Assault Weapons Ban Lapses Monday

Hooray! I was feeling so bad for those poor hunters who have to use shotguns, or god forbid, a bow.

"Ak-47, when you absolutely, positively, have to kill every last motherfucker in the room, accept no substitute"

Let's here it for overkill! Finally the oppressive shackles of good governance are being thrown off!

Stop the NRA

All's I can say is, this site is gonna get a heap more interesting.

(I'm not going to get in trouble for linking to this site, am I? )

What the hell do people need assult weapons for!?! Key word is assult, they are weapons ment for killing used in combat. A deer is not going to shot back, and if you need a hail of bullets to hit a deer instead of one good shot then you suck as a hunter. Cause the last thing i need is to hear on the news that a bunch of gang bangers in Chicago just shot up a neighborhood with Ak-47s. I can't see any good coming out of this. The goverment will do that but won't legalize weed!

Holy shit that's funny!

Somebody on this site has to be truly happy about this.

I think assault rifles are necessary tools in the hunt for today's "super" animals, like the flying squirrel, and the electric eel.

I always believed that most arguments for assault weapons would probably go away if the National Guard became a force exclusively for the use of the State. It would be like a small Army, Air Force, etc., funded by each State as needed, subject to certain laws of course (suchn as modernization requirements based on compatibility with the Federal, active-duty force). In times of war--as declared by Congress--the Guard would deploy as required, but in all other times State Legislature would have to approve deployments and other duties.

In my humble opinion, that would be the most honest, modern interpretation of the Founding Fathers' desire for the citizenry to be able to form an effective militia.

Until something like that happens, I won't even try to pretend I know enough about the various different people around this nation to know why they want the guns they want to have.

I have this friend who is blindly republican and he was talking about this the other day. He was so excited about being able to load more than 10 rounds in his 22 on monday. I just asked why he needed that many rounds and all he said was because I fucking want to. What kind of reasoning is that?

I go out and hunt and I target shoot, but I have no need for a 22 with more than 10 rounds. I have absolutely no use for any kind of assault weapon either.

Apparently a group of about... hmm.. 100,000 people in the entire country TOPS think they're going to be able to resist the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, and Coast Guard of the "evil liberal government" and their Apaches, M1A1 tanks, F-16s, F-18s, F-14s, B-1s, B-2s when said "evil liberal government" comes to take away their guns and convert them to Islam, or something.

That's their theory. I'm serious. They actually think resistance is still possible. It's not even theoretically possible.

No, but the puppies might!

It's a SuicideGirls for hillbillies. All they need now are journals.....but hillbillies can't read!

Point well taken. Nice reference

You, my lady, are 35 different flavors of awesome!

Dude that can happen anyway. What makes you think gang bangers buy guns legally?

I myself, plan on getting one of these.

For home defence, of course.

People seem to forget that people that would hurt other people with guns would go out of their way to get them anyways..
Yes, there are accidents with guns.. I've had bullets whiz by my head. I'm not afraid of guns... I am afraid of reckless drivers. I fear idiots behind the wheel far more than somebody trying to blow my brains out... Irrelevant, I guess.. but, I am tired and I am prone to rambling in this state.

Move along. These arent the droids you are looking for..

^^^
I actually think concealed carry is a horrible idea as well

Edit: re Merovingian's post. You slipped one in there

[Edited on Sep 11, 2004 by BillHaverchuck]

Not sure I follow. The citations imply causality, but there must be more to the study, because the statistics alone don't prove that it was a result of the law.
Anyway I'm not trying to make a big to do about it. Just saying I think it's a bad idea.
I hate all guns, and think they should all be banned.

I dont know. I would like to at least have a fighting chance if I ever got in a situation where a guy was just picking people off in a mall. Which has happend in a mall I have been to many times. Concealed carry laws only puts guns in the hands of the good guys. It helps to let the public police its self in situations where the police cant get there in time.

If your worried about the guns being in the wrong hands, well they already are. People who are going to carry a gun to commit crimes arent going sign up for a permit.

Keith, do you really want to get into this one? If you do, that's fine, but I can virtually guarantee that you have the same chance of winning that argument that you seem to give the citizens of overthrowing the government.

I've always posed one argument about this subject, and I havent recieved an answer yet. Because Im not going to say my argument is fool proof or anything but...

If criminals can get these kinds of weapons independant of the laws associated with regulating (or banning) them. Then wouldnt a place with much more severely inhibitant gun laws have a much higher crime rate? The logic of the argument Im responding to seems to say that Canada should be ruled by marauding gangs of highway warriors like Mad Maxx or something because we cant get the guns necessary to defend ourselves while criminals 'always can get them'. As they control cities with machine guns while the populace is unable to defend itself. Is there some logical hole Im missing here, or what?

Well, technically, there can be no "winning" of this argument except through retrospect. I.E. after the "revolution". However, I foresee only these possibilities of revolution or coup.

1.) Military coup. Pentagon expels the civilian government.
2.) Conventional civil war, where significant portions of the military defect to the rebellion (along with military hardware).
3.) Cult-of-Personality scenario -- President gains enough loyalty from the military and population to declare himself Emperor/Grand Potato/Whatever.
4.) Total meltdown -- absolute collapse of government and economy at all levels. Military unpaid, leave in droves, individuals taking whatever hardware with them that they can acquire. Warlordism sets in.

Only in #4 would private ownership of weapons play a significant part. I believe I am right in saying that, in history, the vast majority of successful rebellions have had the support of the military.

In order for any rebellion to succeed, the military must defect the government en masse.

The American Revolution is not, in my opinion, a relevent analogy in this case, since it was basically the repelling of an invasion by foreign troops rather than a true civil war. I'm thinking more of the Bolshevik and Chinese Communist revolutions (both accomplished with conventional military force) or the 'democratic' revolution during the collapse of the USSR, where (what remained) of the hardline military was sufficiently weakened and demoralized that it did not offer much resistance.

I guess what I'm saying is that, even arguing that a rebellion could be possible, it would not require vast numbers of the civilian population to be armed-to-the-teeth before-hand. I am personally of the belief, though, that barring a total meltdown of the economy, the present situation of the U.S. government is fairly immune to violent rebellion.

[Edited on Sep 11, 2004 by Keith]

Newsweek had a nice blurb how Jeb Bush is being groomed to possibly be a contender to replace George W. (should he win this one).

I guess it's his right. But I definitely feel with a possible 20 out of 28 years of Presidency being under the blood of one family.

the creepy part is that the kind of people who get excited over owning a assault weapon are exactly the kind of people you don't want anywhere near a gun.

sweet, just before that ban my buddies brother bought him an AK47 and a Tech9, time to dust those off and get silly

and they can very easily thanks to a country flooded with firearms, as far as i'm concerned america should be slowly working towards a complete ban followed by a purging and destroying of all existing guns in the country, not kicking it up a notch and legalizing assault arms.

[Edited on Sep 11, 2004 by Snottlebocket]