Skip to comments.Congress caves in on weapons ban (Kansas City Star editorial)
Posted on 09/12/2004 6:53:37 PM PDT by Former Military Chick
Posted on Sun, Sep. 12, 2004
Congress caves in on weapons ban
The gun lobby flexed its muscles, and congressional leaders blinked.
As a result, a 10-year-old ban on the manufacture and sale of assault weapons will expire at midnight Monday unless Republican leaders in Congress change their minds.
House Majority Leader Tom DeLay says there's no reason to bring legislation extending the ban up for a vote because it doesn't have enough votes to pass.
That seems like a dubious claim. The House legislation has 136 co-sponsors, including Reps. Karen McCarthy, Richard Gephardt and William Clay of Missouri and Dennis Moore of Kansas.
House Democrats differ with DeLay; they say the votes are there for an extension. DeLay personally opposes the ban, however. But shouldn't the rest of the members of Congress go on the record as to whether they support or oppose the ban?
Maybe that's the rub. Since the 1994 legislation went into effect, the National Rifle Association has focused on congressional members who supported it. Several lawmakers lost re-election bids because of the NRA's opposition. And the NRA has opposed any extension or expansion of the ban.
Most Americans, however, support restrictions on the military-style weapons covered by the 1994 law. The nation's police officers have been among the strongest advocates of the ban.
And according to a survey by the non-partisan National Annenberg Election Survey at the University of Pennsylvania, 57 percent of people with a gun in their household are OK with banning the weapons, which became popular with criminals because they are designed to be shot from the hip and to fire many rounds in rapid succession.
One argument against the ban is that it simply created a market for weapons with similar features that weren't covered by the legislation. That's an argument, however, for expanding the ban not eliminating it.
Congress has a chance to reduce the number of dangerous weapons on the streets. Too bad it is letting the chance slip away.
Happy, Happy, Joy Joy!
Look at it this way -- they at least had the decency to put this piece in the opinion section, instead of the Front Page News section.
More Guns -- Less Crime.
More gun laws -- More fatalities.
The Dems didn't have the stones to push this - they lost Congress after it passed the first time.
Congress chooses not to support a weapons ban that would only be obeyed by law abiding citizens and infringe on their constitutional rights.
This title is SO wrong. Had me fretting the RINOs and Dims had finally prevailed.
Non-crminals with guns don't kill people, criminals with guns kill people.
It's a great day for the second amendment!
Just for fun, let's do it freedom's way. Everyone who wants to have a gun for protection, fun, or just because the Second Amendment recognizes this right, can purchase any gun they have the money to buy.
Those who do not wish to accept the responsibility to protect their lives, their families, and the freedom of their country, can cower under the bed as they dial 911 and get a busy signal.
That's how freedom works.
You have something, I had not thought about it in that way, thank you.
For those who believe the ban should not have been renewed, the Star says otherwise.
"This title is SO wrong. Had me fretting the RINOs and Dims had finally prevailed."
Me too! However, look at this is
'Payback is a B*tch' for the unconstitutional
invocation of Senate cloture rules to prevent
up-or-down votes on Federal Judicial
Nominees who would otherwise be confirmed.
Then, pop a cold beer and smile!
Yeah...when I read the title, I thought they decided to extend the ban!
YAY! I'm glad to see that Congress is making a good decision on this issue.