Skip to comments.The Assault Weapons Ban Didnít Work Then and It Wonít Work Now
Posted on 12/29/2012 10:33:13 PM PST by Kaslin
Senator Dianne Feinstein is queuing up come January 2013 to retable—yet again—an Assault Weapons Ban (AWB) in order to “severely mitigate the possibilities of another Sandy Hook atrocity.” Great idea, Dianne, as the first AWB that Clinton signed into law worked wonders in schools from 1994-2004. It was awesome. It panned out wonderfully aside from the following:
And that’s excluding the Fairchild Air Force Base Massacre in 1994; the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building Massacre in 1995; the Caltrans Maintenance Yard Massacre in 1997; the Connecticut State Lottery Headquarters Massacre in 1998; the Wedgewood Baptist Church Massacre of 1999; the Xerox Office Building Massacre in 1999; the Edgewater Technology Office Massacre in 2000; and the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks which killed nearly 3,000 people (in which the culprits used box cutters and airplanes to pull that one off). We should have had an Assault Box Cutter and Airplane Ban in place I guess.
Yep, excluding the aforementioned, the AWB that the Left put into practice nearly two decades ago really mitigated murderous schoolyard and workplace evil for its ten-year run, right?
Ah, who am I kidding? The Assault Weapons Ban didn't work. School shootings shot through the roof, and lo and behold killers still found a way around the uber-strict regulations to carry out their death wishes with an assortment of weapons. Yep, correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe the biggest spike in school shootings in our nation’s short history occurred during the initial AWB. Google it and get back to me.
Oh, and another thing according to a comprehensive Congressional Research Service report on guns and gun control legislation: Less than 2% of 203,300 state and federal prisoners who were armed during the crime for which they were incarcerated “used, carried, or possessed a semiautomatic assault weapon.” If the hooligans did use a gun it was mostly your normal, non-funky firearm, i.e. mostly hunting guns and non-"assault" weapons. But we can rest assured that the Progressives would never come after our Remington 870s and our revolvers (because they promised). Never. Ever. Ever.
In addition to the AWB not really stemming the tide of gun violence in the public school systems, it sure didn’t calm things down in the “gun-free” Windy City, as Chi-town racked up a whopping 7,636 murders during the Clinton ban.
Speaking of Chicago, this year alone 446 kids have been shot where guns have been verboten, and just this week Chicago hit 500 murders that have now occurred in the “gun free” Toddlin’ Town for 2012.
It appears as if our former AWB and our current “gun free” zones don’t work.
Considering that fellow who shot the two fire fighters
had killed his grand mother with a hammer, perhaps
a hammer ban would be in order. All hammers made after
this date, that have one of the following features,
a handle, or claws.
Course there are a billion hammers in circulation
already but that won’t stop idiocy like this.
“From my cold dead nail apron”.
It isn’t expected to work, it’s only a small step toward the total ban they want.
Nobody’s old enough to remember prohibition?
What about cocaine ? That legal now ? You can practically get it in any state tax free.
Guns are a deterrent to those who threaten life, liberty and property. Any questions?
I was born during the first year of Reagan’s second term. I didn’t care to know about the assault weapons ban in 1994. I did however want OJ to be found guilty.
Yeah, that pretty much sums it up.
LOL — before I shut myself up, considering the grimness of the subject.
No, no, no! That's because other, irresponsible, gun-coddling jurisdictions have been irresponsibly flooding Chi-town with your criminal-favorite pistols (the standard offending weapon is still a .38 Spl revolver with a 4-6" barrel), making it impossible for Chicago's Finest to do their jobs.
You're just going to have to learn to quit arguing, give up, be overcome and eaten and digested by the Superior Hive Mind. Lie down, die, die, be silent!
These people who are so obsessed with outlawing guns haven’t really thought this out. I would like to see how many of them would rather be chopped up with a machete or shot with a gun if those were the only 2 choices. I bet 100% would choose a gun. I would. You take away the guns criminals will find another way. It could be gasoline or propane bombs, acid in the face, machete, knife, bow and arrow, baseball bat, car, an endless list. The only real reason any politician wants to ban guns is they see it as danger to their power or their tyrannical government in case “We the People get fed up with their crap.
The gun grabbers goal isn’t to stop crime. It is to disarm law abiding citizens thru incrimental infringement.
