Bush shows inability to lead again

[ljb]

The assault weapons ban expires today. Over sixty percent of Americans want this ban to be extended. Bush's congress would have gladly extended the ban if only Bush had told them to do so.
Bush failed in this crucial matter. Remember this come November!

[Secretariat]

Originally posted by ljb
The assault weapons ban expires today. Over sixty percent of Americans want this ban to be extended. Bush's congress would have gladly extended the ban if only Bush had told them to do so.
Bush failed in this crucial matter. Remember this come November!

This is an interesting dilemma for Bush.

...Police departments pretty much are in favor of keeping the ban while the NRA is not. Bush chose the NRA.

I figure he picks up no "new" voters with this decision, and may even lose a few.

It will most likely be addressed in the debates, with kerry most likely asking "why now, in the face of mounting terrorist threats would you choose to lift a ban on assault weapons, that most of our police organizations feel has been an excellent deterrent. How does lifting the ban aid our Homland Security?"

[delayjf]

This bill is worthless, I could have purchased an AK-47 at any time in the past 10 years. These weapons are used in about 2% of weapons related crimes, many of those weapons are obtained illegally.

[Secretariat]

Originally posted by delayjf
This bill is worthless, I could have purchased an AK-47 at any time in the past 10 years. These weapons are used in about 2% of weapons related crimes, many of those weapons are obtained illegally.

I am curious DJ..being a gun owner myself, I have two questions. What is the appeal to having these weapons?

1. I hunt, but wouldn't use them. Why would you want one?

2. Why are most police forces across the country coming out in droves in support of keeping the ban if what you say is true?

[JustMissed]

Hey, don't blame Bush. He said if the Senate passed an extension he would sign it.

What's the deal?

Hey, maybe if lying John Kerry would show up for some Senate meetings he could have gotten it extended.

I think Kerry is lazy and a slackard.

Hope this comes up in the debates, what is Kerry going say in his defense. "Ugh, I was snowboarding that day."he,he.he

JM

[delayjf]

Sec,
I own a few of these assaults rifles, I just use them for shooting, they are in my opinion a lot of fun. I also own muzzle loaders as well, also a lot of fun to shoot.

Can't say as I blame the Police, I would rather face a guy with a handgun anyday. But I don't think the 2nd admendment was put in our Constitution to protect our hunting rights. It's there as a check against an abusive government.

[Tom]

Good point. Bush said he would sign it, ball now in Congress's court.

Where was Kerry-last I knew, he was a member of congress.
He did nothing but whine about it today.
Bush made a commitment to sign it. Congress failed, once again, to do it's job.

And once agin, our resident libs spin it to suit thier agenda. Just not willing to responsibility.

Ha!

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by delayjf
Can't say as I blame the Police, I would rather face a guy with a handgun anyday. But I don't think the 2nd admendment was put in our Constitution to protect our hunting rights. It's there as a check against an abusive government.

Most people don't even consider why the 2nd Amendment was put in the constitution. It is there so that the common man can shoot Senators and other government officials should the need arise. An Ak-47 makes a much better weapon in that case........think about it..........it doesn't have a damn thing to do with hunting..........there is no reason to renew this ban. It is worthless...........

[Secretariat]

Originally posted by JustRalph
Most people don't even consider why the 2nd Amendment was put in the constitution. It is there so that the common man can shoot Senators and other government officials should the need arise. An Ak-47 makes a much better weapon in that case........think about it..........it doesn't have a damn thing to do with hunting..........there is no reason to renew this ban. It is worthless...........

I heard today on CNN Headline News that assault weapons have been associated with 20% of cop killings. I thought that nubmer was high, but that is what they reported.

John Muhammed the Washington sniper used an Assault weapon, and I beleive the kids at Columbine did as well.

Not sure. JR, I am in favor of the 2nd Amendment, but you know the framers weren't dealing with assault weapons, and they got stuff wrong at times like slavery. The purpose of the 2nd amendment was for hunting, and for protection against a monarchial type of goverment which they had just fought.

