The Conservative Case For An Assault Weapons Ban

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    The Conservative Case For An Assault Weapons Ban

    Federal Judge Larry Burns was appointed by George W. Bush and carries well-documented conservative credentials.  He recently sentenced Gabby Gifford's shooter to 7 life sentences plus 140 years in prison for the Tucson killings.  But even for him, "enough is enough":

     

    http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-burns-assault-weapons-ban-20121220,0,6774314.story

    Quote:

    Bring back the assault weapons ban, and bring it back with some teeth this time. Ban the manufacture, importation, sale, transfer and possession of both assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Don't let people who already have them keep them. Don't let ones that have already been manufactured stay on the market. I don't care whether it's called gun control or a gun ban. I'm for it.

    I say all of this as a gun owner. I say it as a conservative who was appointed to the federal bench by a Republican president. I say it as someone who prefers Fox News to MSNBC, and National Review Online to the Daily Kos. I say it as someone who thinks the Supreme Court got it right in District of Columbia vs. Heller, when it held that the 2nd Amendment gives us the right to possess guns for self-defense. (That's why I have mine.) I say it as someone who, generally speaking, is not a big fan of the regulatory state.

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: The Conservative Case For An Assault Weapons Ban

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    With all the guns out there, there's just no need for the narrow sliver at issue. Assault weapons, high capacity magazines, and to a lesser extent military-style armor.


    The world didn't end and crime didn't skyrocket the last time there was an assault weapons ban active.

     The only people I can really understand getting seriously worked up about this are those who already paid for one while it was legal - to that extent I would support my tax dollars going to a government buy-back of the weapons at issue. No need to screw anyone who was just following the law.

    [/QUOTE]

    People get worked up over senseless laws. These stated bans will NOT stop these events or the number of casualties!!

    When assault weapons were banned guess what???? They were still available except law abiding citizens didnt get them any longer.

    The ignorance and opportunistic feeding from anti gun lobby is sickening!!

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: The Conservative Case For An Assault Weapons Ban

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    These stated bans will NOTstop these events or the number of casualties!!


    Says YOU.


    Just because you say it doesn't make it true. I disagree with your statement. I also see a complete failure to articulate why you think you're right. As always, you're just saying you're right because you're right.

    [QUOTE]

    You just ignore the FACTS like the other weapons I have stated that are readily availsble and ould have made this much worse!!

    Let me know if, you need another list here's 2.

    Shot gun with buckshot takes out multiple targets with a spray of ball bearings.

    This could have been much worse!

    He could have walked in with a few glass containers filled with certo (makes jello) mixed with gasoline and threw the equivalent of napalm into each classroom.

    IED's made with nails, tacks ball bearings, etc and packed with gun powder from simple fire crackers into PVC or hundreds of other fairly small devices could have done much more harm.

    THE WEAPON IS NOT THE ISSUE!!! We need to discuss WHY PEOPLE DO THESE THINGS and start looking for real answers!! 

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: The Conservative Case For An Assault Weapons Ban

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    "Shot gun with buckshot takes out multiple targets with a spray of ball bearings."

    Reload time & any magazine, what size?

    You didn't answer that previously. 

    "He could have walked in with a few glass containers filled with certo (makes jello) mixed with gasoline and threw the equivalent of napalm into each classroom.

    IED's made with nails, tacks ball bearings, etc and packed with gun powder from simple fire crackers into PVC or hundreds of other fairly small devices could have done much more harm."

    Which would have left him exposed at all times. Again: These people do not want to get captured.

    There's a reason he went with those weapons.

    [/QUOTE]

    I did answer the shotgun vs AR-15 question. One takes longer to load but, takes out multiple targets at a shot and one loads faster but, is only one target at a time.


    Some have been caught so "these people dont want to get caught" is not always true

    But, if he was also suicidal he could also take a single shot 22 for the finale or lighter fluid and a match to set himself on fire with.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: The Conservative Case For An Assault Weapons Ban

    Waiting for someone to say this judge is not a "real" conservative.

