Just ban 'em. No need for civilians to own assault weapons. End of story.

[Botany]

Last edited Tue Jul 5, 2022, 10:38 AM - Edit history (1)

There is no age @ which people should be able to legally buy and own assault weapons.

Quit fucking around and get rid of those killing machines now. And we don't need to listen to the
bought off gun humpers in the congress, state houses, or in the media talking about "the law
abiding people" who enjoy them. Enjoy them? Please! My simple mental health test is if you want
to own an assault then you automatically fail that mental health test. Lawn darts caused 1 or 2 fatalities
and they were banned and when I go deer hunting I am allowed only 3 shells in the gun plus I have to
have a hunting license too.


Both Australia and New Zealand banned assault weapons and that stopped mass shootings in those countries
and I am sure they have mental illness there too.

BTW why do I think the assault weapon used in Highland Park was bought legally in Indiana or Wisconsin?

Just ban the damn things. (I never said this would be easy or that I had all the answers.)

[brooklynite]

1. Any thoughts as to how to ban them?

[Botany]

10. A journey of a thousand miles starts with the 1st step

We could start by with the .223 ammo. Extremely high muzzle speed and the bullet is made to tumble
after it hits somebody so when it hits somebody's leg it can blow it off and then the person can bleed out
with in minutes.

It will be hard but this must be done.

[mdelaguna]

28. Bold, even rogue executive orders.

Even if later to die in court. Keep the EOs coming like waves upon the sand. Make it hard for them. Make them react and spend time and money preparing cases.

[Zeitghost]

55. .223/5.56mm

Is a standard light duty rifle round. There is nothing special or unique about it that makes it more damaging than any other rifle round and it's actually considered relatively low compared to other rifle rounds. And the AR-15 can be modified to fire any number of cartridges in a few minutes.

I say this not to put down your idea, but rather to show that it would require essentially banning all rifle ammunition, which would be extremely difficult and not all that practical.

[jimfields33]

13. +1,000,000

It all comes down to killing the filibuster. Until that happens, everything is moot.

[paparush]

19. Donate to Moms Demand Action

They've been working on Gun Safety Policy non-stop since Sandy Hook.

https://secure.actblue.com/donate/mda-web-2022?source=mdno_nav_button&refcode=mdno_nav_button&utm_source=mdno_nav_button&utm_medium=o&utm_campaign=nav_button

[Handler]

31. I have a thought

First put a tax stamp on them. A thousand percent of the cost would be a good start. We already do that with fully automatic weapons . That along with a stringent background check would remove thousands upon thousands of these assault weapons. I would think very few new weapons would be sold in the future. I think the tax stamp would only require a simple majority vote.

[Straw Man]

53. The devil is in the dollars.

First put a tax stamp on them. A thousand percent of the cost would be a good start. We already do that with fully automatic weapons.

The tax stamp for NFA weapons is currently $200. Unless you're finding fully automatic weapons for $20, it's far from a thousand percent of cost.

[Handler]

56. My point is NFA weapons has a tax stamp to be paid for

I know it is $200. I say raise the tax to 1000 percent, how many 18 yo can afford that. I also contend no guns should be grandfathered in. You want to keep your assault weapons, pay the tax.
My goal here is to get assault weapons out of the hands of civilians.

[Straw Man]

65. I understand your goal.

I don't think you can do it through the back door with punitive taxes. Reclassifying non-military semi-auto firearms as NFA is going to be a hard enough sell. Raising the tax by a factor of 10 won't pass muster.

[48656c6c6f20]

2. So I guess it's not the gun?

Link to tweet

[KS Toronado]

46. What the NRA fails to see

is our younger generation who grew up having "Active Shooter Drills" from kindergarten to high school.
As more of them reach voting age and become politically active, we should see a more active push
to make assault type weapons illegal. And my gut feeling is they'll do it as Democrats because
of reQublicOns love of guns. They will help keep Democrats in Congress to accomplish this.

[NutmegYankee]

3. Restrict ownership to only those in the organized militia or a state authorized police force.

And organized militia by definition is under the authority of a state or a political subdivision.