Clearly, the answer is to ban all guns. That’s how the dems will spin this.
When any congress critter screams that we must ‘do something’, keep a sharp eye on your rights and your wallet.
If they ban them, this time things will be different. Any attempt at controland registration will be worse than Canada’s experience with their gun control attempts.
Anyone that wants a full auto, short barrel shotgun or rifle, or silencers will just get them as the penalty will be the same for having a silenced full auto without registration as for having a 10-22 with a banana mag.
With every step the libs take to increase control, we move closer to being a 3rd world country, and the firm establishment of a thriving black market (where EVERYTHING is available for a price) is just part of that transformation the dems want to make happen.
Neighbor beat his wife to death with a hammer in 1950 and threw the bloody, hair coated hammer into our yard where my older sister found it. If they had only enacted a ban back then, I’ll bet this grandmother would still be alive (or killed by another means).
Congress (mainly libs) continues to focus on what they perceive as “assault weapons”. But what will happen when we have a mass killing with shotguns? One shell can do a lot of damage with even more collateral damage. Think reloading is an issue? Empty a shotgun on a crowd and see who’s close enough to stop you from reloading and shooting again. Does anyone remember the “Washington Sniper”? A Bushmaster was the weapon used and therefore assault weapons were bad despite the fact that only one shot was fired at any victim. Do not be blinded by media - this is step one on a total weapons ban. Any bill submitted must be rejected in entirety. We’ve got to stop blaming objects for actions taken by people. Put the responsibility where it belongs, not on the object.
One protester shows up at Denver gun show.
>>What about cocaine ? That legal now ? You can practically get it in any state tax free.<<
You are absolutely correct. All this poppycock will accomplish is to create a new huge black market for ammunition and weapons.
Legal gun owners, becoming outlaws with the stroke of a pen just for attempting to preserve the rights we’ve enjoyed since America’s founding.
Alcohol prohibition was responsible for hundreds of thousands of lives lost. The black hole called the war on drugs has caused a huge black market and has caused hundreds of thousands of lives.
When will we ever learn.
It isn’t designed to stop shootings, it is designed to harass gun owners and give the government a database of EBR’s so they cna begin the process of taking them away.
There’s lots of interesting facts about guns here:
The amount of “illegal” guns in the gun-free paradise of the EU is greater than the legally held guns. People are just ignoring them and keeping their guns.
That is exactly where they are going, ban all guns. What bothers me with commentary about how the assault weapons ban did not work is the left will use that as a basis for why they need to much further this time....ban all weapons or as close to it as they can get with a previso they enact registration of guns and gun owners of those remaining in public hands.
What you arent considering is that violence was invented by the chinese when they invented gunpowder. There was never any violence before then. </sarcasm>In reality, of course, firearms were developed to solve the problem of non-firearm violence. Non-firearm violence, of course, is harder by an order of magnitude and, in the absence of firearms, that fact naturally lends itself to domination by violent elites such as knights and noblemen.
Disarmament of the individual is sine qua non for unlimited tyranny.To disarm in principle is to trust absolutely. Trusting someone who demands, rather than earns, trust is folly. Disarming in principle is yielding the very right to withdraw trust.
The gun controller actually promotes the thing which he purports to oppose. At least, so the reports of lines at gun stores indicate.
The Wind and the Sun
An Aesop Fable
The wind and the sun argued one day over which one was the stronger. Spotting a man man traveling on the road, they sported a challenge to see which one could remove the coat from the man's back the quickest.
The wind began. He blew strong gusts of air, so strong that the man could barely walk against them. But the man clutched his coat tight against him. The wind blew harder and longer, and the harder the wind blew, the tighter the man held his coat against him.The wind blew until he was exhausted, but he could not remove the coat from the man's back.
It was now the sun's turn. He gently sent his beams upon the traveler. The sun did very little, but quietly shone upon his head and back until the man became so warm that he took off his coat and headed for the nearest shade tree.
Gun ownership is a burden, and as such it is an indication of lack of trust. The government should exert itself to prevent the motive for, and not the access to, weapons. But that would mean doing the governments job of controlling the power of the sword, and protecting the rights of the people. What fun would that be? </sarcasm>
(A significant number of background checks cover multiple gun sales.)