And... it's back: The ASSAULT weapons ban

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...introduce-assault-weapons-ban-bill/?hpt=po_c2

(CNN) – Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California said Sunday the president will soon have legislation "to lead on" in the gun control debate, announcing she will introduce a bill next month in the Senate to place a ban on assault weapons.

"We'll be prepared to go, and I hope the nation will really help," Feinstein said on NBC's "Meet the Press."

Gun control lovers rejoice? Gun lovers rage? Is this really an answer? What did we learn from 1994-2004?

 

[badb0y]

This isn't going to do anything.....if someone wants to go around killing people they will find other ways to do it.

Don't own a gun, don't care about guns but this isn't the solution.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

I can't believe how boneheaded she is and how she keeps getting re-elected in CA. /sigh

 

[jpeyton]

In the unlikely event it makes it through the Senate, it's going to hit a brick wall in the House.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

I am ambivalent about whether more gun restrictions are ethically the right thing to do - I see pros and cons to both sides of that discussion - but I am 100% convinced that they will have no beneficial effect, and other things being equal I don't favor creating new laws that don't help the American public. I'd much rather see the focus placed on revamping our mental health laws to allow for more commitment of violent, scary mentally ill people like James Holmes and Jared Laughner.

 

[bozack]

The one restriction I heard the liberals on the radio speaking of today was magazine size, and how if the assault weapons ban were in effect the shooter wouldn't have had access to 30 round magazines and his ability to do as much damage would have been limited.

Personally as someone who does not own, nor has any intent to own a firearm I just don't see the logic, you can swap a clip in a matter of seconds, so having one clip that holds 30 rounds, or a few which hold ten would seem a wash....

They also went on about how guns are sold at Walmart etc, but again in this case I fail to see how that is an issue, nor should it matter so long as all retailers selling firearms are licensed to do so and follow the proper procedures.

I do feel that if they springboard off of this tragic event they will have enough steam to get another AWB into effect, but I doubt it would do anything to curtail gun violence and is more of a token showing of them doing something in the wake of the killings.

 

[ichy]

I am ambivalent about whether more gun restrictions are ethically the right thing to do - I see pros and cons to both sides of that discussion - but I am 100% convinced that they will have no beneficial effect, and other things being equal I don't favor creating new laws that don't help the American public.

IMO the biggest issue with new gun laws is that there are already 300 million guns in circulation and I don't see how any proposed gun controls would make it significantly harder for criminals to obtain guns. The one thing that might make sense is eliminating rules which allow people to buy handguns without a background check. It wouldn't make it impossible for felons to get guns but it would make it harder and more expensive. Beyond that I just don't see anything which would actually work.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

The one restriction I heard the liberals on the radio speaking of today was magazine size, and how if the assault weapons ban were in effect the shooter wouldn't have had access to 30 round magazines and his ability to do as much damage would have been limited.

Personally as someone who does not own, nor has any intent to own a firearm I just don't see the logic, you can swap a clip in a matter of seconds, so having one clip that holds 30 rounds, or a few which hold ten would seem a wash....

They also went on about how guns are sold at Walmart etc, but again in this case I fail to see how that is an issue, nor should it matter so long as all retailers selling firearms are licensed to do so and follow the proper procedures.

I do feel that if they springboard off of this tragic event they will have enough steam to get another AWB into effect, but I doubt it would do anything to curtail gun violence and is more of a token showing of them doing something in the wake of the killings.

To be a devil's advocate, reloading is an obstacle. There's enough of you guys who play FPS games to realize that in situations where you might have to hit a reload soon you will make sure you reload in a safe environment, and you conserve ammunition if you're running low on a current magazine until you can safely reload.

Anyway, the point is that it's a limitation. To a trained individual say a law enforcement officer or someone in the armed forces, yeah, if you had 270 rounds broken into 9 magazines of 30 rounds or 27 magazines of 10 each, continue to shoot away while reloading isn't going to be a huge obstacle. But if you look at amateur shooters who begin to panic when things don't go their way, fumbling for a magazine can be a make or break when seconds count.

In the end this isn't the solution to end violence, but it can help curtail certain acts of violence, perhaps limiting the damage done.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

The bottom line over magazine size is if you're reloading you're not shooting. And if you're in a position where that matters past 10 shots or so you're either doing it wrong or you're shooting up a crowd.

Hell, past 2 shots and you're probably doing it wrong.

 

[Jaepheth]

The real kicker is that none of the mass shootings were carried out using an assault weapon of any kind.

Well, some people may consider the movie theater shooting as being an "assault weapon".

but the VAST majority of gun crimes are committed with handguns.

"Assault weapons" bans are like taking cough syrup for your scraped knee.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

The real kicker is that none of the mass shootings were carried out using an assault weapon of any kind.

Well, some people may consider the movie theater shooting as being an "assault weapon".

but the VAST majority of gun crimes are committed with handguns.

"Assault weapons" bans are like taking cough syrup for your scraped knee.

To be clear, while I don't support an assault weapons ban, we now know that all of the shootings on Friday were done with an AR-15 (contrary to early reporting). It is not clear whether the shooter ever used the two pistols he was carrying, other than possibly to commit suicide.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

The AWB is a start in the right direction. Nobody is saying this is going to solve all our problems.