Groups that call themselves militias, but aren’t actually under the governor’s authority are just brigands or gangs.

[LonePirate]

9. I think you're on the right path here. Just need a way to define how.

People like Gov. Abbott will say anyone and everyone is a member of the militia but we are going to need far tighter rules and requirements than that.

[NutmegYankee]

20. US Constitution Article I Section 8, clause 15.

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

[paparush]

21. Ask Gov Abbot what the Texas National Guard is for, then.

We HAVE standing, well regulated militias, hence 18 year old Johnny Zitface doesn't need a fucking AR.

[uponit7771]

69. +1, USSC "originalist" absolutely ignore this part of the 2a

[samplegirl]

4. I agree

It should of been done by now.

[PJMcK]

5. It's too late

There ar more guns in America than people.

How are we going to change that?

I've come to the sad realization that we'll never get rid of this threat to our safety.

[paparush]

23. Agreed. More guns is not the answer.

More guns than people and we have a violent crime rate 20x greater than the next developed nation. More guns are clearly NOT making us safer. It's only made gun manufacturers richer.

[EX500rider]

58. Not quite 20x the rate

Europe as a whole has a homicide rate of 3 per 100,000, the US rate is 6.3, so double would be more accurate.

You can cherry pick certain European countries with a lower rate but you can do the same with US states, New Hampshire has a rate of 0.9
The worst US rate is Wash DC @ 28.2


And though the US is #1 in firearms ownership we are #59th in homicides, behind all those scary countries like Bermuda, the Bahamas, Jamaica, Costa Rica etc


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_intentional_homicide_rate

[William Seger]

25. Tomorrow's mass shooter may not yet have an AR-15

Make it illegal for anyone to buy an assault rifle, or to sell one to anyone except a government buy-back program, and at least some of tomorrow's would-be murderers will not be able to get one.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

6. This should be interesting.

[Bluethroughu]

7. 100%

[Amishman]

8. Then what?

Forgive the shameless cut and and paste from a month ago, but there are factors DU doesn't seem to consider as much as we should

Banning them is the 'easy' part, the hard part is what comes after that.

Lots of discussion on the need to ban dangerous guns and restrict magazines. Makes total sense, but the discussion seems focused on what might be possible to pass and how to do it.

What is being overlooked is what happens after that.

Let's say Heller is overturned, and we have the ability to pass an enhanced version of the 94 Assault Weapons Ban - one with no grandfathering.

How do we get the now illegal guns?

A few will cooperate. I own a pistol with two magazines that hold 15 rounds each (its what came with it), and I'd be fine exchanging them for ones that hold less. (I live in a very rural area where police response times can be 30+ minutes)

I'm certain that I'd be the exception and not the norm. It's a reasonable assumption that the majority won't turn them in because its the law, or even the right thing to do. Look at the abysmal registration compliance in NY and CT when they implemented a registration program - estimated at 20% or less registered.

Taking them away against their will also isn't likely to be successful.

The immediate first challenge will be one of nullification by states. Think of the current state / federal schism on marijuana but times 100. This will need to be addressed, possibly by threatening to withhold federal funding to states.

The next part is enforcement and removal once the states are brought into line.

This is definitely the hardest of the hard parts.

I see two near intractable problems: we don't fully know how many there are, we don't fully know who has them, and who collects those we do know about?

We can get clues from manufacturer and sales records, but since very few states have any sort of registration or restrictions on private sales, there is no way of proving who should have one to turn in. Add in home built guns and there are a bunch that we don't even have that. On top of this is the magazine issue, they are not serialized or recorded in any way. We have next to nothing to go on for tracking down magazines.

Those we can track down, who gets them and how?

Going door to door would be a losing proposition.

There aren't nearly enough federal resources to do it, plus backlash against this would be even hotter than state/local resources doing it. You could easily get state and local law enforcement standing with the gunners in opposition.

State and local resources isn't much better. In red areas they will likely be sympathetic to the gunners and simply refuse. If there is a means to force them into action, I would expect them to do anything they can do undermine it.

