The Useful Illogic of 'Assault Weapon' Bans

[RugersGR8]

A ban of so called "assault weapons" is just the camel's nose under the tent, just the beginning, etc. An "assualt weapons" ban is something the lib dems want to "snowball" into bigger and more darconian "Anti-2nd Amendment" & anti-gunownership" legislation.

http://reason.com/archives/2016/06/22/the-useful-illogic-of-assault-weapon-ban
The Useful Illogic of 'Assault Weapon' Bans
Jacob Sullum | June 22, 2016

"The mechanism for achieving "broader gun control" is the recognition that "assault weapons" account for a tiny share of gun homicides and that many other firearms are just as deadly—points that advocates of a ban are keen to obscure for the time being."

 

[dennishoddy]

 

[gerhard1]

This is what Pete Shields said as well.

"I'm convinced that we have to have federal legislation to build on. We're going to have to take one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily -- given the political realities -- going to be very modest. Of course, it's true that politicians will then go home and say, 'This is a great law. The problem is solved.' And it's also true that such statements will tend to defuse the gun-control issue for a time. So then we'll have to strengthen that law, and then again to strengthen that law, and maybe again and again. Right now, though, we'd be satisfied not with half a loaf but with a slice. Our ultimate goal -- total control of handguns in the United States -- is going to take time. My estimate is from seven to ten years. The problem is to slow down the increasing number of handguns sold in this country. The second problem is to get them all registered. And the final problem is to make the possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition -- except for the military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors -- totally illegal."

Fields was the founder of Handgun Control, Inc.

 

[RugersGR8]

Well like I said in the OP, "A ban of so called "assault weapons" is just the camel's nose under the tent, just the beginning, etc. An "assualt weapons" ban is something the lib dems want to "snowball" into bigger and more darconian "Anti-2nd Amendment" & anti-gunownership" legislation.". Looks like the lib dem gun grabbers/haters are next going to line up their sights on "sniper rifles". The author of this article pats himself on the back as a "supporter of the Constitution" and a "gun owner", IMHO he is an troll. :finger:

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/node/61252
Memo to the NRA: ‘Go to hell’
June 22, 2016 | by DOUG THOMPSON - A CHB Opinion

 

[gerhard1]

One thing I notice is that the liberals use any excuse that they can to nibble away at our rights. They acknowledge that in the last two mass shootings, and others, that no-fly lists or terror watch-lists would have nothing to prevent them, yet they use them to promote proposals which they (the liberals) admit they would not have prevented.

In both San Bernardino and Orlando, the killers bought their weapons legally, passing background checks and as far as I know, neither was on either a terror watch list or a no-fly list, so to use either of these incidents as a reason to pass laws preventing people on these lists from buying guns is akin to arguing for the banning of alcohol because someone OD'd on heroin. It is illogical.

 

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

One thing I notice is that the liberals use any excuse that they can to nibble away at our rights. They acknowledge that in the last two mass shootings, and others, that no-fly lists or terror watch-lists would have nothing to prevent them, yet they use them to promote proposals which they (the liberals) admit they would not have prevented.

In both San Bernardino and Orlando, the killers bought their weapons legally, passing background checks and as far as I know, neither was on either a terror watch list or a no-fly list, so to use either of these incidents as a reason to pass laws preventing people on these lists from buying guns is akin to arguing for the banning of alcohol because someone OD'd on heroin. It is illogical.

While some of them are dumb enough to think these laws would prevent violence, that is not the majority. Unfortunately, the majority of gun grabbers are intelligent and calculating enough to understand none of the legislation proposed last week would have prevented the shootings. Neither will they prevent future shootings. They are counting on the failure of any law passed to justify further legislation.

The grabbers are so intent on the prize, they're willing to sacrifice future victims just because they think we are too dumb to own anything more dangerous than a sharpened stick. It's for your own good after all. Quit bitching!