Assault weapons ban advocated by a conservative

Charles Krauthammer and Judge Burns make some good points and I hope we continue to have a good discussion about what they said. No doubt they are well respected men. 2013 will be an interesting year in politics. Hopefully those we elected will represent us well.
 
Seems like an even better approach would be to just let the states decide what they want to do. Obviously wyoming, SD,ND,AK,etc doesn't need the same set of rules as new York or California. Sucks that 0.0001% ruins it for 99.999% of people.
 
WyOpitz said:
Seems like an even better approach would be to just let the states decide what they want to do. Obviously wyoming, SD,ND,AK,etc doesn't need the same set of rules as new York or California. Sucks that 0.0001% ruins it for 99.999% of people.
Click to expand...

Kids in SD and Ak aren't as important as kids in CA and NY?
 
Just saying that things are different in more rural states then they are in urban areas, a blanket federal law doesn't fit everyone. Just a thought.
 
Not necessarily, but I know how good you are at putting words in other people's mouths. I'm just saying that some things would be better fine tuned to each state as THEY see fit. I don't know how far they will take gun control and would prefer the states have some say in the matter.
 
Hopefully states will be able to decide their own laws, however doubtful...Living in CA, we're already screwed on this one!
 
The People demanding our Black Rifles or High Cap Mags just want these as a start. They also want your Elk Rifle and your Target pistol or the one you conceal when you go to that shady part of town. Make no mistake all it will take is the small things we give up for them to demand more until we have nothing more to give. If this group cannot understand from the get go that even without Black Rifles there are numerous Rifles that could replicate the firepowerof a AR15, a Rem 742 Woodsmaster with a 10 round clip ect. That 742 is someone's Deer rifle, do we let those go too? I love my Model 1 but I don't want it to be the only gun I have. John
 
Draftstud and a few others made the most salient point. At what point would the gun grabbers be satisfied? Today it's my AR and my 30 round magazine, tomorrow it's my Mossberg 500 and it's 6 round magazine, then next week it's my XD .45 and my 16 round magazine, next month it's my Remington 1100 and it's 5 shot magazine, a year from now it's my Ruger Redhawk revolver with it's six shot cylinder, will it stop before they go for my .20 gauge over and under?

As for the judge, the proper platform for such a statement is when rendering a decision on a case brought before the court. His comments exhibit a bias and prove that there can't be a fair and impartial hearing held in his jurisdiction. Those comments should be grounds for his dismissal, or at least prevent him from sitting on the bench in any case that involves guns.
 
Excellent post rhomas and that's exactly why the NRA takes the stance they do knowing that you can't compromise on any one or two things they are demanding without expecting them to ask for more and more in the future when someone grabs another legal gun to "do their thing"! It's already been proven in the past that these gun restrictions don't work and the editorials in the last post are baloney regarding the NRA!
 
Last edited:
It's already been proven in the past.
Click to expand...

Topgun, I share your fear about future gun control, but it's emotional, not really supported by "the past."
In fact, there was a ten year "assault rifle" ban, but there is no more.

What past laws, regulations, policies are you calling "more and more?"

The only constant in our lives is CHANGE. It's how we influence it and accept it that makes a difference. I submit to you that if we continue to draw the same old line in the sand concerning no reasonable changes to gun control ... then we are going to lose the tug-of-war and face much more stringent controls than we would otherwise, primarily because we aren't involved in the decision. If we stubbornly hold on to pride and emotion, disregarding reason and acceptance of change, then eventually we will lose much, much more.
 
DRAFTSTUD said:
The People demanding our Black Rifles or High Cap Mags just want these as a start. They also want your Elk Rifle and your Target pistol or the one you conceal when you go to that shady part of town. Make no mistake all it will take is the small things we give up for them to demand more until we have nothing more to give. If this group cannot understand from the get go that even without Black Rifles there are numerous Rifles that could replicate the firepowerof a AR15, a Rem 742 Woodsmaster with a 10 round clip ect. That 742 is someone's Deer rifle, do we let those go too? I love my Model 1 but I don't want it to be the only gun I have. John
Click to expand...


Old people are funny.
 
Someone tell me when have we had the things happen with the current people who wish we did not have guns happen in the past history? We cannot allow "They never did it in the past" to become "Well they did it!" John
 
I'm just not sure how any of these new proposed regulations will help? I'm all for coming up with a compromise, however I don't feel that banning high capacity magazines or any assault rifles will make a significant difference.

Let's look at the statistics of mass shootings. Since 1982 there have been 62 mass shootings in the US.

Of those, 142 total guns were used with the average shooter using about 2 guns per event. 48% of the time the shooter used a semi-auto handgun. 25% of the time they used an assault rifle, 14% of the time they used a revolver pistol and 13% of the time they used a shotgun. (75% of the time, a non assault rifle was used).

79% of the time the killers obtained the weapons legally compared to 19% of the time when the weapons were obtained illegally (usually stolen I would assume) with one instance where they were not able to determine how the gun was obtained.

Banning assault rifles would still leave these crazies their number one weapon of choice.

Would banning the high capacity magazines make much of a difference? Changing out a 10 rounder 6 times vs. only changing a 30 rounder twice doesn't seem like it would make much of a difference to me? Maybe a few more seconds overall?

More shocking to me is out of the 62 tragedies, an overwhelming majority showed previous signs of mental illness. (You can hover over the map to see the specifics).

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map

Selecting the weapon is the easy emotional thing to do. I just don't see it solving the issue at hand.

Let's focus in on the individuals who commit these crimes and work on better means of controlling them. Most don't have a criminal record which is why they could continue purchasing the weapons with out any issue. Or, they will just steal one anyways. The ban would not stop them. And, minimizing their magazine capacity won't stop the event from happening either. Maybe it will limit casualties...maybe not?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Minnesota's Proposed "Assault Weapon" Bans (2024)
9 10 11
Replies
204
Views
10K
BrentD
BrentD
Doublecluck
Gun cases are cool and so is gun etiquette!
2 3 4
Replies
63
Views
3K
perma
perma
MarvB
Well happy friggin election Oregon... :(
10 11 12
Replies
230
Views
19K
MarvB
MarvB
B
Biden Announces Lead Ammo/Lure Ban Across Eight National Wildlife Refuges by 2026
4 5 6
Replies
114
Views
10K
MTGomer
MTGomer
HuntingJudge
Montana Antelope Hunt 24
Replies
2
Views
268
HuntingJudge
HuntingJudge
Advertisement

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
113,466
Messages
2,022,392
Members
36,182
Latest member
Corsen

Share this page

Back
Top