Should one or both of these guns be illegal ?
So this is from Wiki and defines a bit how Clintons assault weapons Ban defined assault weapons, CA AWB is set up very similar.
Criteria of an assault weapon
Assault weapon (semi-automatic) refers primarily (but not exclusively) to firearms that possess the cosmetic features of an assault rifle (which are fully-automatic). Actually possessing the operational features, such as 'full-auto', is not required for classification as an assault weapon; merely the possession of cosmetic features is enough to warrant such classification as an assault weapon. Semi-automatic firearms, when fired, automatically extract the spent cartridge casing and load the next cartridge into the chamber, ready to fire again; they do not fire automatically like a machine gun; rather, only one round is fired with each trigger pull.
In the former U.S. law, the legal term assault weapon included certain specific semi-automatic firearm models by name (e.g., Colt AR-15, TEC-9, non-select-fire AK-47s produced by three manufacturers, and Uzis) and other semi-automatic firearms because they possess a minimum set of cosmetic features from the following list of features:
Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:
Folding or telescoping stock
Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
Grenade launcher (more precisely, a muzzle device that enables launching or firing rifle grenades, though this applies only to muzzle mounted grenade launchers and not those mounted externally).
Semi-automatic pistols with detachable magazines and two or more of the following:
Magazine that attaches outside the pistol grip
Threaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppressor, handgrip, or suppressor
Barrel shroud that can be used as a hand-hold
Unloaded weight of 50 oz (1.4 kg) or more
A semi-automatic version of a fully automatic firearm.
Semi-automatic shotguns with two or more of the following:
Folding or telescoping stock
Fixed capacity of more than 5 rounds
Should one or both of these guns be illegal ?
That is the point I made in my earlier post.
But just because there will be disagreement or they might not get it right the first time is no excuse to just throw up our hands and say, "If they can't be perfect, let's not have rules at all."
But that's exactly the kind of obfuscatiing fillibustering that people who want no chage at all to the status quo throw up all the time in an attempt to create noise and stifle action. It's a cheap parlor trick. Anyone can do it. Just throw doubts at everything. Make every single word or utterance a debate. And everything grinds to a halt, and no progress is ever made. (PS, GN, to be clear, not aiming this at you, just used your post as a start point.)
I would support a limit on cartridge capacity on new weapon sales. High volume clips should be outlawed. Unnecessary.
A Bushmaster is not really a great weapon. Fairly inaccurate. It's a one shot at a time weapon. Hardly in the family (M16) of combat weapons. The .223 (5.56 mm) does create terrible wounds however.
There are 300 million guns in the U.S. today. Anyone with a criminal record should have their weapon seized. Anyone with a mental health problem should have their weapon seized. The criteria for licensing should be severe. And guns (like cars) should be subject to re-registration and fees.
I am in my 60s. I do not recall as many incidents like these mass shootings when I was young (U Texas tower with Charles Whitman exception). What has changed to increase violence?
Everybody in Switzerland owns a rifle and other guns. THEY do not have a problem.
Maybe more gun safety and safe storage education? This kid in CT had easy access to his mothers weapons. Why didn't she lock them up in a safe? Most of the recent shootings have been from people described by acquaintances as "mentally disturbed". Can we do more as a society to identify and treat people that have a propensity to commit violence? That is the type of stuff that may prevent these types of tragedies. Another one is for schools and malls and places with high concentrations of people to have armed guards. I'm not sure how feasible this is but who knows. If the problem were prolific enough they should. There was a recent incident in a mall where a man armed to the teeth killed two people before being thwarted by a concealed carry gun holder. The killer, when confronted by an armed civillian ran and killed himself in the stairwell. Who knows how many lives were saved.
Last edited by chiefst2000; 12-18-2012 at 11:04 AM.
I realize it's not nice to speak ill of the dead but make no mistake this all happened because of her gross negligence. Go through the accounts of those who knew her and her son. She actually warned a babysitter to quote "never take your eyes off Adam, not even when you're in the bathroom" when Adam was younger. She KNEW Adam was dangerous. In light of that she still kept dangerous weapons and a large stash of ammo in the house and accessible to Adam. Whether the kid broke into a safe or she gave him access makes no difference. If they ended up in his hands like this the fault is all on her. Period.
I also support a waiting period. If you are already a gun owner, a waiting period should not be much of an an inconvenience to you. You already have a gun for protection. And if you've never owned a gun (likely meaning little experience with firearms) then you're exactly the guy I want having to wait to purchase a weapon. But I gather the gun show guys don't like waiting periods.
Also, I don't know what kind of database the ATF maintains, but it would not be too hard to look for purchase/registration anomalies that suggest potential criminal behavior (e.g., the little old lady who out of the blue is suddenly buying hand guns at shows every couple of weeks ).
Last edited by BushyTheBeaver; 12-18-2012 at 12:40 PM.
Just wait till the first battered woman is killed by her abuser during the waiting period, and see how that plays out in the vulture media.I also support a waiting period. And if you've never owned a gun (likely meaning little experience with firearms) then you're exactly the guy I want having to wait to purchase a weapon.
Too bad. This is literally the last reason why I'd NOT pass mandatory wait periods.But I gather the gun show guys don't like waiting periods.
It is disturbing that in some locales, you can walk into and out of a gun show, and if you have enough money, have 30 new guns and a palatte of ammo in your car by the time you're done.
Frankly, in this case, you make a good point. The mother was not a nut job. Just irresponsible and in denial. Perhaps he son needed to be institutionalized or under care. However, in many of the other recent cases, the shooter was a nut job. It's not a perfect world. Bad guys will ALWAYS be out there and ALWAYS have access to weapons if they try hard enough. This school was somewhat secure (locked doors), but he was DETERMINED to defeat the safeguards.
In the schools here in Charleston there are armed guards in every school - elementary to HS. I don't like that presence BUT it will deter psycho cases.
But again, regulated clip sizes and even more scrutiny on ownership can help. Maybe disqualify ownership if any family member has a criminal or mental situation. Based on address.