What Exactly is an Assault Weapon?

[sappstuf]

I know there are many on the left that would like to see the assault weapon ban reinstated. But what exactly is an assault weapon? Here is what the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 said:


Firearms were determined to be “assault weapons” if it had two or more of the following features:

Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:

1.Folding or telescoping stock
2.Pistol grip
3.Bayonet mount
4.Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
5.Grenade launcher (more precisely, a muzzle device which enables the launching or firing of rifle grenades)

There was no mention of caliber or anything like that. So what you ended up with is that this was illegal:

http://cdn.pjmedia.com/files/2011/06/put8tQI8u_ygldYpa0RpjmUmH3K98wPmvd4lLMY1ZoZdMLhkzN 1-6i7AZtaPzhcl9aOmk8vr3mQNOkEHToYHRed0l6xg5So4TvxLUj 1Kr0hE14Lvvww.jpg

But this was legal:

http://cdn.pjmedia.com/files/2011/06/Nsgkcj972eGXexZ-JnIVMv1GpxKXcvgvGmY8RqLASllbNcy1Fi6gxfH8CYf0C4sZN9 VlQ6B8c6nGfalCzEGY_Vh-JUALSB4H8RghrHnBhUPJaEGPi4U.jpg

See that little piece of metal on the top picture on the bottom of the barrel below the front sight? That is where you would attach a bayonet. Yeah.. That is the difference.

Does that make you feel safer?

Shockingly, studies that have looked back at the ban shows the ban had no effect on gun violence.

I'm shocked.. Shocked I tell you, that it didn't make a difference.

[diverdog]

I know there are many on the left that would like to see the assault weapon ban reinstated. But what exactly is an assault weapon? Here is what the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 said:



There was no mention of caliber or anything like that. So what you ended up with is that this was illegal:

http://cdn.pjmedia.com/files/2011/06/put8tQI8u_ygldYpa0RpjmUmH3K98wPmvd4lLMY1ZoZdMLhkzN 1-6i7AZtaPzhcl9aOmk8vr3mQNOkEHToYHRed0l6xg5So4TvxLUj 1Kr0hE14Lvvww.jpg

But this was legal:

http://cdn.pjmedia.com/files/2011/06/Nsgkcj972eGXexZ-JnIVMv1GpxKXcvgvGmY8RqLASllbNcy1Fi6gxfH8CYf0C4sZN9 VlQ6B8c6nGfalCzEGY_Vh-JUALSB4H8RghrHnBhUPJaEGPi4U.jpg

See that little piece of metal on the top picture on the bottom of the barrel below the front sight? That is where you would attach a bayonet. Yeah.. That is the difference.

Does that make you feel safer?

Shockingly, studies that have looked back at the ban shows the ban had no effect on gun violence.

I'm shocked.. Shocked I tell you, that it didn't make a difference.

Biden will try to ban both. The NRA made the previous law look stupid. For some reason I thought pistol grips were banned.

[sappstuf]

Biden will try to ban both. The NRA made the previous law look stupid. For some reason I thought pistol grips were banned.

So what specifically will you try to ban? What makes you think companies won't just design around the requirements? Where do you think sub-compact handguns came from? That's right, because when the ban was in effect, handguns could only hold 10 rounds so companies made them smaller and easier to conceal which might make them more dangerous.... Right?

What makes you think any new law wouldn't lead to the same sort of unintended consequences?

[sappstuf]

Biden will try to ban both. The NRA made the previous law look stupid. For some reason I thought pistol grips were banned.

Nope... But let us say they were. Does this guy, who is using an alternative to the pistol grip look like he is having any trouble?

http://img167.imageshack.us/img167/8914/u15shouldered2zd2.jpg

Banning pistol grips would be another useless gesture.

[rock on sooner]

Just for the sake of argument, what if the law said "detachable magazines
with a capacity of more than 5 rounds and ANY of the following:", would
that make any difference in the effectiveness of said law?

[sappstuf]

Just for the sake of argument, what if the law said "detachable magazines
with a capacity of more than 5 rounds and ANY of the following:", would
that make any difference in the effectiveness of said law?

The magazine is seperate from the gun, so your sentence doesn't make any sense with that in mind.

But if you think 5 should be considered "high capacity" then what is capacity? Would that mean a 6-shooter is now a high-capacity gun?

[olevetonahill]

The magazine is seperate from the gun, so your sentence doesn't make any sense with that in mind.

But if you think 5 should be considered "high capacity" then what is capacity? Would that mean a 6-shooter is now a high-capacity gun?

An experienced shooter can drop an empty mag an insert a new one pretty dayum fast if they want to. 5 rds or 30 it will only slow em down a few seconds

[pphilfran]

An experienced shooter can drop an empty mag an insert a new one pretty dayum fast if they want to. 5 rds or 30 it will only slow em down a few seconds

It don't matter how fast he is...one guy with a gun and a bunch of people doing what they were taught...hide...lock up the room...avoid confrontation...nobody is coming towards him because they are all hauling *** the other way...can't blame em since all they have to protect themselves is a ruler and a day planner...

[olevetonahill]

It don't matter how fast he is...one guy with a gun and a bunch of people doing what they were taught...hide...lock up the room...avoid confrontation...nobody is coming towards him because they are all hauling *** the other way...can't blame em since all they have to protect themselves is a ruler and a day planner...

Yup
In answer to the thread Title What is an assault weapon?
Just about any dayum thing I assault you with, Be it a stick, a baseball bat, a rock a 22 single shot. well you get the idea right?

[BigTip]

Yup
In answer to the thread Title What is an assault weapon?
Just about any dayum thing I assault you with, Be it a stick, a baseball bat, a rock a 22 single shot. well you get the idea right?

Don't forget your mouth.
Verbal assault.

[olevetonahill]

Don't forget your mouth.
Verbal assault.

Yea I coulda went on an on , But figured if they dont get the idea by then they too stupid to keep on .

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Ole Mid and Diver fail at trying to design a gun that would allow use Second Amendmenters to agree on their premise of gun control. What we need is a solid mental health control, not something that violates EVERYONE's 2nd Amendment. I have not read of ONE INSTANCE where a person went on a shooting spree with multiple victims that wasn't either mentally compromised or a criminal conducting a criminal activity. If anyone can show a case where a legal gun owner of sound mind goes off on a ramage, please enlighten. You can't...

