Senate Okays "assault weapons" ban extension (EDIT: Senate GOP Scuttles Gun Bill)

[tnitsuj]

from USATODAY.COM

gee, I guess the whole country is going to remain safe from these evil black guns with folding stocks and other evil features

 

[Tab]

Yes, this is going to help alot

 

[K1052]

It still has to get through the House where it could be modified or killed. Bush has also said that he wants a clean bill limiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers, so hopefully he would veto any bill reauthorizing the ban.

 

[ElFenix]

"These are weapons of war. They are designed to kill a lot of people quickly," said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., who authored the 1994 gun ban while in the House.

yeah, they kill a lot faster than any other semi automatic rifle! down with assault weapons!

 

[kylebisme]

Sen. Charles Schumer - "These are weapons of war"

...being necessary to the security of a free state?

 

[maddogchen]

Originally posted by: K1052
It still has to get through the House where it could be modified or killed. Bush has also said that he wants a clean bill limiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers, so hopefully he would veto any bill reauthorizing the ban.

Huh? wait aren't things supposed to go through the house and then pass on to the Senate?

 

[KK]

Originally posted by: maddogchen

Originally posted by: K1052
It still has to get through the House where it could be modified or killed. Bush has also said that he wants a clean bill limiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers, so hopefully he would veto any bill reauthorizing the ban.

Huh? wait aren't things supposed to go through the house and then pass on to the Senate?

I thought so too. Hell I'm so confused anymore by people on this board, I wouldn't be surprised if the supreme court was part of the procedure now.


KK

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: maddogchen

Originally posted by: K1052
It still has to get through the House where it could be modified or killed. Bush has also said that he wants a clean bill limiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers, so hopefully he would veto any bill reauthorizing the ban.

Huh? wait aren't things supposed to go through the house and then pass on to the Senate?

Stolen description of where I think they are at now:

"Conference Committee Action: If only minor changes are made to a bill by the other chamber, it is common for the legislation to go back to the first chamber for concurrence. However, when the actions of the other chamber significantly alter the bill, a conference committee is formed to reconcile the differences. If the conferees are unable to reach agreement, the legislation dies. If agreement is reached, a conference report is prepared describing the committee member?s recommendations for changes. Both the House and the Senate must approve of the conference report."

 

[LordMagnusKain]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

"These are weapons of war. They are designed to kill a lot of people quickly," said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., who authored the 1994 gun ban while in the House.

yeah, they kill a lot faster than any other semi automatic rifle! down with assault weapons!

to bad the law doesn't do anything to help;

 

[tnitsuj]

We should make it so that each bullet costs around $1k. That would cut back on "gun violence".

 

[Drphibes]

It would only make guns unaffordable to people who abide the law.

 

[Mookow]

Originally posted by: tnitsuj
We should make it so that each bullet costs around $1k. That would cut back on "gun violence".

Yes, because there is no way that anyone could make gunpodwer and a fairly precisely proportioned piece of metal. Ever.

EDIT: actually, since you said "bullet", you dont even need to get propellant.

 

[Zephyr106]

Just curious, do those of you pro-assault-weapons-in-everyone's- hands want the weapons to calm your fears? Do you fear the government, police, or criminals, enough that a non-assault rifle is insufficient for your personal protection?

Zephyr

 

[SuperTool]

Originally posted by: tnitsuj
We should make it so that each bullet costs around $1k. That would cut back on "gun violence".

Chris rock said that in a clip from "Bowling for Columbine"

 

[Drphibes]

We dont live in a Utopia. People in current times are so willing to put there well being in other people hands no one wants to be responsible for themselves or their actions everyone would rather take the easy way out and blame rediculous things on inanimate objects. If someone here can travle back in time and un invent the gun that would be great but it aint gonna happen. Its an arms race in our own back yard such is the nature of technology once you have it you have too keep up. If it wasnt guns it would be bows and arrows. Maybe we should stop blaming the tools we use and figure out whats wrong with society.

 

[Mookow]

Originally posted by: Zephyr106
Just curious, do those of you pro-assault-weapons-in-everyone's- hands want the weapons to calm your fears? Do you fear the government, police, or criminals, enough that a non-assault rifle is insufficient for your personal protection?

