The Second amendment 2013 - Page 18

Thanks, Zdog, and your always condenscending attitude is duly noted as well.

and you act like you don't have one :)

Don't like copy and pastes, then it is simple don't read them. By saying that everytime makes it seem like it really bothers you, sad.

Oh and zdog sometimes you just have to start someplace and do something, instead of sitting around saying nothing will work. You really don't know what will work until it is tried. Now do you?

the things you pick out of posts to complain about are funny. 

What's sad is there were questions posed, first this is a democratic republic, not a democracy, so majority doesn't rule, though so many believe it to be true.  It was said, and rather than educating yourself, you run and copy past a  bunch of "polls" showing the "majority" of people agree with you.

There was a question if they thought a ban from a 30 capacity mag to a 10 would stop a school shooting?

I asked to define an assult weapon, thus far nobody has given a decent description and past history has shown an "assault weapons" ban had no effect on gun violence or crime in general.

I brought up the fact that background checks make you feel good, I don't think they'll have much effect on anything overall.

I don't mind copy and pastes, I do it as well, but if all you can do is copy and past and provide no thought of your own, why are you in this conversation?

oh, ok

did the assault weapon ban work last time?

Can you point me to the data that shows decreased gun violence, decreased shootings, decreased crime, all that stuff?  Thanks in advance

"past history has shown an "assault weapons" ban had no effect on gun violence or crime in general."

What does past history show on mass murder and can you provide some proof of this or are you just pulling stuff out of the air?

Can you provide data for your claims?

I certainly didn't pull out of the air, I never even said, nor typed it.  I have no idea what effect it had on "mass murders"  what is a mass murder?  5 dead?  10? 2?  do they count if you knew them before hand, say a mother goes crazy and kills her 4 kids, husband and then herself, is that a "mass murder" or a domestic murder?  does it matter?

There's plenty out there to show the assault weapons ban had no effect on gun violence or crime, which is what I said.  You said we needed to try something rather than do nothing.  because we really won't know till it's done.  Well it has been done and almost every single review since then has said, it has shown little to no effect and any gains were to small to be measured reliably.  The best Diane Feinstein could come up with as showing it "worked" was it was driving up prices :)  

The assault weapon ban may have been more effective had the definition of an assault weapon been  more complete and had the manufacturers not figured out ways to modify their products so they were exempt  and then sellling the parts to return them to their original status. 

Mass killers target Americans once every two weeks on average, in attacks that range from robberies to horrific public shooting sprees like the massacre of 27 people in Newtown, Conn., a USA TODAY examination found.

Using news accounts and FBI records from 2006 through 2010, the most recent years for which complete records were available, USA TODAY identified 156 murders that met the FBI definitions of mass killings, where four or more people were killed.

All told, the attacks killed 774 people, including at least 161 young children.

The review offers perhaps the most current, complete picture yet of a crime that is both frighteningly common and not widely understood.

Feinstein, who authored the 1994 ban, argued that this time would be different because the bill cuts out loopholes and eliminates workarounds. Unlike the 1994 ban, there is no sunset date. In 1994, semiautomatic guns had to have two red-flag features, such as pistol grips or threaded barrels, to be banned; this bill requires only one, in hopes that it would be harder to modify guns to avoid regulation. While assault weapons already out there would be allowed to remain, as in 1994, all sales of existing assault weapons would require background checks. “No gun is taken from anyone,” Feinstein said. “The purpose is to dry up the supply.”

That’s a taller order, because millions of people have already taken advantage of that supply. There are more than 300 million firearms in the U.S. and likely millions of assault weapons among them. And as with every push for gun control, outspoken calls for reform have been accompanied by gun owners clearing out cases at sporting-goods stores. The exceptions and unclear definitions in the 1994 law muted its force, and workarounds would inevitably be found again. More important, while legislators promised that such a law would have curtailed recent mass shootings, there’s no definitive evidence that it would have.

Read more: http://swampland.time.com/2013/01/24/after-newtown-democrats-propose-an-assault-weapons-ban/#ixzz2JNue2QQ9