Whoever would be tasked with a door to door effort, I would not expect them to put themselves at risk and push the issue (which would certainly be needed). It is very clear that he hardcore gunners value their guns more than the lives of innocent children, I imagine they would care even less about the lives of law enforcement trying to take their guns. As we've seen, law enforcement won't even go into a school to save children from being murdered, they certainly won't be willing to risk their necks out for this.

What does this leave? Honestly, I can't think of too many options, and only one that might have a chance of working.

That is to treat gun owners like a little child. Reward them / bribe them for doing the right thing because they won't do it on their own. In other words a mandatory buyback program that pays so well that most of them will want to turn them in out of greed. This would probably mean double or more what those items sold for before the ban. Searching google, looks like AR-15 magazines are $10-$15 each. Handgun magazines are $25 to $40. It might take rewards of $2500 for an assault rifle and $50 for a high capacity magazine (numbers pulled out of thin air, but remember it will take a major windfall to make them want the money more than their precious guns).

It won't get all of them, the hardcore nutters won't turn them in at any price, but if we can get the majority it would be a huge improvement. Getting most of them also has the impact of de-normalizing ownership of this stuff. This approach isn't ideal, and the idea of rewarding gun nuts and giving them tons of cash for their nasty toys will feel wrong to many, but this is one of the only remotely viable roadmaps.

[BlueTsunami2018]

12. Criminalize the possession.

Sure, have the buybacks and voluntarily turn ins but make it clear that after a certain date, if you’re caught with an illegal weapon, you will do five years mandatory in prison. No exceptions, no excuses. You don’t have to go door to door or any of that. People will hide them or bury them or whatever but they won’t be openly carried or have any public presence.

[ripcord]

14. You do know that many sheriffs would ignore this law right?

Sheriffs across the country have said they won't enforce federal gun laws that they feel take away rights from citizens much the same way some states won't enforce federal immigration laws.

[groundloop]

30. That's the exact opposite of what I've read

When I see sheriffs and state patrol officials in the news they are all pretty much in agreement that assault weapons make their jobs more dangerous.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

38. Not in the rural areas of the US. nt

[uponit7771]

68. Like they do other laws that doesn't mean don't establish and enforce laws that for public good.

[Amishman]

37. which wouldn't do much

I expect for half the country it would be either directly nullified, at at least unenforced. A parallel would be the dubious legal status of marijuana in this country.

Even in areas where it is enforced, it would just add another charge when the gun is discovered - which would probably be after the crime is committed.

Not saying it's pointless - far from it - but it is important to understand the scope of the challenges facing us with this problem. Getting the law to say they can't have the gun does not remove the gun from their possession. The later is much much harder to accomplish than the former. It also is essentially impossible to do without their consent - which is why I see bribery/greed as the only remotely viable option to accomplish that.

[Liberal In Texas]

40. You know that saying "....only criminals will have guns" gunners like to spew?

That is correct. When we make military-style weapons illegal only criminals will have them. You say,"Hardcore nutters won't..." well, then they'll be criminals. No different than if they were sitting on a pile of meth in the garage.

The thing is. It has to begin someplace. A big start will be to stop them being available in shops and big stores. These incel disaffected 18 -22 year olds won't be able to waltz into a store down the street and buy a weapon to kill dozens of people in 2 minutes. Will there be a black market? Probably. But that will dwindle down in time.

And you make any buy-back program limited. After a certain time the amount paid for turned-in items will be substantially lower or zero. If nutters hold on to them they won't be worth a dime if later found and confiscated by law enforcement.

The assault weapon ban was pretty effective in the past as far as it went. We just have to start doing some sane regulations with these weapons.

Oh. Also tax the shit out of ammunition.

[Amishman]

41. I'll agree with most of that, though a punitive ammo tax would quickly be overturned

Several courts have already ruled that ammunition is covered under the second amendment. One of the more recent rulings was Guns Save Life v Ali, which 6-0 by a very blue Illinois court. If our own judges agree that ammunition is protected, taxes on them are likely limited to to levels that do not significantly impact the ability to buy it.