[Midtowner]

How about front loading pistols and rifles for anyone without any permit required. Everything else would be registered and only held by individuals who could qualify for a gun ownership license tightly regulated by the ATF. There'd be mental health screenings and required time at a shooting range to ensure you understood how your equipment worked. I'd also require that licensees store their weapons safely, in that if they were ever found to not be doing so, they would be ineligible to own guns for a term of years and forfeit everything else.

I'd also like to see the feds buy back as many firearms as possible from folks who didn't want to or couldn't qualify for a license. Weapons would be non-transferable between individuals except through registered sales (which could be recorded on the internet).

If that was the case, CCW and open carry would be no big deal to me.

[KantoSooner]

THA, I get your argument, but it's utterly circular. We as a country say, 'anyone who does something like that is insane', thus the question of sanity is begged. You're absolutely right that we need to concentrate on the mental health issues as the real root cause. That's going to open up lots of civil liberty issues, though, like involuntary commitment, forced medication, etc etc.
It's not going to be easy or without a lot of fighting.

[Midtowner]

THA, I get your argument, but it's utterly circular. We as a country say, 'anyone who does something like that is insane', thus the question of sanity is begged. You're absolutely right that we need to concentrate on the mental health issues as the real root cause. That's going to open up lots of civil liberty issues, though, like involuntary commitment, forced medication, etc etc.
It's not going to be easy or without a lot of fighting.

The Constitution can always be amended, and there might be some consensus in the area of mental health.

[rock on sooner]

An experienced shooter can drop an empty mag an insert a new one pretty dayum fast if they want to. 5 rds or 30 it will only slow em down a few seconds

Vet, I agree with your point, with the key word being "experienced"....meaning that
"a few seconds" might make a difference in rushing the shooter..my only point. I agree
also with THA about the mental health issue. As I stated in another thread, we can all
spend more time helping to identify the disconnected, the loner, the bullied one, etc.
and maybe by doing that more of the potential mass shooters can be stopped before
they start.

Sapp, my phrase about the magazine's capacity was in the context of defining an assault
weapon...generally thought to be a long gun.

Interesting point made on NPR this A.M. about gun deaths with rifles versus hand guns...
roughly 400 with long guns versus approx 9000 by handgun.

As I also said earlier, don't need more gun laws, enforce what's on the books. The one
thing I think should be done that isn't is the gun show loophole, no background check at
a gun show but there is in legit gun dealerships.

[olevetonahill]

How about front loading pistols and rifles for anyone without any permit required. Everything else would be registered and only held by individuals who could qualify for a gun ownership license tightly regulated by the ATF. There'd be mental health screenings and required time at a shooting range to ensure you understood how your equipment worked. I'd also require that licensees store their weapons safely, in that if they were ever found to not be doing so, they would be ineligible to own guns for a term of years and forfeit everything else.

I'd also like to see the feds buy back as many firearms as possible from folks who didn't want to or couldn't qualify for a license. Weapons would be non-transferable between individuals except through registered sales (which could be recorded on the internet).

If that was the case, CCW and open carry would be no big deal to me.

Yer Uncle agrees with you.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_ZAn-ABmM9m4/SVJnDZfB6zI/AAAAAAAAE70/cvfbe9GsbJQ/s400/Uncle+Joe%27s+seasonal+greetings.jpg

[olevetonahill]

Vet, I agree with your point, with the key word being "experienced"....meaning that
"a few seconds" might make a difference in rushing the shooter..my only point. I agree
also with THA about the mental health issue. As I stated in another thread, we can all
spend more time helping to identify the disconnected, the loner, the bullied one, etc.
and maybe by doing that more of the potential mass shooters can be stopped before
they start.

Sapp, my phrase about the magazine's capacity was in the context of defining an assault
weapon...generally thought to be a long gun.

Interesting point made on NPR this A.M. about gun deaths with rifles versus hand guns...
roughly 400 with long guns versus approx 9000 by handgun.

As I also said earlier, don't need more gun laws, enforce what's on the books. The one
thing I think should be done that isn't is the gun show loophole, no background check at
a gun show but there is in legit gun dealerships.

Rock If a whacked out Crazy mother ****er wants to take out a bunch of folks all he has to do is PRACTICE the changing a few times and he can become very fast ,As far as some one RUSHING the shooter, How they gonna do that when they running away?

As far as the Gun show Loop Hole as you call it goes. When was the last time you went to one? Most folk their are Dealers and as such Have to go by the Law with the Background checks and all the Paper work. The few Individuals who sell a Gun at those things Usually sell them to a Dealer there.

Bad guys DONT get weapons in a Legal manner

[Midtowner]

Yer Uncle agrees with you.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_ZAn-ABmM9m4/SVJnDZfB6zI/AAAAAAAAE70/cvfbe9GsbJQ/s400/Uncle+Joe%27s+seasonal+greetings.jpg

I know someone who'd disagree:
http://images.christianpost.com/full/57210/adam-lanza.jpg?w=262

[olevetonahill]

Yer Uncle agrees with you.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_ZAn-ABmM9m4/SVJnDZfB6zI/AAAAAAAAE70/cvfbe9GsbJQ/s400/Uncle+Joe%27s+seasonal+greetings.jpg



Oh and I forgot to add , Yer a ****ing Idiot

[Midtowner]

Oh and I forgot to add , Yer a ****ing Idiot

And this guy things you're a genius:

http://images.christianpost.com/full/57210/adam-lanza.jpg?w=262

[olevetonahill]

And this guy things you're a genius:

http://images.christianpost.com/full/57210/adam-lanza.jpg?w=262

Compared to You and Him I am .
What else ya got dip****?

[Curly Bill]

Oh and I forgot to add , Yer a ****ing Idiot

You don't have to say that - its understood. ;)

[olevetonahill]

You don't have to say that - its understood. ;)

I know, I just wanted to make sure He dint think I had forgotten him in anyway :watermelon:

[TheHumanAlphabet]

THA, I get your argument, but it's utterly circular. We as a country say, 'anyone who does something like that is insane', thus the question of sanity is begged. You're absolutely right that we need to concentrate on the mental health issues as the real root cause. That's going to open up lots of civil liberty issues, though, like involuntary commitment, forced medication, etc etc.
It's not going to be easy or without a lot of fighting.
Kanto, we did it before, but it was misused and all the state mental institutions were opened up and closed down. I agree we have to be careful, but there has to be a mechanism to place people who are a danger to themselves and others into protective mental care. Supposedly Ms. Lanza was trying to lay the groundwork legally to have her son committed. She ran out of time going through the maze of the courts.

