to bad i live in CT :(

Yea, let's make it easier for terrists and criminals to buy assult weapons :smash:

-spence

Since when do terrorists and criminals "buy" anything?

hmmmmmmmmm! sarcasm again ? :D:happy:

If the guns aren't leagal there will be less in the country for people to buy illegally or steal. They have to come from somewhere.

This notion that the AWB wasn't very effective isn't a very realistic assumption. The idea is to stop the flow of new weapons into the system. For sure there will still be a lot on the street, but why keep pumping more in?

The original AWB had plenty of holes in it. For sure it was mostly a feel good measure, but it was a step in the right direction. Gun owners get too freaked out the left is going to try to ban all guns. The vast majority of people don't want this, it won't ever happen.

You don't need a LAW 12 gauge :smash:

-spence

Not like anything changed with the AWB bill.

Preban hicap mags were still available. (grandfathered)
Companies like Bushmaster modified their guns to meet AWB regulations and kept on selling.
Plenty of guns were grandfathered in.

Originally posted by spence
If the guns aren't leagal there will be less in the country for people to buy illegally or steal. They have to come from somewhere.

This notion that the AWB wasn't very effective isn't a very realistic assumption. The idea is to stop the flow of new weapons into the system. For sure there will still be a lot on the street, but why keep pumping more in?

The original AWB had plenty of holes in it. For sure it was mostly a feel good measure, but it was a step in the right direction. Gun owners get too freaked out the left is going to try to ban all guns. The vast majority of people don't want this, it won't ever happen.

You don't need a LAW 12 gauge :smash:

-spence

Not true. Look at the UK and Australia. They've banned a lot of firearms and their gun crime rates are going UP. Criminals have a way of smuggling things into the country.

The top 10 guns used in crimes in the U.S. in 2000, according to an unpublished study by U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and obtained exclusively by TIME:

1. Smith and Wesson .38 revolver
2. Ruger 9 mm semiautomatic
3. Lorcin Engineering .380 semiautomatic
4. Raven Arms .25 semiautomatic
5. Mossberg 12 gauge shotgun
6. Smith and Wesson 9mm semiautomatic
7. Smith and Wesson .357 revolver
8. Bryco Arms 9mm semiautomatic
9. Bryco Arms .380 semiautomatic
10. Davis Industries .380 semiautomatic

What do these all have in common?
They're cheap.

What did the ban do to the gun industry? Made it rich as hell.
Modified ban listed weapons were extremely expensive.
5 dollar magazines went up to 30 dollars a pop.

Originally posted by green meanie
to bad i live in CT :(

Ahh...cheer up. You can still have hi-cap mags, and you can still own a machine gun in CT (as long as its full-auto only and not selective fire).

I'm a closet gun lover... the fact is that criminals will always get guns and law abiding citizens can get them too.. if you put laws restricting them, the honest people wont have them and the criminals will still find a way to get them....

i have never done anything wrong in my life and for that i should be punished for others?

the AWB didnt stop us from buying ar15's or any semi auto so the DEMS like to scare people into thinking it was banning semi auto and it wasnt.

the truth is since they started the ban it hasnt helped a bit.

remind me when they come to regulate fishing poles and take them away not to help.

Originally posted by Eben
I'm a closet gun lover... the fact is that criminals will always get guns and law abiding citizens can get them too.. if you put laws restricting them, the honest people wont have them and the criminals will still find a way to get them....

again, this is getting scary....:)

Afterhours... Since we agree on so many things, I wont be surprised when you vote for Kerry in November. I mean, if your as smart as myself, I dont see how you could vote for Bush.:smash:

Originally posted by green meanie
i have never done anything wrong in my life and for that i should be punished for others?
Since you're such a gem I suppose you should be able to purchase landmines and deadly pathogens as well right?

I understand the nuances on what makes an assult weapon and what isn't, and some of it is quite silly. On that I agree.

But this notion that the Second Amendment gives a law abiding citizen the right to own a weapon designed for the sole purpose of killing people is patently absurd.

I've yet to see anyone take an AR-15 hunting...ever. You shouldn't need an extended round clip unless you plan to be in a fire fight. If you like danger that much, go fish at Hazard :eek5:

-spence

SKS's were included in the ban (new ones... most were grandfathered in) yet thats used as a hunting rifle in Europe? :confused:

Originally posted by spence
But this notion that the Second Amendment gives a law abiding citizen the right to own a weapon designed for the sole purpose of killing people is patently absurd.

I've yet to see anyone take an AR-15 hunting...ever. You shouldn't need an extended round clip unless you plan to be in a fire fight. If you like danger that much, go fish at Hazard :eek5:

-spence

Look, any serious scholar of the 2nd Amendment (I defer to experts such as Sanford Levinson of Yale Law School) recognizes it as an individual right, one that is there to give the citzenry tools to counter state tryanny.

The 2nd Amendment is NOT about duck hunting. Hunting is a PRIVILEGE, not a right spelled out by the constitution.

The 2nd Amendment is all about self defense (of one's person and other innocent citizens), so one could argue that self-loading firearms are quite appropriate for the law-abiding citizen to own (certain Supreme Court rulings notwithstanding).

But the context of state tyrany is completely different from what we have today, unless you're worried about Ruby Ridge and Waco.

Also the context of weapons is completly different. By this account I should be able to mine my front yard to protect myself from the Tiverton Police :uhuh:

-spence

The concept of free speech has also changed.

Who would have known over 250 years ago that we would have 24 hour mega multi- media companies tightly controlled by a few people.

Does that mean we throw out the First Amendment?

Obviously not - you can't pick and choose your freedoms.

Something to consider...

I find it funny, and this has nothing to do with this discussion, but i find it funny how some people are so gung-ho over the right to bear arms, and freedom of speech, but Here we have Bush who really pushing the boundaries of the seperation of church and state, and nobody says a thing about it... what gives?? :huh:

Ben take me shooting! :love:

This year the Bush Admin gave 1 million dollars to a abstinance only Christian program that preaches that pre-marital sex is morally corrupting :smash:

-spence

So if Cheney drops dead is Falwell gonna be the new VP?

I wonder what Larry Flynt would think of that?

It is my understanding that the 2nd amendment is guaranteeing that the people will have the weapons necessary to hold back an oppressive government.

At the time all that was needed were simple rifles.
In this day, we actually need a hell of a lot more.

The amendments list out the powers that the people are guaranteed in order to remain free plain and simple.

Originally posted by Eben
Ben take me shooting! :love:

:devil:

eben- i'd vote for almost anyone but kerry. guess i'm just not that smart.