Assault weapons still stalled despite pressure

[Narf]

ANNAPOLIS -- In apparent defiance of House Speaker Michael E. Busch, House Judiciary Chairman Joseph F. Vallario Jr. is refusing to hold a vote on a controversial bill that would extend the federal ban on assault weapons.

Vallario (D-Dist. 27A) of Upper Marlboro, who is generally opposed to new gun laws, is keeping tight control of the bill, saying that he has no plans to act on the House version of the assault weapons ban until something happens in the Senate. Holding the bill runs counter to the wishes of Busch (D-Dist. 30) of Annapolis, who said he supports extending the federal assault weapons ban, set to expire in September.

The federal assault weapons ban "shouldn't be broadened, but I absolutely believe we should codify the current law. I see no reason why we should allow these semi-automatic weapons back on our streets," Busch said.

Full article here

[Narf]

1. Perhaps Mr. Busch didn't get the memo...

I see no reason why we should allow these semi-automatic weapons back on our streets," Busch said.

News flash for Mr. Busch...the weapons never left the streets. They can still be bought, sold, and traded. You can still buy a nearly identical weapon, save for a few cosmetic modifications, at your local gun store, gun show, or private sale. The streets are not running red with the blood of machine gunning victims, assault weapon crime is not skyrocketing, and more and more people are buying these "heinous weapons" every day. Pretty much business as usual.

[vpigrad]

2. Sigh

> the weapons never left the streets.

No, but the flood of new ones of those things did stop! That has saved the lives of hundreds of police officers? Do you really not care about the people that protect the law?

The companies are gearing-up to produce more of those killing things. Busch is doing the right thing. They must be stopped. The public should be protected.

[MrSandman]

3. Not really...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=44471&mesg_id=44471

[Columbia]

4. I agree

Those evil bayonet lugs must be kept off our streets for the children's sake.

[Narf]

11. I'm just waiting for my fully-automatic grenade launcher...

God knows those things have led to a rash of drive-by grenadings!!!

[slackmaster]

26. The one and only transferrable M19 was on the market recently

Asking price was about $300,000 IIRC.

[MrBenchley]

5. Exactly...

Unfortunately some here are impervious to reason, and care nothing for public safety.

[MrSandman]

6. It did stem the epidemic of...

Drive-by bayonetings.

[MrBenchley]

8. Is that why the NRA killed its liabiltiy bill...

because an amendment had been added that affected nothing but bayonet lugs? Wow, they must be fucking idiots, then...

[MrSandman]

9. Actually, one of the better ideas...

The next legislative battle will be for a ban renewal, not repeal, but as the mouthpiece for the corrupt gun industry, it makes no sense:

The gun mfgs. would rather restrict the secondary market(gun shows) and free themselves of frivolous lawsuits(like Newark's) than to repeal a law(AWB) they so easily avoid.

[MrBenchley]

18. In other words...

the claim that it affects only bayonet lugs is horseshit...

[MrSandman]

21. No, like European smokeless powders with taggants...

The claim the AWB is effective is ...
horseshit

[Narf]

22. Poor choice of words...I prefer to call it a "pantload of hooey".

[slackmaster]

25. Look here folks, a STRAW MAN!

Does anyone have a match?

[Narf]

10. I believe you've been misinformed...

The guns that have been manufactured since 1994 are functionally identical to the ones manufactured before 1994. The ONLY differences have been cosmetic. No more bayonette lugs, grenade launchers, flash supressors, pistol grips, or detachable magazines of over 10 rounds. NOT ONE of those things in any way affects the functionality of the weapon. NOT ONE! Let me repeat that one more time...NOT ONE! The "assault weapon" that was used to kill all of those people in the D.C. area was a perfectly legal, POST-ban rifle...less scary looking but functionally identical to a semi-auto made before 1993. Let me repeat that...FUNCTIONALLY IDENTICAL!

Do you have ANY data that would show that the lives of hundreds of police officers have been saved? Do you have ANY data that would show that hundreds of police were killed by these rifles before the ban?

The companies aren't gearing up for anything except cosmetic changes. They've been producing "those killing things" all along.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[FeebMaster]

15. By all means

cite us a story about a bayoneting, please.

"> No more bayonette lugs,

How is that cosmetic? As if people haven't been killed with a bayonette before."



"you argue for grenades in the hands of those weapons nuts? Again, grenades aren't "cosmetic." They're real things."

Who is arguing for grenades? The ban effects launchers. Grenades have been heavily regulated for a good long while. They're pretty expensive, not to mention the paperwork involved in getting them and the $200 tax per grenade.