(The Bruen decision also covers this, but I'll leave that out as an assault weapons ban wouldn't survive the historical / textual test included in that decision).

Again, my point is NOT 'it won't work, so don't try it' but rather to bring attention to the difficulty and amount of time it will take to clean this up - and that some methods commonly proposed might not work.

[Liberal In Texas]

52. This nonsense interpretation of the 2nd Amendment is another problem.

The courts have been blind to the words "well regulated" so it's probably just time to overturn the whole thing entirely. But that's another problem. The courts need to be reined in on how they've become a legislative arm of the government. We tax the crap out of cigarettes because they're dangerous. It's nonsense that any court can override the taxing power of the legislature.

By that "protected" reasoning, ammo ought to be free. But then the arms industry wouldn't be making a profit. Maybe that's the way. Bullets can no longer be sold for money. But seriously, the legislatures should keep levying a tax on ammo and let the NRA keep taking it to court. It's like what the repubs do...keep repealing the ACA 3 dozen times even though they know it has no chance of becoming law. We should keep taxing guns and ammo and then appeal and appeal.

[Ferrets are Cool]

11. K and R

[LetMyPeopleVote]

15. For this thread

Link to tweet

[IronLionZion]

16. Go ahead. Whip the votes in congress and send the bill to Biden's desk

he'll sign it into law. And then it will be banned for a few minutes until the extreme RW supreme court overrules it anyway.

We need lots more senators and liberal judges to get this done.

[sarisataka]

17. Just ban 'em... Of course!

It's so simple. Why hasn't anyone thought of that before?

*you know what goes here*

[DownriverDem]

18. Biden has appointed second most Fed judges

of a President's second year in office. Please find out how our government works. Too many folks think he can just do what they want. It doesn't work that way.

[Botany]

26. I never thought or meant to say that such a ban would be easy or that President Biden ...

.... could order such a ban but the time has come to ban those damn things.

[bronxiteforever]

22. Kick & recommend. With all my soul I support this.

I don’t want anyone to live like this.

[fescuerescue]

24. Glad that's settled.

[mjvpi]

27. Bingo. It's like alcoholism.

Take every argument that ammosexuals use about guns and stick alcohol in place of guns and you will be ready to stage an intervention.

Weapons of war have no place in a civilized society. Period. Ban them.

[wildman76]

29. I so agree

[bucolic_frolic]

32. You would deprive people of their Rapture technology?

Of their good feelings from offering thoughts and prayers?

Cruel, just plainly cruel to these loving people.

[twodogsbarking]

33. If a video game showing a gunman murdering school children were made

it would likely be banned.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

35. Banned by who? nt

[twodogsbarking]

50. Whom.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

59. My bad,

banned by whom?

[twodogsbarking]

60. People who ban things.

Like abortion.

[sindri]

34. maybe start with new guns and insurance companies

Start with new sales. Work with insurance companies - start with regulating like cars before banning. Huge liability insurance for anyone hurt by the gun. Retire all old guns and ammo. Require gun makers to change new guns and ammunition so new ammo doesn't work with old guns - is this possible? Stop production of all ammo that works with existing assault weapons.People can trade in for new guns and ammo but only with valid registration and insurance. Those collectors keep what they want but will run out of ammo eventually. Problem is that all stakeholders need to be involved with this- manufacturers, law enforcement, law makers, citizens, etc.

[Snackshack]

36. Agreed

This is a case where a few bad apples have ruined it for all.

[Rebl2]

39. Only folks

that need those guns are people fighting a war, not to use on fellow Americans. Blame those that back NRA and that would include putin.

[Kaleva]

42. It would not bother me if you banned them

[Lonestarblue]

43. Good thought, but we already have over 400 million guns in private hands in this country.

If guns were banned entirely, which I certainly support, there are enough guns and ammunition to fuel mass murders for decades to come. That doesn’t mean we can’t do anything, and many blue states have passed stricter regulations, but as long as red state politicians do nothing all people in blue states need to do to get a gun is simply go to another state. We need national regulations that make owning any assault weapon costly and onerous. And we all know the only way to get anywhere close to national regulations is more Democratic Senators and keeping the majority in the House. We have a chance this Fall. I hope voters step up.

