Assault weapons ban? Yes

[tallmike]

BTW you are aware that at the time of the drafting of the Constitution it would take an entire battalion to equal the fire power of a modern assault weapon. Allowing these weapons in the town square doesn't seem to jibe with insuring the domestic tranquility as Madison wrote into the Constitution.

The founding fathers never imagined that freedom of expression would extend to the internet. Freedom of the press would extend to 24 hour news channels. Freedom of religion would allow for televangelists. Search and seizure protections would extend to the inside of a car or the hard drive of a computer.

The fact that they never imagined the technological advances we have made does not mean their ideas do not extend to protect them.

They did not have to.

You are under the impression that the Founding Fathers were dreaming up freedoms for us to follow.

Here is a little clue about our country that seems to never have been taught to you.

The Founding Fathers created a document that restricts GOVERNMENT, not the citizen. They feared a tyrannical GOVERNMENT, and therefore, places obstacles and restrictions on what that government can do.

It is not about them imagining that we'd have automatic weapons. It is about them knowing how abusive governments are, and stopping them from ever interfering.

The Second Amendment is a right we have, not given to us by government. It is the responsibility of government to ensure that we continue to enjoy it. Government exists to protect our rights, not give them to us.

Yep, I agree. If you slow down and read posts all the way through before you reply to them you would see that.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

This would indeed be part of an outline of those supporting an AWB in court. And an AWB would indeed be Constitutional until such time as a court ruled otherwise, which would likely be the case.

Rifles account for a very small percentage of overall gun crime and violence. And AR 15s and similar weapons represent an even smaller percentage. Consequently the state can not document that a ban would have the desired effect of reducing gun violence, and absent a compelling governmental interest a court would have no other choice than to invalidate such a ban.

AR 15s and the like also meet the criterion of being ‘weapons in common use,’ since an overwhelming number of Americans own these rifles, their possession would clearly fall under Second Amendment protection.

Pure speculation on your part to assume the SC would not uphold an AWB, especially in light of the fact that as I keep saying a modern semi auto with a 100magazine is the functional equivalent of the machine guns that were available at the time the SC upheld the ban of fully auto weapons.

The Heller Court, when reaffirming Miller, determined that weapons considered ‘dangerous and unusual’ were not entitled to Second Amendment protection. To compare an AR 15 to a fully automatic rifle, or a sawed-off shotgun, for that matter, is idiocy – there is no legitimate civilian use for a fully automatic weapon or a sawed-off shotgun, whereas a semi-auto AR 15 has a legitimate civilian use as a sporting and target rifle; it clearly falls into the ‘in common use’ category, and possession of this firearm is consequently protected.

According to Miller in order for a firearm to be protected by the second amendment it
must have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia,
that its use could contribute to the common defense and be in common use of the time.

 

[Darkwind]

The founding fathers never imagined that freedom of expression would extend to the internet. Freedom of the press would extend to 24 hour news channels. Freedom of religion would allow for televangelists. Search and seizure protections would extend to the inside of a car or the hard drive of a computer.

The fact that they never imagined the technological advances we have made does not mean their ideas do not extend to protect them.

They did not have to.

You are under the impression that the Founding Fathers were dreaming up freedoms for us to follow.

Here is a little clue about our country that seems to never have been taught to you.

The Founding Fathers created a document that restricts GOVERNMENT, not the citizen. They feared a tyrannical GOVERNMENT, and therefore, places obstacles and restrictions on what that government can do.

It is not about them imagining that we'd have automatic weapons. It is about them knowing how abusive governments are, and stopping them from ever interfering.

The Second Amendment is a right we have, not given to us by government. It is the responsibility of government to ensure that we continue to enjoy it. Government exists to protect our rights, not give them to us.

Yep, I agree. If you slow down and read posts all the way through before you reply to them you would see that.

Sorry, I was actually responding to the OP that you had quoted.

My bad.

 

[Missourian]

We have a well regulated militia and unless you are in the National Guard you are not part of it. In what way are you "wellregulated"?

