Police chiefs, doctors push ban on assault weapons (E-mail her)


PDA






Gixerman1000
August 24, 2004, 07:14 PM
Police chiefs, doctors push ban on assault weapons (E-mail her)
http://www.madison.com/tct/news/ind...id=8882&ntpid=4


Police chiefs, doctors push ban on assault weapons
Without federal action, it'll expire Sept. 13

By Anita Weier = E-mail: aweier@madison.com

August 24, 2004


Fifty-five Wisconsin police chiefs joined the groups Physicians for Social Responsibility and the Wisconsin Anti-Violence Effort today to call for reauthorizing and strengthening the federal assault weapons ban.


Jeri Bonavia, executive director of WAVE, accused President Bush and congressional leaders of "passing the buck" instead of renewing the legislation, which was passed in 1994 and will expire Sept. 13 unless it is reauthorized.

The police and doctors represented at a news conference at the Inn on the Park this morning asked Bush and U.S. Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Menomonee Falls, who chairs the House Judiciary Committee, to work to extend the ban.

"A high number of police officers are killed and wounded by these weapons," said Onalaska Police Chief Randy Williams, president of the Wisconsin Chiefs of Police Association. Last October, a Green Lake County sheriff's deputy was gunned down with an AK-47 when he responded to a domestic dispute, Williams said.

One-fifth of law enforcement officers slain in the line of duty from 1998 through 2001 were killed by assault weapons, according to a report by the Violence Policy Center in Washington, D.C.

"The key point is that this policy of extending the ban is key to ensuring the health and well-being of patients affected by gun violence," said Amy Shulz, a registered nurse who is president of the Madison chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility. "These weapons cause huge internal damage by attacking many organs at once."

The ban prohibits the manufacture, sale or possession of semi-automatic rifles, shotguns or pistols designed to maim and kill with a spray of bullets. But Physicians for Social Responsibility says the law has several loopholes and should be amended by:

• Changing the definition of assault weapon to include pistols, rifles and shotguns with a detachable magazine and thumbhole stocks or pistol grips.


• Regulating assault weapon frames and receivers to reduce the availability of gun parts that are easily assembled into deadlier weapons.


• Outlawing the importation, sale and use of high-capacity ammunition magazines, especially those that hold more than 10 rounds.

A poll by Lake Snell Perry & Associates of likely voters in 10 states this year found that most of those polled want the ban expanded. In Wisconsin, 73 percent favored renewing the ban, with 52 percent strongly favoring renewal. One in five opposed renewal and 7 percent refused to answer.

In addition, 69 percent of likely Wisconsin voters supported strengthening the ban to prevent the gun industry from manufacturing commercial models of military-style assault weapons. Among gun owners surveyed, 66 percent supported renewing the ban and 60 percent supported strengthening it.

Wisconsin police chiefs supporting the reauthorization of the weapons ban include top cops from DeForest, Evansville, Fort Atkinson, Milton, Oregon, Portage, Watertown, West Bend and the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

E-mail: aweier@madison.com

If you enjoyed reading about "Police chiefs, doctors push ban on assault weapons (E-mail her)" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
R.H. Lee
August 24, 2004, 07:30 PM
"Physicians for Social Responsibility"?????

Gimme a break :rolleyes: These clowns need to clean up their own act before they begin dictating "responsibility" to others. Too many of their trusting patients are dying from misdiagnosis, negligence and malpractice.

Bruce H
August 24, 2004, 08:18 PM
The above should go for chiefs of police also.

manwithoutahome
August 24, 2004, 11:19 PM
I can't even find a doc that will put me back on the meds that I know that work and I'm supposed to just trust them now?

And the chief of police here in Eugene is the same way. The MMM came here and the chief was right up front calling for more gun control. Thank God that he isn't in charge of issueing CHL's then no one would have one. LOSER!!!!!

They need to ensure that they stop killing the 100,000+ people a year (give or take a few) before they start getting on a high horse about guns.

