"end of awb makes it likely that military rifles will once again be legal

[taxidriver]

and widespread"

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/nation/2672121

[FeebMaster]

1. What is it with AWB supporters and the SKS?

It's not even an assault weapon under any of the expanded bans that have been suggested unless it has a detachable magazine, which most don't. As for constantly calling it an assault rifle. Give me a break. Only in the fevered dreams of gun grabbers where blood is constantly flowing in the streets or will be any day now.

Is anyone even manufacturing them anymore? It's probably been decades since someone built a new SKS.

Of course, if you can get the SKS banned at some point it's certainly no stretch to ban Garands or pretty much any semi-auto hunting rifle after that. After all, they fire far more powerful ammunition than that puny old SKS.

[taxidriver]

2. eh, sks's are cheap, ammo is plentiful, and you can customize them.

very good plinkers.

[FeebMaster]

3. Gun grabbers certainly seem to hate cheap guns.

Really, though, if you can call the SKS an assault rifle and get it banned, you can get pretty much any semi-auto banned, which is probably the idea. Seems a little too sensible for the gun grabbing crowd. Maybe they finally hired someone with a clue about guns and gun laws.

[Jack_DeLeon]

4. I guess they dont like poor people having guns...

[CO Liberal]

8. 1 - We're Not "Gun-Grabbers"....

2 - The only thing we "hate" is assholes who use a gun - any kind of gun - to injure or kill others.

[Jack_DeLeon]

10. Please explain?

#2?

Do you not hate gun owners who arent assholes who use a gun to injure or kill others?

Or do you consider all gun owners assholes?

How about assholes that kill or injure others who are committing a crime against them?

How about police who are assholes who use a gun to injure or kill others?

[CO Liberal]

13. As Far as I'm Concerned

Other than police or military personnel performing their assigned duty or someone defending themselves against being shot by someone else, anyone who uses a gun to kill or injure another peoson is an asshole.

And no - I do not consider ALL gun owners assholes. Only those who act like assholes.

[Columbia]

40. So would you consider a woman defending herself from forcible rape

By shooting her attacker, an asshole?

[FeebMaster]

24. CO, clearly I didn't call you a gun grabber.

I simply said that gun grabbers seem to hate cheap guns. Why would you think I was singling you out when I referred to gun grabbers? Do you hate cheap guns?

[Zister]

27. The antis dont have any idea

As usual, the people who gave birth to things as ineffective as the AWB are now picking on the ole SKS. FeedMaster is very correct, the SKS doesnt even come close to meeting anyones criteria of being a assault rifle. Some people in the news have even said that it is a copy of the AK47. They have no idea, they just want to alarm the people who will believe anything they read. The SKS was designed and put into action a decade before the AK was even on the drawing board. They are nothing alike other than having a similar gas piston and firing the same cal round. People describe the SKS as firing some super bullet. When in reality, it only fires a very conservative round by rifles standards.

[OpSomBlood]

5. No military in the world uses weapons covered by the AWB.

So calling them "military-style" is fallacious.

[taxidriver]

7. i was under the impression it covered things like the AUG and the Ar15

and the Ak 47. all of which are military style weapons.

[FrontPorchPhilosophr]

9. And the Key word in your statement is"Style".....

All semiautomatic rifles function in the same manner.

For a long while pre 9/11, the bozo's in charge of the Border Patrol would not PERMIT their personnel to have "assault weapons" much less regular military ordnance.

The troops in the field were equipped with Remington 740's with 10 round magazines (that being the largest manufactured commercially for that rifle).

The Remington 740 functions EXACTLY the same manner as the AR-15, the semiautomatic AK, and numerous other banned/restricted "assault weapons" - which were banned PURELY on the basis of STYLE and APPEARANCE, i.e. they LOOKED "evil" to some folks....

Using APPEARANCE to implement restrictions, allowed "some folks (Teddy Kennedy, Di Fi, Barbara Boxer, El Shumer, we all know who they are )"to GET A FOOT IN THE DOOR of outright BANNING....

And when the manufacturers said, "OK" and changed the appearance slightly, in FULL COMPLIANCE with the LAW, the grabbers absolutely HOWLED!

NOT FAIR!!!!!

You're CHEATING!!!!!

Cheating? By OBEYING the law?!?

In REALITY, for all PRACTICAL purposes, the availability of FUNCTIONALLY identical "assault weapons" has remained UNCHANGED since the ban was implented.....

