Obama may re-instate the ban on assault weapons.

[TxMxRonin]

The only assault rifles sold in America as semi-automatic and a citizen making a weapon fully-automatic is against federal law.

 

[TxMxRonin]

The only assault rifles sold in America as semi-automatic and a citizen making a weapon fully-automatic is against federal law.

 

[Rooster Cogburn]

The people are the ultimate authority, and government must be subject to them. I don't have to explain why I need guns.

European governments have their people so afraid of their neighbors they don't even want this sacred charge. I never want to live in a place like that. Governments, in America and in Europe, always expand arbitrary power through fear. We must always resist this impulse and crush it where we find it. It would be one thing for State governments to do this, but the Federal government has absolutely no right.

 

[Azeban]

Didn't read the whole thread, so I'm pretty sure someone would have said this, but what's the point of banning assault weapons? It's not like people use an AK47 to mug people or hold up a liquor store. They use a Glock. An assault weapons ban is pointless.

 

[Rooster Cogburn]

Damn it- spare me, they were doing system maintenance!

 

[chronobreak]

I've not once heard of a fifteen year old child being murdered in cold blood without provocation by an armed officer on the beat. Have you?

And yes, especially in the 90s, the LAPD made headlines for being a bunch of bigoted meatheads. The only time cops seem to be making headlines in the US anymore is when they get killed.

Why does it have to be a fifteen year old child? How about a 22 year old man with a 4 year old child? http://www.prisonplanet.com/video-of-california-police-shooting-spurs-investigation.html

This is just one example, I'll leave it up to other people to find more, and I know there are. You think cops ain't corrupt? You think cops don't kill people without provocation? I advise you to open your eyes.

 

[TwistedEllipses]

EDIT: I've encountered many errors and that is why I've ended up with a double post - can someone please remove this?

 

[WiseOdd]

Hey, I wan't guns as well. Gimme some ak47s, a rocket launcher and a BFG!!

No- wait, I live in Denmark... I don't know anyone who even owns a gun. I know some people who used guns while in the military, I even touched a real gun once (40 year old, from WWII).

Could sb explain it for me? Why would the average American want guns?
Yeah, so you can go hunting... even though you live in the middle of a city in which there lives more people than in my entire country. "Guns for hunting" sounds like the most lame excuse for: "I want guns so I can shoot people".

 

[Agayek]

Replace "stupid" with "faulty instincts". The reason deer die off is because their instincts tell them to eat as much as possible before winter. Winter comes, not enough food to go around and then they die.

People, however, forfeit instinct long ago. A man can't justify shooting three cops with a high-powered assault rifle while wearing nearly full body armor by calling it instinct.

So by your logic, shooting 3 cops with a high-powered assault rifle is perfectly acceptable?

You are not being consistent. If you want to ban assault rifles (one more time, the guns that are only aesthetically different from hunting rifles) then you should want to ban all guns, because each and every gun is just as deadly as every other.

I would disagree with you on that point, but at least your opinion would at least be credible.

Edit:

Hey, I wan't guns as well. Gimme some ak47s, a rocket launcher and a BFG!!

No- wait, I live in Denmark... I don't know anyone who even owns a gun. I know some people who used guns while in the military, I even touched a real gun once (40 year old, from WWII).

Could sb explain it for me? Why would the average American want guns?
Yeah, so you can go hunting... even though you live in the middle of a city in which there lives more people than in my entire country. "Guns for hunting" sounds like the most lame excuse for: "I want guns so I can shoot people".

It's not about going hunting or shooting or anything of the like. Hell, it's not even about owning guns. It's about the government and limiting its power.

I don't own a gun and probably never will, but I will die before I say people should not be allowed to own them. The same holds true for everything else. I fully support the legality of purchasing any and every thing imaginable. The only thing the government should be allowed to do is punish people when they infringe on another's rights.

 

[DrDeath3191]

I agree with your stance: No one needs an assault rifle, but I believe smaller arms should still be allowed. You don't need a military-grade weapon to protect yourself on the way to the grocery store.

 

[chaser[phoenix]]

]There's no part of me that sees the use of concealable weapons or assault weapons.
I suppose it goes on that I borderline consider myself a hippie-- why can't we all just get along?

I'm still convinced that "the right to bear arms" is out of date; that now we have the correct technology and law-enforcement to fight "evil-doers".
I suppose, therefore, I agree with Obama's ban on whatever needs be banned. If it keeps us from killing each other; even if the lack of weapons saves one life, then it was worth the "sacrifice".

What about when the evil-doers are the law-enforcement personnel?

Surprisingly, I happen to agree with you on the first point. I think we should all get along and fuck all the guns. I couldn't disagree more on the second point though. The government cannot suspend liberties because of potential violence. It's not within their purview to play mother to everyone.

As Benjamin Franklin once said, "those who would sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither". I paraphrase, but the point remains. This whole debate isn't about getting guns off the streets (which I may add for the umpteenth time, only guns that superficially look scary will be banned), it's about the government violating basic rights found within the American Constitution.

Hmm... I like your point there, worthy adversary.
You make perfect sense from that perspective. I agree the government shouldn't inhibit what rights we do have but at the same time I don't agree with a lot of the young teenage minds convinced that the guns make the bad people go away.

But then to counteract my statement it's a poor assumption to assume that every teenage boy is bound to be like the Columbine killers; that everyone is out for violence and that every boy agrees that killing their opponent is the only necessary option.

I imagine I just would agree with the ban because of my lack of interest in weapons.
I have absolutely no intention to ever pick up a gun.

But fine; if there is no ban on weapons, then I believe they must be much, much more difficult to obtain.

 

[Agayek]

I agree with your stance: No one needs an assault rifle, but I believe smaller arms should still be allowed. You don't need a military-grade weapon to protect yourself on the way to the grocery store.

Why is a pistol acceptable and an AK-47 not? You can kill someone just as dead with a 9mm, or even better a .357 or .44 magnum. And hell, a standard semiautomatic .22 hunting rifle that would be ignored by the proposed ban is just as, if not more, capable of widespread death than the commercially available AK-47s.

Please for the love of God stop being hypocritical. If you're against something, be against it always. Just like if you support something, be for it always. Exceptions lead to nothing but moral decay.

 

[Biek]

those damn Americans with their Constitution and rights, who do they think they are.

Funny, Thats what I tell myself everytime a American teenager cracks under the pressure your society puts on him and shoots up his classmates with guns he bought at the nearest convenience store.

Its also delightfully hypocrite that you mention legal weed, since you can bet your ass the average marihuana usage in America is infinitley higher than ours in comparison. Not to mention hard drugs. oh and FYI: its not legal, they just formally not care to forbid its use only. Pretty weak to bring that up as well, whats next? Your going to say I should thank you for saving me from the Germans?

But anway, you go ahead and enjoy your firearms. Ill go ahead and enjoy my collective health insurance.

 

[Agayek]

Funny, Thats what I tell myself everytime a American teenager cracks under the pressure your society puts on him and shoots up his classmates with guns he bought at the nearest convenience store.

If he's that deranged, it would be just as simple to find the anarchist's cookbook and whip up a few explosives using relatively common items.

Its also delightfully hypocrite that you mention legal weed, since you can bet your ass the average marihuana usage in America is infinitley higher than ours in comparison. Not to mention hard drugs. oh and FYI: its not legal, they just formally not care to forbid its use only. Pretty weak to bring that up as well, whats next? Your going to say I should thank you for saving me from the Germans?

But anway, you go ahead and enjoy your firearms. Ill go ahead and enjoy my collective health insurance.

No idea on drug use in either country, so I can't comment there.

All I will say is that enjoy your socialized health care and the 6-18 hour waits for the emergency room while you are bleeding to death.

 

[DragunovHUN]

That's really funny that people keep mentioning Assault Rifles, because that's not what's being banned here.

Finally someone who understands the term. One single user in a 9 pages long discussion.

 

[magicmonkeybars]

I'm against the ban, how will you defend yourself against your evil government without them?

 

[Thanatos34]

Funny, Thats what I tell myself everytime a American teenager cracks under the pressure your society puts on him and shoots up his classmates with guns he bought at the nearest convenience store.

If he's that deranged, it would be just as simple to find the anarchist's cookbook and whip up a few sticks of dynamite.

Its also delightfully hypocrite that you mention legal weed, since you can bet your ass the average marihuana usage in America is infinitley higher than ours in comparison. Not to mention hard drugs. oh and FYI: its not legal, they just formally not care to forbid its use only. Pretty weak to bring that up as well, whats next? Your going to say I should thank you for saving me from the Germans?

But anway, you go ahead and enjoy your firearms. Ill go ahead and enjoy my collective health insurance.

No idea on drug use in either country, so I can't comment there.

All I will say is that enjoy your socialized health care and the 6-18 hour waits for the emergency room while you are bleeding to death.

I like this guy.

It is a slippery slope to begin banning guns, and no, Obama by himself does not have the authority to do so.

 

[sneakypenguin]

That's really funny that people keep mentioning Assault Rifles, because that's not what's being banned here.

Finally someone who understands the term. One single user in a 9 pages long discussion.

Eh, there are more of us who understand. We just get drowned out by the horde of emotional irrational post.

Paint it black a put a pistol grip on a regular rifle and suddenly it's a child killing, cop murdering, school shooting rampaging full auto military type assault rifle.(to most on the forum)

 

[Ionami]

I for one am against the banning of assault rifles.

And for those of you who are saying "Sure Obama has the right. He's the president." that's crap. One man in a seat of authority should not have the power to trump the ideas of millions.

And what if those millions are actually FOR more gun laws/control? Does he have any right then to trump them by NOT creating a ban on assault rifles?

Maybe a simple majority is in favor, but the 2nd amendment issue means that in order for the ban to be fully legitimate there needs to be a constitutional amendment. Do you think that 2/3 of the senate and house, as well as 3/4 of the states would favor an amendment getting rid of the 2nd Amendment (or at least limiting it severely)? I would admit that a simple majority f Americans would favor this, but not a 2/3-3/4 majority.

I'm not saying that the majority are in favor of a ban...

I'm asking what he would think IF the majority were in favor. Would he still demand that he be allowed to have whatever firearm he wants? Or would he be okay with it?

 

[Echo3Delta]

So the ban on slavery should be repealed as it abridged, infringed, or violated your rights?



That piece of paper was written in a different era, technologically and politically.

It is no longer a means to justify over 11,000 murders by firearms each year.

Oh my God, you people make me so tired. The 5th Amendment states: "No person [...] shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law." In spirit, that Amendment has no room for slavery, and slavery was specifically outlawed in I believe the 14th Amendment. One second while I check to see if you're an American.

[...]

Oh, Aussie. Well good to go then, I guess you can't help it.