Wayne

Harry Tuttle
August 24, 2004, 11:43 PM
One-fifth of law enforcement officers slain in the line of duty from 1998 through 2001 were killed by assault weapons, according to a report by the Violence Policy Center in Washington, D.C.


only if you classify the officers duty pistol as an assault weapon

Harry Tuttle
August 24, 2004, 11:43 PM
• Changing the definition of assault weapon to include pistols, rifles and shotguns with a detachable magazine and thumbhole stocks or pistol grips.



and there you go, i hope all the non AW owning pistol shooters take note

TrapperReady
August 24, 2004, 11:53 PM
Please note that this group is hardly representative of all docs.

Check out the dashboard closely... :D

http://www.fototime.com/{EB0C0778-7D42-43C4-92C5-9327C6188B4B}/picture.JPG

Standing Wolf
August 24, 2004, 11:55 PM
Fifty-five Wisconsin police chiefs joined the groups Physicians for Social Responsibility and the Wisconsin Anti-Violence Effort today to call for reauthorizing and strengthening the federal assault weapons ban.

55 more reasons I'm generally skeptical of cops being allowed anywhere the nation's civil rights.

R.H. Lee
August 24, 2004, 11:59 PM
Please note that this group is hardly representative of all docs.

heh. Bet none of 'em drive a pick up with or without shotgun shells on the dash.:D

misANTHrope
August 25, 2004, 12:17 AM
Ah, the deadly thumbhole stock...

Atticus
August 25, 2004, 12:21 AM
"The key point is that this policy of extending the ban is key to ensuring the health and well-being of patients affected by gun violence," said Amy Shulz, a registered nurse who is president of the Madison chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility. "These weapons cause huge internal damage by attacking many organs at once."


Sometimes it's hard to believe how ignorant, some intelligent (or at least educated) people can be.

beemerb
August 25, 2004, 12:21 AM
Are police chiefs real police officers or have most of them turned to politics to gain their positions.I do not consider them law officers anymore.
Bob

beemerb
August 25, 2004, 12:25 AM
Are police chiefs real police officers or have most of them turned to politics to gain their positions.I do not consider them law officers anymore.
Bob

mattx109
August 25, 2004, 03:23 AM
"These weapons cause huge internal damage by attacking many organs at once."

No kidding?

By their definition, the weapons in use by police officers would be the kind that "cause huge internal damage by attacking many organs at once" too.

:rolleyes:

jetman
August 25, 2004, 02:02 PM
doctors = a bunch of over-educated idiots

johnnymenudo
August 25, 2004, 03:10 PM
Gunowners=a bunch of paranoid rednecks that blank their sisters and use their guns to make up for their lack of manhood.

How do you like that for a generalization?

If you want to argue the issue, name calling and insulting comments are not going to win you any points.

JM

TrapperReady
August 25, 2004, 04:11 PM
jetman = ignore-list-fodder

fletcher
August 25, 2004, 04:18 PM
Fifty-five Wisconsin police chiefs joined the groups Physicians for Social Responsibility and the Wisconsin Anti-Violence Effort today to call for reauthorizing and strengthening the federal assault weapons ban.


Quite the misnomer.

Warbow
August 25, 2004, 05:06 PM
jetman wrote:

doctors = a bunch of over-educated idiots

Yeah. One of my biggest fears in life is if I ever have to undergo a life saving operation that the doctor who performs it will be over-educated.

hammer4nc
August 26, 2004, 08:34 AM
"Don't blame cops...Cops don't make the laws, they only enforce them." This, and other similar examples, prove that cops do much more than merely enforce laws, esp. with regard to gun-grabbing, eh? Apologists: Next time you're tempted to repost this bit of fallacy, in an attempt to absolve cops of blame for the next gun confiscation law; please bookmark and review this article. Thanks.

SteveS
August 26, 2004, 01:39 PM
doctors = a bunch of over-educated idiots

I don't think that is fair. The Physicians for Social Responsibility does not represent all doctors. I wonder how many members they have. I have never been to a doctor's office that showed or distributed any of their literature.

Double Maduro
August 26, 2004, 04:16 PM
You want to know about them?