Although I understand the occurrence of:
"drive by bayonettings" (0 pre-ban and 0 post-ban) and
"drive by rifle grenade" launchings (ditto)

PROVES the value of the AWB to "some folks"

:o

[John BigBootay]

16. Good assesmnet, FPP, and welcome... n/t

[enfield collector]

14. actually no, the semi-auto AUG and AK47 were banned by shrub Sr

under the 1989 import ban which has no expiration date. the full auto version of the AUG and AK47 were banned by reagan, again no expiration date on that ban either. you see the repugs are much better at gun control than we are, yet we get labelled as the "gun grabbers" by them.

[greendeerslayer]

17. actually no...

The full auto AUG and AK were and are covered by the Class 3 licensing requirments, you and I can own them for an extra $200 dollar tax stamp.
The importation of these rifles was banned but the AK at least is now manufactured by any number of domestic companies and is widely available.

[enfield collector]

20. true, however since no new machine guns

have been registered since 1986 supply and demand puts legal guns out of reach for those of us who must work for a living, e.g. an AUG is $12K and an AK47 is $8-10K. so dickhead cheney can afford 30 of them and I have none. criminals however feel no such compunction to obey the law so they can get them for what they are really worth e.g. a couple of hundred bucks.

[library_max]

71. Whoops! Then the Second Amendment doesn't apply to them

according to US v Miller.

[MrBenchley]

6. Yup...

Which is why 70% of voters, pretty much every liberal organization, pretty much every liberal writer or pundit, the Democratic presidential ticket and most elected Democrats support this sensible ban.

On the flip side, the Aryan Nation is against the AWB. So is the Second Amendment Causus...of course, they're the scum of the earth.

[Jack_DeLeon]

11. which is really sad because...

Which is why 70% of voters, pretty much every liberal organization, pretty much every liberal writer or pundit, the Democratic presidential ticket and most elected Democrats support this sensible ban.

It means that most of those people probably think it bans "machine guns."

[MrBenchley]

12. Not at all...

but go ahead and pretend that if it comforts you.

[FrontPorchPhilosophr]

15. This IS an area of public interference where the Republicans...

are coolly cynical.....

Standing UP for gun rights WHEN it suits their political ambitions, and pandering to the "Eww, guns, icky" fear factor of the MMM/soccer mommy vote when THAT suits them.....

After all, WHERE is a 2nd Amendment RKBA advocate gonna GO?....

The Democratic MACHINE cynically talks about how to convince the RKBA voter that they are NOT out to grab out guns, while Di Fi, Charles Shumer, et al OPENLY continue to pursue their original GRABBER agenda....

And Kerry pretends it's all about "hunting".... secure in the knowledge that for many "blue collar" registered Democrats, it IS.....

:puke:

[MrBenchley]

18. Be of good cheer....

Roy "10 Commandments" Moore is your boy...he's 100% gun rights!!!

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36899

Of course he's crazy as a shithouse rat...but with WorldNutDaily he's found his true audience.

[name not needed]

19. Oh, how nice of you

Determining other people's beliefs over one issue. How if you own a gun or side with gun owners you are a racist piece of shit. Care to explain that one? I'd love to hear you explain something rather than bitch and moan at someone that doesn't agree with you.

[MrBenchley]

22. Gee, wasn't the poster I replied to crying about that issue?

"I'd love to hear you explain something"
Sure...just about every racist piece of shit that can be found today spouts this "gun rights" crap. Look at the idiot members of the Second Amendment Caucus...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=118&topic_id=54661

Pick a racist or bigot: Fred Phelps? Jerry Falwell? Trent Lott? David Duke? All pro-gun.

[greendeerslayer]

21. bogus

You keep using this 70 percent claim to bolster your arguement. It is bogus. 70 percent of the nation may support the ban(if the poll you repeat ad nauseum is correct, which I doubt) but that is meaningless. I can guarantee you that 70 percent of the states Kerry needs to win do not support the ban. AR, NC, PA, OH, AZ, etc., 70 percent of the people in these states do not support the ban.
Anyway we live in a democratic republic. A simple majority is not enough to gut the Constitution. In 1955 probably 70 percent of Americans (at least in some states) supported segregation. By your reasoning this should have remained the law of the land.
On 9-12 70 percent of the populace might have supported nuking Kabul, does that make it correct?