[CaptainTruth]

44. Are there enhanced sentences for those convicted of a crime using an assault weapon?

At the very least there should be much harsher sentences for anyone using an assault weapon while committing a crime.

Note I said "at the very least." I know this doesn't solve the problem, it seems like something we (Congress) could accomplish. Maybe it already exits, I don't know.

[iluvtennis]

45. Agree - assault weapons are for the military police SWAT teams, not civilians. n/t

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

47. I agree.

I think they should simply be confiscated, and if found with one after some date, mandatory jail time.

Exactly how many more school children, or people grocery shopping, or attending a parade, need to die for the gun apologists to finally care?

I also believe photographs of what the guns do should be published. The terrible damage done to those who survive also needs to be shown. People have no idea just what those guns and their bullets do to bodies.

[Botany]

49. Senior citizen blacks in Buffalo, NY, mostly Hispanic school kids and teachers in TX, and now an ..

.... upper middle class (Jewish) in suburban Chicago. In all cases it was an AR 15.

[yaesu]

48. this instead of that sugar coated crap bill they passed which does nothing to stop mass murders. nt

[dchill]

51. How about a mental health background check for...

... people who want to run for office?

[The Grand Illuminist]

54. This is how far it is gone.

We are probably going to need them to ban them.

[48656c6c6f20]

57. Why ban them?

We should force congress to provide every citizen one, and every child born with one. Freedom-15's for everyone! Let's arm the whole fucking country. It will sort itself out. If you want to deify guns in GunMurka, give me my godamn God ordained government issue Freedom-15!

[Model35mech]

61. True, every legitimate use can probably be done with bolt action rifles.

Target shooting and hunting don't require rapid rates of fire and high capacity magazines

I think the big problem is sweeping up the assault weapons already in private hands. It's gonna be expensive and there will be compliance problems.

But compare that to the dead people... and then convince me it's better to have dead people.

CBSnews says guns were purchased in 'Chicagoland', a general description of metropolitan NE Illinois.

[bluestarone]

62. Maybe just ban tha ammo?

Would that be possible? Sue the companies MAKING the ammo!

[Lurker Deluxe]

64. Yea

The South American cartels are already so inept that they would never take advantage of this.

How long do you think it would take them to include ammo along with the drugs and women being trafficked?

Unless you are suggesting we militarize the border to stop it ...

[WarGamer]

63. So your opinion is... an Assault Weapon Ban would be ok'd by SCOTUS?

Even after hints in Heller seemed to protect them?

[Violet_Crumble]

66. What would your solution be?

I ask as an Australian who saw the quick and bipartisan response from Commonwealth, State and Territory governments within weeks after Port Arthur. There were some constitutional challenges to the NFA, but the courts dismissed every one of them. The courts in the US are corrupt, so I know the same outcome won't be achievable there. Personally I think the entire US political system is way overdue for an overhaul. The Supreme Court needs to be reconstructed totally and the life terms done away with, there needs to be mandatory voting in the US to do away with single issue obsessives getting too much control, get rid of Primaries where sane opposition like Liz Cheney don't have a chance because a few thousand lunatics control all of it, set up a totally independent agency to oversee elections like our Australian Electoral Commission. And educate Americans that they don't need to own or use assault weapons. There's absolutely no reason for the vast majority of gun owners to possess them...

[Botany]

70. Thank you for this well thought out and written post.

I can't believe the attacks I have gotten in this thread ... I never said I had all the answers
but to me at least it seems clear we need to ban those weapons of war. An AR 15 or AK 47
round is made to tumble after it hits a body which causes massive trauma and blood loss
aka death. V.P. K Harris gets "it" we need to ban those damn things.

[uponit7771]

67. K&R, No civilian should own a pistol grip rifle they were designed for war ... PERIOD