Try here.

http://www.psr.org//home.cfm?id=home

DM

ssr
August 26, 2004, 04:48 PM
PSR is a fringe group. It has nothing to do with medicine or professional medical societies.

50 Freak
August 26, 2004, 05:03 PM
One-fifth of law enforcement officers slain in the line of duty from 1998 through 2001 were killed by assault weapons, according to a report by the Violence Policy Center in Washington, D.C.

Gee....does that mean maybe the FREAKING BAN DOESN'T WORK!!!!!!!!!!!:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

MeekandMild
August 26, 2004, 08:16 PM
...said Amy Shulz, a registered nurse who is president of the Madison chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility... That is a bit incongruous. Do they even have any doctors in this organization? According to their website:
Whether you're a health care professional or a citizen who simply cares about human health and survival, PSR amplifies your voice. PSR's national leaders and local chapters speak on behalf of more than 20,000 members, bringing a powerful and scientifically respected message to policy makers and the public. I went through their website and found a simple checkoff form with various member classes, no way of checking credentials. No list of what percentage of their members have doctoral degrees nor how many of their doctors are doctors of education, doctors of sociology or doctors of political science.

On another page they identify themselves on the one hand as a tax exempt organization and on the other as a political organization working to oust conservatives from government. They could just as easily call themselves 'Lesbians for Jesus' or 'Redheads Who Like Yogurt' what they are is either a DNC or a CPUSA front organization.

Not saying there are no real doctor's organizations (http://www.haciendapub.com/gunpage1.html) which are strongly pro-RKBA or anti-RKBA. Just saying this group of loons ain't one of them.

spacemanspiff
August 26, 2004, 10:04 PM
okay, so i got a little verbose with my email. Enjoy!

Dear Anita

I have a few questions about your article. First off, how much research did you do in the background of the 1994 Assault Weapon Ban (AWB)? The way the article is written it leads me to believe that the data was taken from gun control proponents so-called ‘fact sheets’. I will address each point made in your article:

“"The key point is that this policy of extending the ban is key to ensuring the health and well-being of patients affected by gun violence," said Amy Shulz, a registered nurse who is president of the Madison chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility. "These weapons cause huge internal damage by attacking many organs at once."

Any projectile from a firearm is going to cause massive tissue and organ damage. The attributes of an ‘assault weapon’ do not make their projectiles any deadlier than that of a non-assault weapon. Every attribute of an assault weapon that is banned from manufacture by the ’94 AWB are cosmetic features. The pistol grips, the collapsible stock, the flash hider, bayonet lugs, magazine well forward of the grips, forward handle, magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, do not make the weapon any more dangerous than one that does not have those features.
The entire point of the AWB was to restrict weapons that looked scary.

What makes an AK-47 different than a M-1 Carbine? Both are semi-automatic rifles. Both can have bayonets attached. Both can have flash hiders on their barrels. Both have magazine wells forward of the stock grips.

The ban prohibits the manufacture, sale or possession of semi-automatic rifles, shotguns or pistols designed to maim and kill with a spray of bullets.

That statement is not true. The AWB restricted the sale or possession of semi-automatic rifles that had enough features to qualify as a ‘assault weapon’, but only if they were made after September 14, 1994. Any rifles with those features manufactured prior to that date are lawful for private citizens to own. While some manufacturers closed up shop after the AWB was enacted, others obtained contracts with military and law enforcement agencies to manufacture rifles for use by government agencies. They were unable to offer those same weapons to the civilian marketplace though.

It is also untrue that these assault weapons were ‘designed to maim and kill with a spray of bullets’. That entire argument is devised by people who watched a movie like ‘Rambo’, or ‘Predator’ and watched as an actor used a prop with special effects to shoot from the hip. For some reason Hollywood thinks that inaccurate portrayals of firearms makes for better cinema. This is why people still to this day believe that Glock makes a ceramic pistol that can be smuggled through airport metal detectors, simply because a fictional product was mentioned in the movie ‘Die Hard’. And why people think that you can accurately shoot an AK-47 or any rifle from the hip, because Rambo always did it, and so did Arnold in movies like Predator, Commando, True Lies, etc.