"Tell that to a sniper. Cop killers love to hide their firing positions. That isn't a cosmetic issue. Again, you show complete disregard for protecting the law-enforcement community."

You show complete disregard for reality if you think a flash suppressor completely suppresses the flash. Not to mention the whole loud damn bang when the gun goes off, which generally is going to give away someones position more than muzzle flash, especially during the day.


"> pistol grips,

Again, that isn't a cosmetic feature! It's a very real feature that allows one to more easily shoot from the hip."

Right. Shooting from the hip. A pistol grip really helps with that. :eyes: As if a grip vertical with the ground is going to be easier to hold at the hip than one that's closer to horizontal with the ground.


"Again, why do you lie? There's no reason, unless you're going on a killing rampage, that you need over 10 rounds, or even over one. How could you claim that is only a "cosmetic" feature? What is your agenda?"

Sorry to break it to you but high capacity magazines still abound despite the ban.


The point is that the ban amounts to a ban on cosmetics because not all the features are automatically banned. You are allowed 2 of the features to be a legal post ban rifle. So if you have a detachable magazine and pistol grip you're legal. So what the manufacturers did was take off the flash suppressors and bayonet lugs. Poof same rifle, now legal.

[Romulus]

16. "not even close to true"

>How (are bayonet lugs) cosmetic? As if people haven't been killed with a bayonette before.

I would rather see some guy with a 3-foot rifle with fixed bayonet lurching down the street at me instead of NOT seeing some guy with a pocket knife sidling up to me. As if we haven't seen enough "swords in the news" stories, anyway.

>Why do you argue for grenades in the hands of those weapons nuts? Again, grenades aren't "cosmetic." They're real things.

What good is a so-called grenade launcher (basically a metal washer welded onto the end of a barrel) if the grenades are already tightly controlled by BATFE? As if the person with the ILLEGAL rifle-launched grenade will be unable to figure out that they stlll should plan how to launch it after having gone through the hassle of obtaining the ILLEGAL renade.

> Tell that to a sniper. Cop killers love to hide their firing positions. That isn't a cosmetic issue. Again, you show complete disregard for protecting the law-enforcement community.

That's a good one. NO military sniper rifle has a so-called "flash suppressor." The "muzzle brake" (which is labelled a "flash suppressor" by the ignorant) helps keep the muzzle from flying out of control after a shot by venting the fired gunpowder gas to the top of the muzze. The FLASH from the fired gunpowder remains just as visible.

> Again, (pistol grips) isn't a cosmetic feature! It's a very real feature that allows one to more easily shoot from the hip.

Whatever. That's why fire departments have pistol-grip nozzles on their fire hoses - because it's easier to control a "high volume spray" with one while they blast away "from the hip." Oh, wait: fire departments DON'T use pistol grips on their fire hoses - oh, well.

Tell you what: try holding your wrist cocked 90 degrees at your waist, with your hand in a fist, and have someone try to push your fist back. Then try it with your wrist held naturally to your side so your knuckles are pointing downward. Then get back to us on which is more ergonomic for pointing something "from the hip."

> or detachable magazines of over 10 rounds
>Again, why do you lie? There's no reason, unless you're going on a killing rampage, that you need over 10 rounds, or even over one. How could you claim that is only a "cosmetic" feature? What is your agenda?

You should ask any police officer why he/she has more than one round. And then ask them why they take their firearm home at the end of their police shift instead of leaving it at the station; and also why they tote it around off-duty when they go to the mall, movie theater, etc, instead of leaving it at home.

[MrBenchley]

19. This is a tedious bit of horseshit

even for the RKBA crowd--"The AWB is only cosmetic."

Jeeze, if that was true, these dingbats wouldn't be creaming their jeans over these guns every damn day...

[Narf]

20. Your arguments would carry a lot more weight if you'd done your homework.

Bayonet lugs: the presence or absence of a bayonet lug does NOT affect the function of the gun. It shoots the same bullet at the same velocity with or without the lug. I challenge you to find me ONE news story about someone, outside of military combat, being attacked with a bayonet attached to a rifle. Just one.

Grenade launchers: Grenades are illegal. Period. Even with a grenade launcher I couldn't fire a grenade because I can't buy them. You might as well include a ban on ICBM launchers attached to rifles...same effect.

Flash supressors: These DO NOT, repeat DO NOT hide the flash of the weapon firing, they merely redirect the blast to the sides of the muzzle so it does not blind the shooter. The flash is still quite visible, it merely looks like a star instead of a ball. Same amount of flash, different shape. Again, you show a complete disregard for the facts.

Pistol grips: Again, these in no way affect the accuracy or velocity of the bullet fired from the gun. Any shooter or firearms expert will tell you that shooting from the hip is FAR LESS accurate than firing from the shoulder and firing semi-auto from the hip is completely impractical. That's why police and military training doesn't include firing semi-auto from the hip. Snipers do not fire from the hip, they fire from the shoulder for accuracy.

Can you explain to me the difference between shooting 30 rounds from a single clip or shooting three 10 round clips? 30 rounds is 30 rounds is 30 rounds. If you believe the government version of events then Lee Harvey Oswald shot at least three rounds from a SINGLE SHOT BOLT ACTION rifle, at a moving target, in a matter of seconds!

You are good at parroting the party line from the All Guns Are Evil/I Fear All Guns crowd but the facts simply do not support your position. Not one of the features mentioned above in any affects the accuracy, velocity, or lethality of the bullet fired from the gun. NOT ONE! The two rifles below fire the same bullet, at the same velocity, with the same lethality. EXACTLY THE SAME. Why is one illegal (at least until Sept. 13th) and the other perfectly legal when the only difference is cosmetic?

[TX-RAT]

23. Do you carry these pictures in your wallet?

[MrBenchley]

27. Gun porn is common down here in the gungeon

"Fetishism falls under the general category of paraphilias, "abnormal or unnatural attraction." Fetishism is a fixation on an inanimate object or body part that is not primarily sexual in nature, and the compulsive need for its use in order to obtain sexual gratification. Inanimate object fetishes can be categorized into two types: form fetishes and media fetishes. In a form fetish, it is the object and its shape that are important....Inanimate object fetishists often collect the object of their favor, and may go to great lengths, including theft...Fetishists may use any object for sexual gratification....For some, merely a picture of the fetish object may suffice in arousing the fetishists though most prefer or require the actual object."

http://www.psychologytoday.com/htdocs/prod/PTOInfo/pto_term_fetishism.asp

[slackmaster]

28. Psychology Today???

Lately I've been thinking about building my own a nuclear fusion reactor. Would you be so kind as to tell us how it's done? I think Popular Mechanics had a lead article on them a couple of years ago.

I must say PT's definition is clear and concise. I especially liked this part under Causes:

... Psychoanalytical models center on concepts of penis worship and castration anxiety. Studies show that fetishists have poorly developed social skills, are isolated in their lives and have a diminished capacity for establishing intimacy....

:dunce:

Thanks for the laugh anyway. It's always funny to see someone with 14,753 posts, 99% of which concern shootings, someone who often speculates about other people "stroking their stubbies" or "creaming their jeans", giving a lecture about gun fetishes.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[natasha1]

29. No, it did not...

No, but the flood of new ones of those things did stop!

No, the manufacture (flood) of assault weapons did not stop. For example, just a few years ago I purchased, legally, at a gun show, with a background check, a civilian variant of the AK-47, a Romanian SAR-1. This is a firearm manufactured AFTER the "ban" went into effect:



Compare this with a real AK-47:



Not much difference, right? In fact, they are functionally identical, except the civilian version can only fire semi-auto, not select-fire.

(see http://www.impactsites2000.com/site3/class3_2.htm for more comparisions)

All the law did was say that an "assualt weapon" can't have more than 2 or so certain "evil features", like a pistol grip, bayonet lug, flash supressor, grenade launcher, etc.

To get around this, if you wanted the pistol grip feature and two other "evil" features, gun manufacturers incorporated other cosmetic changes, like the affectionately-known "butthole" stock:



Make no mistake, the ban did not affect the manufacture of functionaly identical weapons. They were simply changed slightly to adhere to the letter of the law.

Nat

[TX-RAT]

30. Please not the photo albums again

Could someone please give me a reasonable excuse for owning these.

[slackmaster]

31. I have a better question

Perhaps you can explain why anyone should provide you with a justification that meets your criteria for reasonableness.

[TX-RAT]

33. I take that as a no.

[slackmaster]

35. Wanting something is a good enough "excuse" for owning it IMO

As long as someone is not legally disqualified from owning a firearm, what's wrong with having them own an ugly one?

[MrBenchley]

32. Paladin once asked if these photos were shared

with, for example, employers and local law enforcement...and the whole asylum erupted in rage at what an "unfair" question that was....

[slackmaster]

36. Earth to MrBenchley - This is an open forum on the Internet in 2004

Anyone can see anything posted on this forum.

[natasha1]

37. Share with whom you like...

I just found these pictures on the web. Did a google on SAR-1 Firearm and came up with:

http://www.impactsites2000.com/site3/home.htm

Nat

[MrBenchley]

38. So did you send them to your employer?

[natasha1]

39. Send them to who?

You want me to send a picture of an AK-47 to my boss? Well, O.K. - how would I go about it? I can't just walk in and say, "Hi, Boss, there's this picture of an AK-47 I've been wanting to show you..."

Most of my co-workers (including my boss) are pro-freedom, pro-gun, and Democrats, so I wouldn't expect any wierd looks, other than having no appropos way to broach the subject...

Nat

[MrBenchley]

40. Hell, you didn't have any problem flashing us with it....

Why don't you tell your employer "it's a guy thing" and that you expect civilzation to fall apart?

[natasha1]

47. Yes, but...

I was in the middle of a discussion with you all on the subject of assault weapons, so it was appropriate.

I would no more walk into my bosses office out of the blue with a picture of an assault rifle than I would with picture of a pink triangle. I'd be equally comfortable discussing either issue with my boss - since he's cool with both - but it wouldn't be an appropriate unsolicited gesture.

Time and place, Mr. Benchley.

Nat

[MrBenchley]

50. Gee...

Are you telling us those claims that all your co-workers are pro-gun was just so much hot air?

Seems like if that was true, it wouldn't be at all hard to turn the conversation that way....but then I doubted that claim the second I heard it.

[natasha1]

51. Lol!

Are you telling us those claims that all your co-workers are pro-gun was just so much hot air?

Seems like if that was true, it wouldn't be at all hard to turn the conversation that way....but then I doubted that claim the second I heard it.

Not at all. I could explain, but I don't want to publically identify myself. If I did, you would understand.

Heh, if you only knew, Mr. Benchley.

Nat

[MrBenchley]

52. In other words....

Those claims that all your co-workers are pro-gun were just so much hot air....and you don't flash your gun porn at co-workers for the very sensible reason that then they would think you were some sort of dangerous lunatic.

I could explain, but I don't want to publically identify myself."
I coulda been a contender....

[slackmaster]

53. Speaking of hot air...

Have you found any proof that taggants are used in European smokeless gunpowder yet, MrBenchley?

[FatSlob]

54. PORN!

Yet another sex reference. So far we've had penis, vagina, masturbation, prostitution, and pornography references from you. Obsessed much?

[slackmaster]

56. There is hope for recovery from fetishistic sexual imagery

According to Psychology Today, which is apparently a "good" source of information...

Treatment

Treatment approaches have included traditional psychoanalysis, hypnosis, and behavior therapy techniques. Research on the outcome of these therapies has been incomplete, but often they have not been successful. More recently, a class of drugs called antiandrogens that drastically lower testosterone levels temporarily have been used in conjunction with these forms of treatment. The drug lowers the sex drive in males and reduces the frequency of mental imagery of sexually arousing scenes. This allows concentration on counseling without as strong a distraction from the paraphiliac urges. Increasingly, the evidence suggests that combining drug therapy with cognitive behavior therapy can be effective....

...Nathan et al. (1999) also note that research suggests that cognitive-behavioral models are effective in treating paraphiliacs. They provide the following explanation of different approaches. Aversive conditioning involves using negative stimuli to reduce or eliminate a behavior. Covert sensitization entails the patient relaxing, visualizing scenes of deviant behavior followed by a negative event such as getting his penis stuck in the zipper of his pants. Assisted aversive conditioning is similar to covert sensitization....

Antiandrogens. Visualizing penis stuck in zipper.

YEOW! :think:

See http://www.psychologytoday.com/htdocs/prod/PTOInfo/pto_term_fetishism.asp#treatment

[MrBenchley]

58. Gee fat slob...

I'm just observing the RKBA crowd's peculiar fetish....

[slackmaster]

59. With only one exception, EVERY SEXUAL REFERENCE

In this thread was started by YOU, MrBenchley.

The only exception is reply #23 by TX-RAT, another gun control enthusiast.

Why does the pro-control side have a near monopoly on sexual put-downs and scatological epithets?

WHY do YOU so often introduce sexual imagery, often autoerotic (e.g. creaming of jeans, stroking of stubbies) and attribute it to OTHER PEOPLE?

Why do you suppose that is, MrBenchley? Maybe Psychology Today can shed some light on the phenomenon.

FWIW I can't recall ever having the slightest sexual feeling associated with a firearm. I've always treated them as tools with great potential to cause damage, injury, or death. That danger is always at the forefront when I am in the presence of a deadly weapon. Not exactly the best state of mind for sexual arousal.

But that's just me....

