Replies

First of all, the "assault weapons ban" doesn't actually DO anything

Yes it does. Other than violating the fundamental principle that the right to keep and bear arms "shall not be infringed", it also puts an absolute limit on magazine capacity. That means government bureaucrats get to have as many rounds as they want, while ordinary "civilians" (the term citizen being obsolete) can only have 10 rounds. It is a framework to get people used to the idea of such restrictions; and after the public becomes accustomed to the concept, they can lower the magazine capacity down (such legislation has already been proposed) until finally only single-shot weapons are allowed (after which, they too will be restricted, and then banned).

All right. I got a bunch of replies to my post that the "assault weapons ban" does nothing. Most of them were quite nasty and insulting. Go figure. But the ONLY thing that anyone could come up with that the ban bans is ammo clips greater than 10 rounds. That's it? A bunch of you people are threatening to kiss off Bush over THAT? And that with the full knowledge that there are thousands of the large clips available all over the country legally for low cost?

Let's see. Bush has appointed John Ashcroft as AG, who in turns has, for the first time I know of, taken a stand that explicitly states the second amendment applies to individual rights. He has joined the Emerson case that stated same. Bush (and Ashcroft) support the right to conceal carry, again the only President and AG in history to publicly take that stand.

And there are folks here who are gonna support the Dem candidate (that's what you do if you don't vote for Bush) over this one item? . . . shaking my head . . . And I thought the folks are DU were unreasonably radical.

Timmywrote:
First of all, the "assault weapons ban" doesn't actually DO anything...

To which you replied:
Yes it does. Other than violating the fundamental principle that the right to keep and bear arms "shall not be infringed", it also puts an absolute limit on magazine capacity. That means government bureaucrats get to have as many rounds as they want, while ordinary "civilians" (the term citizen being obsolete) can only have 10 rounds. It is a framework to get people used to the idea of such restrictions; and after the public becomes accustomed to the concept, they can lower the magazine capacity down (such legislation has already been proposed) until finally only single-shot weapons are allowed (after which, they too will be restricted, and then banned).

BUMP!