What is with the obsession with phrases like ‘spray of bullets’? Anti gun organizations always use that sound bite, as well as ‘bullet hoses’, or ‘high capacity- rapid fire’.

Any semi-automatic firearm can fire as fast as the trigger is pulled. But no weapon is designed for that kind of use. Only a skilled shooter can control the weapon while it is being fired at a faster rate. Recoil and muzzle rise bring the weapon off the target, making it virtually inaccurate to fire as fast as possible.

But Physicians for Social Responsibility says the law has several loopholes and should be amended by:
• Changing the definition of assault weapon to include pistols, rifles and shotguns with a detachable magazine and thumbhole stocks or pistol grips.
• Regulating assault weapon frames and receivers to reduce the availability of gun parts that are easily assembled into deadlier weapons.
• Outlawing the importation, sale and use of high-capacity ammunition magazines, especially those that hold more than 10 rounds.

Gun control advocates have always said they don’t want to ban *all* guns. But that first bullet point shows that their intent is to disarm the entire populace of firearms that have sporting and defensive purposes. Not to mention that this country was founded, not in terms of *needs* but that of WANTS. This country’s forefathers WANTED the freedoms of speech, religion, freedom from taxation without representation, and the freedom to provide for every aspect of their families needs, including that of self defense.

Look at Great Britain: a nanny state that has the government dictating what is approved for their lowly serfs to own or possess. There is no freedom whatsoever in that kind of a society.

And to have gun-control supporters crying about who needs what, is truly unpatriotic.

Although there is absolutely no evidence that the weapons currently banned are more deadly, what evidence does the Physicians for Social Responsibility have that shows that weapons with detachable magazines and thumbhole stocks or pistol grips are a danger to society? The answer? NO EVIDENCE.

I’ve already addressed the fact that the features of a so-called assault weapon do not make the weapon any more dangerous, so I wont beat that horse into the ground with that 2nd bullet point.

What purpose does it serve to restrict how many rounds a firearm can hold? The answer: NONE.

Finally, what is a poll of *likely* voters? Is it a poll of the public, or just those who *might* vote? Sounds like a very unscientific method of obtaining data. I can find a group of “likely” voters and get their opinion on all kinds of topics. But they might not even be in a position to vote, they may be under the age of 18, or be convicted felons, or voices in my head.

Miss Weier, I suggest you do more research before writing articles in the future. Your credibility as a journalist could be jeopardized if you continue to use myths, lies, and misinformation to sell your rhetoric.

jetman
August 27, 2004, 01:07 AM
my apologies if I insulted anyone out there specifically. It's just an opinion I personally formed by dealing with many of the Drs. in a very problem birth at a local hospital. I doubt anyone here was actually there 12 years ago to be personally offended, but if so no harm intended.

R.H. Lee
August 27, 2004, 11:34 PM
Excellent matter of fact letter, spiff. Keep us posted on any response. :)

Doc
August 28, 2004, 11:24 PM
PSR is a fringe group. It has nothing to do with medicine or professional medical societies.

well, yes and no.

yes, PSR is a beltway organization dedicated to its own proliferation.

no, lots of organized medicine including the AMA, the American Acad of Peds
American College of OB/GYN and the American College of Phys and Surgeons
are all VEHEMENTLY anti-RKBA.

not too long ago the AMA and AAP lead a campaign to routinely question patients
about guns in the home (ostensibly for SAFETY reasons) but then, the party line
was to actively dissuade patients to keeping guns for SAFETY reasons

:banghead:

idiots :banghead:

ssr
August 29, 2004, 09:18 AM
I was speaking specifically about PSR. I meant that they are a group, association, of medical professionals who try to advance their social agenda, not a medical one, and that their purpose is not medical advancement.

Trust me, I know about the stance of many medical associations, which is why I do not and will not be a member.

If you enjoyed reading about "Police chiefs, doctors push ban on assault weapons (E-mail her)" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!