AWB explanation for the ignorant


PDA






2nd Amendment
September 15, 2004, 12:32 PM
I had to sit and explain in about three emails last nite exactly what the AWB was and why its expiration didn't matter. I'm going to post a similar explanation of a couple websites of mine and I was thinking about sending it to several area papers to offset the twitching from places like the Bloominton PD. Below is the rough draft. Yes it's short and simplistic but that's the goal. Keep it as simple as possible. Sound byte material. Short enough to make a Letters to the Editor section. What I'd like is for you folks to pick it apart. I don't want to add a lot of detail, just make certain the basics are covered and nobody can rise up and shoot through some gaping hole I missed. And yeah, I utterly ignored a couple things...I don't *think* it matters...

******************************************************


The AWB: What it really was



With all the misinformation being pumped out since the sunset of the Clinton "Assault Weapons Ban" I have decided to create a short piece on what the AWB really was. Hopefully it'll help correct the mistaken views of most non-gunnies. Hopefully it might also help you really upset any of the anti-rights faction you might encounter.

The "Assault Weapons Ban" is more correctly called the Ugly Gun Ban. The basis of the legislation was, literally, the physical appearance of various firearms. Did it look "scary"? What can be done about such ugly guns? How can we do something without totally sending the vocal elements of the "gun culture" over the edge? Those were among the questions asked. And in the end it came down to what they could destroy while not seeming to infringe on the "rights of hunters".

So the AWB became little more than a ban on cosmetic features, people. The AR15 had been in production by numerous manufacturers for years. On this rifle is a pistol grip, a bayonet lug and a flash suppressor. It can also accept standard capacity(20/30rnd) mags. Some also had collabsibe stocks. There were many other rifles that follow this basic pattern of accoutrements. Ugly black rifles. Now keep in mind here, these are all semi-auto firearms. One shot from each squeeze of the trigger. That's all.

The AWB did not stop production of these firearms. They have continued to be available, as fast as factories can produce them, throughout the ban. All the AWB did was force the removal of the bayo lug and the flash suppressor. It also prevented the installation of of folding or callapsible stocks on new rifles. That's IT! Anything already in existence was grandfathered and new rifles simply lacked a couple cosmetic features.

The only other thing the "ban" did was ban the sale of standard capacity(20/30 rnd or more) mags to the public. All mags already in existence remained legal and available.

With the sunset of the ban all that changes is rifles already in continuous production for decades get to wear flash suppressors and bayo lugs again and, if you want one, a folding stockl. That and new standard capacity mags can be sold to the public along with the old ones that have been available all along. That's IT! That is all that has changed. All the hoopla and hand-wringing and predictions of doom from the fringe elements in the VPC and Brady group are based on the returned availability of a bayo lug!

Do you, the average reader, expect a series of mass bayonettings? Do you actually believe the presence or lack of a bayo lug or a folding stock has made a difference in crime? Knowing these facts, on what do you think the anti-gun folks are basing their dire predictions? How much trust can you put in the maturity of any law enforcement officer who would sit there and tell you he expects to be in more danger now than he was Sunday? Nothing has changed. All that happened is that, for once, Washington DC didn't cater to a tiny number of vocal special interest groups and they don't like it.

That alone is reason enough to rejoice!

If you enjoyed reading about "AWB explanation for the ignorant" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
2nd Amendment
September 15, 2004, 04:19 PM
Well considering the flurry of responses I guess it's good to go! :D

Andrew Rothman
September 15, 2004, 05:05 PM
The only other thing the "ban" did was ban the sale of standard capacity(20/30 rnd or more) mags to the public. All mags already in existence remained legal and available.

Nope!

The only other thing the "ban" did was ban the sale of standard capacity(20/30 rnd or more) mags imported or manufactured after September 14, 1994 to the public.

ZeroX
September 15, 2004, 05:32 PM
I've been tempted to write something along those lines to the Herald Times but I figured it'd be too "edited for space" to be worth anything.

2nd Amendment
September 15, 2004, 05:40 PM
Thx, Matt. I'd meant to put the word "new" in there but let it slip by. I like your qualifier better anyway.

ZeroX, the Herald story, front page, from...Tuesday(?) was what sparked this. What a load of tripe. I wasn't planning on even sending it to the Herald, though. I figure it would never see the light of day. OTOH the Linton Daily Citizen and the Bloomfield whatever-it-is and maybe the Washington paper as well would probably print it in full. Between them their circulation is probably as broad as that Bloomington rag's.

raz-0
September 15, 2004, 05:44 PM
Some also had collabsibe stocks

collapsible

2nd Amendment
September 15, 2004, 06:03 PM
Crap, I just realized that's not even the worst. Check out "callapsible". Yeesh. It'll definitely go through the spell-checker.

fistful
September 15, 2004, 06:09 PM
don't forget the 10 round limit for handguns

jojosdad
September 15, 2004, 06:13 PM
2nd Amendment - this is my editing idea for a letter to the editor. Tried to just shorten it up and replace some terms with ones that most antis will understand.

The AWB: What it really was

The "Assault Weapons Ban" is more correctly called the Ugly Gun Ban. The basis of the legislation was, literally, the physical appearance of various firearms. Did it look "scary"?

The AR15 had been in production by numerous manufacturers for years. On this rifle is a pistol grip, a bayonet lug and a flash suppressor. It can also accept standard capacity(20/30rnd) mags. Some also had collabsibe stocks. There were many other rifles that follow this basic pattern of accoutrements. Now keep in mind here, these are all semi-auto firearms. One shot from each squeeze of the trigger. That's all.

The AWB did not stop production of these firearms. All the AWB did was force the removal of the bayonet lug and the flash suppressor. It also prevented the installation of of folding or collapsible stocks on new rifles. That's IT! Anything already in existence was grandfathered and new rifles simply lacked a couple cosmetic features.

The only other thing banned was the sale of standard capacity(20/30 rnd or more) magazines imported or manufactured after September 14, 1994 to the public. Those already in existence remained legal and available.

With the sunset of the ban all that changes is that rifles already in continuous production for decades get to wear flash suppressors and bayonet lugs again and, if you want one, a folding stockl. That and new standard capacity mags can be sold to the public along with the old ones that have been available all along. All the hoopla and hand-wringing and predictions of doom from the fringe elements in the VPC and Brady group are based on the returned availability of a bayo lug!

Do you, the average reader, expect a series of mass bayonettings? Do you actually believe the presence or lack of a bayo lug or a folding stock has made a difference in crime? Knowing these facts, on what do you think the anti-gun folks are basing their dire predictions? How much trust can you put in the maturity of any law enforcement officer who would sit there and tell you he expects to be in more danger now than he was Sunday? Nothing has changed. All that happened is that, for once, Washington DC didn't cater to a tiny number of vocal special interest groups and they don't like it.

That alone is reason enough to rejoice!

edited to change "sheeple" to antis.

2nd Amendment
September 15, 2004, 06:22 PM
Amazing what a little spit and polish can do. If I had an editor that could do that all the time I might be a published author rather than a wannabe. :) Thx. I like it.

jojosdad
September 15, 2004, 06:26 PM
Yer welcome - if you really have any other projects - pm me.

Atticus
September 15, 2004, 07:09 PM
I tried to explain the ban to a bunch of highly educated people where I work. I finally taped two different looking ink pens to a piece of paper and labeled them "good pen" and "bad pen". Banning the "bad pen" I told them would eliminate forgery and fraud forever. The next day, none of them offered a bit of argument...and a few even asked me to explain some other gun related things to them. One step at a time.

And they were AMAZED that a flash hider did not hide the location of the shooter...even after Sarah B., and a host of police chiefs, told them it did.
These are scientists- people paid to ask questions and to document the results. Hopefully, I raised their level of skepticism just a little bit.

fistful
September 16, 2004, 01:34 AM
oh...what do flash-hiders do? Keep from blinding the shooter?

2nd Amendment
September 16, 2004, 02:54 AM
Seriously? I always thought the theory was to disperse the flash at night to reduce location ability by the enemy. I never really cared enough to find out if this is true or not but it always seemed...less than effective to me if so. *shrug* They certainly never seemed much help at reducing night blinding for me.

Honestly, my main reason for wanting them is because it PO's the leftys. :)

If you enjoyed reading about "AWB explanation for the ignorant" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!