The problem is that this has placed an open season on all law abiding gun owners and everyone has their 2 cents on getting rid of them, esp. the liberal press - I mean the entire press...

When you cannot own a gun and a semi-auto, then you lose your leverage against the government. Worked out well for Stalin, Hitler, Mao and Mussolini.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

The Constitution can always be amended, and there might be some consensus in the area of mental health.

I would favor a debate on Constitutional amendments. Either for mental health or for the 2nd Amendment change. THat is the only venue, IMO, for this debate, you go back door and change laws, then I will fight hard against said law.

[Midtowner]

Kanto, we did it before, but it was misused and all the state mental institutions were opened up and closed down. I agree we have to be careful, but there has to be a mechanism to place people who are a danger to themselves and others into protective mental care. Supposedly Ms. Danza was trying to lay the groundwork leagally to have her son committed. She ran out of time going through the maze of the courts.

I can't imagine it would be that much more difficult than CT than here. I've successfully placed adults into guardianship for the purpose of obtaining them mental healthcare. It ain't impossible, but they really do have to be very much out-to-lunch. Most recently, one was a bipolar female on a serious mental break and the other was a paranoid schizophrenic. Got them placed inpatient and on meds and both are doing tremendously better now.

We can't just lock people up because they "might" be a danger, there have to be real diagnostic criteria or else I can see that provision being seriously misused.


When you cannot own a gun and a semi-auto, then you lose your leverage against the government. Worked out well for Stalin, Hitler, Mao and Mussolini.

England, Australia, most of Europe, y'know, civilized places without a lot of random gun violence.

[diverdog]

So what specifically will you try to ban? What makes you think companies won't just design around the requirements? Where do you think sub-compact handguns came from? That's right, because when the ban was in effect, handguns could only hold 10 rounds so companies made them smaller and easier to conceal which might make them more dangerous.... Right?

What makes you think any new law wouldn't lead to the same sort of unintended consequences?


Show me where I advocated a ban?

[TheHumanAlphabet]

I can't imagine it would be that much more difficult than CT than here. I've successfully placed adults into guardianship for the purpose of obtaining them mental healthcare. It ain't impossible, but they really do have to be very much out-to-lunch. Most recently, one was a bipolar female on a serious mental break and the other was a paranoid schizophrenic. Got them placed inpatient and on meds and both are doing tremendously better now.

We can't just lock people up because they "might" be a danger, there have to be real diagnostic criteria or else I can see that provision being seriously misused.

Agreed. (uhh.. Danza = Lanza) I have to think that Lanza had a diagnosis, if not, WTF? And I agree with being careful, it was misused years ago. You know, we isolated Tuberculosis patients (wouldn't be surprised that occurring again with the drug resistant types going around), I think we can do this for mental patients, though it may mean a special court as the others are bogged down. I hate legal stuff and courts, but there are cases where family law/practice is really needed and I think this one would be a good help. Mid, were these people placed in a conservatorship with a family or medical person as guardian?

[rock on sooner]

Rock If a whacked out Crazy mother ****er wants to take out a bunch of folks all he has to do is PRACTICE the changing a few times and he can become very fast ,As far as some one RUSHING the shooter, How they gonna do that when they running away?

As far as the Gun show Loop Hole as you call it goes. When was the last time you went to one? Most folk their are Dealers and as such Have to go by the Law with the Background checks and all the Paper work. The few Individuals who sell a Gun at those things Usually sell them to a Dealer there.

Bad guys DONT get weapons in a Legal manner

Yeah, I know only law abiding folks follow the rules. As to rushing the shooter, this
most recent event, at least two people did and paid dearly for it. You're right that
most are hauling a** in the opposite direction. I was thinking more about the nut
in the mall in Oregon or the shooter in Wisconsin...

The gun show thing...my understanding is that most of the illegal sales are from
unlicensed individuals and the bad guys seem to be able to pick them out or go from
one table to the next until they find what they're looking for. I don't have much
experience at those shows, though.....

[olevetonahill]

Yeah, I know only law abiding folks follow the rules. As to rushing the shooter, this
most recent event, at least two people did and paid dearly for it. You're right that
most are hauling a** in the opposite direction. I was thinking more about the nut
in the mall in Oregon or the shooter in Wisconsin...

The gun show thing...my understanding is that most of the illegal sales are from
unlicensed individuals and the bad guys seem to be able to pick them out or go from
one table to the next until they find what they're looking for. I don't have much
experience at those shows, though.....

I'd be willing to bet any amount say 10 to 1 that Most bad guys wont get near a Gun show simply because of the Police presence And all the Security Vids.

A Bad guy get his guns the Old fashioned way . They steal em :sneakiness:

[rock on sooner]

I'd be willing to bet any amount say 10 to 1 that Most bad guys wont get near a Gun show simply because of the Police presence And all the Security Vids.

A Bad guy get his guns the Old fashioned way . They steal em :sneakiness:

Yer prolly right...hmmm, guess I shunt go to the grocery store on Fridays
then...they always have an off duty cop around customer service...all the
payday check cashing....:highly_amused:

[BigTip]

The gun store next to me said the last two days have been record sales days.

They've been in busy over 30 years.

[KantoSooner]

I was just combining two of Vet's comments in my mind and had a fun thought: idiot thieves attempting to rob a gun show.
Sort of like the scene from Crocodile Dundee. "Knife? That's not a knife. THIS, this is a knife."

[olevetonahill]

I was just combining two of Vet's comments in my mind and had a fun thought: idiot thieves attempting to rob a gun show.
Sort of like the scene from Crocodile Dundee. "Knife? That's not a knife. THIS, this is a knife."

Heh, Prolly be sompun Matlock and H 2-0 would try if they ever went crooked

[nutinbutdust]

I know there are many on the left that would like to see the assault weapon ban reinstated. But what exactly is an assault weapon? Here is what the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 said:



There was no mention of caliber or anything like that. So what you ended up with is that this was illegal:

http://cdn.pjmedia.com/files/2011/06/put8tQI8u_ygldYpa0RpjmUmH3K98wPmvd4lLMY1ZoZdMLhkzN 1-6i7AZtaPzhcl9aOmk8vr3mQNOkEHToYHRed0l6xg5So4TvxLUj 1Kr0hE14Lvvww.jpg

But this was legal:

http://cdn.pjmedia.com/files/2011/06/Nsgkcj972eGXexZ-JnIVMv1GpxKXcvgvGmY8RqLASllbNcy1Fi6gxfH8CYf0C4sZN9 VlQ6B8c6nGfalCzEGY_Vh-JUALSB4H8RghrHnBhUPJaEGPi4U.jpg

See that little piece of metal on the top picture on the bottom of the barrel below the front sight? That is where you would attach a bayonet. Yeah.. That is the difference.

