27 February 2009

Attorney General To Re-impose Assault Weapons Ban

Nothing freaks out non-country club going conservatives like the prospect of jack-booted thugs from the government coming to seize your firearms. At best, gun control is a way to tamper down on an American sub-culture that might prove "problematic" for the administration. And at worst, it's the first step to rounding up "unenlightened" Americans for the 21st century gulags. That's why Obama's "bitter" comment proved so embarrassing for him during the campaign season, because many Americans value the importance of the reasons behind the 2nd Amendment with zero equivication. This might seem completely paranoid and maniacal to you (although I'm drifting further into that camp by the day), but it's difficult to understand any sort of rationale behind Attorney General Holder's announcement to re-institute the Assault Weapons Ban. From ABC:

"As President Obama indicated during the campaign, there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons," Holder told reporters.

Holder said that putting the ban back in place would not only be a positive move by the United States, it would help cut down on the flow of guns going across the border into Mexico, which is struggling with heavy violence among drug cartels along the border.

"I think that will have a positive impact in Mexico, at a minimum." Holder said at a news conference on the arrest of more than 700 people in a drug enforcement crackdown on Mexican drug cartels operating in the U.S.

While Mexico is certainly having a crisis of security, the Mexican drug cartels are not using AR-15s, but grenades, RPGs, and automatic weapons which are not available in American gun shops. Don't expect Holder to re-think the decades long failed drug policies in America, because the man is a confirmed crusader. The left did their best in the 90s to disarm the American population by swarming like buzzards around human tragedy to portray every school shooting as the fault of the NRA. Michael Moore interviewing an Alzheimer's-ridden Charlton Heston during Bowling For Columbine showed their "by any means necessary" approach to this end. Sure, liberal weenies are funny as hell when they're crying about trees or screaming while being arrested, but these people are in charge now and their threat to freedom shouldn't be laughed off. Don't think bad shit can't happen here because it's America. [/end paranoid rant for the day]

19 comments:

Shea said...

man, that sucks

Oz said...

Turns out Pelosi read the tea leaves in her own caucus and aborted the idea like a fetus at a NOW convention.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/pelosi-tosses-cold-water-on-reviving-assault-weapon-ban-2009-02-26.html

Nixon said...

Thanks for the tip Oz, and good use of the term aborted, haha.

Anonymous said...

Remember, you're not paranoid if it's true.

Kath

Bag Blog said...

The gun bi'ness is booming here - thanks to Obama paranoia. It is good to see some part of the economy doing well.

subrookie said...

I read that crap about how they wanted to do it because of the escalation in violence in Mexico. Like you said not many civilians have access to fully automatic weapons and our gun laws hardly are contributing to RPGs and AKs in Mexico.

If I remember right the ban restricted gun manufacturers to a maximum capacity of 10 round clips. So, relatively common handguns like the Beretta 92FS were considered "assault weapons". It pisses me off when they try and make this connection between fully automatic weapons and semi-automatic handguns.

Just because a gun "looks" like an automatic weapon doesn't mean it is.

olgreydog7 said...

Because we all know that even drug cartels have a line they do not cross. And for them, that line is the legal purchase of fire arms. Sure they may kill and sell dangerous substances to people for money but, by golly, they buy their weapons legally!

LF9012@YAHOO.COM said...

Lt Nixon,
Let's look at the larger issue.Obama/Holder are daring to create a serious rift and cause the gun crowd to react.Doesn't the present administration remember that GWB rode into Dodge on the gun vote.Gore/ Clinton caused on overreaction that defeated the 2000 bid for the Presidency.Why does Obama want to resurrect this battle.
I'm a gunny and a liberal.If Congress passes a ban then that's how it goes BUT I DO NOT BELIEVE A EXEC ORDER BANNING ASSLT WPNS IS CONSTITUTIONAL.We must not allow any President to rule thru exec orders- it by passes the enumerated clause of the Constitution .The President does not have this power but my money says this is what will happen.We're fighting bullshit wars in which every Iraqi and Afgh has a fully auto AK 47 but here at home they are no no in a semi auto mode.
Also with Nafta one would think that firearms would be freely traded also.Forget the drug lords- why can't the Mexican people have firearms?Next question is- when did Holder get the mission to protect Mexico?Isn't he the US Atty Gen?
The problem with America is that we need to tend our own garden.
Rangeragainstwar frequently writes on 2nd Amendment issues.

