Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 9/14/2004 3:06:16 PM EST
Reacting to the expiration of the federal assault weapons ban, the Violence Policy Center released the following statement today from Legislative Director Kristen Rand:

Soon after its passage in 1994, the gun industry made a mockery of the federal assault weapons ban, manufacturing "post-ban" assault weapons with only slight, cosmetic differences from their banned counterparts. The VPC estimates that more than one million assault weapons have been manufactured since the ban's passage in 1994.

The sad truth is that mere renewal would have done little to stop this flood of assault weapons. Conversely, the end of the ban only makes official what was already known: assault weapons are readily available in America. The only difference is that the arbitrary distinction between pre- and post-ban assault weapons is now gone.

While the assault weapons ban has ended, the debate will continue—as will the killings. A 2003 Violence Policy Center analysis of FBI data reveals that one out of five law enforcement officers (41 of 211) slain in the line of duty from 1998 through 2001 were killed with an assault weapon. So far this year, six law enforcement officers in Indiana and Alabama alone have been killed with SKS assault rifles—weapons not covered under the 1994 ban.

America's police and public deserve an effective assault weapons ban that truly bans all assault weapons.

Link Posted: 9/14/2004 3:11:07 PM EST

Originally Posted By CRC:
Reacting to the expiration of the federal assault weapons ban, the Violence Policy Center released the following statement today from Legislative Director Kristen Rand:

Soon after its passage in 1994, the gun industry made a mockery of the federal assault weapons ban, manufacturing "post-ban" assault weapons with only slight, cosmetic differences from their banned counterparts. The VPC estimates that more than one million assault weapons have been manufactured since the ban's passage in 1994.

The sad truth is that mere renewal would have done little to stop this flood of assault weapons. Conversely, the end of the ban only makes official what was already known: assault weapons are readily available in America. The only difference is that the arbitrary distinction between pre- and post-ban assault weapons is now gone.

While the assault weapons ban has ended, the debate will continue—as will the killings. A 2003 Violence Policy Center analysis of FBI data reveals that one out of five law enforcement officers (41 of 211) slain in the line of duty from 1998 through 2001 were killed with an assault weapon. So far this year, six law enforcement officers in Indiana and Alabama alone have been killed with SKS assault rifles—weapons not covered under the 1994 ban.

America's police and public deserve an effective assault weapons ban that truly bans all assault weapons.




41 of 211....so they're not the "weapon of choice" no matter how liberally you define them or massage the statistics....that's what we all thought.....thanks.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 3:17:45 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/14/2004 3:18:52 PM EST by bastiat]
if the AWB defined assault weapons...

And the SKS doesn't meet the definition of being an assault weapon according to the AWB...

how can these idiots say someone killed by an SKS was killed by an assault weapon?

Freaking morons.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 3:18:43 PM EST
Hey, I'll give the VPC one thing... they ADMIT the law didn't do anything.

We need to use that against the rest of them.

Hey, Brady Bunch!! The VPC says the AWB did nothing!! Take that!! Yo, Fienstien, your secret lover Tom Diaz says your law didn't do SHIT!
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 3:21:13 PM EST
The VPC always said the law did nothing.

They opposed Feinstein's last bill
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 3:26:29 PM EST
Only in defeat do they(VPC) finally admit that the ban was useless.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 3:27:03 PM EST
The Brady Bunch's website has the big banner today

"THE ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN HAS TEMPORARILY EXPIRED!"

Along with a letter from Sara Brady to Bush asking him to do the right thing.

Those boneheads are going to keep hammering at us, but that should be no surprise. Stock up.

Link Posted: 9/14/2004 3:27:43 PM EST
<rhetorical question="on">
If the 1,000,000 new assault rifles are only for killing police officers, then where are the other missing 999,959 dead policemen?
</rhetorical question>

wganz

Link Posted: 9/14/2004 3:35:26 PM EST

Originally Posted By bastiat:
if the AWB defined assault weapons...

And the SKS doesn't meet the definition of being an assault weapon according to the AWB...

how can these idiots say someone killed by an SKS was killed by an assault weapon?

Freaking morons.



The bottom line is the important thing. All things in between are not required to make sense.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 3:42:32 PM EST
The SKS is just an example of on of the "loopholes" in the ban.

To close all the loopsholes in the AWB the next one will ban anything that has a trigger and goes "bang"
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 3:45:16 PM EST
We must stay vigilant or we will get nailed with an even greater ban than we could have imagined...
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 3:45:50 PM EST
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 3:46:44 PM EST
So, those 41 officers wouldn't have died had the shooters used a less effective round such as a .308 or 30-06???

Statistics are for morons....they can prove anything you want.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 3:48:50 PM EST
I've seen several statements that promoted the AWB: not for the direct results; but to get the public used to the idea of further and more restrictive gun control. For instance Sen. Schumer likened it to the camels nose in the tent and he added "wait til you see the rest of the camel".

I'm glad it's gone but it'll problably be back in a more effective form. Not to prevent crime, it's not about crime. It's about control of the citizens of the US.

Regards,
Mild Bill
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 3:58:37 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/14/2004 3:59:09 PM EST by chuckhammer]

Originally Posted By ANGST:
The SKS is just an example of on of the "loopholes" in the ban.

To close all the loopsholes in the AWB the next one will ban anything that has a trigger and goes "bang"



+1
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:20:37 PM EST

A 2003 Violence Policy Center analysis of FBI data reveals that one out of five law enforcement officers (41 of 211) slain in the line of duty from 1998 through 2001 were killed with an assault weapon
.

I had heard some where that most cops "got it" with their own sidearm. I wonder if VPC is counting the cop's high cap service piece as a AWB?
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 4:33:03 PM EST

Originally Posted By StonerStudent:

A 2003 Violence Policy Center analysis of FBI data reveals that one out of five law enforcement officers (41 of 211) slain in the line of duty from 1998 through 2001 were killed with an assault weapon
.

I had heard some where that most cops "got it" with their own sidearm. I wonder if VPC is counting the cop's high cap service piece as a AWB?



Actually I think most cops are killed in traffic related crashes. The ones who are actually shot are usually with their own sidearms.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 5:28:04 PM EST

Originally Posted By CRC:
A 2003 Violence Policy Center analysis of FBI data reveals that one out of five law enforcement officers (41 of 211) slain in the line of duty from 1998 through 2001 were killed with an assault weapon.



ARRRRRGHHHHHHHH­HHHH

LIARS!
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 5:51:45 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/14/2004 5:53:34 PM EST by Skibane]

Originally Posted By bastiat:
if the AWB defined assault weapons...

And the SKS doesn't meet the definition of being an assault weapon according to the AWB...

how can these idiots say someone killed by an SKS was killed by an assault weapon?

Freaking morons.



Answer: These idiots have a much more liberal definition of what constitutes an "assault weapon".

Testifying in favor the New York City law, a representative from Handgun Control, Inc., (which later changed its name to the Brady Campaign) argued that any gun capable of holding more than six rounds should be considered an "assault weapon."Dave Kopel, Bait-’n’-Switch, National Review Online September 13, 2004
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 7:28:07 PM EST
quote from Skibane:

a representative from Handgun Control, Inc., (which later changed its name to the Brady Campaign)


Why do they always change their name? Is it because they can't get any traction with one, so they switch to see if they can pull the wool over some other unsuspecting person(s)?

Link Posted: 9/14/2004 7:33:25 PM EST

Originally Posted By wganz:
<rhetorical question="on">
If the 1,000,000 new assault rifles are only for killing police officers, then where are the other missing 999,959 dead policemen?
</rhetorical question>

wganz





We're going to need a lot more policemen!
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 7:34:17 PM EST

Originally Posted By lippo:

Originally Posted By wganz:
<rhetorical question="on">
If the 1,000,000 new assault rifles are only for killing police officers, then where are the other missing 999,959 dead policemen?
</rhetorical question>

wganz





We're going to need a lot more policemen!



Let's get policemen all with assault rifles too...
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 8:00:45 PM EST
<rhetorical question="on">
If the 1,000,000 new assault rifles are only for killing police officers, then where are the other missing 999,959 dead policemen?
</rhetorical question>

wganz


One of the more brilliant comeback on this board. (Applause for wganz)

StonerStudent: "I had heard some where that most cops "got it" with their own sidearm. I wonder if VPC is counting the cop's high cap service piece as a AWB?"

StonerStudent, that is exactly what they did. And they expanded their definition of "assault weapon" to be anything that was semi.

Yes, a good many police are shot with their own sidearm. What do you do to prevent that, ban cops from carrying guns? No, seriously, this is the kind of illogic the anti's use.

QUESTION: Why should your and my rights be determined by what some criminal or terrorist MIGHT do?
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 8:31:48 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/14/2004 8:34:38 PM EST by StonerStudent]

QUESTION: Why should your and my rights be determined by what some criminal or terrorist MIGHT do?


ANSWER:Only potential criminals and terrorist would want to own ANYTHING that is designed to hurt other people.
Link Posted: 9/14/2004 8:42:53 PM EST
FUCK THOSE GUYS......

THIS TIME WE RUN CONGRESS!!!!
Link Posted: 9/15/2004 2:57:34 AM EST

Originally Posted By cjklekar:
quote from Skibane:

a representative from Handgun Control, Inc., (which later changed its name to the Brady Campaign)


Why do they always change their name? Is it because they can't get any traction with one, so they switch to see if they can pull the wool over some other unsuspecting person(s)?




They changed from HCI to Brady Campaign because they don't want to control JUST handguns anymore. Hangun Control Inc. was just too limiting.
Link Posted: 9/15/2004 3:31:57 AM EST
Reading the latest VPC statement makes one truly feel like they have entered "bizzaro world". The gun control groups, including the VPC, have been touting how crime with AWB's dropped some seventy-odd percent, lots of lives have been saved, and that it is has been an overall glowing success. Now it turns out the same VPC (at least I think it is them; did the NRA infiltrate?) says it was really a failure; too many loopholes, one million weapons sold, blah blah blah. WTF?? It was such a failure that we need a stronger California type ban in effect to produce the results that apparently happened because the ban was successful which they now say it wasn't. (I wish there was a "head spinning" emeticon)
Link Posted: 9/15/2004 3:39:55 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/15/2004 3:42:59 AM EST
They neglected to mention the primary cause of each death. All of the police officer homicides were commited by murderers. All of them. The rifle didn't jump up and walk out the door by itself. Although they'd have you believe that possession of a such a rifle would influence the owner to use it illegally.

They will never recognize the fact that gun owners are some of the most responsible and law abiding citizens in this country.
Top Top