To assume the second amendment was put in place by the framers so Assault Weaapons could help hunters or fight off a monarchial govt is crazy. Many of these weapons find themseves in the hands of criminals, not law abiding citizens. And again, in this world of terrorism ,we live in what kind of security is gained with the sell of assault weapons.

As to Bush saying he'll sign the ban..lol...wink, wink, nudge, nudge...all he has to do is call Tom Delay or Bill Frist and that extension would be through Congress in a second. It's another of his gutless manipulative maneuvers which I've gotten used to.

[Tom]

Originally posted by Secretariat
.

As to Bush saying he'll sign the ban..lol...wink, wink, nudge, nudge...all he has to do is call Tom Delay or Bill Frist and that extension would be through Congress in a second. It's another of his gutless manipulative maneuvers which I've gotten used to.


Then why did congress fail to put it on his desk and call him out on it?
Bush went on records. Congress was sleeping.

[Secretariat]

Originally posted by Tom
Then why did congress fail to put it on his desk and call him out on it?
Bush went on records. Congress was sleeping.

Tom, it's Bush's party as the majority in Congress. Dem's couldn't get it through.

It's not a huge issue with me. However, I think it makes Bush vulnerable in case something happens between now and the election with an assault weapon. (Let's hope nothing does happen!) I'm surprised they didn't extend the ban until after the election. I really think most people who wanted to lift the ban are already in Bush's pocket, but if there is an AK47 incident between now and the election, Bush will be on the defensive.

Frankly, I think its dumb Rove (er..Bush) didn't push to keep the ban, but I guess keeping the NRA happy was more important than listening to the majority of the people.

[GameTheory]

Originally posted by Secretariat
To assume the second amendment was put in place by the framers so Assault Weaapons could help hunters or fight off a monarchial govt is crazy. Many of these weapons find themseves in the hands of criminals, not law abiding citizens. And again, in this world of terrorism ,we live in what kind of security is gained with the sell of assault weapons.
That's right, they "fall into" the hands of criminals. They aren't bought legally anyway. I am neutral on this ban, but I don't think it would keep a single gun out of the hands a criminal that wanted one.

[JustRalph]

You wanna show me where the 2nd Amend. mentions hunting?

There are several notes and references to hunting in party papers and meeting minutes, long after the founding fathers ratified the constitution. In every one of the attempts at changing the 2nd Amendment the leaders of our country recognized that these Aristocratic suggestions that only "gamers and Hunters participating in the Queen's sports" should be allowed weapons were actually covert attempts at disarming the common man. They were all defeated. Rightly so.

The problem with your stat on assault weapons being used on cops is that there are several varied intrepretations on what an assualt weapon is. I used to read the studies and in fact was a police officer when the first ban was imposed. I read all the crap that was put out. It was common knowledge amongst street cops that gun laws being piled on year after year only effects law abiding citizens. The stats and rhetoric about "cops" want them off the street is mostly coming from the international association of Police chiefs and their out of touch ilk. Most street cops disagree with them on most issues. The bad guys don't care about laws. Get it?

I have faced so called assault weapons on the street. In fact I saw a few tech 9's in my time. I wouldn't have treated those guys any different if they were holding a 38 revolver. you treat them all the same. In fact, give your average criminal an Ak-47 (the liberals end all assault weapon) and I will take a Remington 870 or better an 1100. Let me have my 9mm pistol too, (standard cop car setup) put us in the typical urban environment and I bet I win 95% of time. For lots of reasons he may be at a disadvantage.

The assault weapon ban hasn't changed a thing. Good riddance.

The fact is that I can buy several guns that are not considered assault weapons and for $15-95 bucks alter them to be a better assault weapon that those you want to outlaw. Depending on what state I am in, it wouldn't even be illegal either. So the law that just expired is junk...........

[Secretariat]

JR,

You conveniently truncated my sentence (ala the Swift Boater ad on Kerry's 71 speech).