In closing -do you ever ask yourself why it's ok to kill people with a M 4 full auto in IRQ/AFGH but you can't have one to defend your home when you ETS?
JIM

olgreydog7 said...

Jim, you don't use full auto. It's not as accurate :)

Ms. Kiyum said...

I totally think it's your right as an American to bear as many semi-automatic arms as you like. However, what does one need an assault weapon for? Do you go out and target shoot and hunt with these things? Just wondering. I'm clearly not a gun expert.

rangeragainstwar said...

Ms.Kiyum,
It really doesn't matter what you do with the weapon to include automatic weapons.
The US Constitution doesn't require hunting or target useage. The original purpose of this right is to kill people and not punch holes in deer and paper.The people were to bear arms for self defense of homes and communities. This right included military weapons.That's how we beat the Brits.
jim/rangeragainstwar.blogspot.com

subrookie said...

#1 reason I feel we should be allowed to have semi-automatic weapons. Regardless of how they look.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e55_1234305715

In the video several robbers show up with weapons, likely stolen or obtained illegally. The homeowner defends his property with a legally obtained semi-automatic weapon. If we didn't have the 2nd amendment protection we'd all be lemmings and he would be dead.

Oz said...

Actually, Ms. Kiyum, nearly all 'assault weapons' are just semi-automatic weapons that meet mostly cosmetic wickets. They're too scary looking. The only functional criterion that can make something an assault weapon is magazine capacity. Anything over ten round is an assault weapon, which amusingly enough includes the pistol I just bought.

rangeragainstwar said...

Subrookie,
I will defend my home with a model 1897 winchester pump ,hammer shotgun and a old 1873 Peacemaker and will feel well armed. Semi auto capability is fine but not req,d for simple defense.In Cqc i'll take a old 97 anytime.BTW the Constitution says -shall not be infringed. This means semi or muzzleloading.
jim

Ms. Kiyum said...

Actually I was just using semi-automatic and assault weapon interchangeably. I don't really know a lot about weaponry. Guns lost their luster for me when I grew boobs and stopped playing with my bb gun. It was inherited from my Dad and really, really hard to cock. So the general consensus is you keep these on hand just in case thugs show up? There's no sport to it or anything? Aren't shotguns cheaper?

Oz said...

A lot of hunting weapons are semi-automatic, just for convenience. I don't personally own any, because I don't hunt yet. More importantly, long arms like rifles and shotguns aren't really portable. That's where pistols come in. The original idea behind citizens keeping military-type small arms was to facilitate another rebellion if it becomes necessary. (For real - remember that the first one began when the British moved to seize an colonial arsenal.)

I'm sure there are some who would consider hunting for bad guys 'sport.' Maybe I'll take it up as a hobby in thirty years or so... or have I seen too many movies?

DonL said...

You said "....While Mexico is certainly having a crisis of security...." and what PLANET do you live on that you are so bland and/or indifferent to the absolute SECURITY crisis right here in the US? DO you ACTUALLY have pride that your country (let's say, anymore than it would be if it were your beloved FAMILY) has the highest incarceration rate of ALMOST any country in the world? ...ok alot of that may NOT be related to gun violence..but let's GO THERE TOO. Do you simply NOT care about the high levels of gun violence, especially (but not limited to) the inner cities? Are you THAT childish enough to cling blindly, immaturely, to some century's old 'ideal' from the 2nd Ammendment (created for an entirely different reality on the ground, wake up, know your history) than exists today? IF you ARE that insanely immature - like the child who cries when taking the ice cream cone away - then the conversation is over. Is gun violence which affects innocent people LESS important to you than some abstract ideal whose only real application is the preserverance of beer-bellied goons who want to keep hunting (?with AK 47s?) NO..you are wrong. The assualt weapons ban is REASONABLE and LOGICAL and a TINY step at ?guess what? PROTECTING INNOCENT PEOPLE from violence.

Oh no...your 'right' to bear arms is holy. HOLY like religious, yes? What hypocrites.

Nixon said...

Yes, the second amendment was specifically designed for beer-bellied goons like me. Thank you founding fathers!

J Hass Group said...

It really doesn't matter what you do with the weapon to include automatic weapons.