Gun-control proponents lament as "Assault Weapons Ban" does nothing

Gee, we could have told them as much. Oh, wait. WE DID!!!

Under the law, bayonet mounts, flash suppressors and telescoping stocks are banned, and rifles cannot have a pistol grip.

But the new modified rifle is still semi-automatic. That means each squeeze of the trigger automatically loads the next round into the chamber.

Duh.

NYU law professor James Jacobs, who has written extensively on gun control issues, praises portions of the SAFE Act, including expanded background checks.

But he says the the assault rifle ban has resulted in a remodeled gun that is no less dangerous – just less scary looking.

"It differs only in how it looks, not in how it functions," Jacobs said.

Yup. This very argument has been made every hour on the hour for the past 50 years to highlight the gross stupidity and pointlessness of so-called "assault weapons bans".

If ever there was one article that beautifully illustrated the arrogant incompetence of the gun control crowd this is it.

link

Those that propose gun control lack a basic understanding of how guns work. Regardless of how guns appear, most will fire as fast as you can pull the trigger. There is no way to argue logically with gun control advocates because their entire position is based upon fear and emotion.

originally posted by: thisguyrighthere
Gee, we could have told them as much. Oh, wait. WE DID!!!

Under the law, bayonet mounts, flash suppressors and telescoping stocks are banned, and rifles cannot have a pistol grip.

But the new modified rifle is still semi-automatic. That means each squeeze of the trigger automatically loads the next round into the chamber.

Duh.

NYU law professor James Jacobs, who has written extensively on gun control issues, praises portions of the SAFE Act, including expanded background checks.

But he says the the assault rifle ban has resulted in a remodeled gun that is no less dangerous – just less scary looking.

"It differs only in how it looks, not in how it functions," Jacobs said.

Yup. This very argument has been made every hour on the hour for the past 50 years to highlight the gross stupidity and pointlessness of so-called "assault weapons bans".

If ever there was one article that beautifully illustrated the arrogant incompetence of the gun control crowd this is it.

link

Yep. That is exactly what the case was with the Clinton "assault weapons ban." It did nothing to stop crime nor did it keep guns from being sold because all of that was banned were cosmetic features that have nothing to do with how deadly the gun was or how it functioned. This goes to show that those who want to ban guns, want to ban something they fear on an emotional level because it looks scary and that they haven't a clue about what they want to ban. Fear and ignorance often go hand in hand.

a reply to: thisguyrighthere

While I tend to agree with the point your making I do see this going in a bad direction. I see it something like this…
Hey so those bans we been putting in place aren't working.
Why?
Well they only ban cosmetic features and people still have access to "scary rifles"
That's an easy one, have our media team start pushing for a ban on semi auto rifles that accept a magazine type of over 10 rounds.
*Printing press fires up* as bloggers get their marching orders.

But hey I could be wrong…this could be the turn of the tide to a logical approach to guns and crime. Heh Americans and logic…not sure most have any left.

a reply to: Metallicus

So true…
I fear the guy taking slow methodical shot's with a high hit percentage. The guy slammin rounds down range just barely hitting 1 of every 3-4 shot's don't bother me a bit. Rapid fire is fun not as much dangerous.

I think the best part about this article is that politicians can no longer pretend an AWB would accomplish anything.

Rather than ignoring us when we ask "what will it accomplish?" we can jam this article in their face and say "see, it doesnt accomplish anything."

Although, for the hardcore morons they could latch onto this bit of stupidity:

"The gun is still lethal,” Gunn Barrett said. “Yes, it can still kill people. But it is not as easy to manipulate and fire accurately than it would be if you had a forward-leaning pistol grip."

Really? "We need this AWB to possibly make the shooter slightly uncomfortable!"

If it wasnt enforceable by law and being used to turn ordinary everyday people into felons it'd be comical.

originally posted by: RickyD

That's an easy one, have our media team start pushing for a ban on semi auto rifles that accept a magazine type of over 10 rounds.

That fight is coming regardless. There are plenty of grabbers today who want to ban semi-autos.