    Also waiting for a cogent rebuttal to his reasoned argument.

    On the second point, I won't hold my breath.

    Eagerly anticipating the NRA's latest equivocation....

     

     

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: The Conservative Case For An Assault Weapons Ban

    There was a guy a few weeks ago that drove his car into a crowd and killed 12 people.

    If we blame the guns here; we must blame the car for that!!

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: The Conservative Case For An Assault Weapons Ban

    In response to tvoter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    There was a guy a few weeks ago that drove his car into a crowd and killed 12 people.

    If we blame the guns here; we must blame the car for that!!

    [/QUOTE]

    Silly analogy.  Go to the little kids' table please.  The grown ups are talking.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: The Conservative Case For An Assault Weapons Ban

    In response to Reubenhop's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to tvoter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    There was a guy a few weeks ago that drove his car into a crowd and killed 12 people.

    If we blame the guns here; we must blame the car for that!!

    [/QUOTE]

    Silly analogy.  Go to the little kids' table please.  The grown ups are talking.

    [/QUOTE]

    Its a true statement; and if the truth offends you too fvcking bad!

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: The Conservative Case For An Assault Weapons Ban

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The argument isn't about any object that could be used as a weapon.

    It is about 'arms', those objects that logically fall under the 2nd amendment. 

    [/QUOTE]


    what argument?

    I simply said if, we blame the gun for SHES then, it's logical to blame the care for killing 12 people!!

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName99. Show UserName99's posts

    Re: The Conservative Case For An Assault Weapons Ban

    In response to tvoter's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    There was a guy a few weeks ago that drove his car into a crowd and killed 12 people.

    If we blame the guns here; we must blame the car for that!!

    [/QUOTE]


    Must have missed that report. Got a link?

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: The Conservative Case For An Assault Weapons Ban

    In response to Newtster's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The 2nd Amendment is not for allowing hunters to have guns, it's for self protection against criminals and a potential despotic government. 

    Secondly, if people are really interested in minmizing deaths they would not spend so much time selecting weapons they feel inappropriate or appropriate to kill someone. Banning assault rifles or whatever you want to ban is not going to do anything to stop this nonsense. People with criminal minds and psychos are not going to turn them in. In reality you ghouls are saying it is alright to kill a kid with a hand gun.

    This is just a complete waste of time while more practical less intrusive, less costly steps to prevent these tragedies are left undone.

    Sure, if the Newtown nut had some pistol instead of an assault rifle maybe fewer people would have been killed. Maybe. On the other hand if the school was competently secured he may not have gotten in at all regardless of the weapon he had. Or he could have been delayed enough to allow police to get there and save some lives.

    It is not a solution to the problem. 

    If the Newtown Nut had been more closely supervised when on psychotropic drugs with known side affects realted to violence and aggression maybe they'd all be alive.

    The focus on guns is a complete distraction and shows a continued lack of leadership from Obama.

    [/QUOTE]


    HEAR HEAR!!!

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: The Conservative Case For An Assault Weapons Ban

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    "Banning assault rifles or whatever you want to ban is not going to do anything to stop this nonsense."
    v. 

    "Sure, if the Newtown nut had some pistol instead of an assault rifle maybe fewer people would have been killed."

     Absent a way to completely stop all shootings, why on EARTH would you not want to make high body counts less probable?

    Why is "fewer people killed" not a worthwhile goal?


    Christ.

    [/QUOTE]

    If it would guarantee that, then sure but, it WILL NOT because they are too many other ways for people to do horrible things!!

     

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    Re: The Conservative Case For An Assault Weapons Ban

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    If it would guarantee that, then sure but, it WILL NOT because they are too many other ways for people to do horrible things!! 


    All of a sudden the whacko wingnuts want to live in a world of absolutes.  

    [/QUOTE]

    The leftnutz want to ban the gun to act like they care when anyone with a brain knows the gun is not the issue and there are countless other ways to do horrible things to masses without using a gun!

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     

Share