If the AWB is renewed, how will you vote?

[atek3]

Newsflash from GeneC: 7.62mm=.308
Thank you, Captain Obvious. A "North China Industries" 7.62mm rifle is chambered for 7.62x39, not .308 which refers to 7.62x51.
And if you want to get picky 7.62x39 actually uses .311 inch bullets.

Oh come on, not one rifle in a real caliber like 223 or 308?

When people say a rifle in 308, 99% of the time they aren't refering to a 7.62x39, 300 win mag, or 300 WSM.

atek3

 

[RooK]

( ATEK, 7.62 IS .308)

Chances are if it was a .308, being here in the US, they would have listed it as ".308". More than likely that refers to the 7.62x39mm cartridge used by the SKS/AK rifles. The only .308 Norinco imported was some M14 clones in limited quantities.

Edit: Posted right after you.

 

[Lobotomy Boy]

I don't agree with GeneC, but I respect the boy for sticking to his beliefs. And I'm pretty danged sure that no one here is going to budge him from those beliefs if this thread keeps going for another 50 pages.

So back to the original question about voting. Lately I've been thinking that things worked pretty well back when we had a divided government. When the Dems controlled both the executive and legislative branches we got the AWB. When we had divided government we got Monica and Sploogegate. Now we have a Republican president and a Republican legislative branch and we're still worried about the AWB being renewed. Frankly I'd rather have the president splooging on some skankho's dress and using her nether regions as a humidor than passing legislation like the AWB and the Patriot Act.

I plan to vote Libertarian for president, knowing full well it may mean we get Kerry/Edwards, but also voting for Republicans for congress and state legislators. I've decided that a paralyzed divided government beats the heck out of a government that actually does something.

 

[Treylis]

I didn't say that, the International Association of Police Chiefs and the Natl Sheriffs Association and the Police Benevolent Society, et al said that. I really don't know, but I'll sure take their word for it. So, surely you don't mean that ANYONE should be able to own ANYTHING they want, even though that's what you say. So either you're actually saying something you don't really mean or...what?

Well, you said it, quoting them. You're getting into semantic twisting here, I think you know what I meant from my statement.

And, well, yes, I meant exactly what I said. I try to do that, clarity in writing is a virtue. ANYONE should be able to own ANYTHING unless their possession of that thing directly presents a threat to other (non-consenting) people or their property.

Why on earth would you think I would say something directly like that and then go: "Oh, well, I didn't really mean it"?

 

[RevDisk]

I will not be voting for Mr Bush regardless. I disagree with many of his policies, his past activities and the people with whom he associates.

On the other hand, I will not be voting for Mr Kerry either dispite my status being registered as a Democrat. Sorry, I neither like nor trust Mr Kerry.


I have proved my patriotism over and over. Not with harshy written words, but with deed. Part of being a true patriot is being educated about things. I have read much on both candidates and in good conscious I cannot abid by either. Take it or leave it, I'm voting according to my beliefs.


Mr GeneC, I respect your beliefs. I respect your words of standing up to others to defend your beliefs. I extremely disagree with your beliefs. I was 13 in 1994. I have proved myself a good citizen in every way possible that I know. I signed up for the Service, I hold public office, I vote, I write/call/visit other public officials, etc. I have never been convicted of any crimes, I have never had a single traffic/parking incident.

I fall to understand why I should be punished for my age. Why should I pay more for magazines and weapons that are functionally no different than those made 11 years ago? Why should I have to put up with aging normal capacity magazines?

I was trusted with weaponry that 99% of Americans will never likely see, let alone operate. To own such weaponry as a civilian, I would have to pay four or five digits for a weapon that is nearly 20 years old, after submitting to background check that that is likely more time consuming than my military security clearance. Even after I was checked out, I would still be subject to intense scrutiny. It takes a long time to make enough money to save up four or five digits on my current pay level... I'll do it anyways.

Why is that? What else do I need to prove that I haven't thus far?

 

[itgoesboom]

Gene,

I really don't want to go back through all the pages, so I am going to paraphrase you.

You said that the AWB doesn't affect anyone born before 1972. I will ignore the innacuracy of the date, since in most states, and under federal law, people can purchase rifles at the age of 18.

