Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

The last "Assault Weapon Ban" EXPIRED because government studies showed it was WORTHLESS

+3
Floridatexan
2seaoat
Markle
7 posters

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Markle

Markle

The last "Assault Weapon Ban" EXPIRED because government studies showed it was WORTHLESS

The fact that the ban was useless in the past, doesn't faze the anti-gun nuts. They see a tragedy and leap to the opportunity to take advantage of someone else misery.

AS ALWAYS with Progressives, results DO NOT MATTER, ONLY WHAT FEELS GOOD AT THE MOMENT.

Studies on effectiveness of the legislation
The Task Force on Community Preventive Services, an independent, non-federal task force, examined an assortment of firearms laws, including the AWB, and found "insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws reviewed for preventing violence."[25] A 2004 critical review of firearms research by a National Research Council committee said that an academic study of the assault weapon ban "did not reveal any clear impacts on gun violence outcomes."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban

2seaoat



Wrong.....the studies ended with just the opposite of what you are trying to say.....that they were ineffective.....the conclusions were the benefits were to small to measure within the time period. Here is a much better synthesis of all the studies and the application of statistical analysis......which quite frankly does not address the grandfathered weapons.....which proves that the ban must be more extensive and comprehensive.


http://us-presidents.insidegov.com/stories/9338/how-effective-assault-weapons-ban

Guest


Guest

What you're calling an assault weapon (which is just a scary looking underpowered semi-auto rifle) is involved in a small percentage of gun crime. Not only are you diverted from the issue at hand which is an islamic terrorist act... but you can't even grasp your red herring correctly. First... violent crime in total is declining while gun sales are increasing. Second... gun crime is largely localized and committed by felons already illegally possessing a weapon. By simply removing inner cities from gun crime statistics... we are a remarkably peaceful populace.

2seaoat



First... violent crime in total is declining while gun sales are increasing. Second... gun crime is largely localized and committed by felons already illegally possessing a weapon. By simply removing inner cities from gun crime statistics... we are a remarkably peaceful populace.

The crime rate is dropping because America experienced more average rainfall in the last 10 years.......a correlation is not a proof. The crime rate is dropping because the population bubble is getting old. How many 65 year olds are jacking a corner gas station, and when that bubble was younger from the late sixties through the nineties the crime rate was up. Gun sales do not lower crime anymore than the more rain does.......except most criminals do not like getting rained on..........in regard to your inner city black people are using illegal guns and are the criminals......well again, poverty and economic levels have a higher correlation to gun violence than race, but heck......why would I with white guilt interfere with your racism.

The assault weapon ban was incomplete because it grandfathered almost 75% of the weapons. There needs to be a much more comprehensive assault weapon regulation, and not necessarily a ban. The issue right now is not lowering the crime rate by regulating guns, but cutting down gun violence....two very distinct concepts. A teenager stealing a lawn mower is quite different than a mass shooting.

Guest


Guest

The fact that you injected race only demonstrates your racism. Regardless... the majority of the issue is easily identifiable. The fact is that you don't push for solutions to the elephant... you instead promote a peripheral political agenda. It's telling.

Floridatexan

Floridatexan


https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2016/06/12/gun-used-orlando-shooting-becoming-mass-shooters-weapon-choice/8CsglZoMR1jbkoWcKGQZ6H/story.html

Orlando gun is becoming mass shooters’ weapon of choice

WASHINGTON — Sunday morning in Orlando, a man armed with an assault-style rifle killed at least 50 people and wounded 53 others in a crowded nightclub.

Six months ago, in San Bernardino, Calif., a man and woman armed with assault-style rifles killed 14 people and wounded 20 others at a holiday party.

In 2012, in Aurora, Colo., a man armed with an assault-style rifle killed 12 people and wounded 58 others in a crowded movie theater.

Also in 2012, in Newtown, Conn., a man armed with an assault-style rifle killed 26 people at an elementary school.

One common denominator behind these and other high-casualty mass shootings in recent years is the use of assault style rifles, capable of firing many rounds of ammunition in a relatively short period of time, with high accuracy. And their use in these types of shooting is becoming more common: There have been eight high-profile public mass shootings since July of last year, according to a database compiled by Mother Jones magazine. Assault-style rifles were used in seven of those.