I say bring it on sooner rather than later. Don't give the public time to acclimate to incremental infringements. Time is what makes the slippery slope possible.

Yep Americas lust for weaponry seems to win every time. If gun control does nothing then why have it at all? Maybe we should just let everyone have any weapon (grenades, bazookas, flame throwers, etc) they want at any age and be done with it.

Zero restrictions for everyone, even for convicted felons. Allow concealed carry for anyone in any place , schools, airports etc etc..

Then America would be a much safer place.

I just heard a story on the news about a student bringing heroin to an elementary school.

They should ban that heroin stuff too. No wait.....

I guess bans don't work.

its about slippery slope
the ultimate goal is as whats his name said;
"we have to brainwash the american people ( all you bitter clingers)..."

oh look:
its mister fast and furious himself

Breitbart.com has uncovered video from 1995 of then-U.S. Attorney Eric Holder announcing a public campaign to "really brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way.

www.breitbart.com...
see the video

a reply to: thisguyrighthere

It started when they banned machine guns. Where were you?

a reply to: Danbones
Yeah, but good ol' Eric Holder doesn't see any need to investigate real federal crimes (VA Hospital coverups) when they cause deaths and involve an actual conspiracy to, in the very least... hide evidence.

a reply to: PhoenixOD

There's always someone who has to come to these threads and just show their absolute stupidity. I'm pretty sure none of the people here want that or have even given you reason to think we do. It seems like your trying to say some inflammatory crap to get the pot stirred. I will call out your blatant divisive bullish*t that has no basis in reality. How bout you stick to what the thread topic is. Which has nothing to do with dropping all gun laws nor gun lust…and Americans winning when it comes to gun laws is so funny I actually laughed out loud in class.

ETA: I see you've edited that crap you spouted earlier. I do agree that every non-violent offender should be able to carry whatever firearm they want as long as they have proven to know gun safety and abide by it. How bout we put laws in place that make it a felony to not follow gun safety rules. Now that's gun control I could get behind.

originally posted by: InverseLookingGlass
a reply to: thisguyrighthere

It started when they banned machine guns. Where were you?

I'm all for full NFA and GCA reppeal.

Unfortunately I wasnt alive to fight either.

I suppose I could have fought the machinegun nonsense of FOPA but as I was 7 years old my options, as well as my awareness, were limited.

a reply to: butcherguy

The ban on full auto weapons and selling dynamite in hardware stores has prevented countless deaths.

Bans don't work for me though. I want what I want. Society can burn. Liberty for all.

a reply to: PhoenixOD
didja see what happened to those two unarmed surendering bad guys in florida the other day?

Miami police kill 2 unarmed suspects by shooting disabled car 377 times
"The guys tried to put their hands up, and as soon as they put their hands up, it erupted again."

www.policestateusa.com...

wow
(I'm not even going to touch the fact that law enforcement had to fire TWO VOLLIES on unarmed suspects)
guns are not the problem

a reply to: InverseLookingGlass

The ban on full auto weapons and selling dynamite in hardware stores has prevented countless deaths.

How would one go about proving that statement is true?

ETA: Or is that why you said countless.... because there is no way to count what didn't happen?

a reply to: thisguyrighthere

I'm for opening the full spectrum of military armaments for recreational use.
mines, RPG's, semtex all of it. Copious liberty to you brother. Don't step foot on my lawn though.

originally posted by: Metallicus
Those that propose gun control lack a basic understanding of how guns work. Regardless of how guns appear, most will fire as fast as you can pull the trigger. There is no way to argue logically with gun control advocates because their entire position is based upon fear and emotion.

you put the nail on the head
agreed

a reply to: InverseLookingGlass

I guess you're being sarcastic (the lawn jab is a tell) but why not?

If you have the space and cash to blast old cars with RPG's then why shouldnt you?

Being able to blow # up all day on your own property does not equate to an allowance to murder.

A major hole in the anti-liberty thinking. Right along with these fools who equate carrying a firearm with the proverbial "license to kill."