Mr. President, do NOT ban assault weapons!

[The balkens]

Out of those incidents, Virginia Tech was done without any assault weapons but rather with two handguns. So far as I can tell, AWBs won't do anything until there isn't a high circulation of firearms in the US which is already existing. A massive confiscation would have to be done practically speaking and because there is such a large pool, it'll be nigh impossible to get rid of all or even most of it. It'd arguably be easier to go after ammunition manufacture.

I am perfectly fine with strong regulation of handguns as they more of a security concern than long guns anyway.

Regulations like what?

5 round magazines?

[Washington Resistance Army]

Except they really aren't. They are trying to go after a pretty much made up class of weapons, that account for a tiny fraction of all firearm related deaths (not including suicides) a year. Also, if you think 5.56 is a high powered round, your going to shit bricks when you see my hunting rifle chambered in 308.

as a foreigner the only time i hear talk about bans is when there has been a mass shooting.

so having these weapons vs not having them you see absolutely no chance of possible improvement on the present conditions?

Given there was no improvement last time they were banned..

[Saiwania]

Regulations like what? 5 round magazines?

5 rounds is low for a magazine fed weapon, almost impractically so. If you don't allow magazines to at least have up to 10 rounds, you may as well ban semi-automatic magazine fed handguns entirely. 6 rounds or less is more ideal for revolvers.

There is no getting around the fact though, that handguns of all types comprise the lion's share of all gun violence in the US.

[Gun Manufacturers]

if they wanted to take all your guns now that's a reason to bitch and moan but they just wanna take some of the more powerful weapons on the possibility that it will make things better for everyone.

viewtopic.php?p=29097429#p29097429

[Imperializt Russia]

if they wanted to take all your guns now that's a reason to bitch and moan but they just wanna take some of the more powerful weapons on the possibility that it will make things better for everyone.

viewtopic.php?p=29097429#p29097429

It'd probably help posters if you state what model both guns are.

[Genivaria]

Regulations like what? 5 round magazines?

5 rounds is low for a magazine fed weapon, almost impractically so. If you don't allow magazines to at least have up to 10 rounds, you may as well ban semi-automatic magazine fed handguns entirely. 6 rounds or less is more ideal for revolvers.

There is no getting around the fact though, that handguns of all types comprise the lion's share of all gun violence in the US.

You make a good case for handgun regulation.
My main concern is how easily concealable a handgun is compared to other firearms, so if you wanna get real severe you can make purchasing a handgun conditional on the basis of what work you do.
As you say the majority of gun violence can be traced to handguns, which means that if you extend the regulation to handgun ammunition then you are effectively disarming the majority of petty criminals.

Which means that we could also move to disarming a majority of police since they no longer have reason to be so paranoid everytime they pull someone over.

[The Lone Alliance]

Have you failed to realise that proposed AWBs only come up in the wake of mass shootings, with an intention of stopping mass shootings, fully realising that it won't end all gun crime ever?

People don't want to see Columbine repeated. They don't want to see Aurora repeated. They don't want to see Sandy Hook, V-Tech or Orlando repeated.

Except V-Tech wasn't done with an assault rifle.
32 people died to two handguns.

[Imperializt Russia]

Have you failed to realise that proposed AWBs only come up in the wake of mass shootings, with an intention of stopping mass shootings, fully realising that it won't end all gun crime ever?

People don't want to see Columbine repeated. They don't want to see Aurora repeated. They don't want to see Sandy Hook, V-Tech or Orlando repeated.

Except V-Tech wasn't done with an assault rifle.
32 people died to two handguns.

I'm entirely aware.

[The Foxes Swamp]

as a foreigner the only time i hear talk about bans is when there has been a mass shooting.

so having these weapons vs not having them you see absolutely no chance of possible improvement on the present conditions?

Given there was no improvement last time they were banned..

so why was the ban lifted?

[The balkens]

Given there was no improvement last time they were banned..

so why was the ban lifted?

No improvement?

Why bother.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Given there was no improvement last time they were banned..

so why was the ban lifted?

Because there was no improvement and it was unpopular, and it's even more unpopular now.

[Gun Manufacturers]

viewtopic.php?p=29097429#p29097429

It'd probably help posters if you state what model both guns are.

I didn't do that for a reason.

[The Foxes Swamp]

so why was the ban lifted?

Because there was no improvement and it was unpopular, and it's even more unpopular now.

of all the things governments ban this is the one they repeal. that's insane.

[Gun Manufacturers]

Because there was no improvement and it was unpopular, and it's even more unpopular now.

of all the things governments ban this is the one they repeal. that's insane.

They didn't repeal it. There was a sunset provision, and when that provision kicked in, Congress didn't renew it.

[Paddy O Fernature]

Except they really aren't. They are trying to go after a pretty much made up class of weapons, that account for a tiny fraction of all firearm related deaths (not including suicides) a year. Also, if you think 5.56 is a high powered round, your going to shit bricks when you see my hunting rifle chambered in 308.

as a foreigner the only time i hear talk about bans is when there has been a mass shooting.

so having these weapons vs not having them you see absolutely no chance of possible improvement on the present conditions?