But, what about people who were financially uable to purchase so-called "assault rifles" prior to the banning? Most college students don't have the extra income to plop down $1000+ for a rifle. What about people who are in the service. What's the yearly pay for servicemen when they first join? Do you think that a PFC in the army is going to be able to save up and buy a $1000 rifle with extra magazines while being paid $12,000 a year? Somehow people who have more money should be considered better and not be subject to the same laws?

And what about those of us who were unable to vote for our majestic leaders back then? Personally, I was born in 1978, so I hadn't had a chance to vote against those who placed the restriction against us.

Now I have my chance to make my voice heard. If the AWB is renewed, I will vote against the those who support it in every election possible. Period.

Frankly, I am finding your attitude to be similar to that of a slave. Your masters decide what is best for you, and you just go along with it. Whats more, you don't seem to care whether or not others will be enslaved too.

To be honest with you, I like GWB, but I don't like certain things he has done. At the same time, there are things he has done that I do like. I would prefer him to John Kerry, but if he signs the AWB renewel, then that will be the straw that broke the camels back, and I will vote against him. I will do that soley to send the message that any politician that supports limiting my rights will lose my support.

 

[Justin]

Now, on the long gun chart , you can say that Bg used AK( ATEK, 7.62 IS .308)

Not really. Like I said, in the ATFe report it looks like they've muddled together two different models of 7.62mm rifle from the same manufacturer. I get the distinct impression that when they say 'North China Industries 7.62mm rifle' they are talking about both the SKS and the MAK90, both models that are specifically mentioned in the ATFe report. I In other words, among crime guns, you don't even begin to see a statistical representation of any sort of self-loading rifle until you simmer the stats down to just long guns used in crime, and even then, they have to cook the books by passing off two distinctly different models of firearm as the same thing. Even then, neither the SKS nor the MAK90 are considered to be assault rifles by anyone's definition, be it the military, or the stipulations of the 94 AWB. In other words, even when you break the stats down this far, the numbers continue to bear out that "assault weapons" as defined by the 94 AWB never were, and have not become the gun of choice for criminals.

In other words, out of nearly 1.4 million violent crimes committed in 1999* autoloading rifles that could even be loosely construed as based on a military pattern (note that I did not say they were actual assault rifles or "assault weapons" per the 1994 AWB) were involved in somewhere in the neighborhood of 1,000 crimes.

*FBI 1999 UCR, http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/Cius_99/99crime/99c2_02.pdf

 

[GeneC]

You might be trying to split hairs here Justin. This is a mak90:


http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...5271701&rd=1&ssPageName=WD1V#ebayphotohosting


Btw, the problem with the info you cited is no info was collected as to what weapons were used in forcible rates, so that throws off all other stats, but I'm plaesed to see violent crimes dropped 28% from '90-'99.

 

[GeneC]

Revdisc & IGB, too bad, don't blame me 'cause y'all were born when you was. Those too young to vote just has to live with whatever was voted. What's the problem? Do you think you should get some kind of special consideration 'cause you were teenagers and are still being effected by a law you don't agree with? I joined the Marine Corps when I was 17 and that was in '76, so I still couldn't fight in 'Nam if I wanted to (which I didn't), it's just the grace of God when you're born, so what's your point?

My point (which is ancient history now) was that the awb has never effected any assault rifles bought before '94 and those eligible to buy them up to '94 had to of been born before '76( ok,ok I concede '76, but that just means certainly by '72).

 

[GeneC]

"Newsflash from GeneC: 7.62mm=.308
And if you want to get picky "

Well let's don't , let's move on.

 

[itgoesboom]

Gene,

My point is that my generation sees this as an opportunity to change things for ourselves, and not have to live under the laws that were passed while we were unable to vote.

Just because you feel happy to be subordinate to our elected officials doesn't mean the rest of us do. If status quo is enough for you, fine, but some of us want a return to our rights. Throughout history there have been many people willing to live as slaves and subordinates. Wonder why we never hear about them?

So you go about your life, happy that you got yours, don't worry about the rest of us, and don't feel any obligation to help leave this world as well or better off than when you joined it.

I.G.B.

