Help me respond worthless AWB article in my college newspaper


PDA






powderific
September 18, 2004, 03:28 AM
I found this while reading through my school's weekly newspaper, and am very angry about the blatant disregard for the truth. Obviously we are used to this kind of article and have seen them many times before, but in a small school I feel that I might be able to have some sort of impact on the after effects. There are so many things wrong with this article that I would like you guys help in making a concise letter to give to the paper on just how crazy it is. I'm hoping to come up with something under 120 words to get it into the letters to the editor section, any help you can give would be much appreciated.




Lifted Gun Ban Source of Fear

The 19 assault weapons now legal for purchase include the Uzi, the preferred weapon of the Israeli military; the AK-47, a Russian rifle accurate from 1500 meters and the TEC 9, which can hold 50 bullets in its magazine.
How could the average American resist the pistol grip, folding stock, bayonet mount, flash suppressor and my favorite adaptation, the grenade launcher, that are characteristic of these constitutionally protected "hobby guns?"
People kill people, but guns help people kill efficeintly. Assault weapons pose a danger because they allow efficeint violence.
Gun enthusiasts and internet research made me realize that killing someone with an assault weapon is like buying a Bentley to run someone over. Assault weapons are not a logical choice, but rather an efficient one.
Violence is a public health issue; guns decrease the safety and the health of our community. Every gun-related death is preventable, and every life is sacred. Rapper 50 Cent is living proof that a handgun assault is not easy to survive, while the 30 bullets in an AK47 clip are simply impossible to survive. Gun deaths, 10 in Omaha in 2003-04, and gun assaults, 142 in Omaha in 2003-04, are measurable and tragic. We can prevent future crimes by removing guns, especially assault weapons, from the home and streets of our communities. While there are no body counts to measure the violence these guns allow, think of the silent victims in our community who are coerced, intimidated and held hostage by the warfare in their city streets or suburban homes. Guns create an opportunity for fatal violence, and that is a risk no community should encourage with the free trade of military-issued weapons.

If you enjoyed reading about "Help me respond worthless AWB article in my college newspaper" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Rawlings
September 18, 2004, 03:41 AM
Challenge them to name one national military force that issues strictly semi-automatic weapons such as were included in the ban.

Better yet, challenge them to count how many of those 142 gun assaults and 10 gun deaths were perpatrated by assault weapons that got up on their own volition, trundled out the door, and shot some folks.

:banghead:

Stebalo
September 18, 2004, 03:52 AM
The 19 assault weapons now legal for purchase

First of all, the AWB did not ban the purchase of anything. Everything listed in the ban was legal to buy, legal to sell, legal to own. It was a ban on manufacture. They love to name drop 'uzi' and 'ak47' and regardless of whether the ban applies to these weapons or not (of course it doesn't) whatever is legal to own now was legal to won before September 13.

MP5
September 18, 2004, 08:16 AM
Here's some useful info about how the ban didn't reduce violence:

http://washingtontimes.com/national/20040816-114754-1427r.htm

We can prevent future crimes by removing guns, especially assault weapons, from the home and streets of our communities.

How does preventing the legal purchase of a weapon prevent a crime? Not all crimes are committed with firearms, and few are committed with so-called assault weapons (see above article and do a search here for further links to crime statistics). Do criminals march into stores and buy their weapons? You'd think those pesky background checks might get in their way.

While there are no body counts to measure the violence these guns allow, think of the silent victims in our community who are coerced, intimidated and held hostage by the warfare in their city streets or suburban homes.

If there are no "body counts to measure the violence," why does the author assert it exists? Can the author point to specific examples of this "warfare" in our "suburban homes"? This is empty rhetoric at its most pitiful.

Guns create an opportunity for fatal violence, and that is a risk no community should encourage with the free trade of military-issued weapons.

These aren't military weapons (see the editorial response here for ideas http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=102051 ). People create violence, not guns. The opportunity is there with someone's bare hands. http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/aacrime2001.htm (Scroll down to "America's Weapon of Choice?")

Every gun-related death is preventable

By not pulling the trigger. Does the author propose that cars be banned since they're deadly weapons and kill more people than guns do each year? Of course, they're only deadly weapons when used irresponsibly, just like a gun. I for one have never pointed a gun at anyone, let alone killed someone. I've never killed anyone with my car, either. It's a question of maturity, responsibility, and morality--not removing or restricting Constitutional freedoms.

Some stats about death causes:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/lcod.htm

http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/factsheets/death_causes2000.htm

Baba Louie
September 18, 2004, 08:25 AM
"In fact, the assault weapons ban will have no significant effect either on the crime rate or on personal security. Nonetheless, it is a good idea . . . . Its only real justification is not to reduce crime but to desensitize the public to the regulation of weapons in preparation for their ultimate confiscation."
Charles Krauthammer (columnist), Disarm the Citizenry. But Not Yet, Washington Post, Apr. 5, 1996
We can prevent future crimes by removing guns, especially assault weapons, from the home and streets of our communities. While there are no body counts to measure the violence these guns allow, think of the silent victims in our community who are coerced, intimidated and held hostage by the warfare in their city streets or suburban homes. Guns create an opportunity for fatal violence, and that is a risk no community should encourage with the free trade of military-issued weapons. Guns also create an opportunity for law-abiding citizens to STOP fatal violence initiated by criminal ilk and the elimination of that factor is a risk no community should encourage.
What was the reason Paul Revere rode out that April night? An attempt to stop a tyrannical gov't from confiscating the assault weapons of the day? Who is the militia?
"Warfare in their city streets"? And you want them/us to lay down THEIR/OUR ARMS? Who is the militia?
No law will stop outlaws from creating chaos. But a rifle/shotgun in the hands of a good citizen can, has and will.

powderific
September 18, 2004, 12:19 PM
Thanks guys, I'll whip up the letter today. People who think like this drive me crazy, it doesn't even make sense. Accurate to 1500 meters? Yeah, I wish.

If you enjoyed reading about "Help me respond worthless AWB article in my college newspaper" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!