Zephyr

What is the difference in capability between an AR-15 that accepts high capacity magazines, has a pistol grip and a bayonet lug versus an AR-15 with high-cap magazines and a pistol grip?

How many bayonetings were committed in the last decade? Do you realize that the government sells rifles far more powerful than most, if not all, of the banned "assault weapons" to civilians?

Oh, wait, this is a law based on looks/feelings, not facts and logic. Sorry to bring any logic into the debate.

 

[Zephyr106]

Originally posted by: Drphibes
We dont live in a Utopia. People in current times are so willing to put there well being in other people hands no one wants to be responsible for themselves or their actions everyone would rather take the easy way out and blame rediculous things on inanimate objects. If someone here can travle back in time and un invent the gun that would be great but it aint gonna happen. Its an arms race in our own back yard such is the nature of technology once you have it you have too keep up. If it wasnt guns it would be bows and arrows.

My question still stands. Do you fear for your physical well being on a day to day basis?

Zephyr

 

[Drphibes]

No but i also use my gun for other things besides self defense and if the day ever came where i had to use it in that manner id much rather have a gun than a knife.

Just because i dont fear for myself on a daily basis dosent mean i might not fear for myself oneday. Its kinda sticking your head in the sand saying just because you dont have to beat off robbers or whatever on some particular day crime dosent exist. Thats like not stocking up water for a hurricane because they dont happen every day.

 

[shrumpage]

Originally posted by: Zephyr106
Just curious, do those of you pro-assault-weapons-in-everyone's- hands want the weapons to calm your fears? Do you fear the government, police, or criminals, enough that a non-assault rifle is insufficient for your personal protection?

Zephyr

No...i just enjoy shooting guns.

Its fun to load up a 10/22 with a 50 round magzine and blast a large block of ice, oh the folding stock makes it look cool.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain

Originally posted by: ElFenix

"These are weapons of war. They are designed to kill a lot of people quickly," said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., who authored the 1994 gun ban while in the House.

yeah, they kill a lot faster than any other semi automatic rifle! down with assault weapons!

to bad the law doesn't do anything to help;

what do you mean? of course it does! it bans those big guns that kill people faster! and it bans clips with lots of rounds that let you kill more people between changing clips! it's an assault weapon! not a normal gun! the military uses them!

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: maddogchen

Originally posted by: K1052
It still has to get through the House where it could be modified or killed. Bush has also said that he wants a clean bill limiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers, so hopefully he would veto any bill reauthorizing the ban.

Huh? wait aren't things supposed to go through the house and then pass on to the Senate?

only spending bills have to start in the house

 

[Drphibes]

To bad the ammount of crime commited with an assault weapon is lower than 20 percent. If there so great at killing people how come everyone dosent use one. Its not because of a ban if you read the entire article. The ones that are used for crime arent even legal so how does the ban affect them there breaking it anyway. Assault weapon crime statistics

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: Zephyr106
Just curious, do those of you pro-assault-weapons-in-everyone's- hands want the weapons to calm your fears? Do you fear the government, police, or criminals, enough that a non-assault rifle is insufficient for your personal protection?

Zephyr

i don't own a gun of any sort; however i think it is important that the laws allows people to do so, assault rifles and all.

 

[DoubleL]

Humm assault weapon, I was in the military, Well still am, I was in a war, The only time I ever heard the word assault weapons was on the news, Anything can be a assault weapon and anything can be called a assault weapon, I would face a so called assault weapon on the streets, In my home, Mac10, AK-47, AR-15 than a 12 GA shot gun any day of the week

 

[Bulk Beef]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: maddogchen

Originally posted by: K1052
It still has to get through the House where it could be modified or killed. Bush has also said that he wants a clean bill limiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers, so hopefully he would veto any bill reauthorizing the ban.

Huh? wait aren't things supposed to go through the house and then pass on to the Senate?

only spending bills have to start in the house

This bill actually did start in the House where it was passed last year. At that point, it was a positive for gun owners. It was only today that the Senate voted to amend the bill with the extension of the AWB, and then killed it a few hours later.