 

[itgoesboom]

Nice edit there Gene, but I already copied it.

Newsflash from GeneC: 7.62mm=.308
Thank you, Captain Obvious. A "North China Industries" 7.62mm rifle is chambered for 7.62x39, not .308 which refers to 7.62x51.
And if you want to get picky 7.62x39 actually uses .311 inch bullets.



Well let's don't , let's move on.
Btw:


7.62 mm = .300

So you tell him you agree and don't want to be picky, and move on, and then in the next line, start getting picky and try to throw in a little jab?

Nice.

BTW, 7.62x39 DOES infact use .311 diameter bullets.

Kinda like .38 spcl bullets aren't actually .38, but I am sure you already knew that, since you seem to act like you know everything.

I.G.B.

 

[GeneC]

IGB, so tell me young man, what you're gonna do different that your father and grandfather didn't do to change things?

So what? The fact is, he talked about being picky and said 7.62 +.311 and the FACT is 7.62=.300, but I decided that it wasn't worth bickering over , so I editted it out, but you decide that some conspiracy is in effect so you decided to "expose" it, in your youth, but don't realize that nothing was gained and you really didn't "expose" anything, which is why there's an age limit to responsible things, 'cause apparently young people lacks the wisdom and experince to know when diplomacy is being exercised for the greater good, or even understands the sacrifices for the greater good, but I can give you an example, if you and me and 2 or 4 other 'soldiers ' were a squad and on patrol somewhere and you started talking the crap your talking about how this or that ain't fair and personal freedom this and that, we'd leave your self-centered butt on the trail somewhere, 'cause you just don't get it.

 

[Justin]

Gene, I'd appreciate it if you'd assume that I have a certain level of competence regarding firearms, and please not lecture me about a model of firearm that I own.



The MAK90 Sporter is a firearm that is designed to meet to the ATF specification that all imported guns should conform to some level of 'sporting use.'

As a result, when these rifles are imported into the USA, the requirements that define an assault rifle are actually stricter for foreign-made guns than for domestically made ones. (Generally speaking, domestically produced rifles are allowed to have one more "evil feature" than foreign ones.)

You'll note that the rifle in the picture you posted has neither a flash hider or bayonet lug. I'd be willing to bet that when that particular rifle was imported into the United States that it also had a thumbhole stock on it. You'll notice that the pistol grip on that particular example is a different color than the rest of the furniture on the gun? Keep that in mind.

Ok, this is gonna get bumpy, but try to stay with me.

Upon buying the imported MAK90, the owner went out and purchased a US made parts kit. Now, according to the law, if a firearm has 10 or more parts that were made in the USA then the law judges it to have been manufactured in the USA. So, swapping a few parts (including the stock/grips) in a Chinese made MAK90 turns it into an American made MAK90.

Since the weapon is now legally considered to be a product of the United States, the owner can then legally attach one more "evil feature" to the weapon without it becoming a violation of the 1994 AWB.

You can accuse me of splitting hairs 'til the cows come home, but by the legal definition, the rifle picture you posted is most emphatically not an "assault weapon" as defined by either the ATF's importation standards* or the domestic 1994 AWB**.

What you've done is post a picture of a Fiero while trying to pass it off as a Ferrari.



*Since it is now legally considered a domestically produced firearm.

**Because it doesn't exceed the allowed minimum number of "evil features" for a domestically produced firearm manufactured after Sept. 13, 1994.

 

[Justin]

So what? The fact is, he talked about being picky and said 7.62 +.311 and the FACT is 7.62=.300, but I decided that it wasn't worth bickering over , so I editted it out, but you decide that some conspiracy is in effect so you decided to "expose" it, in your youth, but don't realize that nothing was gained and you really didn't "expose" anything, which is why there's an age limit to responsible things, 'cause apparently young people lacks the wisdom and experince to know when diplomacy is being exercised for the greater good, or even understands the sacrifices for the greater good, but I can give you an example, if you and me and 2 or 4 other 'soldiers ' were a squad and on patrol somewhere and you started talking the crap your talking about how this or that ain't fair and personal freedom this and that, we'd leave your self-centered butt on the trail somewhere, 'cause you just don't get it.