[natasha1]

61. Well put, Mr. Slackmaster!

Well said. My sentiments exactly.

Nat

[natasha1]

60. Just for you, Mr. Benchely...

I have made this image my computer wallpaper here at work:



Just for you.

;)

Nat

[natasha1]

34. Some reasons...

Hi TX-Rat!

Here are my reasons, in no particular order:

1) They are cool. Yup, it's a guy-thing. It's like why some of us need shiny, tough-looking chrome things on our engines in our cars. Fact is, a shiny F150 drives just like a dull one. Just like my SAR-1 shoots just like any other semi-automatic rifle. It's just cool to own a military rifle. It's why I bought a Mustang GT over the standard model. I can't drive it any faster, really, but it's cool to have, anyway.

2) Insurance. Rifles like this are meant to take abuse and keep on working. If you ever find yourself in a situation where law and order collapse, this is the sort of weapon you are going to want with you.

Nat

[TX-RAT]

42. 4 good reasons to own a assault rifle, sorry 7 you said cool 3 times

1. Cool, cool, cool
2. shiny
3. guy thing
4. tough looking
Having been in law enforcement most of my life I can assure you thats the last weapon i would choose.

[FeebMaster]

43. I know whenever I need gun advice

the first person I ask is a cop.

"Having been in law enforcement most of my life I can assure you thats the last weapon i would choose. "

[TX-RAT]

44. Interesting

Just where do you get your advise.

[FeebMaster]

45. I just said.

Cops.

[TX-RAT]

46. Sorry was never a cop.

Sheriffs dept.

[Columbia]

48. Ok, question

You own a business in south central LA and it's your only source of livlihood for you, your wife, and children. One day while you are watching TV as you are tending your shop you see a breaking news story about a riot starting a few miles away. Rioters by the thousands are running around looting stores and burning them to the ground and they are headed your way.

Luckily you have collected a bit of firearms since moving to this country decades ago. Your choices of arms include:

1. A semiautomatic rifle with 3 detachable magazines (30 rds each)
2. A bolt action rifle with 100 loose rds.
3. A semiautomatic handgun with 6 magazines (15 rds each)
4. A revolver with 100 loose rounds
5. A semiautomatic shotgun with 100 loose shells
6. A pump shotgun with 100 loose shells

Being able to only carry one effectively, which would you choose to defend your business from the thousands of rioters?

[TX-RAT]

55. I choose number 7

Use the best weapon you have,your brain, and get the hell out of there.I can always replace my merchandise.

[Columbia]

63. Guess what

Your store burns to the ground never to return because you CAN NOT replace the stock lost without any income. Decades of hard work were invested in that store and now it is gone.

Those who defended their stores still stand.

[TX-RAT]

64. Hypothetical horse shit

Ever heard of insurance?

[natasha1]

49. The world's armed forces can't be wrong...

Since all the world's armies prefer assault weapons in similar situations, that's a pretty good vote for me.

When talking about the AK-47 and its variants in particular, it's a great weapon. Simple. Rugged. Durable. You can pack the receiver full of sand, open the breach and bang it out, and rack in a magazine and keep on firing. The damn thing is built like a lawnmower, not some precision-cut Kimber that needs to be kept up in great shape to work in adverse conditions. And it's cheap. While an M-16 variant is going to run you $800+, you can get an SAR-1 for around $200.

It's not to say that the SAR-1 (or any rifle) is an all-purpose tool appropriate in all situations. But if you were to ever find yourself in a situation, say, like the Iraqies are in now, I'd take it over a shotgun or a pistol.

What weapon would you choose, say, if you were a storeowner on top of his store duing the LA riots? A shotgun might do, but I'd prefer having 30 rounds on tap instead of 7 or 8.

Nat

[TX-RAT]

57. post 55 answers that

[natasha1]

62. Ah, I see. Run away.

Ok, your choice.

Me, I'm going to stand my ground.

Nat

[Baclava]

7. ...tick...

...tick...tick

[Narf]

12. And then one day you find...

ten years have got behind you....

Rather prophetic, eh?

[-..__...]

17. It gets even better!

160 days on the AWB Dooms Day clock, but take this into consideration also: http://www.aip.org/enews/fyi/2004/009.html

By my guesstimation, that leaves around 70 days or so where a vote can happen (not counting Fridays or Mondays).

Life is getting good and better for gun owners. :)

[Romulus]

14. looks like

my taking time off from work to go lobbying has paid off.:)

[slackmaster]

24. One of the shallowest justifications ever offered for anything

"I see no reason..."

Right up with MrBenchley's empty "logic" in favor of a gun registry.

:argh: