Assault Weapons Ban

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

This is outrageous....how can George Bush claim to be the candidate who will make this country safer if he's not willing to fully support this ban?  I am much more afraid of being murdered by a gun than by terrorism.

I guarantee that if this ban expires, more people will die from assault weapons in the next term than from terrorism.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

Well, the question is really does it do any good? I say it doesn't. Criminals who want such weapons will attain them - criminals don't care about the law, so don't expect them to follow it.

Now, one can argue that ordinary people shouldn't have automatic or semi-automatic weapons, but I think people should. The question I ask is should they be allowed to carry them around? With fully automatic weapons, I believe things like that should be kept in the house, not being carried around. Such weapons exceed general everyday needs for self-defense(your common street thug wants a weapon that can be concealed, not something that says 'HEY I'M CRAZY, YOU BETTER AVOID ME'), but in the unlikely, yet possible, events of a foreign invasion or tyrannical government, such weapons become necessary to defend life, liberty, and property.

Funny, since we banned fully automatic weapons, I don't see a lot of criminals out there committing crimes with them.  Almost all the gun crime in the country is committed with weapons that are legal for a person to own.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

Well, the question is really does it do any good? I say it doesn't. Criminals who want such weapons will attain them - criminals don't care about the law, so don't expect them to follow it.

Now, one can argue that ordinary people shouldn't have automatic or semi-automatic weapons, but I think people should. The question I ask is should they be allowed to carry them around? With fully automatic weapons, I believe things like that should be kept in the house, not being carried around. Such weapons exceed general everyday needs for self-defense(your common street thug wants a weapon that can be concealed, not something that says 'HEY I'M CRAZY, YOU BETTER AVOID ME'), but in the unlikely, yet possible, events of a foreign invasion or tyrannical government, such weapons become necessary to defend life, liberty, and property.

Funny, since we banned fully automatic weapons, I don't see a lot of criminals out there committing crimes with them.  Almost all the gun crime in the country is committed with weapons that are legal for a person to own.

And were stolen from the rightful owner. Of course most Democrats would love to ban guns because it would prevent the peoples right of revolution.

If those guns had never had a legal owner, they wouldn't be in the hands of criminals right now.  They would never have even been manufactured.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

Well, the question is really does it do any good? I say it doesn't. Criminals who want such weapons will attain them - criminals don't care about the law, so don't expect them to follow it.

Now, one can argue that ordinary people shouldn't have automatic or semi-automatic weapons, but I think people should. The question I ask is should they be allowed to carry them around? With fully automatic weapons, I believe things like that should be kept in the house, not being carried around. Such weapons exceed general everyday needs for self-defense(your common street thug wants a weapon that can be concealed, not something that says 'HEY I'M CRAZY, YOU BETTER AVOID ME'), but in the unlikely, yet possible, events of a foreign invasion or tyrannical government, such weapons become necessary to defend life, liberty, and property.

Funny, since we banned fully automatic weapons, I don't see a lot of criminals out there committing crimes with them.  Almost all the gun crime in the country is committed with weapons that are legal for a person to own.

And were stolen from the rightful owner. Of course most Democrats would love to ban guns because it would prevent the peoples right of revolution.

If those guns had never had a legal owner, they wouldn't be in the hands of criminals right now.  They would never have even been manufactured.

\

Um, yes they would be and would have.

Why would they have been manufactured?  Who would they have been sold to?  How many automatic weapons are manufactured today that aren't specifically commissioned by the military or law enforcement?

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

Well, the question is really does it do any good? I say it doesn't. Criminals who want such weapons will attain them - criminals don't care about the law, so don't expect them to follow it.

Now, one can argue that ordinary people shouldn't have automatic or semi-automatic weapons, but I think people should. The question I ask is should they be allowed to carry them around? With fully automatic weapons, I believe things like that should be kept in the house, not being carried around. Such weapons exceed general everyday needs for self-defense(your common street thug wants a weapon that can be concealed, not something that says 'HEY I'M CRAZY, YOU BETTER AVOID ME'), but in the unlikely, yet possible, events of a foreign invasion or tyrannical government, such weapons become necessary to defend life, liberty, and property.

Funny, since we banned fully automatic weapons, I don't see a lot of criminals out there committing crimes with them.  Almost all the gun crime in the country is committed with weapons that are legal for a person to own.

Consider this - most criminals weren't using them before. As I said, your average criminal doesn't carry large weapons - they carry concealable handguns, knives, and sometimes nothing at all(using only large size to intimidate smaller, weaker people). Walking around with an assault weapon makes you look suspicious, so people avoid you, the police follow you, you don't get to commit crimes. In reality, the assault weapons ban didn't really make a dent in crime.

These assault weapons would probably not be used by "average" criminals...more likely people who were planning some sort of larger-scale crime where they would have to be able to threaten a lot of people at once, or who anticipated getting in a stand-off or shoot-out with police.