Here was my whole sentence:

"The purpose of the 2nd amendment was for hunting, AND for protection against a monarchial type of goverment which they had just fought."

Obviously that is my opinion based on reading materials by Madison. I never stated that 2nd amendment was JUST for hunting.

[Lefty]

You mean one of the assault thingy's that Kerry was waving so proudly on TV tuther day?

lbj, where did you get that 60% stat. Don't blve it.
Criminals don't obey laws so gun laws don't matter. Thousands on the books now. Will one more do the trick?
Here's a better law: 3 strikes and you're dead. Commit 3 felonies and we execute you. I'd vote for that.

[ljb]

from Lefty,
"lbj, where did you get that 60% stat. Don't blve it."
You are right again Lefty, on CNN last night the correct figure was posted. 68%

[ljb]

And another tidbit from Lefty,
"Here's a better law: 3 strikes and you're dead. Commit 3 felonies and we execute you."
Lefty did you know there are four contries in the world that still have the death penalty?
Iran, Iraq, N. Korea and U.S. of A.
Damn axis of Evil? Go figure :D :D :D

[Lefty]

Yes, lbj, so what? I blve in the death penalty for murderers. Liberals have it backwards. They believe in abortion but will cry at the execution of a murderer. Crime should be dealth with harshly.

[delayjf]

Sec,

John Muhammed the Washington sniper used an Assault weapon, and I beleive the kids at Columbine did as well.

You are correct, the DC sniper used an AR-15, despite the people he did kill, those who survived the shootings can thank their luck stars that he didn't use a "hunting rifle" like as 30-06. The AR-15 basically shoots a high velocity 22 caliber bullet, which doesn't have near the trama effect of a 30-06 round. Also, he fired only one shot at a time, he could have done the samething with the same caliber rifle that was a single shot bolt action.

AT Columbine they used a tec-9 which is a high compasity 9 mm pistol or handgun. If they had just used a 9mm handguns with 10 round mags, it would have not have made any difference, it takes seconds to change a magazine.

The infamous LA robbery shootout where both robbers were armed with AK-47 machine guns, theyshot hundreds of rounds, but nobody but the robbers were killed. If they had tried that in my hometown during deer season, when everybody has their rifle hanging in the back of their pickup, they would have been gunned down in minutes.

To assume the second amendment was put in place by the framers so Assault Weaapons could help hunters or fight off a monarchial govt is crazy.
Call me crazy, but that's exactly what the 2nd amendment is for, as a last resort. Obviously the founding fathers didn't consider assault weapons at the time, but everybody (the Gov and the people) were on equal footing with reguards to firepower.

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by Secretariat
JR,You conveniently truncated my sentence (ala the Swift Boater ad on Kerry's 71 speech).

I didn't truncate your sentence...........I just pointed out that the hunting part that you refer to has always been historically used to deny arms to the common man. The implied meaning is that when Lefties and Anti Gunners start screaming about hunting, they know they are putting some limits on gun ownership. It is their way of moving in their favored direction.......

[Secretariat]

Originally posted by JustRalph
I didn't truncate your sentence...........I just pointed out that the hunting part that you refer to has always been historically used to deny arms to the common man. The implied meaning is that when Lefties and Anti Gunners start screaming about hunting, they know they are putting some limits on gun ownership. It is their way of moving in their favored direction.......

Of course you truncated it. You took only the hunting part of my point rather than using the whole sentence. Truncate means "cutting off" - look it up.

My sentence was:

"The purpose of the 2nd amendment was for hunting, ANDfor protection against a monarchial type of goverment which they had just fought."

And DJ, to assume that assault weapons was what the framers had in mind when writing the second amendment is ridiculous. There were no assault weapons back in the 18th century, so they had no point of reference to today's world, just muskets. Maybe they were thinking pre-emptively?

[Tom]

Originally posted by JustRalph
You wanna show me where the 2nd Amend. mentions hunting?

........


Amendment II
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, and the right to hunt being obvious, ,the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.