Tell your senator to vote for extension of Assault Weapons Ban

[NewJerseyDem]

The Senate is expected to vote on an amendment to the gun liability bill that would extend the assault weapons ban. This vote should happen tomorrow and is reportedly going to be very close. Already, 3 republicans, Mike DeWine, John Warner and Lincoln Chafee have come out in support of the ban. I assume that "Democrat" Zell Miller will vote for it.

Call or e-mail your senator and tell them to vote for the amendment.

Or, if you don't like the assault weapons ban, well then I guess you can call your senator and tell them to vote no.

Likely swing senators appear to be:

Olympia Snowe (R-ME)
Susan Collins (R-ME)
Arlen Specter (R-PA)
John Breaux (D-LA)
Mary Landrieu (D-LA)
Mark Pryor (D-AR)
Blanche Lincoln (D-AR)
George Voinovich (R-OH)
Evan Bayh (D-IN)
Richard Lugar (R-IN)
Russ Feingold (D-WI)
Mark Dayton (D-MN)
Norm Coleman (R-MN)
Tim Johnson (D-SD)
Ben Nelson (D-NE)
Max Baucus (D-MT)
John McCain (R-AZ)

[el_gato]

1. NO

[lcordero]

2. the answer is NO

It's garbage legislation and it should die a horrible death. I have a lot of reservation about people that propose ANY kind of gun control legislation or that try to pass off gun control as "gun safety". Gun control legislation leave LAW-ABIDING citizens at the mercy of CRIMINALS. Gun control legislation sets up for other raping and mugging of LAW-ABIDING citizens through other garbage legislation.

[NewJerseyDem]

3. But, does anyone need an assault weapon?

It just seems like there is no reason why anyone would need an assault weapon to defend themselves against criminals. I can see if someone wants a less powerful weapon to defend themselves but assault weapons are only going to be used by the criminals.

[drb]

4. If your Boy George wins in November, you're gonna...

...freakin' wish you had an assault weapon, becuase Ashcroft's jack-booted thugs are gonna be kicking your door down!

[tom_paine]

14. Well said. Hyperbole, but with a very real possibity of coming true

I wish I didn;t have to say that. I miss the days of "It can't happen here," naivete.

Of course it can. The only question is: Is it happening here right now?

[ComerPerro]

19. Ok, see, here is the thing about "protecting yourself from the government"

If Ashcroft's thugs do indeed come after you, an assault rifle isn't gonna save your ass.

[Columbia]

21. Sure it will if you have enough of them and enough people

[lcordero]

5. don't bring in this "need" crap

I have a television do I? Do I need a TV? NO!

I hate asking morons for permission for anything in the damn first place. Especially the same stupid morons that do nothing but look down at a person every damn day.

As far as "need" goes I and ONLY I want to make that judgement, I don't want some condescending piece of shit that thinks that he or she knows better to make that judgement for me.

[NewJerseyDem]

7. Well, a television doesn't kill people

Assault weapons are used to KILL people, televisions aren't.

There is nothing wrong with the government putting restrictions on dangerous weapons when the only reason people use those weapons is to murder people.

This has nothing to do with condescension.

[FeebMaster]

9. You're wrong.

"There is nothing wrong with the government putting restrictions on dangerous weapons when the only reason people use those weapons is to murder people."

People use them for reasons other than murdering people.

[NewJerseyDem]

10. What are those other reasons? (n/t)

[Columbia]

11. Hunting, target/competition shooting, self-defense

[leanings]

18. None of the dozen or so people I know

who own semi-autos have any criminal tendencies. Neither of my semi-autos has ever been used in a crime. I shoot competitively and use them for recreation. And, yes, they are the last bastion of defense against a government run amok or complete breakdown of civil order.

You mentioned television not killing anyone. How many Iraqis did television kill last year?

[Hippo_Tron]

12. The only reason somebody would want an assault weapon is to kill people...

Making the sale of assault weapons legal will result in the death of many policemen/women in gunfights. Nobody goes hunting with a fully automatic AK-47 and unless you've pissed off the mafia, you don't need one to defend your house.

[FeebMaster]

13. That's nice.

But no one here is even talking about fully automatic weapons let alone talking about hunting with them.

[leanings]

20. You're repeating a propaganda line

That bears no resemblance to either the statistical or technical facts of the issue.

[FeebMaster]

6. Need is irrelevant. (nt)

...

[Hammie]

15. You gotta get beyond the propaganda

First, the law is not about determining what we need.

Second, so-called assault weapons are nothing of the sort. The type of firearm most prone to criminal misuse is the handgun. Long guns of all types make up a small fraction of the guns misused by criminals. Of those, so-called assault weapons are an even smaller fraction. The anti-freedom extremists' campaign against these weapons is entirely based on the similarity in appearance that some of them have to military select-fire weapons (i.e. machine guns) and much of the population's ignorance about the actual weapons in question which are all semi-auto (i.e. self loading) not full auto (machine gun). Most of them are military pattern sporting arms that are popular for target shooting because of the relatively low power cartridges that they fire which are more comfortable, as well as less expensive, to shoot during extended range sessions. They also tend to be very durable (last for large numbers of rounds fired) and easy to maintain which which adds to the appeal to recreational users as it is not uncommon for a target shooting enthusiast to put several thousand rounds through a gun per year.

[RamboLiberal]

17. Define an assault weapon

And no it is not a full-auto. Full-auto has been banned for a very long time since the days the gangsters created a big problem by using Thompsons or other full-autos. You need a special, very expensive, very extensive background check to legally own a full-auto.

The assault weapon ban IMHO was a feel-good bill that did nothing but ban certain weapons and features that were easily worked around by gun manufacturers. AK-47's are still very fully legal. Just not in certain configurations.

There are probably some good features in the bill but this bill badly needs reworked to make sense.

An interesting website that gives you a quiz by picturing rifles is this.

http://www.ont.com/users/kolya/

For instance this weapon is legal.


Another big problem with the ban was so many things were grandfathered i.e. high capacity magazines.

I actually put more blame on pop culture that made and continue to make these weapons glamourous and desired. For instance Tec 9's and 10's are considered by most who know firearms as being junk guns, but Hollywood would glamorize these weapons in shows like Miami Vice and movies, and soon every street thug and HS killer wanted one.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

8. "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"

vs. "Assault Weapons Ban" Guess which side I'll take?

The day we have peace on earth, and we are ready to disarm Pinkerton Corporation, the ATF, the DEA, the Secret Service, the police, the armies of the world ... let me know.

[tom_paine]

16. Well said, also, WhoCountsTheVotes

My God, can anyone look at the Nazi Monsters currently wit their boot on our necks (though gently at first) and say the 2nd Amendment is a bad thing?

When the Founding Fathers came up with the 2nd Amendment, I have no doubt they were thinking of our very own 2004 King George.

They didn't know him personally (one wonders how far the Bushevik tradition of Benedict Arnold-ing America goes back...perhaps Benedict Arnold was himself a Bush?) but they knew his kind.

In those days, Busheviks weren't Totalitarian Monsters, they were Monarchist Monters of the Marie Antionette Variety.