An "assault weapons" compromise.

And a lot of us just, strangely, think that the results when the policy fails -- dead people -- are a little more serious than the results when attempts to deter, say, shoplifting by the threat of a criminal sanction fail.

And we just can't figure out why those results -- people's deaths -- aren't regarded as outweighing whatever interest anyone might have in owning something that goes bang.

I want to take guns out of criminals' hands as much
as anyone, and I'm all for laws that logically do so.

I want to take guns out of criminals' hands as much as
anyone, and I'm all for laws that logically do so.

WHETHER assault weapons should be banned is a whole nother topic. It is *not* the topic of this thread.

Those dead people, as members of a civilized society, were entitled to have their right to life protected, not merely to have the loss of their lives avenged after they're dead.

Might those all be expressions your own opinion?

But you cite your authority, and I'll be happy to cite mine.

And maybe you'll explain what this "right to not be robbed ..." might mean. Or, put another way, why we have laws against such things. Shouldn't that "right to protect yourself" have it all pretty much covered?

I didn't say you have the right to the protection of others
(i.e., I assume you meant, to be absolutely clear, "to protection by others").

If you don't understand the difference, ask, and, if your lack of understanding appears genuine and your desire to understand sincere, it shall be explained.

(i) has a barrel equal to or less than 105 mm in length, or

(ii) is designed or adapted to discharge a 25 or 32 calibre cartridge,

(i) is less than 660 mm in length, or

(ii) is 660 mm or greater in length and has a barrel less than 457 mm in
length,

(i) is not a prohibited firearm,

(ii) has a barrel less than 470 mm in length, and

(iii) is capable of discharging centre-fire ammunition in a semi-automatic
manner,

(a) a licence under which the person may possess it; and

(b) a registration certificate for the firearm.

(a) in the case of a first offence, to imprisonment for a term not
exceeding ten years;

(b) in the case of a second offence, to imprisonment for a term
not exceeding ten years and to a minimum punishment of
imprisonment for a term of one year; and

(c) in the case of a third or subsequent offence, to imprisonment
for a term not exceeding ten years and to a minimum
punishment of imprisonment for a term of two years less a day.

(a) has borrowed the firearm;

(b) is the holder of a licence under which the person may
possess it; and

(c) is in possession of the firearm to hunt or trap in order to
sustain the person or the person's family.

Permitted Purposes For Owning A Restricted Firearm

In most cases, there are only four purposes for which you can be licensed to acquire and/or possess a restricted firearm:

1.For use in target practice or target shooting competitions;
2.To form part of a gun collection;
3.For use in connection with your lawful profession or occupation.

Or in rare cases,

4. To protect life.

Firearms Prescribed As Restricted

Here is a list of restricted firearms as specified in the Criminal Code regulations that came into effect on December 1, 1998. This list includes all firearms that have been restricted by a former Order in Council.

The firearms of the designs commonly known as the High Standard Model 10, Series A shotgun and the High Standard Model 10, Series B shotgun, and any variants or modified versions of them. The firearm of the design commonly known as the M-16 rifle, and any variant or modified version of it, including the:

(a) Colt AR-15;
(b) Colt AR-15 SPI;
(c) Colt AR-15 Sporter;
(d) Colt AR-15 Collapsible Stock Model;
(e) Colt AR-15 A2;
(f) Colt AR-15 A2 Carbine;
(g) Colt AR-15 A2 Government Model Rifle;
(h) Colt AR-15 A2 Government Model Target Rifle;
(i) Colt AR-15 A2 Government Model Carbine;
(j) Colt AR-15 A2 Sporter II;
(k) Colt AR-15 A2 H-BAR;
(l) Colt AR-15 A2 Delta H-BAR;
(m) Colt AR-15 A2 Delta H-BAR Match;
(n) Colt AR-15 9mm Carbine;
(o) Armalite AR-15;
(p) AAI M15;
(q) AP74;
(r) EAC J-15;
(s) PWA Commando;
(t) SGW XM15A;
(u) SGW CAR-AR;
(v) SWD AR-15; and,
(w) Any 22 calibre rimfire variant, including the:
i. Mitchell M-16A-1/22,
ii. Mitchell M-16/22,
iii. Mitchell CAR-15/22,
iv. AP74 Auto Rifle.