I am a member of a well regulated militia, it's called the unorganized militia. Most Americans are a member of the unorganized militia.

Unorganized by definition can not mean well regulated.

Yes, it can.

Well regulated in the context of the Second Amendment means "properly functioning"...to be properly functioning, when called upon, each man needed to be armed and ready.

 

[Politico]

You hate guns we get it!

 

[tjvh]

We always hear that assault weapons are no different functionally from semi-automatic hunting rifles. But there is a difference and that is the large capacity magazine. These magazines are not made to fit hunting rifles,they are for assault rifles.
Assault rifles fitted with large capacity magazines are the functional equivalent of machine guns which the Supreme Court has already ruled may be banned for ownership by civilians.
Finally, there is the mentality that is engendered by the use of such weapons. While the hunter imagines himself bringing down a nice duck or pheasant when sighting down the barrel of his hunting rifle, what is it that the owner of an assault weapon sees in his minds eye?
Bring back the assault weapons ban, it's Constitutional and common sense.

First off, the term Assault Rifle was a fabricated term by people who want to disarm other people. There are many hunting rifles with detachable magazines, so you are wrong. The guns you idiot gun grabbers want to ban are used as hunting rifles by many people throughout America, but the Second Amendment isn't about hunting... It never was. It's about keeping power in the hands of the people, so that politicians and their brainwashed minions (you) cannot one day decide they aren't going to honor the Constitutional Rights of others... Which of course we are seeing this now from Liberal politicians and the idiots who refuse to question them simply because they have a (D) after their name. I know idiots like you want to ban guns outright because they simply don't jive with your utopian dream... But Freedom allows citizens who disagree with your agenda protections from people like yourself, who use tragedies to further agenda's. The idea that somehow holding an AR-15 turns you into some sort of monster (in bold in your post above) is perhaps... Well it IS the most ridiculous argument I have heard yet, with regards to gun control... Are you smoking dope? You want to talk common sense? Then why don't you ask yourself how taking guns away from Law abiding citizens who have registered firearms reduces crime... Then you will realize how irrational, ridiculous, and oppressive you really sound. Get a grip, because no matter how twisted your utopian ideology has made you, there are still a great number of Americans who will not follow you, and your masters down the path that you wrongfully believe is in everyone's best interest... And they never will. Have a pleasant evening loon... And you might consider seeking professional help.

 

[dnsmith35]

We always hear that assault weapons are no different functionally from semi-automatic hunting rifles. But there is a difference and that is the large capacity magazine. These magazines are not made to fit hunting rifles,they are for assault rifles.
Assault rifles fitted with large capacity magazines are the functional equivalent of machine guns which the Supreme Court has already ruled may be banned for ownership by civilians.
Finally, there is the mentality that is engendered by the use of such weapons. While the hunter imagines himself bringing down a nice duck or pheasant when sighting down the barrel of his hunting rifle, what is it that the owner of an assault weapon sees in his minds eye?
Bring back the assault weapons ban, it's Constitutional and common sense.

This would indeed be part of an outline of those supporting an AWB in court. And an AWB would indeed be Constitutional until such time as a court ruled otherwise, which would likely be the case.

Rifles account for a very small percentage of overall gun crime and violence. And AR 15s and similar weapons represent an even smaller percentage. Consequently the state can not document that a ban would have the desired effect of reducing gun violence, and absent a compelling governmental interest a court would have no other choice than to invalidate such a ban.

AR 15s and the like also meet the criterion of being ‘weapons in common use,’ since an overwhelming number of Americans own these rifles, their possession would clearly fall under Second Amendment protection.

Pure speculation on your part to assume the SC would not uphold an AWB, especially in light of the fact that as I keep saying a modern semi auto with a 100magazine is the functional equivalent of the machine guns that were available at the time the SC upheld the ban of fully auto weapons.

AR-15s are not assault weapons and even if the USSC determines that a an AWB is constitutional the kinds of US firearms that would be banned under a bonafide AWB are listed below.