 

[Brovane]

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...introduce-assault-weapons-ban-bill/?hpt=po_c2



Gun control lovers rejoice? Gun lovers rage? Is this really an answer? What did we learn from 1994-2004?

What will be interesting this time if the Legislation passes (doubtful) will it be challenged judicially that it violates the 2nd Amendment. I think the 1994-2004 was never challenged judicially.

 

[velillen]

The one restriction I heard the liberals on the radio speaking of today was magazine size, and how if the assault weapons ban were in effect the shooter wouldn't have had access to 30 round magazines and his ability to do as much damage would have been limited.

Personally as someone who does not own, nor has any intent to own a firearm I just don't see the logic, you can swap a clip in a matter of seconds, so having one clip that holds 30 rounds, or a few which hold ten would seem a wash....

.

You will always be able to find 30, 40, or even 100 round magazines and drums even during a ban. There are simply to many in circulation right now and people won't give them up. Or least all of them. So they will be out there and you could get one if you really wanted.

As for reloading...with practice it stops you got all of 5 seconds tops. Quick and easy to drop a mag and grab another and be ready to go. Not that it wouldn't help but its not as big as people make it out. Or these guys would just use other guns instead of just 1. All the recent shootings the criminals have had multiple guns but just used one.



But as a gun owner I could care less about them banning hi capacity. I practice with 5 rounds at a time. Only time I do 30 rounds is in my 22 and only for fun. But I will say don't expect me to willingly Gove over my hi capacity mags for free. Why would I give someone my things for free when its cost me plenty of money and was perfectly legal at the time

 

[bozack]

To be a devil's advocate, reloading is an obstacle. There's enough of you guys who play FPS games to realize that in situations where you might have to hit a reload soon you will make sure you reload in a safe environment, and you conserve ammunition if you're running low on a current magazine until you can safely reload.

Anyway, the point is that it's a limitation. To a trained individual say a law enforcement officer or someone in the armed forces, yeah, if you had 270 rounds broken into 9 magazines of 30 rounds or 27 magazines of 10 each, continue to shoot away while reloading isn't going to be a huge obstacle. But if you look at amateur shooters who begin to panic when things don't go their way, fumbling for a magazine can be a make or break when seconds count.

In the end this isn't the solution to end violence, but it can help curtail certain acts of violence, perhaps limiting the damage done.

But using this current example the shooter wasn't an amateur or so it seems, instead it was someone who seemingly was very familiar with weaponry....

So while I would agree for the novice it would be an hurdle, the reality is that it isn't a major deterrent, rather as others have said they either carry multiple loaded weapons, or train themselves to get better at reloading quickly.

Stressing that I don't have a horse in this race as I really don't care about owning a gun ever...just don't see what could have happened differently here without an all out ban on firearms.

This to me was owner negligence. The mother should have not given her son access to the guns, or if it was something she was doing to bond should have been a lot smarter about it and kept them locked up at the range and away from him.

 

[Pr0d1gy]

Fear as the great motivator.

 

[Jaepheth]

To be clear, while I don't support an assault weapons ban, we now know that all of the shootings on Friday were done with an AR-15 (contrary to early reporting). It is not clear whether the shooter ever used the two pistols he was carrying, other than possibly to commit suicide.

Ah, I hadn't heard that bit of news.

Even so, most gun crime is committed with hand guns:
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-20

handgun total = 6,193
rifle total = 323
shotgun total = 356

Nearly 10 times as many murders are committed with handguns.

For comparison:
http://www.madd.org/blog/2012/december/2011-State-data.html
There were 9,878 fatalities caused by drunk drivers the same year.

 

[Kadarin]

I can't believe how boneheaded she is and how she keeps getting re-elected in CA. /sigh

Given the way she's holding that gun I would be scared to be anywhere near that room.

The ONLY reason why I vote for her at all is because I REALLY don't want a Republican majority in the Senate.

 

[HomerJS]

Using reverse logic, why ban any weapon?

 

[Puddle Jumper]

The previous assault weapons ban didn't do anything to stop Columbine.

 

[Theb]

It's bizarre to me that people are able to steal these guns. I've never known anyone with more than two guns that didn't use a gun safe. Most of the people I know with even one gun have a gun safe for when they're not carrying it. I've never known the combination to anyone's gun safe, friend or family. With some guys I'd be their wife doesn't even know the combo.

Maybe some legislation that guns need to either be secured or on your person at all times, but if people aren't already locking up their ARs, especially people with crazy kids/friends, I doubt a law is going to convince them.

 

[waggy]

The ONLY reason why I vote for her at all is because I REALLY don't want a Republican majority in the Senate.

/facepalm

wow

 

[PokerGuy]

The AWB is a start in the right direction. Nobody is saying this is going to solve all our problems.

Not only is it not only going solve "all" our problems, it's not going to solve "any" problems. Idiots like Feinstein want to use this opportunity to once again put in place a ban that didn't accomplish anything when it was previously in place. Stupid people like her can't use logic and realize that such a ban is completely useless.

 

[Matt1970]

It's not meant to do a damn thing. They know that but they hope the majority of the voters don't. It's just meant to make it look like our Government cares.

 

[HomerJS]

Not only is it not only going solve "all" our problems, it's not going to solve "any" problems. Idiots like Feinstein want to use this opportunity to once again put in place a ban that didn't accomplish anything when it was previously in place. Stupid people like her can't use logic and realize that such a ban is completely useless.

your ideas?