The suppleness of English syntax soon transformed the noun into an adjective -- a vernacular predecessor of phony -- and bogus eventually became a proper synonym for "counterfeit: false or spurious." But especially if you're under forty, bogus today is just as likely to mean "unpleasant or contemptible, unfair, bad," as in, "Man, this class is bogus!"

Bogus
(1)Adj. Not good. ie. "I just died. That's pretty bogus."
(2)Excl. Really not good. ie. "Aw man, that cop took my board." "Bogus!"

Assault weapons are increasingly being perceived by legislators, police organizations, handgun restriction advocates, and the press as a public health threat. As these weapons come to be associated with drug traffickers, paramilitary extremists, and survivalists, their television and movie glamour is losing its lustre to a violent reality.

Because of this fact, assault weapons are quickly becoming the leading topic of America's gun control debate and will most likely remain the leading gun control issue for the near future. Such a shift will not only damage America's gun lobby, but strengthen the handgun restriction lobby for the following reasons:

It will be a new topic in what has become to the press and public an "old" debate.

- Although handguns claim more than 20,000 lives a year, the issue of handgun restriction consistently remains a non-issue with the vast majority of legislators, the press, and public. The reasons for this vary: the power of the gun lobby; the tendency of both sides of the issue to resort to sloganeering and pre-packaged arguments when discussing the issue; the fact that until an individual is affected by handgun violence he or she is unlikely to work for handgun restrictions; the view that handgun violence is an "unsolvable" problem; the inability of the handgun restriction movement to organize itself into an effective electoral threat; and the fact that until someone famous is shot, or something truly horrible happens, handgun restriction is simply not viewed as a priority. Assault weapons - just like armor-piercing bullets, machine guns, and plastic firearms - are a new topic. The weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons - anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun - can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons. In addition, few people can envision a practical use for these weapons.

Efforts to stop restrictions on assault weapons will only further alienate the police from the gun lobby.

- Until recently, police organizations viewed the gun lobby in general, and the NRA in particular, as a reliable friend. This stemmed in part from the role the NRA played in training officers and its reputation regarding gun safety and hunter training. Yet, throughout the 1980s, the NRA has found itself increasingly on the opposite side of police on the gun control issue. Its opposition to legislation banning armor-piercing ammunition, plastic handguns, and machine guns, and its drafting of and support for the McClure/Volkmer handgun decontrol bill, burned many of the bridges the NRA had built throughout the past hundred years. As the result of this, the Law Enforcement Steering Committee was formed. The Committee now favors such restriction measures as waiting periods with background check for handgun purchase and a ban on machine guns and plastic firearms. If police continue to call for assault weapons restrictions, and the NRA continues to fight such measures, the result can only be a further tarnishing of the NRA's image in the eyes of the public, the police, and NRA members. The organization will no longer be viewed as the defender of the sportsman, but as the defender of the drug dealer.

Efforts to restrict assault weapons are more likely to succeed than those to restrict handguns.

Although the majority of Americans favor stricter handgun controls, and a consistent 40 percent of Americans favor banning the private sale and possession of handguns,<129> many Americans do believe that handguns are effective weapons for home self-defense and the majority of Americans mistakenly believe that the Second Amendment of the Constitution guarantees the individual right to keep and bear arms.<130> Yet, many who support the individual's right to own a handgun have second thoughts when the issue comes down to assault weapons. Assault weapons are often viewed the same way as machine guns and "plastic" firearms - a weapon that poses such a grave risk that it's worth compromising a perceived constitutional right. ...

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v2.0
==================
 
The time now is 12:16:12AM EDT, Tuesday, May 11, 2004.
 
There are exactly...
5 days,
23 hours,
43 minutes, and
48 seconds left in our fund drive.
 
This website could not survive without your generosity. Member donations 
pay for more than 84% of the Democratic Underground budget. Don't let
GrovelBot become the next victim of the Bush economy. Bzzzt.
 
Please take a moment to donate to DU right now. Thank you for your support.
 
- An automated message from the DU GrovelBot

Click here to donate.