• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

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

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
The root cause to the shooting on Friday was that the mother didn't secure her guns properly. Unless we're going to have the police go to every gun owner house and ensure they are securely storing their weapons, I don't see what all these other laws are going to do.
 
WOW!
Americans must have a REALLY short attention span.

We already had them outlawed and crime went up. The ban expired just 8 years ago. Did everyone already forget?
 
bozack said:
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.
Click to expand...

Got news for you... There were plenty of 20/30+ round magazines around for purchase and in circulation during the entire AWB... And those fit any AR-15 or AK-47, etc just like those magical ten round magazines did.... SO the net effect of the AWB?

ZERO.
 
JTsyo said:
The root cause to the shooting on Friday was that the mother didn't secure her guns properly. Unless we're going to have the police go to every gun owner house and ensure they are securely storing their weapons, I don't see what all these other laws are going to do.
Click to expand...

That's not the root cause... that's one of the causes, but it's not a root cause.
 
ichy said:
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.
Click to expand...

Show me the "rules" that say you don't need a background check to buy a handgun... Please show me.
 
Don Vito Corleone said:
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.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Here is why. People say that they'll find other ways to kill or they will get another gun illegally. One for most to try and find another way to kill as effortlessly as they can with gun will disuade many from killing. Two, most would not go to the places they need to go to get a gun if there is a ban. Laws won't stop all these killings, but laws done correctly can make folks go that extra jump, that maybe would keep them from following through.
 
IIRC the estimate is that there are around 15 million AR-15s in the United States at the moment.

Say everyone has 3 magazines for them, that is 45 million magazines. And that's not counting AKs or other popular semiautomatic firearms with detachable magazines.

Good luck enforcing a magazine capacity restriction.
 
JTsyo said:
The root cause to the shooting on Friday was that the mother didn't secure her guns properly. Unless we're going to have the police go to every gun owner house and ensure they are securely storing their weapons, I don't see what all these other laws are going to do.
Click to expand...

Actually I think this should the first requirement to own a firearm. The person must purchase an approved gun storage cabinet. While that may not have prevented this, that would prevent many others.
 
schneiderguy said:
IIRC the estimate is that there are around 15 million AR-15s in the United States at the moment.

Say everyone has 3 magazines for them, that is 45 million magazines. And that's not counting AKs or other popular semiautomatic firearms with detachable magazines.

Good luck enforcing a magazine capacity restriction.
Click to expand...

Won't have to enforce anything. Because after the weapon is used in such an assault, the owner will have spend his life in prison. After sending a couple of folks up the river, everyone will fall in line.
 
WackyDan said:
Got news for you... There were plenty of 20/30+ round magazines around for purchase and in circulation during the entire AWB... And those fit any AR-15 or AK-47, etc just like those magical ten round magazines did.... SO the net effect of the AWB?

ZERO.
Click to expand...

Not disagreeing with you at all, if anything we are in agreement that such bans are useless as all they do is drive prices up on certain items.

They are also talking of limiting the amount of ammunition that is sold, but logistically how??

What is to stop anyone from going to multiple stores.
 
Pens1566 said:
Private seller, gun show.
Click to expand...

Which in most states is against the law and is considering straw market buying/selling. This is an enforcement issue.

And as far as that issue is concerned, I've seen straw market guys on Craigslist too. So focusing on parking lot deals at gun shows is the tip of the problem, and doesn't solve anything.
 
schneiderguy said:
IIRC the estimate is that there are around 15 million AR-15s in the United States at the moment.

Say everyone has 3 magazines for them, that is 45 million magazines. And that's not counting AKs or other popular semiautomatic firearms with detachable magazines.

Good luck enforcing a magazine capacity restriction.
Click to expand...

You are assuming most gun owners would break the law if they were required to turn them in ?

If it was a felony ?

Personally I think a lot of gun owners would comply with the law.
 
WackyDan said:
Which in most states is against the law and is considering straw market buying/selling. This is an enforcement issue.

And as far as that issue is concerned, I've seen straw market guys on Craigslist too. So focusing on parking lot deals at gun shows is the tip of the problem, and doesn't solve anything.
Click to expand...

17 states regulate private sales at gun shows. Not "most". And you asked for an example. I gave it to you.
 
bozack said:
Not disagreeing with you at all, if anything we are in agreement that such bans are useless as all they do is drive prices up on certain items.

They are also talking of limiting the amount of ammunition that is sold, but logistically how??

What is to stop anyone from going to multiple stores.
Click to expand...

I love how the libs always want to artificially increase prices on ammo or limit the purchase amount.

Do you really want to limit people from target shooting? Sighting in their hunting rifles? Becoming and staying proficient in all aspects of the safe firing and handling of their weapons? Really?
 
Kadarin said:
The ONLY reason why I vote for her at all is because I REALLY don't want a Republican majority in the Senate.
__________________
Click to expand...

ill take a moderate republican over her anyday of the week. oh and thanks for keeping a nutjob in political office.
 
Tom said:
You are assuming most gun owners would break the law if they were required to turn them in ?

If it was a felony ?

Personally I think a lot of gun owners would comply with the law.
Click to expand...

IIRC the last assault weapon ban did not make it illegal to own large capacity magazines. It only made it illegal to sell brand new large capacity magazines (anything over 10 rounds) to anyone other than the military and law enforcement.
 
Tom said:
You are assuming most gun owners would break the law if they were required to turn them in ?

If it was a felony ?

Personally I think a lot of gun owners would comply with the law.
Click to expand...

IIRC the estimates are that only 10% of "assault weapon" owners registered their rifles in California after the ban. The rest chose to be felons.

So yes, I do think that there would be mass non-compliance. The government has no way of knowing who has the magazines, and they are not going to search every house in the entire country.
 
Matt1970 said:
IIRC the last assault weapon ban did not make it illegal to own large capacity magazines. It only made it illegal to sell brand new large capacity magazines (anything over 10 rounds) to anyone other than the military and law enforcement.
Click to expand...

You could also sell/transfer high capacity magazines as long as they where manufactured before the date that law went into effect. In the 1990's after the ban went into effect I purchased several high capacity magazines. The price just went up, what was a $30 magazine before the ban became a $90-100 magazine. Actually some Gun Control advocates got their nose bent out of joint because the gun manufacturers where going back to the Cops and paying them for their pre-ban magazines and giving them LE magazines in exchange. They could then turn around and sell the pre-ban magazines civilians. I think they went this route because trying to confiscate magazines already out there without compensation would open them up to lawsuits under the 5th amendment. However in CA the Assault ban that went into effect in 2000 this also banned the transfer/sell of high capacity magazines but not the possesion.
 
Tom said:
You are assuming most gun owners would break the law if they were required to turn them in ?

If it was a felony ?

Personally I think a lot of gun owners would comply with the law.
Click to expand...

If even 1% of gun owners decided to resist rather than turn in their weapons the casualties would dwarf any mass shooting.

You really think millions of people will give up expensive rifles without an issue?
 
From the coverage I have seen, the mother was shot by the rifle but the killer used hand guns in the school. Is there an update on that somewhere?

Michael
 
statue-of-liberty-crying315.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top