Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ohio Lawmaker Unveils High-Powered Assault Weapons Ban
releases.usnewswire.com ^

Posted on 12/01/2003 10:15:19 AM PST by chance33_98

Ohio Lawmaker Unveils High-Powered Assault Weapons Ban; Victims, Groups Call on Ohio to Ban Military-Style Guns in Case Washington Doesn't

12/1/03 9:16:00 AM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To: Assignment Desk, Daybook Editor

Contact: Toby Hoover, 419-244-7442 (office) or 419-260-8043 (cell), for the Ohio Coalition Against Gun Violence; Web site: http://www.ohioceasefire.org

News Advisory:

WHAT: News conference to unveil legislation that will ban military-style assault weapons in Ohio. Participants will also call on the Ohio congressional delegation -- especially Senators Voinovich and DeWine -- to support S. 1431 and H.R. 2038, two bills that will renew and strengthen the federal assault weapons ban.

The current federal ban will expire Sept. 13, 2004 unless Congress and President Bush act.

VISUALS: Replicas of military-style assault weapons; b-roll of assault weapons being fired

WHERE: Room 110, Statehouse

WHEN: Tuesday, Dec. 2, 12:30 p.m.

WHO:

-- Sen. Eric Fingerhut

-- Eleanor Helper, whose daughter survived a recent assault weapon shooting at Case Western Reserve

-- Toby Hoover, executive director, Ohio Coalition Against Gun Violence

-- Michael Beard, president, Coalition to Stop Gun Violence


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; US: Ohio
KEYWORDS: bang; banglist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

1 posted on 12/01/2003 10:15:19 AM PST by chance33_98
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: chance33_98
These people are gun nuts. They could work on statistically significant causes and agents of careless injury such as cars and ladders, but no, they don't like loud noises and think only of firearms in that respect. Car crashes are loud, too.
2 posted on 12/01/2003 10:19:09 AM PST by RightWhale (Close your tag lines)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chance33_98
Does this mean I can't have my M1?


3 posted on 12/01/2003 10:23:22 AM PST by Conspiracy Guy (Ignorance can be corrected with knowledge. Stupid is permanent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Flurry
We should be able to own and use an M1-1A if we could afford the fuel cost and had the garage space.

The only weapons I'd ban from civilian ownership would be WMD such as ICBMs with atomic warheads, chemical and biological weapons and Democrat-controlled legislatures.
4 posted on 12/01/2003 10:27:52 AM PST by RicocheT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
Oy vey, Fingerhut! Why do you want to disarm Americans, while supporting $2 billion in military aid each year to Israel?

Don't be a putz like Feinstein, Schumer, Boxer, Levin, Durbin, Wyden, Leiberman, Sugarman, etc. etc. etc....

5 posted on 12/01/2003 10:28:57 AM PST by BushMeister
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RicocheT
I have many of these. With a variety of warheads, must I give them up as well?


6 posted on 12/01/2003 10:30:06 AM PST by Conspiracy Guy (Ignorance can be corrected with knowledge. Stupid is permanent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: chance33_98
two bills that will renew and strengthen the federal assault weapons ban.

Translation: We're coming after your "sporting" firearms now.

7 posted on 12/01/2003 10:32:34 AM PST by aomagrat (IYAOYAS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aomagrat
Who cares. Bring it on you freaking idiots. Molon Labe.
8 posted on 12/01/2003 10:35:05 AM PST by Jack Black
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: *bang_list
*BANG*
9 posted on 12/01/2003 10:42:09 AM PST by cryptical
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black
BUMP to that!
10 posted on 12/01/2003 10:44:17 AM PST by Constitution Day
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black
Considering the SCOTUS refusal to hear the Silveira case, Ohio can now use the California model to throw gun owners into the cattle cars.

FMCDH.

11 posted on 12/01/2003 10:50:29 AM PST by Dead Corpse (For an Evil Super Genius, you aren't too bright are you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: chance33_98; 88keys; Akron Al; babyface00; Badray; Bikers4Bush; boxerblues; Captiva; ...
2nd Amendment Ping to NEOhio, NWPennsylvania;SWNew Jersey

Who keeps electing these people?

Get US Out of the United Nations

In God We Trust…..Semper Fi

12 posted on 12/01/2003 11:02:38 AM PST by North Coast Conservative (never take a gun to a gunfight that doesn't start with at least .40 cal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chance33_98
They don't remember what happened in 1994 because of the AWB, do they?

Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it. :^]
13 posted on 12/01/2003 11:04:39 AM PST by E. Pluribus Unum (Drug prohibition laws help fund terrorism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chance33_98
The Right to Keep and Bear Arms
REPORT
of the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CONSTITUTION
of the
UNITED STATES SENATE
NINETY-SEVENTH CONGRESS
Second Session
February 1982

Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary

Click here to read the report BY THE SENATE that finds an INDIVIDUAL RIGHT to keep and bear arms

"The conclusion is thus inescapable that the history, concept, and wording of the second amendment to the Constitution of the United States, as well as its interpretation by every major commentator and court in the first half century after its ratification, indicates that what is protected is an individual right of a private citizen to own and carry firearms in a peaceful manner."


±

"The Era of Osama lasted about an hour, from the time the first plane hit the tower to the moment the General Militia of Flight 93 reported for duty."
Toward FREEDOM

14 posted on 12/01/2003 11:54:14 AM PST by Neil E. Wright (An oath is FOREVER)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black
molon labe


the sooner the better
15 posted on 12/01/2003 12:50:12 PM PST by bc2 (http://www.thinkforyourself.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black

16 posted on 12/01/2003 1:40:13 PM PST by Travis McGee (----- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com -----)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
I wonder how they define "high-powered" assault weapons? They certainly can't be talking about that little 'ol .223, can they?
17 posted on 12/01/2003 4:14:56 PM PST by John R. (Bob) Locke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: John R. (Bob) Locke
I think if it is propelled with "gunpowder" then it is "high-powered."

Low-powered would be BBs I think.

18 posted on 12/01/2003 8:20:05 PM PST by Travis McGee (----- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com -----)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
I think I'm going to have to agree. Pretty much, anything that looks more intimidating than a cap gun with a red plastic tip is "high-powered."
Besides the obvious violation of a Constitutional Right, what bothers me is how do these idiots determine what is a military style weapon or "civilian" style weapon? Some snipers in the Army use Remington 700 series rifles. The only actual difference between what the snipers use and what a hunter uses is the scope and bead count of the round, two accessory features that are unavailable on the civilian market anyway.
I'm assuming these fools are talking about AR-15's and AK style weapons. Although effective weapons, they are weak and inaccurate in comparison. As far as the motivation behind the bill (I'm going out on a limb here and I'm going to assume the idiots have good intentions) I guess they are trying to curb gun related violence (a whole other topic all-together). If that's the case they should be aiming their efforts at handguns-not that I feel that that should happen either.
Have to give it to the the Rats here, they are slick. They will have popular support around the Capitol, at the very least, due to the recent I-270 incidents.
19 posted on 12/01/2003 8:58:22 PM PST by raynearhood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: raynearhood
It's pretty easy for them to BS most of the non-shooting sheeple about "assault weapons" because the outwardly look like the full-auto military arms.

When they call your deer rifle a "sniper rifle," that'll be a different situation. The fools have no idea.

20 posted on 12/01/2003 9:03:15 PM PST by Travis McGee (----- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com -----)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson