Rational Basis Analysis of "Assault Weapon" Prohibition (Long, but must read)

Independence Institute ^ | 1994 | David Kopel

[Lurker]

What the hell would you know about firearms. You work for the BATF...

L

[PatrioticAmerican]

"'clips' out in the field "

OK, I call bullsh!t. Just what "field" is it that you claim to be a part?

[gc4nra]

Thanks Dan, good job, as usual!

[PatrioticAmerican]

If he is a BATFink, that would explain a lot. BATFinks are known "in the field" as the losers of law enforcement. They are regarded as out of control idiots who couldn't make the postal service. Seriously. I know few who give the BATFinks any respect. I know a few range instructors who have given up trying to teach those apes anything about firearms. They have a reputation of arrogance that has lead to unwanted range incidents.

[PatrioticAmerican]

I believe that ownership should never be in question, only the storage of cerain arms. If a person has the means to safely store a munition, as safe as the Army might, then ownership is not a question, it is a given.

[Lurker]

I used to work with F Troop occasionally, until I decided to refuse any other jobs they were involved in.

To a man, they were unprofessional, poorly trained in discipline, didn't have the first idea which end of the tube the round came out of, and were some of the worst liars I have ever come across.

F Troop has institutionalized perjury in fact.

Mash here for proof.

F Troop doesn't need to be reformed, it needs to be disbanded, and anyone who participated in the murders at Waco and Ruby Ridge need to be spending the next 20 years in a prison cell having their rectums stretch by lifers with AIDS.

Some day the goons who did this are going to pay for what they did. In spades.

I pray to God I'm around to see it happen.

L

[Lurker]

Your time is going to come....

L

[POGIFFMOO]

Just finished reading this thread.....woof! Well I want to insert my two cents.
If you look at all the sensational crimes of the centuries, OJ, Peterson, Assassinations, etc, practically none were with assault weapons or guns. I always have claimed (sarcastically) that a gun ban would have made a big difference in the OJ case.
I have also asked how often a gun has walked into a McDonalds by itself and started killing people? Almost every murder by a gun has had a human along for the ride. Could those humans have had anything to do with it? Don't the statistics show that more people have been killed with things other than guns than all gun killings combined? So let's ban duct tape, handkerchiefs, lampcords, water, sticks, rocks, furniture, knives, forks, spoons, icicles and even frozen meat. For that matter how about anything hard, soft, wet, dry, hot, cold, big or small?

People kill people. They will find something or someone to do it. So I guess we even have to outlaw hands, feet, heads and thoughts.

Our founding fathers knew this. They just never expected us to get so stupid that common sense would go the way of the Dodo. They did not want a legislature that would attempt to control all aspects of human behavior, because they knew people would control themselves.

To even need a scholarly treatise as extensive as the one above, which I enjoyed reading, to explain how absolutely stupid and brain dead our collective legislatures are, is proof that our society has declined below the bottom of the proverbial barrel.

IMHO it is now illegal in the schools to teach that one plus one equals two.

Pretty soon we will have to teach people how to breath and walk.

What a sad, sad commentary on the state of our country today.

[Gritty]

BTTT

[PatrioticAmerican]

"breath "

Cover already. So many people, with no problems whatsoever, have been told they have breathing problems and are now on drugs and other therapy.

[mvpel]

I believe that ownership should never be in question, only the storage of cerain arms. If a person has the means to safely store a munition, as safe as the Army might, then ownership is not a question, it is a given.

So ownership should never be in question unless you can meet the government's arbitrary "safe" storage requirements. In NYC, the police require you to allow them to inspect your safe in your home.

[Jesse]

"They are not precision weapons but weapons used to kill by utilizing overwhelming fire. That is why we have armies."



A belt fed machine gun is every bit as precision a weapon as an M16, probably more so because it is better stabilized by way of the mount or bipod. Functionally not much difference...cartridge may be larger, but it is legal for civilians to own a belt fed .223 based on the M16 lower, for example.


For purposes of personal self defense, a machine gun is not a good choice for many reasons. However, the intent of the 2nd amendment is the defense of the people against an overbearing government, and for this purpose, machine guns are useful. Hopefully, like many preparations we make for disasters in life, we will never use this particular insurance policy, but I rather it be there. That is why we have the militia, a separate and distinct entity from armed forces.

[wku man]

To be accurate, it wasn't a tank, it was a Combat Engineer Vehicle (CEV), built on an M60 tank chasis, which does have a very short 152mm cannon (which is used for blowing up obstacles, not taking out other tanks and such), but that wasn't what was used to pump the gas into the house at Mt. Carmel. The CEV crew used the vehicle's crane arm to punch the hole(s) in the wall, then an attached hose pumped the CS in.

Don't get me wrong. I don't defend the Waco apologists, just trying to make sure our side doesn't use the distortion tactics the others do.

Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!

[wku man]

"I'm sure "common sense" gun laws would stop them about as well as the 18th Amendment did."

"No replies."

'Bout says it all, eh? Funny how truth and common sense trump irrelevance and ad hominem every time.

Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!

[PatrioticAmerican]

No law can ever be made to be perfect. That is why the 2nd exists in the first place, but reasonable storage requirements should never denied. Doing so would render all arms owners as nut cases who need to be questioned.

Outlawing the storing of large explosives in a tract home environment is not unresonable.

So, who is to say? WE are to say! Of course, WE haven't voiced much of an opinion until recent history, so WE have lost many rights.

[TheErnFormerlyKnownAsBig]

bump for future reading when I'm not so tired. Kopel's stuff you have to devote real thinking to.

[Triple]

"THAT is a little excessive for defense of property in a city" _jim (referring to a 30 round magazine)

Exactly who do you think authorized you to make that judgement?