[MrBenchley]

23. Nope...not bogus at all....

"A simple majority is not enough to gut the Constitution."
And the AWB is perfectly Constitutional. Proven so in court many times.

"In 1955 probably 70 percent of Americans (at least in some states) supported segregation."
And now the last gasp of that crowd is spouting gun rights and trying to pretend they're no longer bigoted...but Trent Lott sure didn't fool very many people.

[OpSomBlood]

25. Your RKBA=racism routine is stale and contains no merit whatsoever.

So by all means, continue to use it. It suits your "arguments" perfectly.

[MrBenchley]

26. Nope, it's right on the money...

But hey, as long as you guys keep pretending otherwise, i'm happy to keep mentioning it...because it's true.

[OpSomBlood]

28. So you're saying that people who believe in RKBA are racist?

Please clarify your position.

[MrBenchley]

32. Every racist around peddles this "gun rights" crap

and isn't fooling much of anyone...except these people who seem mysteriously unable to read that sentence right side forward...

[OpSomBlood]

36. And what conclusion do you draw from that?

You keep bringing it up as though it is pertinent to our discussions on gun control laws. If indeed "every racist is pro-gun," how on earth does that corellate with whether or not gun ownership should be illegal?

Are you in favor of gun bans as a form of pre-emptive racism control? Please elaborate so that we can all be enlightened, because your position is awfully confusing.

On the surface, it appears that there is no logical connection whatsoever between machined pieces of metal and ignorant discriminatory antisocial behavior patterns. If there is such a connection, we'd love to hear all about it.

[MrBenchley]

38. Gee, op....the conclusion is pretty evident to me...

which is why our RKBA crowd keeps trying to spin it away....

"your position is awfully confusing."
Not to people who aren't desperately trying to twist it into something it's not, op....

"it appears that there is no logical connection whatsoever between machined pieces of metal and ignorant discriminatory antisocial behavior patterns"
Yeah, but between the politicans and writers peddling lies about some supposed right to own those "machined pieces of metal" and thsoe pimping for "ignorant discriminatory antisocial behavior patterns" there's plenty of correlation...

Just as there's a correlation between those wishing FOR gun control and those fighting for other liberal ideals...which is why those pushing the bogus "gun rights" argument are often given to dirty and dishonest tactics...such as lying about what the Courts have said, lying about what the Second Amendment means, slandering liberal Democrats, creating phony "liberal" pro-gun groups, etc., etc...

[OpSomBlood]

39. What about those against gun control who are fighting for liberal ideals?

Do we just not count?

That's an awfully great way to lose elections.

[MrBenchley]

43. Yeah, look at all the ones here

who bash Democrats and post right wing crap....

[OpSomBlood]

47. We only bash the Democrats who deserve it.

Nobody's above being called out for their errors, regardless of their party affiliation.

[MrBenchley]

51. Hahahahahahahaha....

That IS funny...

[OpSomBlood]

59. I'm glad you're able to amuse yourself.

Really, I'm sure it comes in handy.

[MrBenchley]

60. It's hard to imagine much more ludicrous stuff

than many of the claims of our "pro gun democrats"...

[OpSomBlood]

61. Fine.

n/t

[taxidriver]

29. do you understand the concept of a "big tent" website, benchley?

democrats are allowed to, (and i would encourage them to) own guns.

mr benchley, a question. how would you like to live in a country where the only people that owned guns were cops, criminals, and freepers?

[MrBenchley]

33. Too funny; evidently the "big tent" is not allowed

to include the views of 70%-plus of the country, the Democratic slate, most elected Democrats, most liberal or progressive organizations, and most liberal pundits and writers. But the opinions of David Duke and Larry Pratt are welcome.

[taxidriver]

37. How would you like to live in a country where only cops, criminals, and

freeprs have guns?

[MrBenchley]

44. Gee, far as that goes...

ask me where I live now.

[library_max]

74. Why the hell would it be legal for freepers to have guns

and not legal for non-freepers? Card-stack much?

[greendeerslayer]

30. It is silly....

I guess the black guys I see at the gun range are self-loathing.

[taxidriver]

31. ouch. score one for deerslayer.

[MrBenchley]

34. I can't imagine anything more silly...

then the sort of things our "enthusiasts" see.....

[greendeerslayer]

41. So you think black folks exercing their 2nd amendment rights is silly...

Yes, black folks own guns, they shoot them, do you think they should stop?

