Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Wisconsin
Here is the retraction.

Taken from GonzoSKS at sksboards.com:

O'BRIEN: Welcome back. The White House recently restated President Bush's support for renewing a ban on certain semiautomatic weapons. The ban has been in place since '94, but is set to expire next year, unless Congress renews it.

Recent signals that the GOP leadership might not bring the renewal up for consideration and will let the ban expire have rekindled the fires of that debate. On this program on Thursday of last week, we aired a live demonstration CNN set up with law enforcement officials of a banned semiautomatic rifle and its legal counterpart. We reviewed that demonstration, and one on another CNN program, and decided that a more detailed report could better explain this complex issue.

Here is CNN's John Zarrella.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JOHN ZARRELLA, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): This is a semiautomatic firearm. It instantly self-loads and fires one bullet for each trigger pull. The 1994 Crime Control Act says it is unlawful for a person to manufacture, transfer or possess a semiautomatic assault weapon. The law defines a semiautomatic assault weapon by name and description, listing 19 specific firearms by name that are illegal.

The law also bans certain rifles, pistols and shotguns by description, as well as large capacity ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. The law is very specific. For a semiautomatic rifle to be banned, it must be able to use a detachable magazine and have at least two of the following features: A flash suppressor, a bayonet mount, a pistol grip, a folding or telescoping stock, or a grenade launcher.

Gary Reno (ph), a retired 30-year police officer and assistant chief in Oakland Park, Florida.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Let's examine the banned weapon.

ZARRELLA: ... explained the difference between a banned AR-15 and its legal clone.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Flash suppressor, bayonet log, high capacity magazine, over 10 rounds, pistol grip and a telescoping rear stock.

ZARRELLA (on camera): And the legal weapon doesn't have those features, correct?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Doesn't have any of those features. Does not have a flash suppressor, does not have a bayonet log, has a legal 10- round magazine. Does have the pistol grip, but it has no other features so it makes it a legal firearm, and has a solid rear stock.

ZARRELLA (voice-over): Pro-ban advocates say each of these features would make the weapons more deadly, but anti-ban supporters say those features are only cosmetic and don't contribute to and increase in crime. With only one of the listed features, the gun is legal. And without those features, experts say the guns are identical.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's exactly the same gun.

ZARRELLA (on camera): And the same firepower.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Same firepower, same bullet, you have to squeeze the trigger once to make a bullet go down the barrel.

ZARRELLA (voice-over): In fact, if you fire the same caliber and type bullets from the two guns, you get the same impact.

Here is a .223 caliber bullet fired from a banned AR-15 rifle. Now, the legal version of that rifle.

The smaller hole made by the second gun has nothing to do with the gun or ammunition. The shooter just hit the second target more times in the same place.

Both sides cited Justice Department study about the impact of the law as proof of their argument. Those who oppose the ban say the study shows the ban has had no impact on the reduction of crime and that the answer is to enforce the laws already on the books.

WAYNE LAPIERRE, EXEC. VICE PRESIDENT, NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION: What stops crime is every time a violent felon touches a gun, a violent drug dealer, a violent criminal, use the existing federal law, prosecute him 100 percent, confront the criminal directly, and take him off the street and put him in jail.

ZARRELLA: Supporters of the ban instead say the study shows a decline in the amount of crime committed with these weapons.

REP. CAROLYN MCCARTHY (D), NEW YORK: I'm sure the American people do not want to go back to the day of allowing AK-47s back on the streets, or even the newer models that are the Buschmeister (ph) that were used in the D.C. sniping killings last year.

ZARRELLA: Gun control advocates are working with some members of Congress on not only extending the assault weapon ban in 2004, but introducing new legislation to vastly expand the number of weapons banned. Gun advocates and their supporters in Congress argue this and any future bans are an unconstitutional violation of the Second Amendment right to bear arms.

John Zarrella, CNN, Miami.
13 posted on 05/19/2003 7:30:20 PM PDT by Bogey78O (check it out... http://freepers.zill.net/users/bogey78o_fr/puppet.swf)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]


To: Bogey78O
God, what bull s**t
19 posted on 05/19/2003 8:02:36 PM PDT by shootist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: Bogey78O
REP. CAROLYN MCCARTHY (D), NEW YORK: I'm sure the American people do not want to go back to the day of allowing AK-47s back on the streets, or even the newer models that are the Buschmeister (ph) that were used in the D.C. sniping killings last year.

So we have people writing laws about guns that think the Bushmaster XM-15 is a "newer version" of an AK-47? Saints Preserve Us!

She is the primary sponsor of the House version of the AWB "renewal", HR 2038, which would reduce the required number of "bad" features to 1, and would define even a thumbhole stock as a pistol grip, presence of which get a gun banned under her bill. It also expands the number of guns banned by name, also bans guns that have the same frame or receiver as banned guns, and includes any " semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General. In making the determination, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any Federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event." (1984 double speak anyone?)

So even though the by name ban list includes the sweet little M-1 Carbine and the Ruger Mini-14, it somehow misses the Springfield Armory (et. al)M1A/M14S, she's got it covered in that paragraph quoted above. I think there might be 2 or 3 types of centerfire semi-automatic rifle that would still be allowed, like the Browning and Remington sporting rifles, but darn few.

25 posted on 05/19/2003 8:19:38 PM PDT by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: TEXASPROUD
bttt
31 posted on 05/19/2003 9:17:30 PM PDT by Squantos (Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson