Posted on 05/04/2005 5:48:19 AM PDT by Fido969
Assault weapons ban not sensible as a state-level firearms regulation
Copyright © 2005 Blethen Maine Newspapers Inc. E-mail this story to a friend
The federal ban on certain types of assault weapons made sense. Police credit the now-expired legislation for ridding urban streets of guns used by gangs to tip the balance of firepower toward the bad guys.
What doesn't make sense, however, is for Maine to try to implement its own ban on assault weapons.
State Sen. Ethan Strimling, a Portland Democrat, is the moving force behind a bill to do that. The measure had a hearing on Tuesday and drew fierce opposition from gun rights supporters. Opponents raised a couple good points, the most persuasive being that Strimling's bill is a solution in search of a problem.
A national assault weapons ban made sense because it addressed a real problem. The weapons the bill affected were turning up in urban environments, making combating gangs difficult. Police chiefs from across the nation have attested to the ban's effectiveness in limiting access to these weapons by urban gangs.
Maine doesn't have a history of such crime, however, nor is there evidence that urban gang warfare is about to break out here.
Also, the practical barriers to a statewide ban are considerable. With these weapons legal in other states, it would be very difficult to keep them out of Maine, especially if the intent were to use the weapons in a crime here.
Sensible, effective rules regulating firearms use can reduce crime. Strimling's bill, however, doesn't meet that test.
Yes, because we all know criminals go to their local gun store to purchase their guns.
OK.
One. The federal ban on certain types of assault weapons made sense
Two. Police credit the now-expired legislation for ridding urban streets of guns used by gangs to tip the balance of firepower toward the bad guys.
Three. A national assault weapons ban made sense because it addressed a real problem.
Four. The weapons the bill affected were turning up in urban environments, making combating gangs difficult.
Five. Police chiefs from across the nation have attested to the ban's effectiveness in limiting access to these weapons by urban gangs.
Six. Sensible, effective rules regulating firearms use can reduce crime.
And we all know that an AR15 with a pistol grip, detachable magazine and a bayonet lug is much more dangerous than one with just a pistol grip and detachable magazine.
Well, I do FEEEEEEEEEL that it's more dangerous.
If this statement is true then the police chiefs are lying.
The gun ban stopped guns with bayonet lugs from being sold. Thank god! I heard theat drive by jabbings were a huge issue in the hood!
Don't forget that with a 10 round magazine instead of a 15 round magazine, we have made real progress. Because you could never carry 5 x 10 round magazines...No way never
>>Police credit the now-expired legislation for ridding urban streets of guns used by gangs to tip the balance of firepower toward the bad guys. <<
How is this factually correct given the federal law only banned the sale of firearms that qualified for the ban, but did not addresss then tens of millions of existing firearms that also met the scoring system?
Yet in truth, the law only acted to ban weapons that looked evil as the law gave points for cosmetic features that bear no relationship to criminal use such as a bayonet mount.
When is the last time you heard of someone holding up a liquor store with a rifle and attached bayonet, and having the bayonet be the key factor in the success of the robbery?
ROFL! And ROFL for any reporter who believes the AWB was anything other than a ban on ugly guns.
If this statement is true then the police chiefs are lying.
Meanwhile, the cop in the street has a view opposite of the chiefs in almost all gun matters.
Bulls**t. The ban is sunsetted now, and there are FEWER 'assault weapons' turning up in crimes. The criminal's weapon of choice is still the 9mm tucked in the pants.
You see, my deer sniper rifle has two dangerous features which must be kept out of civilian hands. One, it's accurate, which is a big no-no, and two, it hits hard and could conceivably penetrate a kevlar vest, which is a BIG no-no.
I am so glad we have people like the VPC and Brady Center to keep us safe from ourselves. /sarcasm
This doofus isn't arguing against an "assault-weapon" ban - he's arguing against one at the state level.
As for the police thinking the ban worked, well, take note of any who say such and use that as an indicator of their IQ, or lack thereof.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.