U.S. Army Weapons - AAManual
The regular U.S. Army has an arsenal of various weapons, from small arms to anti-tank weapons. During Basic Training (BCT) every Soldier must qualify with his/her standard rifle, the M16 (America's Army models the M16A2, but the Army has transitioned to the M16A3 and M16A4 models). Soldiers also train with a variety of other weapons during BCT, including the M249 Squad Assault Rifle (SAW), the M67 Fragmentary Grenade and the AT4 Anti-Armor Rocket. Depending on a Soldier's particular Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) they might also train and qualify with weapons such as the M203 Grenade, the M2 .50 cal Machine Gun and/or the Javelin Missile System. Many Infantry and Ranger units now employ the M4A1 Carbine Rifle, a more compact variant of the M16, due to its success in close-quarters and urban combat environments. Today the M4A1 is often seen outfitted with a variety of special sighting attachments such as the M68 Aimpoint or the ACOG Reflex.
M-16A2 Firing Modes: Semiautomatic (single round per trigger depress) Burst (3-rounds per trigger depress)
M-16A3 Firing Modes: Semiautomatic (single round per trigger depress) Automatic (unlimited rounds per trigger depress)
M-4A1 Firing Modes: Semiautomatic (single round per trigger depress) Automatic (unlimited rounds per trigger depress)
M16A2 / M203 Grenade Launcher Firing Modes: Semiautomatic (single round per trigger depress) Burst (3 rounds per trigger depress) + 40mm grenade 1 ea
M249 Squad Automatic Weapon Firing Modes: Semiautomatic (single round per trigger depress) Automatic (unlimited rounds per trigger depress)
M24 SWS Firing Modes: Semiautomatic (single round per trigger depress) Ammo Capacity: 5-round magazines

Those are combat weapons. I don't think many people object to the ban of those specific firearms, just the wanna be look alike which do not have the same fire modes. (The latter, M24 SWS is a sniper rifle.) Any semi-automatic rifle with 7.62 mm (308 cal) can do the same job. A Remington 7400 is available in that caliber and is a great hunting rifle. Banning that rifle will never happen, no way, no how. But recognize the fact that it is too long and unwieldy to be used like the M-16 A2 or A3 and is not intended for normal infantry soldiers carrying them on a regular basis.

 

[M14 Shooter]

We always hear that assault weapons are no different functionally from semi-automatic hunting rifles. But there is a difference and that is the large capacity magazine.

Any and every rifle that has a detachable magazine can take a hi-cap mag.
Point refuted, discussion over.

But, to humor you:

Assault rifles fitted with large capacity magazines are the functional equivalent of machine guns

Not according to the law or the actual definitions

which the Supreme Court has already ruled may be banned for ownership by civilians.

The SCotUS has done no such thing.

Finally, there is the mentality that is engendered by the use of such weapons. While the hunter imagines himself bringing down a nice duck or pheasant when sighting down the barrel of his hunting rifle, what is it that the owner of an assault weapon sees in his minds eye?

Given how few are actually used for crime, its pretty clear that the mind's eye sees any legal use one might have for a gun.

Bring back the assault weapons ban, it's Constitutional and common sense.

Both of these statements are lies, or pure ignorance, and neither can be supported by a sound argument.

Thank you for playing, please try again.

 

[M14 Shooter]

We always hear that assault weapons are no different functionally from semi-automatic hunting rifles. But there is a difference and that is the large capacity magazine. These magazines are not made to fit hunting rifles,they are for assault rifles.
Assault rifles fitted with large capacity magazines are the functional equivalent of machine guns which the Supreme Court has already ruled may be banned for ownership by civilians.
Finally, there is the mentality that is engendered by the use of such weapons. While the hunter imagines himself bringing down a nice duck or pheasant when sighting down the barrel of his hunting rifle, what is it that the owner of an assault weapon sees in his minds eye?
Bring back the assault weapons ban, it's Constitutional and common sense.