Does that make you feel safer?

Shockingly, studies that have looked back at the ban shows the ban had no effect on gun violence.

I'm shocked.. Shocked I tell you, that it didn't make a difference.


That is one of the problems. As it is now no one can seem to define and assault weapon. The last assault ban(I believe it was authored by Diane Feinstein) was clearly written by some one who had no idea what she was talking about.


How about front loading pistols and rifles for anyone without any permit required.

Not trying to be a smart a**, but what is a front loading pistol and rifle? Are you talking about black powder?

One of the biggest problems I see is people that clearly don't know what they are talking about....
On Dec 18th on MSNBC Nancy Pelosi made up a new politically charged term: assault magazine.
“How does something like this happen? Because a person with impaired judgment had access to firepower that should be outlawed. There is no reason why these assault magazines – and that’s what they are. We’ve got to call them what they are.” Oh well at least she didnt call it a clip.

I think there are some unintended consequences from all of the gun control uproar I am seeing. Gun sales are through the roof. You couldnt buy a AR-15 type rifle any where. All the stores are sold out. I have even read about lines to get in gun stores. The other interesting thing is 8000 people a day are joining the NRA.

[KantoSooner]

Kanto, we did it before, but it was misused and all the state mental institutions were opened up and closed down. I agree we have to be careful, but there has to be a mechanism to place people who are a danger to themselves and others into protective mental care. Supposedly Ms. Lanza was trying to lay the groundwork legally to have her son committed. She ran out of time going through the maze of the courts.

The problem is that this has placed an open season on all law abiding gun owners and everyone has their 2 cents on getting rid of them, esp. the liberal press - I mean the entire press...

When you cannot own a gun and a semi-auto, then you lose your leverage against the government. Worked out well for Stalin, Hitler, Mao and Mussolini.

I was living in western Mass at the time. Lots of fun taking the city bus which had become the day shelter for the nuts.

As to the leverage argument, ultimately that is the point of the second amendment. You do the argument no good, however, by being so apocalyptic. We have real votes in this country and I see no rational danger that that will end anytime soon.Very different circumstances existed in the cases you cite. In fact, involuntary commitment for reason of public safety would be far, far more likely to contribute to an oppressive state than even confiscation of so called 'assault weapons'.

Dunno what the solution is, but even banning guns wouldn't help for a long, long time. And neither would empowering say (for lefties) Rick Santorum or (for Fox viewers) Barnie Frank with the authority to pick up and throw into an insane asylum anyone they felt were 'dangerous'.

<mind you that there'd be so many of us in there in the case of Rick making the choices that maybe we could work out a modus vivendi, let us be a self governing hospital. Just a bunch of crazies, access to cabinets full of interesting pharmaceuticals, three hots a day. We could call it....Colorado.>

[diverdog]

I was living in western Mass at the time. Lots of fun taking the city bus which had become the day shelter for the nuts.

As to the leverage argument, ultimately that is the point of the second amendment. You do the argument no good, however, by being so apocalyptic. We have real votes in this country and I see no rational danger that that will end anytime soon.Very different circumstances existed in the cases you cite. In fact, involuntary commitment for reason of public safety would be far, far more likely to contribute to an oppressive state than even confiscation of so called 'assault weapons'.

Dunno what the solution is, but even banning guns wouldn't help for a long, long time. And neither would empowering say (for lefties) Rick Santorum or (for Fox viewers) Barnie Frank with the authority to pick up and throw into an insane asylum anyone they felt were 'dangerous'.

<mind you that there'd be so many of us in there in the case of Rick making the choices that maybe we could work out a modus vivendi, let us be a self governing hospital. Just a bunch of crazies, access to cabinets full of interesting pharmaceuticals, three hots a day. We could call it....Colorado.>


A thought just occurred to me. Had a full blown assualt weapons ban been enacted in 1994 as originally envisioned would the kids that died last week be alive today. Before you answer remember Lanza's mom bought her assualt rifle in 1997.

[nutinbutdust]

A thought just occurred to me. Had a full blown assualt weapons ban been enacted in 1994 as originally envisioned would the kids that died last week be alive today. Before you answer remember Lanza's mom bought her assualt rifle in 1997.

I think the pistols he had would have done the same amount of damage. For all I know he only used the rifle to get in the door, havent really seen any details on whether the rifle or pistols were used.

[sappstuf]

A thought just occurred to me. Had a full blown assualt weapons ban been enacted in 1994 as originally envisioned would the kids that died last week be alive today. Before you answer remember Lanza's mom bought her assualt rifle in 1997.

If Lanza's mom bought that rifle in 1997 then by definition of the US government, it was not an assault rifle.

What do you mean by "full blown assault weapons ban"? It is vague and ill-defined making your question impossible to answer.

[diverdog]

If Lanza's mom bought that rifle in 1997 then by definition of the US government, it was not an assault rifle.

What do you mean by "full blown assault weapons ban"? It is vague and ill-defined making your question impossible to answer.

sapp:

All semi automatic and automatic rifles of any style would have been banned. The NRA so watered down the bill that it was a joke.

[sappstuf]

sapp:

All semi automatic and automatic rifles of any style would have been banned. The NRA so watered down the bill that it was a joke.

So my .22 semi is an assault rifle?

[olevetonahill]

sapp:

All semi automatic and automatic rifles of any style would have been banned. The NRA so watered down the bill that it was a joke.

Which is precisely WHY we need the N.R.A.

[diverdog]

So my .22 semi is an assault rifle?

If it has a clip then yes it would have been banned. I don't think the models that were loaded through the stock were banned or the hunting rifles that had internal stripper clips. You know getting shot by a .22 is pretty bad. The mob used them to do hits.

[diverdog]

Which is precisely WHY we need the N.R.A.

vet:

The NRA is going to have bend on background checks. They are going to have their hands full because I think Bloomberg will go after them with everything he's got and he has a lot.

[olevetonahill]

If it has a clip then yes it would have been banned. You know getting shot by a .22 is pretty bad. The mob used them to do hits.