I'm starting to wonder if Chris Rhines was right. Gene, are you sure you're not just funnin' us?

I'd also like to point out that by this point it should be pretty obvious that the sacrifices made in the name of the 1994 AWB have not had any effect resulting in any gains for the ever-nebulous "greater good."

 

[GeneC]

Then I have to ask ( since you seem to be on some kind of bickering fest), what the heck is your point? The freakin' graph YOU presented shows the 3rd top gun used in violent crimes was a 7.62. What is the point of trying to speculate or extrapolate or spin or spend ANY time trying to defend something that DOESN'T NEED DEFENDING?! It's almost as bad as IGB trying to split hairs on 11 thousandsths of an inch , when his context was why didn't criminals use "man-sized" calibers, when in fact they do! My whole point for even pursuing this thread was that people use credible sources and the one YOU just cited clearly said that they DID NOT gather info on guns used in ANY forcible rapes (which there were hundreds), so ALL the rest of the numbers WERE NOT ACCURATE and therefore your cite wasn't accurate.

 

[GeneC]

I'd also like to point out that by this point it should be pretty obvious that the sacrifices made in the name of the 1994 AWB have not had any effect resulting in any gains for the ever-nebulous "greater good."


__________________

Then you truly don't read these posts , since I have said many , many times that I truly believe that the awb WILL sunset, 'cause I believe my
Govt will do the right thing and I have indicated that the awb has had NO effect on crime, BUT the VCC&LE Act has.

 

[Justin]

Because, Gene, you're trying to tell me that the stats show an assault weapon being listed in the top 10 of all federally traced crime guns, when that is most evidently not the case.

Assault rifles, "assault weapons" or whatever you want to call them have never been used by criminals in any numbers that come close to even measuring a blip of statistical significance.

My point is, that after 7 pages of debate, there is no evidence that has shown that the 1994 AWB had any practical effects on violent crime rates in this nation.

You may as well outlaw pink stuffed bunnies with button eyes in the name of stopping crime. It would do about the same level of good.

You have maintained throughout this entire thread that the 1994 AWB must somehow, in some way be good for the country. Every argument you have presented has been smashed, stomped, crushed, burned, or otherwise obliterated, and yet you cling to this silly notion out of some sort of misguided faith that other men are somehow infallible because they won an election!

The onus has been on you to show that the ban has had any positive effects, yet you have not shown even one remotely compelling reason for why this law should exist.

Throughout this thread, you've shown a streak of bigotry towards young people as well as those without the financial means to pay the artificially inflated prices of preban merchandise.

You've been egotistical, sanctimonious, and insulting to both other members of THR as well as myself. You've continually twisted what you've posted, ignored those with valid questions or critiques, and fired back with accusations of stupidity, drug use, or whining.

In short, you've shown a level of irrational, stubborn, voluntarily ignorant blind faith that is utterly staggering.

 

[GeneC]

Justin , what is your problem? I JUST GOT DONE SAYING THAT THE AWB HAD NO EFFECT ON CRIME and no, I just said it was a 7.62.. As far as youth, I CLEARLY pointed out it was simply a matter of being born at a particular time. You either Don't read posts or you TOTALLY misinterpret them, either way , GET OFF ME and go find something else to do. Btw, I can practice my faith the way I want to. That's what this Country is founded on.

 

[Justin]

I said:

you cling to this silly notion out of some sort of misguided faith that other men are somehow infallible because they won an election!

Gene replied:

Btw, I can practice my faith the way I want to. That's what this Country is founded on.

WHAH?!

 

[GeneC]

I don't expect you to understand, I just expect you to leave me alone.

 

[atek3]

Btw, I can practice my faith the way I want to. That's what this Country is founded on.

From the GeneC lexicon:

Faith: The belief of the "founders" that whoever is in power must be vested with total control of the country, and always makes the RightDecisions(tm).

 

[GeneC]

Well, lucky for you Atek, this Administration HAS been making the right decisions, as you're able to freely get on your computer tonite and post some rediculous post instead of having to be out there patrolling your neighborhood 'til 3am for terrorist activity.

 

[RevDisk]

Revdisc & IGB, too bad, don't blame me 'cause y'all were born when you was. Those too young to vote just has to live with whatever was voted.

