Posted on 02/28/2009 11:50:49 PM PST by neverdem
Washington » Utah congressmen are taking issue with the Obama administration's call for a new assault-weapons ban, saying it interferes with the public's right to bear arms and won't reduce crime.
The ban expired in 2004 after being in place for 10 years. In a news conference Thursday, Attorney General Eric Holder said: "As President [Barack] Obama indicated during the campaign, there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons."
Holder believes the ban would help curb the flow of guns into Mexico, which is seeing increased drug-cartel-related violence.
Utah Reps. Jim Matheson, a Democrat, and Rob Bishop, a Republican, are part of a 10-member task force on gun rights in the House that almost immediately promised to stand in the way of any attempts at a new ban.
"It looks as though with this announcement we've been handed our first big fight," Matheson said.
"I hope this administration doesn't feel a need to resurrect every bad idea," Bishop said. "Bringing this useless ban back is a terrible idea, and we will vigorously oppose it with bipartisan backing."
Republicans really need to challenge the term “assault weapon” more, as it conjures up nasty images of full auto AK-47:s in the public mind. The ultimate irony of the “assault weapon” ban is that THE WEAPONS BANNED ARE NOT ASSAULT WEAPONS UNDER ANY REASONABLE DEFINITION.
Sorry, just had to get that off my chest.
Obama is more dangerous than any assult weapon.
And we've certainly been living in fear and chaos since the ban expired. /s
and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons.”
_____________
Does Holder own or has he bought stock in ammo or firearms? If so, I bet he’s making a fortune by mentioning this weekly.
“It has the shoulder thing that goes up”
Yes. An “assault weapon” is called that because it has a selective fire switch.
To liberals, the words sound mean and bad so they like to say it over and over.
Interesting.
And they sell off before legislation is signed.
Assault weapons includes golf clubs, baseball bats, meat cleavers, any size knife, a guitar, grandmother’s slippers, cars, glass bottles, hockey sticks... the list could go on quite a bit.
LOL, priceless comment by a numbskull.
What in the world is an “assault” weapon? A hammer? An axe? A big knife? A frozen leg of lamb?
Currently, it’s down to the knife level in the UK.
Of course they won't even look at stopping young people from taking Prozac.
Assault rifles are ones that can be flipped to automatic.
Aside from that, there are traditional rifles, and modern rifles.
What they’re trying to ban is modern rifles, and magazines.
The next step will be the traditional rifles, to the dismay of all the pragmatic idiots who shrug because they use a bolt action.
Liberals are mean and cruel and should be banned.
A “leader” fearing the arms of the populace he leads should not be in that position. Ask any country held under the heel of despots.
My question is: Who let this ban expire?
Too late ZerO. We ain’t fools. Already stocked up
5 minutes after the.ban ended.
Good question.
I wondered if he was blowing smoke to appease gun grabbers, knowing that the will to pass a new ban simply isn't there?
Frankly, I have tremendous trouble thinking that anyone in any position of power could be so incredibly tone-deaf as to state publicly that the rights of Americans should be abrogated to appease the corrupt government of Mexico.
His comments were: "Well, as President Obama indicated during the campaign, there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons. I think that will have a positive impact in Mexico, at a minimum." From: Holder Revives Talk Of An Assault Weapons Ban (CBS News)(^)
Mind you, I'm sure Holder would do it in a moment if he could wave a wand and get it done. But what sort of support does he now think he can possibly get in Congress after having couched his reason for wanting it in those inflammatory terms?
Can you imagine the vicious campaign ads against any congress critter who dares vote for a bill that included that?
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.