(Above: Glock handgun with an extended magazine of bullets)Why does anyone need an assault weapon except to kill people? True, it can be used at a gun range but the potential for misuse by an unstable person is too high. We need to re-ban assault weapons. They aren't needed or wanted when hunting. I'm all for protecting the 2nd amendment but believe that sensible restrictions should be in place too.
The shooter in AZ who killed or wounded a dozen people, including a duly elected Congresswoman, had an extended clip to his pistol, which means he had 30 bullets per clip!! That means he transformed a regular pistol into an assault weapon. Such a clip was banned under the assault weapons ban in America until the Republicans and President Bush let the law sunset in '04. It could have prevented this shooter from having 30 bullets, which would have greatly limited the damage. He was only tackled after he ran out of bullets. That would have been sooner had he only had a regular clip. I'm I'll for the right to have weapons and the right to hunt but I don't believe I'm a "radical" for wanting sensible restrictions.
Can assault weapons and extended clips still be found and/or bought? Yes, but it would make it harder and any thing we can do to make it harder will help reduce violence; not end it because that's nearly impossible but reduce it. It would also lower the lethality of an attack. Will it solve the problem completely? No, but we must do something to help curb the lethality of these attacks. In addition, we need to do better about screening people who shouldn't be allowed to carry weapons such as the mentally ill; for their own safety too due to high suicide rates. It's harder to get into college than it is to get a gun in some places!!
I don't think it's infringing upon anyone's right to bear arms to have sensible restrictions on a device that has the potential to kill mass people. Where do gun advocates suggest we draw the line? We don't allow people to have tanks or fighter jets that cause mass destruction but assault weapons of mass destruction are o.k.??? I don't want to ban your hunting rifle, your shotgun or your pistol, so don't accuse me of being anti-gun. I have many family members who own and enjoy guns--that's not my problem. I just want to make it harder for the unstable to get these kind of mass lethality causing weapons.
---End of Transmission---
1 comment:
Here is the biggest issue to what you are saying. The bad people are going to get the banned weapons and clips regardless of legal or illegal. Right now to owned an automatic weapon you first have to pass a background check, just like to buy any firearm. Then you have to pay a tax on that weapon and get registered withe the BATF. They are not going to let just anyone have such an item. If you plan on breaking the law then your most likely have a criminal record and can't bu a gun legally anyway. Bad people are going to do bad things.
Do you really think that if that man had a normal 15 rd mag he wouldn't have caused as much damage? You said they took him down then his clip was empty. It takes roughly 2 seconds to reload a clip in any given handgun with a trained arm. So, instead of the high cap mag, the man would have had two, or more normals and caused just as much damage. High cap mags and "assault weapons" are not to blame here. Its the screwed up people that get them. Bad people are going to do bad things whether its a automatic weapon or a box cutter, if their mind is made up on hurting people they will do it.
Do you suggest we limit gasoline and matches too? Gas can cause just as much pain and damage as a gun in the hands of a criminal. In the land of freedom where do we draw the line? When do we start limiting our freedoms to do whatever withing laws to do what we want? When I go out to the range with my "assault weapons" and large cap mags I am not hurting anyone, I do it for recreation.
Post a Comment