This would indeed be part of an outline of those supporting an AWB in court. And an AWB would indeed be Constitutional until such time as a court ruled otherwise, which would likely be the case.

Rifles account for a very small percentage of overall gun crime and violence. And AR 15s and similar weapons represent an even smaller percentage. Consequently the state can not document that a ban would have the desired effect of reducing gun violence, and absent a compelling governmental interest a court would have no other choice than to invalidate such a ban.

AR 15s and the like also meet the criterion of being ‘weapons in common use,’ since an overwhelming number of Americans own these rifles, their possession would clearly fall under Second Amendment protection.

Pure speculation on your part to assume the SC would not uphold an AWB, especially in light of the fact that as I keep saying a modern semi auto with a 100magazine is the functional equivalent of the machine guns that were available at the time the SC upheld the ban of fully auto weapons.

There is not a single ounce of truth in this statement.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

We always hear that assault weapons are no different functionally from semi-automatic hunting rifles. But there is a difference and that is the large capacity magazine. These magazines are not made to fit hunting rifles,they are for assault rifles.
Assault rifles fitted with large capacity magazines are the functional equivalent of machine guns which the Supreme Court has already ruled may be banned for ownership by civilians.
Finally, there is the mentality that is engendered by the use of such weapons. While the hunter imagines himself bringing down a nice duck or pheasant when sighting down the barrel of his hunting rifle, what is it that the owner of an assault weapon sees in his minds eye?
Bring back the assault weapons ban, it's Constitutional and common sense.

You're so full of shit.
You dont duck or pheasant hunt with a rifle. And a large mag doesnt make a gun a machine gun.
Did you come up with this on your own or did somebody help?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

How long does it take to change a magazine in a rifle?

Longer than it takes to shoot 20 rounds.

Hardly..

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

The Second Amendment isn't about hunting...that is where the OP jumps the tracks.

It's also not about civilians having military weapons. Assault rifles with large capacity magazines are the equivalent of machine guns.

Thats like putting a set of racing tires on a yugo and calling it a race car.

 

[Bigfoot]

We always hear that assault weapons are no different functionally from semi-automatic hunting rifles. But there is a difference and that is the large capacity magazine. These magazines are not made to fit hunting rifles,they are for assault rifles.
Assault rifles fitted with large capacity magazines are the functional equivalent of machine guns which the Supreme Court has already ruled may be banned for ownership by civilians.
Finally, there is the mentality that is engendered by the use of such weapons. While the hunter imagines himself bringing down a nice duck or pheasant when sighting down the barrel of his hunting rifle, what is it that the owner of an assault weapon sees in his minds eye?
Bring back the assault weapons ban, it's Constitutional and common sense.

Your so full of shit.
You dont duck or pheasant hunt with a rifle. And a large mag doesnt make a gun a machine gun.
Did you come up with this on your own or did somebody help?

/agree The guy is ignorant. He is about as knowledgeable on firearms as the typical person who wants to ban many if not all of them including many of our inane Senators and Congressmen.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Now we know what is in the mind of the NRA...paranoia. Guns will not give you courage.

What does that mean?

A gun does not give you courage?

How many times do you see the president out and about without the secret service and their guns to protect him...those guns seem to give him courage.

Cowards cling tightest to their guns. I've raised four children in the Los Angeles area. I've never had a firearm for protection. Anyone trying to sneak into my house will have to deal with my aluminum T-ball bat.

I'm sure the criminal with the Glock is terrified.
Leave it to a lib to bring a t-ball bat to a gun fight.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

We always hear that assault weapons are no different functionally from semi-automatic hunting rifles. But there is a difference and that is the large capacity magazine. These magazines are not made to fit hunting rifles,they are for assault rifles.
Assault rifles fitted with large capacity magazines are the functional equivalent of machine guns which the Supreme Court has already ruled may be banned for ownership by civilians.
Finally, there is the mentality that is engendered by the use of such weapons. While the hunter imagines himself bringing down a nice duck or pheasant when sighting down the barrel of his hunting rifle, what is it that the owner of an assault weapon sees in his minds eye?
Bring back the assault weapons ban, it's Constitutional and common sense.