[MrBenchley]

45. I think there's nothing quite as silly

as the claims of the trigger happy around here...

As it happens, black people support gun control in even greater numbers than white folks...

[Jack_DeLeon]

48. How do you know, did you ask them all?

Next thing you are going to say is that Hispanics are anti-gun too, which is funny considering that most of my friends and family have atleast one gun in thier homes.

You cant make stereotypical blanket statements like that.

[MrBenchley]

52. It's called polling....

and being in touch with the community...which is why pretty much every civil rights group around ended up on the NRA's idiotic enemies list...

[MrBenchley]

35. By the way...

speaking of mind-bendingly silly....this "In 1955 probably 70 percent of Americans (at least in some states) supported segregation" analogy to the AWB is about as silly as it gets...not to mention offensive.

<sarcasm>Yes, denying Americans their constitutional rights is JUST LIKE keeping assault weapons from being made and sold. Oh, those poor little unborn and unsold guns! The injustice of "bigots" like Dianne Feinstein, the New England Journal of Medicine, and MrBenchley keeping these deserving and honest guns from happily spitting lead and getting snuggled by nutcases and criminals....How they must suffer, there in unsold gun limbo...

</sarcasm>

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MrBenchley]

46. Wow, what a pantload....

"Both are forms of social control."
Not even close to true.

"70 percent of Americans (according to you) want the AWB"
Not just according to me...

"why should the Civil Rights legislation of the 50s and 60s have been passed"
Because, believe it or not, waving a popgun is not a civil right....although voting, education, employment and housing all are.

[Jack_DeLeon]

49. Bullshit...

Not even close to true.

You are so wrong. The gun control we have is just as much about social control as segregation.

Infact we still have segregation, its just not the same kind as we used to have. Now at days its more about money than it is about race, however money and race still tend to go hand in hand.

Those that can afford it (mostly WASPS) move to thier gated communities or suburbs with thier private security or atleast well funded police.

While those that cant (usually minorities) get to stay in the inner cities with crumbling infrastructure and overworked and underfunded police.

Usually white communities either have looser gun laws, and they can afford to go to thier ranch or gun club to go shoot.

While those who arent so well off are usually prohibited by law from owning firearms. So even despite the fact that thier underfunded police cant protect them, they are prohibited from protecting themselves.

How many blacks live in Washington D.C.? All of them are prohibited from using thier constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

How many whites live in Virginia, they get to keep and bear thier guns.

This is definately a race issue.

Give back the right to keep and bear arms to the minorities who are forced to do without.

[MrBenchley]

58. Too TOO funny...

And that explains why every racist around is spouting "gun rights"....and every civil rights group around is on the NRA's enemies list....

"This is definately a race issue."
Sure is. just ask Ted Nugent...or Larry Pratt...or David Duke....or Trent Lott...or Jeff Cooper...or Marilyn Musgrave...or THIS "gun rights" champion...

"A House debate over gun rights legislation erupted into a racially charged dispute yesterday when a Republican lawmaker from Wyoming seemed to equate African Americans with drug addicts or people undergoing drug treatment.
Rep. Barbara Cubin's remark -- which triggered a vote on whether to strike it from the congressional record -- nearly overshadowed the House's approval of a measure to protect gun manufacturers and dealers from lawsuits resulting from the criminal use of firearms."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A1249-2003Apr9¬Found=true

[Retired AF Dem]

50. I don't recall education, employment, housing

and let's add medical as being constitutional rights. Right or wrong they are not there.

[MrBenchley]

53. Well, that sums up our "pro gun democrats"

Actual civil rights are not civil rights...but waving a popgun around IS...

[Retired AF Dem]

54. No, that sums up people who don't know what they are talking about

[MrBenchley]

56. Another good way to describe our "pro gun democrats"

"people who don't know what they are talking about"--That's why there's this silly pretense that waving a gun around is a civil right...

[Retired AF Dem]

55. I will admit I'm wrong

if you can find for me anywhere in the U.S. Constitution that we have a right to government sponsored housing, medical care, education. Our country is based on getting off our asses and working and doing things for ourselves. I will be the first to admit that it is a hard and cruel system but that is the way it is.

[MrBenchley]

57. Admit or don't admit whatever you like...

"1963:
On April 13, the Birmingham campaign is launched. This would prove to be the turning point in the war to end desegregation in the South.
During the eleven days he spent in jail, MLK writes his famous Letter from Birmingham Jail
On May 10, the Birmingham agreement is announced. The stores, restaurants, and schools will be desegregated, hiring of blacks implemented, and charges dropped.
On June 23, MLK leads 125,000 people on a Freedom Walk in Detroit.
1968:
King announces that the Poor People's Campaign will culminate in a March on Washington demanding a $12 billion Economic Bill of Rights guaranteeing employment to the able-bodied, incomes to those unable to work, and an end to housing discrimination. "

http://www.lib.lsu.edu/hum/mlk/srs216.html

[Retired AF Dem]

62. and this proves what?

I believe that everybody should have an equal chance for a job, if it turns out that person is lazy and would rather be on the computer all day than work then he has the right to be out of a job. The government still does not guarantee you will have a place to live it says people of all races have a right to live where they want.

[MrBenchley]

63. "if it turns out that person is lazy"

Yeah, the rhetoric never changes...

"He was, simply, too lazy or too cynical to attempt to change his lowly position."

http://www.ferris.edu/news/jimcrow/coon/

"I don't like ANYONE that doesn't work for theirselves or their family. If you stand in a line at the end of every week with your hand stretched out waiting for a welfare check then I don't like you....Quit being lazy and get a job. We make it way too easy to be black"

http://amazingforums.com/forum/ARYANMIL/50.html

[Retired AF Dem]

64. Hmmmmmm

I don't recall saying anything like that. White or black, male or female, if a person does not do their job then they can be out with their hand out.

[MrBenchley]

65. The rhetoric never changes...

But the sheet it hides under does...

"Our country is based on getting off our asses and working and doing things for ourselves."

"if it turns out that person is lazy"

Little Sir Echo, how do you do?

"Clinton liberals think that the real problem is white racism. Their idea of a dialogue is that blacks should express displeasure at a status quo that denies them equality, while whites who are in denial about this reality should come to their senses and express contrition. That is why Clinton has stacked his race commission with racial leftists who have excluded such opponents of affirmative action as Ward Connerly.
These are the realities that liberals cannot face: Blacks are under represented at elite universities because their test scores are abysmal. Blacks are incarcerated in prisons in staggering numbers because they commit crimes in staggering disproportion to their representation in the population. Those blacks who are chronically unemployed are unemployed not because there are no jobs nor because they are barred from jobs by their skin color but because they are unemployable: They do not seek work as avidly as other groups do; they make their neighborhoods too dangerous for businesses to establish operations; and they do not acquire educational skills or work habits necessary for employment."

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=1091

Needless to day, Horowitz is a repellant fuckwit...and "gun rights" all the way.

[Retired AF Dem]

66. Recent history has proven your

rhetoric does not work. I believe this started out about civil rights.

What I have not seen in the Constitution
1. The right of people to have free housing shall not be infringed.
2. The right of the people to have jobs shall not be infringed.
3. The right of the people to have free medical care shall not be infringed.

What I have seen is

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

[MrBenchley]

67. Recent history? That IS rich...

Say, who started railing about "lazy people" in a discussion of civil rights, I wonder?

Here's recent history:

"A House debate over gun rights legislation erupted into a racially charged dispute yesterday when a Republican lawmaker from Wyoming seemed to equate African Americans with drug addicts or people undergoing drug treatment.
Rep. Barbara Cubin's remark -- which triggered a vote on whether to strike it from the congressional record -- nearly overshadowed the House's approval of a measure to protect gun manufacturers and dealers from lawsuits resulting from the criminal use of firearms."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A1249-2003Apr9¬Found=true

Or you could look at the humholes in the GOP's Second Amendment Caucus...the racism isn't hidden very well there...

[Retired AF Dem]

68. Since you are always on the high moral ground

you should sell your nice house in that semi-rural area you live in, take the proceeds, give it to charity and move back to the inner city where you can help people that are less well off than you. Of course you won't do that because you have worked to hard to get to where you are. That is what America is supposed to be about, work hard and move up. And I want everyone to have that chance. So do me a favor and save me your bullshit.

[Name removed]

69. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[FeebMaster]

70. I keep telling you

"pro-gun Democrats" makes no sense. You should use pro-gun "Democrats."

[library_max]

72. And again, the usual courageous refusal to quote the entire Amendment.

Why am I not surprised?

[library_max]

73. Of course, there is a difference between actual poll results

and number you're just making up.