Question for AWB proponents

page: 1
4

log in

join

posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 07:15 AM
link   
You know that CT, NJ, MA, CA, NY are all still under the Clinton-era AWB, right?

Seeing how many people, pundits, politicians and posters drag it out as some must-enact action Im beginning to wonder if any know what the hell they are talking about.

We dont need to embark on some abstract metaphysical exercise here to see that an AWB will do nothing because in CT an AWB did nothing.

So what do people expect a national AWB to do?

Also note the medias reluctance here to call the CT shooters "AR-15 style" rifle an assault rifle. By AWB law it wasnt an "assault rifle." To believe that an AWB will get rid of the scary black rifles is absurd. It'll make it so they dont have bayonet lugs and their flash hiders have to be welded on but they'll still all be evil scary looking black rifles that function just the same an any non-AWB AR-15 style rifle.

So I'm left with two explainations for this support of an AWB. The first is that these supporters are just clueless idiots who have to idea what they're talking about but like the sound of it. Assault Weapons Ban. Yeah, that sounds nice and safe.

The second possibility is they supporters just want to take a chip off the gun rights block and they'll take any chip they can no matter how pointless.

This is an AWB compliant post-ban rifle:


This is an evil non AWB compliant rifle:


So proponents, which are you? The idiot buying into a dream or the anti-gun crusader who will take whatever they can get?




posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 07:23 AM
link   
I guess they figure a national AWB will somehow magically make the millions of weapons sold since 2007 and the big push to buy them, vanish somehow? Maybe they figure if a law is simply passed, the millions who bought AR-s and AK-s by the the case over the last few years will see the wisdom of their logic and willingly hand them over or something?

You're absolutely right that laws in the Northeast are already in excess of what they propose for the nation and it did absolutely nothing to save anyone. Oh, but it's the way some see these things. If what they are doing isn't working it cannot possibly be because the idea is faulty. Never... It's not easy being 100% right all the time, but they have it down well it seems. No, the problem must be that they simply haven't done enough OF it.

So, in this case? Enough laws to fill multiple books on guns in those states aren't enough. We must pass even MORE.....I guess they are figuring criminals will care when the sheer number of laws overrides what any one of them say, since they ignore them now anyway.
edit on 17-12-2012 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 07:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


That's the sort of stupidity that's driving me nuts. Post ban AR's are still AR's.

edit on 17-12-2012 by thisguyrighthere because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 07:46 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 

Realistically, he can't do much... He really can't. Not without Congress and they can't even agree to sit down and talk about anything right now, let alone take up this issue and find consensus at any level. The Government seems broken....and what a time for it.


Now State/Commerce CAN play hell on importing weapons, ammo and spare parts. Thats no small thing given how much of the decent stuff if German, Italian or from Belgium. That leaves a lot they can tax out of reach or really screw with.

However, we have other states like Montana that have already gone to an internal firearms production industry with their "Made in Montana" stamp on the weapon frame. Hence.....Federal Law doesn't even apply. It's an interesting system we have isn't it? I think some on the left are about to get a hard school education about what they WANT to do...what CAN be done..and what ends UP being done in the end. lol..... I'll bet they get about 1/5th what they want out of this when it's all said and done.
edit on 17-12-2012 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 07:49 AM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


I like the 1st one
the flash suppressor has teeth

Wrabbit I hope your right
I don't think I can own anything
that looks like this




edit on 12/17/2012 by spoonbender because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 07:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

..... I'll bet they get about 1/5th what they want out of this when it's all said and done.


That's 1/5th too much.

I lived in one of these AWB states that a took a giant dump on my head when it enacted it's own AWB at the Clinton AWB expiration and I promptly pulled my roots up, left my job and moved myself and my family to a non-AWB state.

There was good momentum going toward liberty in recent months with the prohibition ending laws in Colorado and Montana and Illinois being forced to accept its residents had a right to bear arms.

I dont want to see a backslide into more statist nonsensical tyranny for tyrannys sake.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 07:53 AM
link   
reply to post by spoonbender
 


Depending on the fat content and sodium levels it might not be compliant in NY.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 08:22 AM
link   
Banning 'stuff' never makes sense. Government has been banning 'stuff' of some kind or another across the world to solve one issue or another since the beginning of time. It's a good method used to avoid actually dealing with a difficult problem.





new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join