Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="soberups" data-source="post: 1067470" data-attributes="member: 14668">I never said that I favored &quot;no gun laws.&quot;There are already any number of laws in place pertaining to the sale, posession and carry of guns. Some of them I agree with, others I dont.What I am opposed to...is warm-and-fuzzy &quot;feel good&quot; laws that serve no purpose other than to allow those who passed them to feel like they are doing something meaningful.The so-called &quot;assault weapon ban&quot; of 1994-2004 is a perfect example of such a law. To the uninformed, it &quot;felt&quot; like a law that would make all those icky scary &quot;assault&quot; guns simply vanish. It &quot;felt&quot; like a solution and it made them &quot;feel&quot; safer.The reality...was that the so-called &quot;assault weapons&quot; that they were so afraid of were never &quot;banned&quot; at all. The only thing the law did was to ban the manufacture or import of magazines with a capacity greater than 10 rounds, and it banned the manufacture or import of weapons with certain &quot;scary looking&quot; cosmetic features such as flash suppressors and bayonet lugs.It was still perfectly legal during this time frame to buy and sell such weapons or magazines. I know this because I legally purchased such items myself.The Columbine and Thurston High School massacres both took place during the &quot;assault weapon ban&quot;, with weapons that were compliant with that ban. The ban had no material effect on the outcome of either massacre, since both massacres took place in a &quot;gun free zone&quot; that afforded the shooters a total monoply of force on their helpless and unarmed victims. If you are a lunatic who wants to commit mass murder and you have at your disposal a large group of unarmed victims conveniently herded into a &quot;gun free&quot; zone...it doesnt really matter how many bullets your gun(s) hold or what your guns look like. </blockquote>

[QUOTE="soberups, post: 1067470, member: 14668"] I never said that I favored "no gun laws." There are already any number of laws in place pertaining to the sale, posession and carry of guns. Some of them I agree with, others I dont. What I [I]am[/I] opposed to...is warm-and-fuzzy "feel good" laws that serve no purpose other than to allow those who passed them to [I]feel[/I] like they are doing something meaningful. The so-called "assault weapon ban" of 1994-2004 is a perfect example of such a law. To the uninformed, it "felt" like a law that would make all those icky scary "assault" guns simply vanish. It "felt" like a solution and it made them "feel" safer. The [I]reality[/I]...was that the so-called "assault weapons" that they were so afraid of [B]were never "banned" at all.[/B] The [I]only[/I] thing the law did was to ban the [I]manufacture or import [/I]of magazines with a capacity greater than 10 rounds, and it banned the[I] manufacture or import [/I]of weapons with certain "scary looking" cosmetic features such as flash suppressors and bayonet lugs. It was still perfectly legal during this time frame to [I]buy and sell [/I]such weapons or magazines. I know this because I legally purchased such items myself. The Columbine and Thurston High School massacres both took place during the "assault weapon ban", with weapons that were compliant with that ban. The ban had no material effect on the outcome of either massacre, since both massacres took place in a "gun free zone" that afforded the shooters a total monoply of force on their helpless and unarmed victims. If you are a lunatic who wants to commit mass murder and you have at your disposal a large group of unarmed victims conveniently herded into a "gun free" zone...[B]it doesnt really matter how many bullets your gun(s) hold or what your guns look like. [/B] [/QUOTE]

Verification