Wanna put a wager on that? I have and I will continue to fight against immoral and unconstitutional laws. Being young does not mean being a slave.

What's the problem? Do you think you should get some kind of special consideration 'cause you were teenagers and are still being effected by a law you don't agree with? I joined the Marine Corps when I was 17 and that was in '76, so I still couldn't fight in 'Nam if I wanted to (which I didn't), it's just the grace of God when you're born, so what's your point?

I'm probably not the same religion as you, but I accept you intended it just in passing.

How is being displeased with an unjust and fairly pointless law "thinking I should get special consideration"? I don't want special consideration, I think all people should have the same chance.

My point is that the AWB is a bad law, and I'm glad it's going away. After the AWB is gone, maybe we can work on repealing other bad gun laws. A certain law of 1986 comes to mind. Someday, maybe NFA. I doubt it will happen, but I'll give it a shot anyways.

My point (which is ancient history now) was that the awb has never effected any assault rifles bought before '94 and those eligible to buy them up to '94 had to of been born before '76( ok,ok I concede '76, but that just means certainly by '72).

My point is that you old people shouldn't get special consideration.

Well, lucky for you Atek, this Administration HAS been making the right decisions, as you're able to freely get on your computer tonite and post some rediculous post instead of having to be out there patrolling your neighborhood 'til 3am for terrorist activity.

They've made a few good calls, and a lot of bad ones. Bush is not the reason why America is safe, Americans are why America is at the level of safety it is. Americans are the ones physically guarding and on watch. No one person deserves all of the credit nor all of the blame.

Ironically enough, most of those people doing the guarding are my age, not your's. You owe a lot of that safe and comfy feeling to the folks you think shouldn't have the same oppertunity. Something to ponder, eh?

 

[itgoesboom]

So what?

I was just pointing out the hypocricy of your arguments. There you are, in one sentance agreeing with someone that you shouldn't be picky over such a small difference, and the very next you continue your argument. And by the way, while 7.62mm equals .300 inch, 7.62x39 still uses .311 diameter bullets. So by arguing that, you were also showing ignorance.

we'd leave your self-centered butt on the trail somewhere, 'cause you just don't get it.

More hypocrisy by Gene, what a suprise. This whole argument you have been showing that attitude, "well, I got mine, who gives a damn about the rest of you", and you dare call me self-centered???

And honestly Gene, if you and I were on a patrol together, I highly doubt that anyone on the patrol would trust you with a firearm, considering how you have proven your turn-coat ways.

And what don't I get? That whenever the .gov tells me to do something I should do it without question? Soley because those who went before me made mistakes in who they voted for? Or because some politician decides that my rights mean less to him than a extra paycheck by a special intrest group?

I guess I don't get it.

I don't get how this fits the American spirit. I wonder what America would be like today had our forefathers had that attitude. I can just see Thomas Jefferson saying "Well, my pappy and grandpappy were happy sending all their money over to King George, so I might as well be happy doing it too. Lord knows there is no reason for me to be happier and more secure and freer than my parents and grandparents."

BTW, What am I doing that my parents and grandparents didn't do? Well, how about I call my congressmen and reps and let them know how I feel about issues that they are going to be dealing with. I vote in every single election. I communicate with other voters, and sign petitions when I feel the need. I help get other non-voters active in politics, and work to change America for the better. When a Senator or Rep or local town council member votes in a way that I disagree with, I don't just sit around and say "well, that was a pretty poor decision, but, well, despite the obvious ineptitude, and the fact that this Rep/Senator/TC member cares not about me or my community or even society at large, but rather himself, I will still support him blindly. Where is my checkbook again?" Rather, I call and let them know that they dissapointed me, and let them know how they can regain my vote AND my money come time for elections.

If they don't respond to my pleas, and the pleas of other concerned voters, that I work to get that person ousted from office.

I honestly hope that you are just pulling our chain here Gene, because, unfortunatly, your logic throughout this argument has been more than just confusing, it is lunacy.

But, hell, what do I know, I am just some dumb kid, who by the way is paying money into social security to help support the generations that came before me, that I will never get back. But, I am self centered.

I.G.B.