Can You Guess Which Lobby Is The Most Powerful In Washington D.C. ?

[Billysundae]

Run time: 04:34 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6q6ptnATYs4   Posted on YouTube: January 16, 2008 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: January 16, 2008 By DU Member: Billysundae Views on DU: 2600

 
Edwards, Obama, and Hillary
Sitting In A Tree....

[virginia mountainman]

1. A missed opportunity....

To come out, in FAVOR of gun owners rights, they all three, spit up Sara Brady's lies, about "assault weapons"

They don't even know what an "assault weapon" is.... They don't even realize the ban did NOTHING, and was so unpopular that it got us thrown out of the congress.

[rAVES]

2. AIPAC?

[stlsaxman]

3. "Look- illegal guns don't kill people... ill eagles do!" n/t

[Twist_U_Up]

4. CFR ? They are all members.

as a matter of fact every one on either side is CFR except Kucinich , Paul and Gravel.
Huh Go Figure

[Cant trust em]

5. All good answers to win a national election

You could take aspects from all three answers to have a perfect answer.

1. NRA is making it difficult for cops to trace illegal weapons
2. Protect the second amendment for sportsmen
3. No one needs an AK-47 to hunt

[benEzra]

7. You know possession of an actual AK-47 is already a 10-year Federal felony, yes?

Unless you possess it in the course of police/military duty, possession of an actual AK-47 or any other automatic weapon without explicit Federal authorization (BATFE Form 4) is a felony violation of the Title 2/Class III provisions of the National Firearms Act of 1934, the same law that restricts howitzers, grenades, silencers, and 500-lb bombs.

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/usr/wbardwel/public/nfalist/nfa_faq.txt

Don't forget the lessons of 1994...

[Cant trust em]

8. It's called hyperbole, chief

He's just using it to appeal to common sense gun laws that everyone can relate to.

[benEzra]

9. I would rather emulate 2006 than 1994.

Rifle bans weren't, and aren't, common-sense gun laws.

Dean's 50-state strategy defused the issue in 2006, and anti-AWB Dems turned the Senate blue. Let the "Dems'll-take-yer-guns" meme stay dead, please.

[Cant trust em]

11. Banning assault rifles is totally common sense.

It may be a political loser, but that is another story.

I do agree with you on the "Dems'll take your guns" idea. This issue isn't good for us if it's on the table.

[SecularNATION]

12. On the Contrary....

How is banning assault rifles "totally common sense"? Do you even know what a so-called "assault rifle" is?

[Cant trust em]

13. from Wikipeida

Assault rifles are categorized between light machine guns, intended more for sustained automatic fire in a support role, and submachine guns, which fire a handgun cartridge rather than a rifle cartridge. Assault rifles are the standard small arms in most modern armies, having largely replaced or supplemented larger, more powerful battle rifles, such as the World War II-era M1 Garand and Tokarev SVT. Examples of assault rifles include the AK-47 and the M16 rifle.

[SecularNATION]

14. Definition of "Assault Rifle"

Glad you looked it up. The assault weapons ban did not ban the weapons you describe. Why? Because, they were ALREADY BANNNED! Full-auto weapons, since 1934, can only be possessed by people who are willing to pay a $200 tax, submit to a criminal and background check, and be fingerprinted and registered. Do you know how many of those registered weapons have been used in a crime since 1934? I believe the number is exactly ONE. Yes, ONE.

Firearms commonly referred to, by the public, as "assault rifles" are SEMI-automatic versions of military type rifles. Not real AK-47s or M-16s. The assault weapons ban was a ban on these civilian semi-automatic rifles. Do you favor banning all semi-automatic rifles, or just some of them? If so, why? If not, why not?

Many liberals and Democrats who spew anti-gun bile have no idea what they are trying to get banned. They are ignorant loudmouths who have caused the Democratic Party to lose election after election after election.

[Cant trust em]

17. Here are some other things from the assault weapons ban

Large capacity ammunition magazines
Bayonet mount
Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
Grenade launcher

Sounds like more good things to not have lying around. I love getting into debates on DU, but I really can't muster up the desire for this one. This isn't a big issue for me which is why my original post was about not making this part of the platform. My main concern is not allowing obviously ridiculously dangerous weapons to be easily owned. I'm sure that you don't want that either. Who needs a grenade launcher? Is there seriously a sportsman who is interesting in launching grenades at a deer?

Let me also say that if anti-gun activists get this much push back on DEMOCRATIC Underground then this is obviously a loser in the general election.

[benEzra]

18. Grenade launchers were a red herring, as M203-style grenade launchers are already restricted

under the National Firearms Act, as are grenades (10-year felony to possess either without a Form 4). Civilian collectors can get 37mm safety flare guns dressed up to look like M203's, but they're fake. There are antique rifles with smooth muzzles designed for launching (NFA restricted) finned grenades using a blank cartridge, but no modern rifles that I know of. I guess you could launch potatoes with one.

The Feinstein law exempted most rifle magazines, but even so, the cutoff for what it defined as "large" was Civil War era--only 10 rounds (15-round lever actions hit the market in the early 1860's). If they set the cutoff at 30 rounds, it would have been less laughable. Bayonet lugs are moot, as I've never heard of a single murder committed with a rifle-mounted bayonet (the hole in the end of the barrel is the dangerous part); collectors care, I don't particularly, but banning them makes little sense to me. Flash suppressors redirect the muzzle flame downrange instead of having it flare in your face with every shot (annoying on a target gun, more than annoying on a defensive carbine); I've shot a 16" barreled .223 without a flash suppressor, and it was unpleasant. I don't have a flash suppressor on my SAR-1 (7.62x39mm), but I'd want one on a .223.

There is a deep divide at the national level over the gun issue, with a lot of people supporting Howard Dean's leave-it-to-the-states approach that worked well in 2006, but there are elements within the DLC that are still pushing hard for a new AWB along the lines of H.R.1022, and I think they have no idea just how sweeping such a law would be. The 1994 Feinstein law was annoying, but it didn't really do much except raise prices on replacement magazines for 9mm and .40 caliber pistols, and hardly touched rifles at all. H.R.1022 (current AWB before Congress) would be a lot worse, banning the most popular rifles in America outright, among other things, and passing that would be very, very bad for the party at large, IMO.

FWIW, I wrote the following after the '04 loss; I think it was largely vindicated by Dean's approach to '06, and the results thereof. You may not agree with everything in it, but it at least may help non-gunnies understand the issue a bit more, and where gun owners are coming from.

Dems and the Gun Issue - Now What? (2004)

[Cant trust em]

19. I'm not an anti-gun activist, just a common sense activist

I understand that there are a lot of people (you, most of my family) who are responsible gun owners that are interested in hunting and protecting their families. I know that we can all come to a consensus as to what weapons are necessary for those purposes and don't go over that for no apparent reason. Like I've said before, I'm pretty much agnostic on this issue.

[benEzra]

20. That consensus has stood for 73 years.

Automatic weapons, sound-suppressed weapons, grenades and launchers, missiles, disguised guns, etc. were all placed under tight Federal (NFA Title 2) controls 73 years ago. At the same time, non-automatic, non-sound-suppressed guns under .51 caliber that meet certain minimum lengths were deemed civilian guns under NFA Title 1. The recent "assault weapon" meme is an attempt to shatter that consensus and move the most popular Title 1 civilian guns into a banned status.

BTW, only 1 in 5 gun owners in the U.S. is a hunter (like most gunnies, my wife and I are both nonhunters). Recreational and competitive target shooting is the #1 reason people own guns in the United States, followed by defensive purposes at #2 and hunting a distant third.

I've mentioned before that considerably more Americans own "assault weapons," taking H.R.1022 as the operative definition, than hunt. My wife and I would certainly like to keep ours, and to continue to be able to purchase guns with decent ergonomics and capacities in the future.

[Cant trust em]

21. I could have substituted hunter with sportsman in my post

Thought I'm not a gun owner I suspect that we're pretty much on the same page on this issue. Like I've said in previous posts, I just want to use common sense and I don't want to punish people for being law abiding.

[benEzra]

16. Those are restricted NFA Title 2 weapons under Federal law,

and unauthorized possession outside of police/military duty is a 10-year Federal felony.

The "assault weapon" issue is about non-automatic civilian guns, not military automatic weapons.

[benEzra]

15. Actual "assault rifles" are already banned. "Assault weapons," on the other hand,

include the most popular civilian target rifles and defensive carbines in America, and considerably more people own them than hunt. The "assault weapon" issue created the Dems'll-take-yer-guns meme, which is why it was so necessary to drop it in 2006.

It should stay dropped, IMO; rifles are not a crime problem in the United States, statistically speaking, and never have been.

BTW, this is an "assault weapon" according to H.R.1022:



That's a Ruger Mini-14 Ranch Rifle, a small-caliber farm/utility rifle banned by name by H.R.1022.

[Plucketeer]

6. Of course guns aren't the problem!

IF they could all be rounded up and melted down, we'd simply see a switch to Drive-By Bow & Arrow attacks and car-jackings an' holdups at knife-point! Yeah, tools of death are safe and sane. :puke:

[SecularNATION]

10. More stupidity from the Democrats...

Gun control has been the biggest losing issue for the Democratic party, for years. There are millions of people who would vote Democrat, but for that one issue. And, if it weren't for gun control, George W. Bush would never have gained the White House. If Dems were smart, they'd say, "NO, we don't need any new laws, we just need to enforce the ones we already have. And no, the assault weapons ban didn't and won't solve the problem and shouldn't be reinstated."