You Can Tell It's Election Year When....

The statistics are not from the NRA, they're from the FBI. When in this have I ever insulted you, soledad? I am not a "Gun hoarding nutjob". If you want to push for a constitutional amendment to override the second amendment or get a USSC decision on the constitutionality of gun ownership, fine. Until then, the Second amendment is the law of the land.

My stance on this issue has nothing to do with my "selfish needs". It has to do with constitutional law, and also the fact that gun bans do nothing more than restrict the activity of law abiding individuals, and have no effect on crime. If, again, the courts and the police would start enforcing the laws already on the books it would have a far more tangible effect on crime than creating new laws that judges and prosecutors can arbitrarily apply.

Someone wasn't paying attention in their Statistics class.:eek:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Lady's Human
The statistics are not from the NRA, they're from the FBI. When in this have I ever insulted you, soledad? I am not a "Gun hoarding nutjob". If you want to push for a constitutional amendment to override the second amendment or get a USSC decision on the constitutionality of gun ownership, fine. Until then, the Second amendment is the law of the land.

My stance on this issue has nothing to do with my "selfish needs". It has to do with constitutional law, and also the fact that gun bans do nothing more than restrict the activity of law abiding individuals, and have no effect on crime. If, again, the courts and the police would start enforcing the laws already on the books it would have a far more tangible effect on crime than creating new laws that judges and prosecutors can arbitrarily apply.

---

I apologize, Lady's Human. You have never insulted me. You're absolutely right about that.

This issue just really ticks me off. I can respect your dedication to the Constitution, but I do not think that our forefathers had any clue what we would turn "arms" into and I don't feel anyone in this country should feel they have a right to an uzi.

It's so insane to me I find it hard to believe. But you are not a gun hoarding nutjob. Sorry for the inference to the contrary.

When the Second amendment came into being, it was fairly common for people to own cannon for various reasons. Protecting their ships, lands, and to supply the militia in times of war. While it would admittedly be a tough go to haul your 6 pounder napolean into the neighborhood 7-11, one could do far more damage with a cannon than one could with any semi automatic firearm. One round of grapeshot on the battlefield could literally knock down dozens of soldiers. I just wish they had adopted Hamilton's original language for the second amendment instead of the way it was passed, as it was much more easily understood.


My main irritation with the whole assault weapons ban discussion is that people are mislead about what the law actually did. It did not ban any fully automatic firearms, those are limited and controlled rather severely under other legislation. (If you want to legally own an M-60 machine gun, you can, just have a squeaky clean record, and be prepared to pay several thousand dollars for the weapon and the annual fees. Last quote I saw was in the 10,000 dollar range). All the legislation did was to restrict what SEMI automatic weapons were available.

The assault weapons ban also did not control ammunition magazines manufactured prior to the ban. While pre existing magazines were a grey area, they could still be obtained as long as they were manufactured before 1994.

The assault weapons ban also did nothing to ban any weapon based on functionality. It banned weapons based on cosmetic characteristics, such as whether it had a bayonet lug, a fixed flash suppressor, or a folding stock. A Colt AR-15 manufactured after the ban could still be legally obtained, but you couldn't have one with a flash suppressor. A TEC-9 could still be purchased, but the folding stock had to be welded in place. It was a ludicrous piece of legislation which was nothing more than a way for congress to look good for their constituents without actually doing anything other than make life difficult for people who were already following the laws.

As far as the UZI you mention in your post? A semi automatic UZI (as in a gun that has the same function as a Glock 9mm pistol, just look meaner) will run you about $2500. A fully automatic version, before you go through the permitting process (which will probably cost you about $2000 in fees) will cost you $8500, not including transfer fees and annual taxes. The problem does not lie with legally owned weapons. The problem is that people can import them on the black market and sell them ILLEGALLY with little fear of getting caught, and the black market weapons are far cheaper than the ones that are legally obtained.

Soledad, Apology accepted. No need to get nasty. Leave that to Carville and Ingrahm.