http://www.acep.org/1,33768,0.html

http://www.tf.org/tf/violence/firear...junkgun3.shtml

__________________
I'll get nicer when you get smarter.

maybe only a fraction of murders are done with assault weapons. maybe just a few hundred people were killed by them, maybe only a few dozen cops.

but that's still too high a price to pay in my opinion, so people can have tricked out weapons.

i say let everyone have a musket.

level the playing field for all

(i also don't believe citizens are given the right to bear arms in the 2nd amendment, but that's another debate altogether)

__________________
"strength and wisdom are not opposing values." ~ bc

Thomas Kean for President!


there's what mccain says...then there's what JP5 says mccain says

I did a checkup on our ACTUAL gun control laws and I have to conclude that just about anything goes, if you can obtain a permit. Permits for handguns or auto fire capable weapons are extremely hard to acquire but not impossible. Obtaining permits are however not easy, it require that the person that want the permit has to show that they:

*Need the gun.
*Can be trusted with the gun.
*Don't carry their weapon at public places, unless this is necessary. (transportation)

The law are more complex then that but that is pretty much what it boils down to. There are a few people here that actually have military grade weapons at home, almost all of them are members of the official home guard militia (part of the military, consists of volunteers).

Weapon permits are for weapon types, not the actual weapon and there are no search able files of who got what weapon, only what they are allowed to have. The Home guard are mentioned sever times in the law so I think this is to protect it's members from an occupying force. They should not be ably to trace who is a member of the home guard based on weapon licenses. Still this helps little since few other then them are allowed military grade weapons but the home guard had, until just a few years ago century old bolt action rifles in their armory. The same basic type of weapons our many hunters use. Still some are allowed submachine guns and such for sport shooting at a controlled firing range. I suggest that any home guard members get a membership in a sport shooting club to get a cover for being permitted to have these weapons.

__________________
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he doesn't become a monster.
Friedrich Nietzsche

Don't you realize that you're operating off of emotions, and not facts, Maximus?

Catz

__________________
I'll get nicer when you get smarter.

You're making no sense. This is like saying I can save the lives of thousands of people by banning the Honda Civic -- as if the people that would have bought the Civic are not just going to go out and buy something else. Where's the evidence that so-called assault weapons are more lethal than a "non-assault" rifle. They use the exact same round. If you ban these rifles, they will just buy something else. It's probably not going to save any lives.

to violent crimes.

Again. If we wanted to really reduce violent crime, versus just paying lip service to the idea, we'd ban the production of cheap, low caliber, low cost handguns.

But we don't. Because liberals hate "scary looking" guns and want to give the appearance of doing something about crime while accomplishing nothing.

Catz

__________________
I'll get nicer when you get smarter.

There is a need for condoms, there is no need for assault weapons, especially for the general population. Yes, having access to condoms does make it easier for a kid to have safe sex, but it doesn't mean they are going to have sex. The kids who are going to have sex, will have sex regardless of having condoms, because kids are stupid when it comes to sex. With guns its different, having access to assault weapons makes it easier for a person to fulfill violent tendencies, these people will be violent people regardless of having assault weapons, only now they have a much better way to accomplish their goals. Thus lifting the ban on assault weapons increases the amount of violent crimes.

the second amendment must be kept, but we must do all we can to not let legally criminals get their hands on any weapons.

__________________
Romans 10.
13 for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."

Technically correct. But the M-16 has a three-position switch so you can switch from safe to single-shot to burst. The burst setting was labeled "auto" when I was in the Army. At a guess, they refitted the mechanism without restamping the label.

I got to fire a fair amount of full-auto weapons in the military, including .50-cals, M-60 machine guns, tank coaxs and SAWs. I guess you could also count the little MP-3 grease gun they issued tankers — a .45-caliber submachine gun that fired about one bullet a second and was almost entirely inaccurate past about 20 feet. I always considered that incentive not to have to dismount my tank.

Liberty, a philosophical question: You say you doubt many crimes have been committed with assault weapons. Fair enough. But no crimes have been committed with RPGs or 90mm recoilless rifles, either. By your logic, shouldn't we allow people to purchase those, too?

WHAT? Are you trying to claim that assault weapons require a bulletproof vest, but the bullets from all other guns magically bounce off the standard issue uniform??

Because in most situations it would be idiotic to carry around a rifle everywhere you go.

Sounds like they were using weapons that were already illegal without the 1994 ban. If you can find any evidence that the weapons they used were guns purchased legally and later modified you might have something interesting to talk about. Otherwise

Who cares? This is the most outrageously stupid argument in the debate. Should we also outlaw the pickups with big tires because nobody really needs one of those, either? Jeez -- using this Einstein logic we can outlaw just about anything.