Boxer, Clinton support BOTH Assault Weapon Bans

[Thelakedoctor]

S.1034
Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham - 9/30/2003
Sen Boxer, Barbara - 5/8/2003

S.1431

Sen Boxer, Barbara - 9/25/2003
Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham - 10/1/2003

[MrBenchley]

1. Oh no!

Do you think Democrats will vote for them? (snicker)

[Thelakedoctor]

2. They need to quit playing politics and get behind one ban

PREFERABLY S 1431!

[1a2b3c]

14. I sure as hell wont

They dont live in Kansas. (snicker)

[jody]

3. Clinton and Boxer should first prove that AWB will reduce violent crime.

The just released CDC report below, found that research has not proven that gun-control laws reduce violent crime. Clinton and Boxer have an untenable position without research to show that extending and/or expanding AWB will be effective.

First Reports Evaluating the Effectiveness of Strategies for Preventing Violence: Firearms Laws
QUOTE
Summary

During 2000--2002, the Task Force on Community Preventive Services (the Task Force), an independent nonfederal task force, conducted a systematic review of scientific evidence regarding the effectiveness of firearms laws in preventing violence, including violent crimes, suicide, and unintentional injury. The following laws were evaluated: bans on specified firearms or ammunition, restrictions on firearm acquisition, waiting periods for firearm acquisition, firearm registration and licensing of firearm owners, "shall issue" concealed weapon carry laws, child access prevention laws, zero tolerance laws for firearms in schools, and combinations of firearms laws. The Task Force found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws or combinations of laws reviewed on violent outcomes. (Note that insufficient evidence to determine effectiveness should not be interpreted as evidence of ineffectiveness.) This report briefly describes how the reviews were conducted, summarizes the Task Force findings, and provides information regarding needs for future research. {emphasis added}
UNQUOTE

[Thelakedoctor]

4. Even if one life is saved it is worth it

Seriously a gun with 32 bullets is way more dangerous than one that only holds 4. And most assault weapons hold lots of bullets.

So the potential for more damage is there even if it isn't used every time.

[jody]

5. I agree "Even if one life is saved it is worth it". That's why citizens

should be allowed to use firearms to exercise their inalienable right to defend self and property.

If one armed citizen saves a life by being armed, "it is worth it".

[Thelakedoctor]

6. At the expense of shooting another citizen

even if that citizen is bent on doing harm.

[jody]

7. Are you saying that law abiding citizens should not be allowed to

exercise their inlienable right to defend self and property?

[Thelakedoctor]

8. With a gun they shouldn't be allowed to

Maybe with a stun gun or pepper spray like in Australia.

[jody]

9. Neither criminals nor law enforcement officers have an inalienable

right to defend self and property. Why should law abiding citizens be denied the same tools of choice used by criminals and law enforcement for self defense?

[Thelakedoctor]

10. They can defend themselves- just not lethal imho

I must do everything I can to make sure the person attacking me is stopped BUT NOT KILLED.

Or I am just as bad as them.

[jody]

13. Nice personal philosophy, but to be consistent, you should also demand

that law enforcement officers be prohibited from carrying arms to avoid harming criminals. :shrug:

[1a2b3c]

15. So what if one life is lost

because they tried to defend themselves with non-lethal ammo? Is it still worth it? Whos life is more important? My grandma? Or the 20 year old who rapes old ladies? What if grandma tried the bean bag gun and just ended up getting killed by the kid with the knife?

[slackmaster]

11. Jody, you're asking for accountability?

How utterly progressive.

Shame on you!

:D

[MrBenchley]

12. It is pretty funny

that somebody hiding behind "ignore" because she cannot back up a single one of her claims is asking for it, isn't it?

Ah well, can't beat the RKBA crowd for unintentional hilarity.

[Wcross]

16. somebody hiding behind "ignore"

Bwaaaaaaaaaa- you crack me up Benchy! They have you on ignore for a reason! It is sort of like comics- some people like Jerry Lewis, some can't stand him.

[MrBenchley]

17. "They have you on ignore for a reason!"

I'd be the first to deny cowardice isn't a reason, cross.

But you'll notice anyone who asks Jody for proof of anything swiftly goes on "ignore."

[a2birdcage]

18. What are you talking about?

"I'd be the first to deny cowardice isn't a reason, cross."

You hide behind gun control agendas because you have a fear of firearms. There is no denying that Bench.

[a2birdcage]

19. Benchley has me on ignore.

A hypocrite at its worst.

[MrBenchley]

20. No I don't....

I just don't give a crap about anything you have to say..

[a2birdcage]

21. Yeah I noticed that you don't..........

give a crap when someone presents you with facts and proves you wrong time and time again. You only want to reply to the posts that will allow you to say "cry me a river", "yeah suuuuuure" and the rest of your sake-of-argument comments. Keep up the good work.

[MrBenchley]

22. Gee, when is THAT going to happen?

The next "fact" the RKBA crowd has will be the first one.

"Keep up the good work."
I will. Now take a hike, squiggy.

[a2birdcage]

23. LMAO