Assault weapons and large magazines ban upheld in New York and Conneticut

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Hint: is an AR 15 a weapon in common use or dangerous and unusual...

 

[Valerie]

WHAT is the lawful purpose for owning an assault weapon and WHO rightfully regulates licenses for that lawful purpose?

The police..if you use one to commit a crime you can be arrested and jailed…..it really is that simple.

The mass shooters all pass gun control laws….and he ones who can't buy their guns illegally or steal them…..so what does licensing do to stop mass murder….can you explain that because no one else on your side can…..ever…..each time I ask they always refuse to answer?

no, the issue is not really that simple, despite your simplistic approach to it.

legislators create laws and police enforce them...

shrugging 'mass murder can't be stopped' is a LAME straw man approach.

it is completely irrational for us not to try to do what we can...your government paranoia is showing.

random psychos can not be stopped BUT we can decrease their chances of ever wielding an assault weapon in public.




"the push for an assault-weapon’s ban hearkens to the original ban passed in 1994 that expired in 2004. At the time of that ban’s passage, Reagan -- who took office in 1981-- supported it. In a joint letter to The Boston Globe with Jimmy Carter and Gerald Ford, the former presidents wrote, "While we recognize that assault weapon legislation will not stop all assault weapon crime, statistics prove that we can dry up the supply of these guns, making them less accessible to criminals."

Eight years before this letter in the newspaper supporting the assault-weapons ban, Reagan, who was then president, signed into law the Firearm Owners Protection Act, which was supported by gun rights advocates. In addition to providing protections for gun owners, the act also banned ownership of any fully automatic rifles that were not already registered on the day the law was signed."

Did Reagan support an assault-weapons ban?

 

[Valerie]

 

[Valerie]

 

[M14 Shooter]

no, the issue is not really that simple, despite your simplistic approach to it.
legislators create laws and police enforce them...
shrugging 'mass murder can't be stopped' is a LAME straw man approach.
it is completely irrational for us not to try to do what we can...your government paranoia is showing.
random psychos can not be stopped BUT we can decrease their chances of ever wielding an assault weapon in public.

There is no sound argument for the necessity nor the the constitutionality of banning 'assault weapons'.

 

[M14 Shooter]

This is where Clayton mentions post hoc ergo propter hoc
Or he would, if hr weren't a partisan bigot.

 

[Nosmo King]

Assault is an ACTION you moron NOT a weapon. Damn you are ignorant.

but what action does this ''assault" weapon achieve and who rightfully regulates its lawful purpose?

The assault is committed by a PERSON not a weapon.
Why regulate the weapon when the person is at fault?

Can a lunatic run up a victim count of fifteen, eighteen, twenty or more without a semi-automatic firing system and a magazine holding fifteen, eighteen or twenty rounds?

Yes

Next question?

-Geaux

How? And compare any other method of slaughter with a mass shooting at a school or campus or church.

You're merely equivocating and not looking at the problem of gun violence responsibly.

 

[Valerie]

reenact the ban and give it enough time to prove itself... like forever.



Both sides in the gun debate are selectively citing from a series of studies that concluded with a 2004 study led by Christopher S. Koper, “An Updated Assessment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Impacts on Gun Markets and Gun Violence, 1994-2003.” That report was the final of three studies of the ban, which was enacted in 1994 as part of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994.


The final report concluded the ban’s success in reducing crimes committed with banned guns was “mixed.” Gun crimes involving assault weapons declined. However, that decline was “offset throughout at least the late 1990s by steady or rising use of other guns equipped with [large-capacity magazines].”


Ultimately, the research concluded that it was “premature to make definitive assessments of the ban’s impact on gun crime,” largely because the law’s grandfathering of millions of pre-ban assault weapons and large-capacity magazines “ensured that the effects of the law would occur only gradually” and were “still unfolding” when the ban expired in 2004.

Did the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban Work?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Mindless nonsense.
Especially in that a 10/22 is a rim-fire rifle and thus not an 'assault weapon".

 

[M14 Shooter]

reenact the ban and give it enough time to prove itself... like forever.

Yawn.
For those who want to reisntate the 1994 'assault weapon' ban....? | Page 2 | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[Valerie]

Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence

 

[M14 Shooter]

Firearms not considered 'assault weapons" under the NY SAFE act:

Ruger® Mini-14® Ranch Rifle Autoloading Rifle Models
Super Match M1A™ | Competition Tactical Rifles for Sale

Proof of the mindless nonsense of anti-gun loons.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence

More mindless nonsense.

 

[Dana7360]

Federal court upholds post-Sandy Hook gun bans in New York and Connecticut

I guess the NRA was asleep?

Thank you very much for that good news.

However we all know the nra and gun nuts won't stop with that ruling. They will take it to the supreme court. Which I hope that the court will not twist the constitution and come up with some crazy reason why states can't regulate gun sales.

The constitution is very clear. The government has the power to regulate commerce. Selling guns is commerce so the government can impose regulations on guns.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Federal court upholds post-Sandy Hook gun bans in New York and Connecticut
I guess the NRA was asleep?

Thank you very much for that good news.

However we all know the nra and gun nuts won't stop with that ruling. They will take it to the supreme court. Which I hope that the court will not twist the constitution and come up with some crazy reason why states can't regulate gun sales.

The constitution is very clear. The government has the power to regulate commerce. Selling guns is commerce so the government can impose regulations on guns.

More mindless nonsense.
There is no sound argument for neither the necessity nor the constitutionality of banning 'assault weapons'.

 

[nat4900]

And of course the ban does not stop one criminal or mass shooter from shooting people….and if they want a semi automatic rifle, they will get them easily….the normal gun owners won't have them….but the criminals will……

The same bullshit over and over and over again (without the obnoxious FOX commercials, however.)

The banning of sales, will impact on the PRODUCTION of such weapons and, eventually, even the criminals will have to scramble to access such weapons....maybe you can sell criminals your cache of such weapons for a hefty price.

 

[nat4900]

There is no sound argument for neither the necessity nor the constitutionality of banning 'assault weapons'.

...and those founding fathers ALSO forgot to mention in the 2nd Amend. that nuclear weapons should also be a no-no for the militia.

 

[M14 Shooter]

There is no sound argument for neither the necessity nor the constitutionality of banning 'assault weapons'.

...and those founding fathers ALSO forgot to mention in the 2nd Amend. that nuclear weapons should also be a no-no for the militia.

Irrelevant to what I said.
But you know that.

 

[M14 Shooter]

And of course the ban does not stop one criminal or mass shooter from shooting people….and if they want a semi automatic rifle, they will get them easily….the normal gun owners won't have them….but the criminals will……

The same bullshit over and over and over again (without the obnoxious FOX commercials, however.)
The banning of sales, will impact on the PRODUCTION of such weapons and, eventually, even the criminals will have to scramble to access such weapons....maybe you can sell criminals your cache of such weapons for a hefty price.

Mindless nonsense.
For those who want to reisntate the 1994 'assault weapon' ban....? | Page 2 | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
Still awaiting a sound response.

 

[nat4900]

There is no sound argument for neither the necessity nor the constitutionality of banning 'assault weapons'.

...and those founding fathers ALSO forgot to mention in the 2nd Amend. that nuclear weapons should also be a no-no for the militia.

Irrelevant to what I said.
But you know that.

Does the second amendment state YOUR right to own an assault weapon????
Do you belong to a militia?