Up close and personal bro. Like right up close, You use a s22 short subsonic rd. Its quit doesnt exit , just rattles round in there scramblin the brain

[olevetonahill]

vet:

The NRA is going to have bend on background checks. They are going to have their hands full because I think Bloomberg will go after them with everything he's got and he has a lot.

Guess when the Libs get their way, Yall can start calling Me OUTLAW Vet

[Jacie]

I'd be willing to bet any amount say 10 to 1 that Most bad guys wont get near a Gun show simply because of the Police presence And all the Security Vids.

A Bad guy get his guns the Old fashioned way . They steal em :sneakiness:

Remember David Kuresh? People (as in a friend of mine whose personal arsenal of weapons could outfit a small country) knew him from gun shows in OKC. He was a regular at these.

As for dealers doing checks at a show, I never was but then things may have changed since I last attended one.

And one more thing, is a gun an assault weapon or not, semantics aside, for purposes of this forum it is like art. We all know one when we see one.

And another, we can all agree getting shot by any caliber of bullet does bad things to a body, all of em potentially lethal. The argument against assault weapons has much to do with 30-round banana clips (ftr, I own one of those and a 40-rounder!).

I own one and have never killed anything except inanimate objects with it but it bothers me to no end that they are now with associated with criminally insane killers.

[olevetonahill]

Remember David Kuresh? People (as in a friend of mine whose personal arsenal of weapons could outfit a small country) knew him from gun shows in OKC. He was a regular at these.

As for dealers doing checks at a show, I never was but then things may have changed since I last attended one.

Yea he even had some 'Hell Fires" try something relevant to todays Gun shows not 20 an 25 years ago When Security cams were almost non existent

[Harry Beanbag]

I heard you can buy bazookas and hand grenades at gun shows in California. They're out in the open and everything! :D

[olevetonahill]

I heard you can buy bazookas and hand grenades at gun shows in California. They're out in the open and everything! :D

And No background check

[sappstuf]

vet:

The NRA is going to have bend on background checks. They are going to have their hands full because I think Bloomberg will go after them with everything he's got and he has a lot.

Just not the Constitution...

[sappstuf]

If it has a clip then yes it would have been banned. I don't think the models that were loaded through the stock were banned or the hunting rifles that had internal stripper clips. You know getting shot by a .22 is pretty bad. The mob used them to do hits.

So once again, you aren't talking about caliber which seems to be rather important since no army in the world that I know of has a .22 "assault rifle" standard issue...

[nutinbutdust]

So once again, you aren't talking about caliber which seems to be rather important since no army in the world that I know of has a .22 "assault rifle" standard issue...

But the thing to remember is the 5.56×45mm NATO cartridge(.223)with the standard 62 gr. bullets have a steel core. A standard 22 long rifle isn't much smaller in diameter and weighs 40 grains but the bullet is solid lead. The 223 is designed for tissue penetration and damage. With that said, I wouldn't want to get shot by either.

[olevetonahill]

But the thing to remember is the 5.56×45mm NATO cartridge(.223)with the standard 62 gr. bullets have a steel core. A standard 22 long rifle isn't much smaller in diameter and weighs 40 grains but the bullet is solid lead. The 223 is designed for tissue penetration and damage. With that said, I wouldn't want to get shot by either.

Been shot twice, Rub some dirt on it and quit crying

[okie52]

vet:

The NRA is going to have bend on background checks. They are going to have their hands full because I think Bloomberg will go after them with everything he's got and he has a lot.

Bloomberg is scary...just look what he did to those murderous 20 oz cokes.

[nutinbutdust]

vet:

The NRA is going to have bend on background checks. They are going to have their hands full because I think Bloomberg will go after them with everything he's got and he has a lot.

I don't understand the public misconceptions on this. Maybe it is the part of the country I live in. The gun shows I attend in Iowa and Minnesota have tables with licensed(federal firearms license) dealers. They enforce waiting periods and do background checks just like a store would do. There might be the occasional guy walking around with a rifle on his back with a for sale sign on it. I would never buy one of these because I would have no way of knowing if the gun was stolen. I have seen people doing this sell the firearm to dealers at tables. Again the licensed dealers at the tables have to check if the gun is stolen before they buy it. I guess I have never bought a gun without having a check done except the shotgun my dad gave me for Xmas when I was 12.

[olevetonahill]

I don't understand the public misconceptions on this. Maybe it is the part of the country I live in. The gun shows I attend in Iowa and Minnesota have tables with licensed(federal firearms license) dealers. They enforce waiting periods and do background checks just like a store would do. There might be the occasional guy walking around with a rifle on his back with a for sale sign on it. I would never buy one of these because I would have no way of knowing if the gun was stolen. I have seen people doing this sell the firearm to dealers at tables. Again the licensed dealers at the tables have to check if the gun is stolen before they buy it. I guess I have never bought a gun without having a check done except the shotgun my dad gave me for Xmas when I was 12.

What Im sayin Dust
These folks act Like a ****ing Gunshow is a Large gathering of Crooks and Crazy folk

Maybe They should attend one just so they have a ****in CLUE.

[diverdog]

Just not the Constitution...

Okay so should citizens be able to buy XM-25? How about a crew served weapon or even a M-249?

[olevetonahill]

Okay so should citizens be able to buy XM-25? How about a crew served weapon or even a M-249?

Why not?

[diverdog]

Why not?

I made a mistake on the M249. I guess you can own one in some states.

why does anyone need an M249?

[olevetonahill]

I made a mistake on the M249. I guess you can own one in some states.

why does anyone need an M249?

Why does it have to be a NEED? Why cant I just want one?

[kevpks]

Why does it have to be a NEED? Why cant I just want one?

From a limited search online, it looks like anyone wanting an M249 would have to go through a rigorous process and then find one for sale that was made before 1986. The gun itself would cost between 30K and 100K. From my perspective, someone willing to go through all of that is not likely to be a mass murderer. They are much more likely to unload ammunition into targets on a hill for fun.

[olevetonahill]

From a limited search online, it looks like anyone wanting an M249 would have to go through a rigorous process and then find one for sale that was made before 1986. The gun itself would cost between 30K and 100K. From my perspective, someone willing to go through all of that is not likely to be a mass murderer. They are much more likely to unload ammunition into targets on a hill for fun.

Did they make the SAW that far back?
Hell If I had a Tank I'd drive that bad boy all over my hill, If the Cannon werked Id blast the hell out of some Big assed rocks while I was at it

[soonercruiser]

I think the pistols he had would have done the same amount of damage. For all I know he only used the rifle to get in the door, havent really seen any details on whether the rifle or pistols were used.

You forget...Diver was watching in real time at the WH with OBama.
Just like Bengazhi, they couldn't decide...but, they can tell you what happened.

[LiveLaughLove]

Did they make the SAW that far back?
Hell If I had a Tank I'd drive that bad boy all over my hill, If the Cannon werked Id blast the hell out of some Big assed rocks while I was at it

I have a buddy that has a WW II halftrack (American) with a .50 cal swivel turret (just the turret not the weapon). He has several German machine guns and submachine guns. He has a BAR, a Thompson submachine gun, and a freaking Swedish anti tank gun on skis with a rope harness for pulling it and about 20 rounds of armor piercing shells.

We fired his MG 34 on an Army target range and it blew holes in the targets instead of just knocking them down. The range master got in some deep stuff over that little jaunt, but he got to hip fire the weapon himself so he had a good time at least.

I preferred the Schmeisser MP 40. Coolest looking weapon ever made to me.

[olevetonahill]

I have a buddy that has a WW II halftrack (American) with a .50 cal swivel turret (just the turret not the weapon). He has several German machine guns and submachine guns. He has a BAR, a Thompson submachine gun, and a freaking Swedish anti tank gun on skis with a rope harness for pulling it and about 20 rounds of armor piercing shells.

We fired his MG 34 on an Army target range and it blew holes in the targets instead of just knocking them down. The range master got in some deep stuff over that little jaunt, but he got to hip fire the weapon himself so he had a good time at least.


I preferred the Schmeisser MP 40. Coolest looking weapon ever made to me.

Hell its FUN doing that kinda carp

[TheHumanAlphabet]

I would love to havea BAR. One badass weapon and cool as hell.

[OU_Sooners75]

When a drunk driver kills a person or people, no one blames the car. They blame the driver.

But when a person walks into a gathering spot (be it a school, post office, mall, or movie theater) people blame the gun, not the person.


Hmmm....double standard at best.

Listen fools...the gun, though designed as a weapon for killing, does not fire without someone pulling the trigger. Therefore, the person pulling the trigger is at fault. Just like when a drunk driver kils another person, the driver is at fault, not the car.

If you want to blame the guns, and try to ban the guns for peoples stupidity and evil, then do the same with motor vehicles!

[Ton Loc]

I can't believe that the morons would settle for an all out AR ban. Let's see, 1-13 lives taken by one clip in a plain everyday pistol - no big deal. But 1-30 people dead by rifle with one banana clip is where they draw the line. Dummies, if you aren't going for an all out gun ban then what exactly is your point?

Gun people need to chill and keep their mouths closed until there is a reason to say anything. Right now, they risk saying something stupid and carrying on the retarded conversation. Wait for this to blow over - which shouldn't take too much longer since the fiscal cliff is just a few days away.

[pphilfran]

I can't believe that the morons would settle for an all out AR ban. Let's see, 1-13 lives taken by one clip in a plain everyday pistol - no big deal. But 1-30 people dead by rifle with one banana clip is where they draw the line. Dummies, if you aren't going for an all out gun ban then what exactly is your point?

Gun people need to chill and keep their mouths closed until there is a reason to say anything. Right now, they risk saying something stupid and carrying on the retarded conversation. Wait for this to blow over - which shouldn't take too much longer since the fiscal cliff is just a few days away.It is no fun when we are chillin'...

[OU_Sooners75]

I'm sorry Ton Loc, but if we gun supporters don't say anything, then the dirty liberals that want to strip us of our liberties and freedoms will press on even louder.

When uncheck "facts" and made up statistics go unimpeded, then the people that have no clue start to believe those.

So its best to stand up for the right thing and speak of actual facts and statistics.

[pphilfran]

You are more likely to be murdered by a knife (1694), fist (728), shotgun (356), other (1659) than by rifle (323)

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr...ables/table-20

[OU_Sooners75]

You are more likely to be murdered by a knife (1694), fist (728), shotgun (356), other (1659) than by rifle (323)

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr...ables/table-20

Those numbers don't count!

Hell your more likely to die from a basebat bat than a rifle!

Maybe its rumors, but I'm hearing the shooter in Connecticut didn't shot one person with the rifle, but the pistols he was carrying. I've heard he used the rifle to get past the door.

But since he had an AR with him, that is the focus...hell the guns are the focus, not the person or his mental instability.

[StoopTroup]

Investigators believe most of the bullets came from a Bushmaster .223 assault rifle. It was one of four guns Lanza took from the home he shared with his mother after he shot and killed her.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57559416/assault-rifle-used-during-sandy-hook-massacre/

[StoopTroup]

You can probably ask the CT Governor anything you want via an email.

http://www.governor.ct.gov/malloy/cwp/view.asp?a=4011&q=470882

[BigTip]

So its best to stand up for the right thing and speak of actual facts and statistics.

Yes.

"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
Edmund Burke

[nutinbutdust]

I made a mistake on the M249. I guess you can own one in some states.

why does anyone need an M249?

I am a little slow on the draw, but I see a lot of people asking questions like this. Some even want to know why anyone needs an AR-15. I took this from LINK (http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/336529/regulating-militia-kevin-d-williamson?pg=1)

There is no legitimate exception to the Second Amendment for military-style weapons, because military-style weapons are precisely what the Second Amendment guarantees our right to keep and bear. The purpose of the Second Amendment is to secure our ability to oppose enemies foreign and domestic, a guarantee against disorder and tyranny. Consider the words of Supreme Court justice Joseph Story — who was, it bears noting, appointed to the Court by the guy who wrote the Constitution:
The importance of this article will scarcely be doubted by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. The militia is the natural defence of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.

[radio]

As my HS english teacher tried to teach us....

"The word is not the thing."

[jk the sooner fan]

people.....seriously - the use of the word "clip" in this thread is driving me to drink

http://www.everydaynodaysoff.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/ClipMagazineLesson.jpg

MAGAZINE!!!!!! gah

[jk the sooner fan]

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/poster33090609rc9-tm.jpg

[olevetonahill]

people.....seriously - the use of the word "clip" in this thread is driving me to drink

http://www.everydaynodaysoff.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/ClipMagazineLesson.jpg

MAGAZINE!!!!!! gah

Heh, I have a Bunch of 10 rd CLIPS and several 30 Rd Mags :D

[Curly Bill]

My favorite has been the fools that have been referring to the a .223 as a high-powered weapon because many of the rifles that chamber it can use 20 and 30 round magazines, when they should be saying it's high-capacity.

Anyone with one shred of a clue knows a .223 is not a high-powered weapon.

[Turd_Ferguson]

Heh, I have a Bunch of 10 rd CLIPS and several 30 Rd Mags :D

The first time I loaded the SKS with the stripper clip, I found out that Stripper means the bolt will strip your thumb right off your ****'n hand if your not careful...

[olevetonahill]

The first time I loaded the SKS with the stripper clip, I found out that Stripper means the bolt will strip your thumb right off your ****'n hand if your not careful...

Them ****in Gooks could use those things Fast. Hell they could reload just as fast if not faster than we could.

[nutinbutdust]

Demand a clue, You Hypocrites. NSFW


http://youtu.be/hxRlpRcorEU

[yermom]

When a drunk driver kills a person or people, no one blames the car. They blame the driver.

But when a person walks into a gathering spot (be it a school, post office, mall, or movie theater) people blame the gun, not the person.


Hmmm....double standard at best.

Listen fools...the gun, though designed as a weapon for killing, does not fire without someone pulling the trigger. Therefore, the person pulling the trigger is at fault. Just like when a drunk driver kils another person, the driver is at fault, not the car.

If you want to blame the guns, and try to ban the guns for peoples stupidity and evil, then do the same with motor vehicles!

when a person uses a bomb to blow up a federal building, it's the person making the bomb, not the bomb that's at fault. why should bombs be punished?

i'm not against guns, but that logic doesn't get anyone anywhere. the issue is that a gun makes it too easy to kill a room full of people, the problem is that just picking the gun du jour doesn't really get anyone anywhere. if he had to reload a few times, or carry more guns, i don't think the difference would have been that stark.

the kid at VT just had a Glock 17 i think, and some .22lr pistol (EDIT: Glock 19, Walther P22)

if he was using a .223 rifle in a classroom, then he didn't even need that gun for his intended purpose. he could have been across the street with that thing.

they can ban scary looking guns all day, it's not going to change anything. all they are doing is trying to get more people to think they did something

[OU Adonis]

when a person uses a bomb to blow up a federal building, it's the person making the bomb, not the bomb that's at fault. why should bombs be punished? i'm not against guns, but that logic doesn't get anyone anywhere. the issue is that a gun makes it too easy to kill a room full of people, the problem is that just picking the gun du jour doesn't really get anyone anywhere. if he had to reload a few times, or carry more guns, i don't think the difference would have been that stark. the kid at VT just had a Glock 17 i think, and some .22lr pistol (EDIT: Glock 19, Walther P22)if he was using a .223 rifle in a classroom, then he didn't even need that gun for his intended purpose. he could have been across the street with that thing. they can ban scary looking guns all day, it's not going to change anything. all they are doing is trying to get more people to think they did something

According to the FBI, you are 5 times more likely to be stabbed to death than to be shot to death by any form of rifle.

Yet there is a bush for an assault rifle ban, which comprises a very small percentage of rifles out there.

In fact, you are more likely to be beaten to death by someones bare hands/feet ect than to be shot dead by a rifle.

[Curly Bill]

According to the FBI, you are 5 times more likely to be stabbed to death than to be shot to death by any form of rifle.

Yet there is a bush for an assault rifle ban, which comprises a very small percentage of rifles out there.

In fact, you are more likely to be beaten to death by someones bare hands/feet ect than to be shot dead by a rifle.

Yeah, but it ain't about facts or common sense. It's about the peeps that don't like guns have latched onto a tragedy to further their agenda.

[okiewaker]

Ok, I'm convinced. If AR's would have been banned prior to the CT tragedy guy would have simply said, "dang, can't get an AR to shoot up some kids so,,,,think ill go grab a Big Mac and take in a movie." Sounds reasonable.

[olevetonahill]

when a person uses a bomb to blow up a federal building, it's the person making the bomb, not the bomb that's at fault. why should bombs be punished?

i'm not against guns, but that logic doesn't get anyone anywhere. the issue is that a gun makes it too easy to kill a room full of people, the problem is that just picking the gun du jour doesn't really get anyone anywhere. if he had to reload a few times, or carry more guns, i don't think the difference would have been that stark.

the kid at VT just had a Glock 17 i think, and some .22lr pistol (EDIT: Glock 19, Walther P22)

if he was using a .223 rifle in a classroom, then he didn't even need that gun for his intended purpose. he could have been across the street with that thing.

they can ban scary looking guns all day, it's not going to change anything. all they are doing is trying to get more people to think they did something

Gots to Agree with Dave here.
Like Ive said
If a Crazy mother****er wnts to kill a bunch of folk all he has to do is Go on line a then build a small bomb er 2 and BLAM every ones Bye Bye!

[OU Adonis]

Here is a link to the FBI murder stats for 2011.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-11

5 deaths by poison. Really?

[StoopTroup]

An assault weapon is a weapon you assault someone with. A non-assault weapon is one I used to kill the person who assaulted me.

[LiveLaughLove]

Yeah, but it ain't about facts or common sense. It's about the peeps that don't like guns have latched onto a tragedy to further their agenda.

It's about emotion pure and simple. Nothing else.

[BigTip]

Didn't know which thread to post this on. I live in Austin and I didn't even hear about it.

San Antonio Theater Shooting

On Sunday December 17, 2012, 2 days after the CT shooting, a man went to a restaurant in San Antonio to kill his X-girlfriend. After he shot her, most of the people in the restaurant fled next door to a theater. The gunman followed them and entered the theater so he could shoot more people. He started shooting and people in the theater started running and screaming. It’s like the Aurora, CO theater story plus a restaurant!

Now aren’t you wondering why this isn’t a lead story in the national media along with the school shooting?

There was an off duty county deputy at the theater. SHE pulled out her gun and shot the man 4 times before he had a chance to kill anyone. So since this story makes the point that the best thing to stop a bad person with a gun is a good person with a gun, the media is treating it like it never happened.

Only the local media covered it. The city is giving her a medal next week.

Just thought you’d like to know.

[Curly Bill]

Didn't know which thread to post this on. I live in Austin and I didn't even hear about it.

San Antonio Theater Shooting

On Sunday December 17, 2012, 2 days after the CT shooting, a man went to a restaurant in San Antonio to kill his X-girlfriend. After he shot her, most of the people in the restaurant fled next door to a theater. The gunman followed them and entered the theater so he could shoot more people. He started shooting and people in the theater started running and screaming. It’s like the Aurora, CO theater story plus a restaurant!

Now aren’t you wondering why this isn’t a lead story in the national media along with the school shooting?

There was an off duty county deputy at the theater. SHE pulled out her gun and shot the man 4 times before he had a chance to kill anyone. So since this story makes the point that the best thing to stop a bad person with a gun is a good person with a gun, the media is treating it like it never happened.

Only the local media covered it. The city is giving her a medal next week.

Just thought you’d like to know.

Thanks for posting!

[StoopTroup]

Didn't know which thread to post this on. I live in Austin and I didn't even hear about it.

San Antonio Theater Shooting

On Sunday December 17, 2012, 2 days after the CT shooting, a man went to a restaurant in San Antonio to kill his X-girlfriend. After he shot her, most of the people in the restaurant fled next door to a theater. The gunman followed them and entered the theater so he could shoot more people. He started shooting and people in the theater started running and screaming. It’s like the Aurora, CO theater story plus a restaurant!

Now aren’t you wondering why this isn’t a lead story in the national media along with the school shooting?

There was an off duty county deputy at the theater. SHE pulled out her gun and shot the man 4 times before he had a chance to kill anyone. So since this story makes the point that the best thing to stop a bad person with a gun is a good person with a gun, the media is treating it like it never happened.

Only the local media covered it. The city is giving her a medal next week.

Just thought you’d like to know.

It's definitely a story and it deserves to be covered.

Thing is....it happened in Texas and it happened in a Restaurant and a theatre and an Off Duty Officer put an end to it. It's not like we can't figure out why he did what he did and he didn't shoot himself either.

The CT shooting was an Elementary School and the victims were mostly 5-10 year olds and six Teachers. The guy stole the guns from his Mom and killed her and a brother and once he had killed 28 people/children, he turned the gun on himself. He wiped out his computer and left no reason for doing what he did. It really upset a lot of Parents and Teachers all over the World. Hell....I even thought about keeping my kids at Home the next few days in case some whack job decided to copycat the guy.

CT wasn't just another shooting. It's going to be a reminder of what we failed to do about such things should it ever happen again and should it happen again....we will all be to blame for not figuring out a way to at least reduce the risk of such occurrences.

Like Curly said....thanks for the story. I am glad the City is giving her a medal too. She deserves it. I can see it being a story but in the case of it being a lead story over the CT Shooting....I just don't see it making the CT Shooting a lesser event. Maybe they both deserved a front page spot?

[BigTip]

...I just don't see it making the CT Shooting a lesser event.

That is not the point. The story is a counter point to the knee jerk reaction to the CT shooting to "BAN ALL WEAPONS!!!" which is not the solution of course.

[SCOUT]

It's definitely a story and it deserves to be covered.

Thing is....it happened in Texas and it happened in a Restaurant and a theatre and an Off Duty Officer put an end to it. It's not like we can't figure out why he did what he did and he didn't shoot himself either.

The CT shooting was an Elementary School and the victims were mostly 5-10 year olds and six Teachers. The guy stole the guns from his Mom and killed her and a brother and once he had killed 28 people/children, he turned the gun on himself. He wiped out his computer and left no reason for doing what he did. It really upset a lot of Parents and Teachers all over the World. Hell....I even thought about keeping my kids at Home the next few days in case some whack job decided to copycat the guy.

CT wasn't just another shooting. It's going to be a reminder of what we failed to do about such things should it ever happen again and should it happen again....we will all be to blame for not figuring out a way to at least reduce the risk of such occurrences.

Like Curly said....thanks for the story. I am glad the City is giving her a medal too. She deserves it. I can see it being a story but in the case of it being a lead story over the CT Shooting....I just don't see it making the CT Shooting a lesser event. Maybe they both deserved a front page spot?

Your post has lots of qualifiers. This story is great because it shows that these nuts can be stopped.

More importantly, the lack of coverage of this story shows that things that fit the narrative get coverage and those that don't get page six.

Journalism is dead.

[nutinbutdust]

Senator Feinstein is presenting her new bill tommorow. I took the time today to write both my congressman and senators. I would urge all who oppose this stupid bill to do the same. If you need a template, here is what i used.

Senator _______ ,

I am, a State resident and am currently live in Xxxxx XX.

I am vehemently opposed to the 2013 Feinstein Assault Weapons legislation, and while I know you are a busy man/woman, please continue reading to find out why. I am concerned that even Senator Feinstein knows that the bill will not pass as it is proposed, and this initial proposal is merely being used as a bargaining tactic to “soften the blow” and “show compromise” on later proposals that would still infringe upon our rights.

Please remember the oath you have taken. I consider that a very important promise to this great nation…not merely words to be repeated as a formality to taking an appointed/elected position as it appears some of your colleagues seem to treat it. Specifically, I would direct your attention to the oath:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

The Second Amendment of the Constitution you have sworn to support and defend, states that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

We are at a crossroads right now after the tragedy in Connecticut. There are colleagues of yours that will use the fear, emotion, and television air-time brought on by this tragedy to further their own political motivations.

This country is facing much bigger issues than those that Senator Feinstein is trying to address. And the bill that she is proposing would not have done anything to stop the tragedy in CT, as many of those laws were already in place in that state. It is unfortunate, but criminals break laws and infringing upon the rights of law-abiding citizens is not the way to prevent tragedies like the one in Newtown.

To quote one of your fellow Senators (Senator Kelly Ayotte), “Denying the Second Amendment rights of law abiding citizens will not change the behavior of those intent on using firearms to commit horrific crimes.”

I hope that you would keep the promise that you made to this nation when you took your oath. I trust that you will oppose all proposals that will infringe upon the rights granted to us in the Constitution. If you are a man/woman of honor and keep the promise that you made to this nation, then you can count on my vote in the next election.

If, however, you choose not to uphold a right granted in the Constitution, I will find a representative that is more deserving of my vote that can uphold the oath that they make to this nation to defend the Constitution.

Very respectfully,
XXXXXXX

[TheHumanAlphabet]

The story is a counter point to the knee jerk reaction to the CT shooting to "BAN ALL WEAPONS!!!" which is not the solution of course.

yes it is if you are an effing lib or progressive.