Your so full of shit.
You dont duck or pheasant hunt with a rifle. And a large mag doesnt make a gun a machine gun.
Did you come up with this on your own or did somebody help?

/agree The guy is ignorant. He is about as knowledgeable on firearms as the typical person who wants to ban many if not all of them including our many of our inane Senators and Congressmen.

I wonder if he realizes how stupid he sounds?

 

[Bigfoot]

Your so full of shit.
You dont duck or pheasant hunt with a rifle. And a large mag doesnt make a gun a machine gun.
Did you come up with this on your own or did somebody help?

/agree The guy is ignorant. He is about as knowledgeable on firearms as the typical person who wants to ban many if not all of them including our many of our inane Senators and Congressmen.

I wonder if he realizes how stupid he sounds?

I think that he believes that he is the smartest bird in the flock.

 

[dnsmith35]

I wonder if he realizes how stupid he sounds?

AR-15s are not assault weapons and even if the USSC determines that a an AWB is constitutional the kinds of US firearms that would be banned under a bonafide AWB are listed below.

U.S. Army Weapons - AAManual
The regular U.S. Army has an arsenal of various weapons, from small arms to anti-tank weapons. During Basic Training (BCT) every Soldier must qualify with his/her standard rifle, the M16 (America's Army models the M16A2, but the Army has transitioned to the M16A3 and M16A4 models). Soldiers also train with a variety of other weapons during BCT, including the M249 Squad Assault Rifle (SAW), the M67 Fragmentary Grenade and the AT4 Anti-Armor Rocket. Depending on a Soldier's particular Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) they might also train and qualify with weapons such as the M203 Grenade, the M2 .50 cal Machine Gun and/or the Javelin Missile System. Many Infantry and Ranger units now employ the M4A1 Carbine Rifle, a more compact variant of the M16, due to its success in close-quarters and urban combat environments. Today the M4A1 is often seen outfitted with a variety of special sighting attachments such as the M68 Aimpoint or the ACOG Reflex.
M-16A2 Firing Modes: Semiautomatic (single round per trigger depress) Burst (3-rounds per trigger depress)
M-16A3 Firing Modes: Semiautomatic (single round per trigger depress) Automatic (unlimited rounds per trigger depress)
M-4A1 Firing Modes: Semiautomatic (single round per trigger depress) Automatic (unlimited rounds per trigger depress)
M16A2 / M203 Grenade Launcher Firing Modes: Semiautomatic (single round per trigger depress) Burst (3 rounds per trigger depress) + 40mm grenade 1 ea
M249 Squad Automatic Weapon Firing Modes: Semiautomatic (single round per trigger depress) Automatic (unlimited rounds per trigger depress)
M24 SWS Firing Modes: Semiautomatic (single round per trigger depress) Ammo Capacity: 5-round magazines

Those are combat weapons. I don't think many people object to the ban of those specific firearms, just the wanna be look alike which do not have the same fire modes. (The latter, M24 SWS is a sniper rifle.) Any semi-automatic rifle with 7.62 mm (308 cal) can do the same job. A Remington 7400 is available in that caliber and is a great hunting rifle. Banning that rifle will never happen, no way, no how. But recognize the fact that it is too long and unwieldy to be used like the M-16 A2 or A3 and is not intended for normal infantry soldiers carrying them on a regular basis.

 

[GuyPinestra]

how long does it take to change a magazine in a rifle?

longer than it takes to shoot 20 rounds.

wrong!!

 

[Bigfoot]

Yeah, no one I know disagrees with the class 3 licensing system. It's the low information voter types that like to toss the words "assault weapon" around when they have no idea what an assault rifle actually is.

 

[M14 Shooter]

How long does it take to change a magazine in a rifle?

Longer than it takes to shoot 20 rounds.

You have absolutely -no- idea what you're talking about.

I love it when people who are utterly ignorant about a subjeect try to argue a position on that subject. Please, keep up the good work.