
To: Henrietta
The 2nd amendment says I don't have to show a "need" for an assault rifle, or any other kind of gun. Just like the first amendment says I don't have to justify the books I read or the church I attend. Yeah, but anti-war protestors use the first amendment to hide their hate speech. I'm just interested in why there was a ban in the first place, and two, why do you need such a weapon? I mean, if the second amendment gives us the right to own and bear arms, then why don't we all have cannons in our front yards? Simply saying 'because the law says I can' doesn't really cut it for me. But that's just me. I can understand a handgun, a pistol, a rifle, etc. I would just like someone to give me a practical reason as to why they would want an assault weapon- other than saying 'because I don't have to show a need'.
382
posted on
04/12/2003 4:27:35 PM PDT
by
rintense
(Freedom is contagious. And everyone wants to catch it.)
To: Long Cut
You make a lot of sense. Why and the heck are you still posting on this thread? ;)
383
posted on
04/12/2003 4:31:56 PM PDT
by
rintense
(Freedom is contagious. And everyone wants to catch it.)
To: xm177e2
Leaders persuade through an honest public debate of facts. The 'assault' 'weapons' ban is a pile of warm horse dung that stinks worse than the 'Campaign Finance Reform' bill he signed, the Kennedy 'Education' bill he signed, the Agriculture (welfare) Subsidy bill he signed, the 'USA Patriot' (UNconstitutional sneak-a-peak provision) he signed, etc. Bush is exactly what I expected when I voted for him; if someone better challenges him in the primary, then we'll see.
384
posted on
04/12/2003 4:33:16 PM PDT
by
ApesForEvolution
(Yes, let us allow the economies of gerdung, frunk, mexiztlan, chirushcom and canadastan to wither...)
To: rintense
I would just like someone to give me a practical reason as to why they would want an assault weapon- other than saying 'because I don't have to show a need'. Let's say you're living on a decent-sized piece of property and you spot some dudes you know intend to do you and your family harm coming onto that property. An assault rifle allows you (if you know what you're doing) to get off many shots - some come with 20 to 30 round magazines - within a short period of time with a high degree of accuracy at long range. No other type of firearm has that capability.
To: Technogeeb
Man, you *NAILED* it! B-I-N-G-O.
386
posted on
04/12/2003 4:43:29 PM PDT
by
ApesForEvolution
(Yes, let us allow the economies of gerdung, frunk, mexiztlan, chirushcom and canadastan to wither...)
To: Beelzebubba
...then they will learn to take a stand in defense of the Constitution. BIG PICTURE. LONG RUN. Worked in '92 and '96
Yep, they learn that lesson every time - they just forget it. Do you know what you call a person that tries the same thing over and over and expects a different outcome each time?
387
posted on
04/12/2003 4:43:38 PM PDT
by
CyberCowboy777
(In those days... Every man did that which was right in his own eyes.)
To: rintense
Re: your post #382. If I may?
"I'm just interested in why there was a ban in the first place, and two, why do you need such a weapon?"
Okay, number 1: These firearms were banned because several isolated lunatics used them to kill people in a few mass-killing incidents. This terrified the more moderate soccer moms out there and made the idea of a ban palatable to politicians who previously would have rejected such a thing. Also, the anti-gun Left was WAITING for an excuse to get even a SMALL victory in their mad rush to ban anything with which a citizen could plausibly defend himself.
Number 2.: These weapons, being based on military firearms, are perfect for the defense of one's home, the taking of small game, or the defense of one's basic liberties against tyranny. In essence, they are simply perfect as all-around, general purpose rifles. They are, for the most part, the most reliable, easy-to-shoot, inexpensive(pre-ban), and robust firearms out there. Plus, their ammunition is and remains cheap. Oh, and they're great good fun to shoot, too.
Let's be clear...the 1994 ban covered not the weapons themselves, but certain features thereof...like flash supressors, pistol grips, folding stocks, and bayonet lugs. Their magazine capacity was limited to ten rounds, versus the 20-30 of preban models. What most folks, myself included, object to is the "camel's nose" that this represents. That, and the overall idiocy of it. Seriously, banning a gun because of a bayonet lug?!? Not even the psychopaths responsible for the bans ever used bayonets in their madness! So desperate were the gunbanners for a "win" that they abandoned any rationality.
I hope that this helps. Need to know any more?
388
posted on
04/12/2003 4:44:33 PM PDT
by
Long Cut
(ORION Naval Aircrewman!)
To: rintense
You obviously don't live on a ranch in southern Arizona, California, Texas or out in the middle of Nowhereville USA where a 911 call is guaranteed to be a clean up call. Nor have you considered, it seems, that in the event another American world communist is elected and, in cahoots with a different congress, ejects the Constitution altogether - that we might have to defend ourselves against a tyrannical government that obviously DOES possess mega-fire power.
Shoot, lots of people don't even see the need for the firearms you listed.....
389
posted on
04/12/2003 4:48:45 PM PDT
by
ApesForEvolution
(Yes, let us allow the economies of gerdung, frunk, mexiztlan, chirushcom and canadastan to wither...)
To: rintense
"why anyone would need an assault rifle"
Perhaps you can educate us on the difference between the Bill of Rights and the Bill of Needs.
390
posted on
04/12/2003 4:48:58 PM PDT
by
Mini-14
To: Miss Marple
"Henrietta, I do not care to discuss this issue."
Gee, then why reply?
To: rintense
I would just like someone to give me a practical reason as to why they would want an assault weapon- other than saying 'because I don't have to show a need'. Imagine you are a grocery store owner in some mythical place that, for the sake of this argument, we'll call "Los Angeles". Some social group gets enraged over some issue, say, for example, the results of some trial. Imagine that they start rioting, and large numbers of them come to destroy your property. Imagine that they are pulling people out of vehicles and beating them; and show a clear willingness to kill them. Now, it might be a stretch, but imagine that the police and fire departments are refusing to go into the area and stop the violence and put out the fires.
The only thing standing between your death and the destruction of your life's property is a rifle with a large capacity magazine. Not only that, but with an "assault" rifle, you can even be generous and fire "warning shots" to keep them away from your property, actually saving the lives of the people trying to kill you and destroy your property.
Now, I'm sure you'll say that this could "never happen" in America, but for the sake of the argument can't you imagine that it just might?
To: Mini-14
That was perfect.
393
posted on
04/12/2003 4:50:09 PM PDT
by
chnsmok
To: rintense
I would just like someone to give me a practical reason as to why they would want an assault weapon- other than saying 'because I don't have to show a need'.
382 -rin-
Semi/auto large capacity magazine fed rifles in available military calibers are the best, most practical self defense tools on the market.
-- Why isn't that fact obvious to you?
394
posted on
04/12/2003 4:50:10 PM PDT
by
tpaine
To: Bluntpoint
The war on the Second Amendment can best be described as a Quagmire. I would consider it a war on the Constitution.
395
posted on
04/12/2003 4:51:03 PM PDT
by
unixfox
(Close the borders, problem solved !)
To: Mini-14
For the last 3 plus weeks, the Military and News Media have been calling the so called assault weapons....
SMALL ARMS
That is just what they are and the assault name is a media invention. Have you heard the soldiers talk about "small arms fire"? Have you heard the soldiers say anything about assault weapons fire? I haven't.
To: rintense
" I can understand a handgun, a pistol, a rifle, etc. I would just like someone to give me a practical reason as to why they would want an assault weapon- other than saying 'because I don't have to show a need'."
These so-called "assault weapons" that they are trying to restrict are merely rifles (which you defend my right to own) with certain aesthetic and functional features that look "scary" to some folks. Banning rifles with a certain type of stock or a flash-hider is just plain silly, has no purpose (other than to inure people to the idea that certain weapons are "bad" 'cause they look "scary").
Why do I want a so-called "assault weapon?" Just in case the government decides it wants to be a bit too tyranical. That's why we have the 2nd amendment.
Hey, don't worry if you don't have a so-called "assault weapon"; if the spam hits the fan, you can hide behind me and my so-called "assault weapon."
To: rintense
Thanks. :)
SOMEONE has to look at this dispassionately. Believe me, it's not easy...I'm a strong progunner and Constitutionalist myself. Balancing that with my loyalty to my Commander isn't always easy, so in instances where he and I disagree, I keep my E-6 yap shut.
I lurked at FR for over a year while Slick was President, because there's NO WAY I could say anything at all about the bastard without breaking my oaths.
398
posted on
04/12/2003 4:55:12 PM PDT
by
Long Cut
(ORION Naval Aircrewman!)
To: MEG33
Yep. My one issue is the Bill of Rights. Perhaps you've heard of it?
To: Technogeeb
I lived in L.A. during the riots; I know the scenario you outlined can happen.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 361-380, 381-400, 401-420 ... 621-633 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson