The Back Alley Archives

Of course its being phrased as a way to 'help our poor mexican neighbors who can't control their own population.'.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Story?id=6960824&page=1

I don't know why Senate Republicans rolled over on Holder's nomination. Everyone saw this coming.

Hopefully, however, there will be enough blue dog Democrats in the House to stop it this time.

Tip, from what I understand, Mexico may be on the verge of some sort of civil war between the drug traffickers and the gov. While I'm not sure how much banning assault weapons will help, I do believe we need to monitor the situation to the south.

Personally, I would LOVE to own a machine gun but I can't afford one. I am not sure assault weapons are necessary for personal/home defense although I believe that someone should be able to own one if they want. In fact, I think anyone should be able to do anything they want but must have the personal responsibility that goes with those freedoms. Some time ago people lost that idea of being responsible for their actions and thus we are continuing to lose freedoms because of it.

Here's a good page about the 1994 ban:

http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcassaul.html


These aren't machine guns.  They're typically semi-automatic (one pull of the trigger discharges one bullet) guns with "scary" cosmetic features like folding stocks, mounts for a grenade launcher and pistol grips.  To be fair, it's reasonable not to have folks running around with grenade launchers, but as far as I know it's already illegal to possess grenades without some kind of explosives license so what good does banning such a mount do? 

"Assault weapons," as defined under the 1994 law, are involved in an extremely small number of crimes (about 0.2% of violent crimes and 1% of gun crimes).  They're not exactly the preferred choice of drug dealers and gang members because they're not concealable.

If you truly want a machine gun, you can still have one.  You'll have to pony up some cash due to their scarcity.  The manufacture and import of machine guns was banned in 1986, but they're still legal to own and transfer as long as you pay a federal tax on them (I think it's around $200) and have the proper paperwork.

So why do politicians want to ban assault weapons?  Because they want to appear to do "something" about gun crime and doing "something" about a gun that sounds scary is even better.  Who do you think first started calling them "assault weapons?"  Not gun enthusiasts.

Furthermore, banning a single class of weapons like "assault weapons" is a good first step to banning other kinds of weapons.  Hell, even the Washington Post recognized that back when the first ban went through: 

"No one should have any illusions about what was accomplished (by the ban). Assault weapons play a part in only a small percentage of crime. The provision is mainly symbolic; its virtue will be if it turns out to be, as hoped, a stepping stone to broader gun control."

Interesting. There's going to be a new bipartisan congressional task force on gun rights.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20090225_11_0_WASHIN825829&allcom=1