As already stated, nothing improved last time they were banned, so why bother? Why would I vote for a proven method that doesn't work and will do nothing to solve anything? That's the very definition of insanity.

[Paddy O Fernature]

Because there was no improvement and it was unpopular, and it's even more unpopular now.

of all the things governments ban this is the one they repeal. that's insane.

Of course they let it sunset. It did NOTHING and was pointless legislation.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Because there was no improvement and it was unpopular, and it's even more unpopular now.

of all the things governments ban this is the one they repeal. that's insane.

As other have said, it wasn't repealed. The ban had a sunset clause and there was no support to reinstate it.

[Grinning Dragon]

Which has brought us here again. And I am still trying to figure out that; all checks and backgrounds were passed, the sale was lawful, etc, but yet once again emotion has lead the charge and dancing in blood, the whining, the emotional guilt tripping is being thrust upon those who don't support another round of lets blame weapons. So the shitheads who hate freedom in Congress are going to do their song and dance, lots of talk tv appearances, fake platitudes thrown about, etc.
In the end, there just isn't enough votes for these to pass in the Senate, or will die in the House.

[Big Jim P]

5 rounds is low for a magazine fed weapon, almost impractically so. If you don't allow magazines to at least have up to 10 rounds, you may as well ban semi-automatic magazine fed handguns entirely. 6 rounds or less is more ideal for revolvers.

There is no getting around the fact though, that handguns of all types comprise the lion's share of all gun violence in the US.

You make a good case for handgun regulation.
My main concern is how easily concealable a handgun is compared to other firearms, so if you wanna get real severe you can make purchasing a handgun conditional on the basis of what work you do.
As you say the majority of gun violence can be traced to handguns, which means that if you extend the regulation to handgun ammunition then you are effectively disarming the majority of petty criminals.

Which means that we could also move to disarming a majority of police since they no longer have reason to be so paranoid everytime they pull someone over.

The very attributes that make handguns the choice of criminals also makes them the best choice for defensive carry, a use to which an overwhelmingly vast majority are put.Happily the trend of late is for more and more states to ease restrictions on carry, some (12 states I think so far) going with Constitutional Carry.

[Big Jim P]

if they wanted to take all your guns now that's a reason to bitch and moan but they just wanna take some of the more powerful weapons on the possibility that it will make things better for everyone.

The array of calibers available in sport/defense rifles are not especially powerful.

[Traditional Conservative Justice]

of all the things governments ban this is the one they repeal. that's insane.

As other have said, it wasn't repealed. The ban had a sunset clause and there was no support to reinstate it.

We don't need anymore restrictive gun laws than we already have here in 'Murica. Look how hard it is just to get an Assault Rifle:

How Hard It Is To Get An Assualt Rifle in 'Murica

It's ridiculous, it shouldn't have to be this hard to get one. This ain't no commie country y'all.

[Big Jim P]

This is unsourced, and perhaps some of my more knowledgeable colleagues here can confirm or deny this, but I've heard that the reason gun violence in the US is disproportionately high due to an increased prevalence of organized crime in particular.

Gang activity account for a majority of gun violence.

[Grinning Dragon]

As other have said, it wasn't repealed. The ban had a sunset clause and there was no support to reinstate it.

We don't need anymore restrictive gun laws than we already have here in 'Murica. Look how hard it is just to get an Assault Rifle:

How hard it is to get an Assault Rifle in 'Murica

It's ridiculous, it shouldn't have to be this hard to get one. This ain't no commie country y'all.

YAY for emotional driven bullshit.
Fuck that article and fuck the author. So let me get the straight, the whole 7 minutes it took to buy an AR15 rifle = bad, but buying a different rifle that isn't an AR15 = good?

[Washington Resistance Army]

As other have said, it wasn't repealed. The ban had a sunset clause and there was no support to reinstate it.

We don't need anymore restrictive gun laws than we already have here in 'Murica. Look how hard it is just to get an Assault Rifle:

How Hard It Is To Get An Assualt Rifle in 'Murica

It's ridiculous, it shouldn't have to be this hard to get one. This ain't no commie country y'all.

Here's the actual way to get an assault rifle.

Pay $20,000 for it, wait 6 months for the ATF to approve all the needed paperwork and pay a $200 tax for the weapon.

[Tule]

The basic problem is not guns and rifles with prolific rates of fire. The problem is guns and rifles with prolific rates of fire ending up in the hands of unstable fucknuts like Omar Mateen, whether through corporate treachery like in the case of Mateen or sparse gun laws and/or enforcement of them.

And the problem with every gun-control law or proposal is that they target the stable and law-abiding, while not even getting noticed by the unstable or criminal.

You can get a pump action shotgun legally for $400 equivalent here.

Want a handgun on the black market? Better be willing to dish out $4000.

Trust me, criminals notice.