Brady Campaign Hoping For Expanded "Assault Weapons" Ban

[308Mike]

From NRA-ILA:

[center]Brady Campaign Hoping For Expanded "Assault Weapons" Ban Under An Obama Administration[/center]

Friday, October 10, 2008

With the prospect of Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) being elected President of the United States, the Brady Campaign is trying to rejuvenate public interest in one of the group's priority issues: a ban on all detachable-magazine semi-automatic firearms, a vast expansion of the federal "assault weapon" law of 1994--2004. As Brady notes in a new propaganda paper, "Assault Weapons: Mass Produced Mayhem," "Senator Barack Obama supports banning assault weapons."

Gun owners who still believe that Obama may be after some people's guns, but not theirs, might want to read Brady's paper. The group advocates "a stronger, more comprehensive law" than the one imposed in 1994-one that would ban the manufacture of all semi-automatic firearms "capable of accepting a detachable, high-capacity ammunition magazine." Gun owners better think again, if they think that verbiage doesn't apply to them, just because they don't have "high capacity" magazines for their deer rifles and pistols. It doesn't matter what kind of magazines they have; what matters is whether a larger magazine could be inserted in their gun. Reality check: Any gun that uses a detachable magazine is capable of using one of any size. The District of Columbia has used that basis to define the seven-round-magazine Model 1911 .45 pistol as a "machine gun," along with all other semi-automatics that typically use magazines holding a similar number of rounds.

Oddly, in the press release Brady published along with its paper, and in the paper, the group provided two items of information that seriously undercut its call for a ban. First, Brady admitted that the 1994-2004 law merely banned the inclusion of various attachments (folding stock, flash suppressor, etc.) on semi-automatic firearms, but did not ban the firearms themselves. According to Brady logic, murder should have gone up since the ban expired. Instead, since 1994, the nation's murder rate dropped 35 percent.

Second, Brady claims "Our communities are less safe today than they were four years ago" because "In the four years since the federal assault weapons ban expired, at least 163 people have been killed . . . with military-style semiautomatic assault weapons." But in the same time frame, there were more than 22,000 murders without firearms of any sort; meaning non-gun murders outnumbered those with "assault weapons" by about 123-to-1. Furthermore, in most of the 163 murders Brady mentions, no more rounds were fired than could have been fired with many other kinds of guns. For example, in the so-called "D.C. Sniper" murders Brady highlights, only one shot was fired per crime.

Echoing similar rants of the past, Brady claims that "Assault weapons have no sporting or self-defense purpose" and that "assault weapons are exceedingly dangerous if used in self defense, because the bullets many of the weapons fire are designed to penetrate humans and will penetrate structures, and therefore pose a heightened risk of hitting innocent bystanders."

But firearms that Brady calls "assault weapons"--AR-15s, M1As, and semi-automatic pistols--dominate rifle and pistol competitions. Even anti-gun commentators have pointed out that any gun can be used for self-defense. Bullets used in self-defense are supposed to penetrate a criminal attacker, and the guns that Brady calls "assault weapons" use the same calibers of ammunition as other guns.

About the only new item in this Brady effort, compared to those from the past, is that the group tries to use the Supreme Court's decision in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) to justify a ban. The Court suggested that fully-automatic firearms might not be protected under the Second Amendment, based in part on the history of prohibitions on the carrying of "dangerous and unusual weapons," and Brady said that, "Assault weapons are certainly 'dangerous and unusual weapons.'"

But semi-automatic firearms are not fully-automatic. The Court did not rule on either fully-automatics or semi-automatics. And the historic prohibition on "dangerous and unusual weapons" only applied when a person armed himself "in such a manner as will naturally cause a terror to the people." American courts have never found rifles, shotguns, most handguns, or any firearms useful for military purposes and the defense of the state to be "dangerous and unusual" unless the arms were used in a threatening manner.

[Termite]

Sarah Brady makes me think vile & evil thoughts.

I'm sorry her husband got shot. Really, I am. But for her and her ilk to use a man who now has the mind of a child to push their hopolophobic and lunatic agenda, seriously pisses me off.

I'm going to stop now, before I type something that forces the moderaters to cyber-smack me.

[Jered]

If these people want to move somewhere with gun control, why don't they go to Airstrip One?

[mekender]

one of the "assault weapons" pictured in the new brady flyer is the street sweeper shotgun... a NFA item

[mekender]

and wouldnt it be hard to prove that the AR-15 and/or the AK-47 are dangerous AND unusual?

since the AK is the most common rifle in the world and the AR is the most popular sporting rifle in the US, that would be a neat trick wouldnt it?

[cu74]

and wouldnt it be hard to prove that the AR-15 and/or the AK-47 are dangerous AND unusual?

since the AK is the most common rifle in the world and the AR is the most popular sporting rifle in the US, that would be a neat trick wouldnt it?

Yes, but the anti-rights folks don't deal in logic or reason when developing their "proofs".

[Dub_James]

and wouldnt it be hard to prove that the AR-15 and/or the AK-47 are dangerous AND unusual?

since the AK is the most common rifle in the world and the AR is the most popular sporting rifle in the US, that would be a neat trick wouldnt it?

Yes, but the anti-rights folks don't deal in logic or reason when developing their "proofs".

Exactly. Facts aren't relevant. Only a Congressional majority is.

[Lokidude]

If these people want to move somewhere with gun control, why don't they go to Airstrip One?

Can't we trade Sarah Brady for a certain British gunsmith?

[Spells]

I think this is a pretty dumb law, but I hope the people arguing against it have better arguments against it than "What part of 'shall not be infringed' do you not understand?"

Brady claims that "Assault weapons have no sporting or self-defense purpose"

I can already hear the arguments they'll put forth in banning ARs, AKs, or even many semi-auto pistols. "Do you not have enough firepower to defend yourself with a 6-shot .357 magnum? You can't defend your house with a revolver and a pump action shotgun?"

Same thing on protecting yourself from the government. A populace armed with bolt-action rifles, revolvers, and pump shotguns is going to be perfectly effective.

This is particularly silly:

But firearms that Brady calls "assault weapons"--AR-15s, M1As, and semi-automatic pistols--dominate rifle and pistol competitions.

They only dominate because they're legal. If they were illegal something else would dominate. And I don't think people who compete in rifle and pistol competitions make up a whole lot of voters in the big scheme of things.

This is one of the things that irritates me about the NRA. They pose arguments that are only convincing to people who already agree with them, not undecideds or people who disagree but are persuadable or are just uninformed.

[mekender]

They only dominate because they're legal. If they were illegal something else would dominate. And I don't think people who compete in rifle and pistol competitions make up a whole lot of voters in the big scheme of things.

This is one of the things that irritates me about the NRA. They pose arguments that are only convincing to people who already agree with them, not undecideds or people who disagree but are persuadable or are just uninformed.

you dont think that the AR platform being the most versatile and easiest to work on has anything to do with why they are so popular?

you statement is almost a /heaaddesk moment... they are only popular because they are legal, if they were illegal then something else would be popular...

well no shit, i didnt need to be the head cashier at wal-mart to figure that one out... i mean come on...

and the key is, the bradys dont want to stop with just the scary looking guns... they want them all, the scary ones are just the easiest ones to scare soccer moms about so they are the starting point...

gun control isnt about the guns, it is about the control...