In the past 10 years, assault-style rifles have been used in 14 public mass shootings. Half of those shootings have occurred since last June.

Assault-style weapons have long been a flashpoint in the American gun debate. They were outlawed in 1994. But that ban expired in 2004 and Congress opted to not renew it. Gun rights proponents point out that rifles, of any type, are rarely used to kill people in the US. Because of that, researchers have generally found that the assault weapons ban had little impact on US homicide rates while it was in effect.

On the other hand, compared to other firearms, assault-style rifles make it fairly easy to kill or injure many people in within a short period of time. So perpetrators wishing to inflict indiscriminate harm on a large crowd of people often turn to them. Of the 10 mass shooting incidents with the highest number of casualties — killed and wounded — in the US, seven involved the use of an assault-style rifle, according to Mother Jones’ database.

Terrorist groups have taken note of the widespread availability of assault rifles and other guns in the United States. In 2011, Al Qaeda encouraged its followers to take advantage of lax guns laws, purchase assault-style weapons and use them to shoot people.

‘‘America is absolutely awash with easily obtainable firearms,’’ American-born Al Qaeda spokesman Adam Gadahn said in a video. ‘‘You can go down to a gun show at the local convention center and come away with a fully automatic assault rifle, without a background check, and most likely without having to show an identification card. So what are you waiting for?’’

Gadahn was incorrect on one point: fully automatic weapons, which shoot continuously when you hold down the trigger, have been banned since 1986. But he was correct on the other points: Most states don’t require background checks for firearms purchased via private sales at gun shows. Most states don’t require showing ID to purchase a firearm from a private seller.

Indeed, federal law allows people on terror watch lists to purchase guns, and thousands of them have done so.

The ease of purchasing guns in the US, even powerful ones designed to kill many people in a short period of time, is underscored by a crucial fact in Mother Jones’s database: Of the 79 mass shootings since 1982 that Mother Jones was able to determine purchasing information for, 63 were committed with guns purchased legally.

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


Guest


Guest

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5763109de4b015db1bc8c123

In the aftermath of the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history,the political debate has quickly turned to the weapon a gunman used to massacre 49 people and injure 53 more at a gay nightclub in Orlando,Florida,on Sunday.

Some supporters of stricter gun laws argue it’s far too easy to obtain firearms like the shooter’s Sig Sauer MCX,an $1,800 semi-automatic rifle and a cousin of the highly popular AR-15. They say the same features that have made these weapons fit for the battlefield render them unfit for civilian use. In the wrong hands,their accuracy,reduced recoil,large magazine size and high rate of fire make these guns perfectly suited to inflict mass casualties in a short period of time. And it’s hard to discount that concern: In seven of the last eight high-profile mass shootings —as well as in earlier incidents in Newtown,Connecticut,and Aurora,Colorado —perpetrators were armed with assault-style rifles.

But as momentum builds for a new assault weapons ban,data shows just how small of an effect such legislation would have on the overall levels of gun violence in the U.S.

At least 84 people have been killed and 119 have been injured so far this year in 86 shooting incidents involving assault-style rifles,according to data compiled by the Gun Violence Archive,a not-for-profit corporation that tracks gun violence. Those numbers include the casualties at Pulse nightclub over the weekend.

There have been at least 267 incidents involving assault-style rifles in 2016, including reported weapons thefts,crimes in which the guns were brandished,arrests for illegal possession and other legal interventions in which they weren’t fired.

Those deaths account for about 2 percent of the 6,153 gun deaths and less than 1 percent of the 12,560 gun injuries the Gun Violence Archive has counted so far this year. This tally consists largely of homicides and assaults,but also includes suicides that were part of a murder-suicide. It also counts accidental deaths,the majority of which involve handguns,not rifles.

If those numbers seem high,that’s because they are. The U.S. has the highest gun death and ownership rates in the developed world. Americans are 10 times more likely to be killed with a gun than people in other developed nations; with an estimated 300 million to 400 million civilian firearms,the U.S. is by far the most heavily armed nation per capita. About 20 million to 30 million of those guns are assault-style rifles,according to the National Shooting Sports Foundation,a lobbying group that wants you to refer to these weapons as “modern sporting rifles.”

Gun Violence Archive notes that its count could be incomplete because it relies on news and police reports,which don’t always include full details on the weapons used. Its data also only specifies incidents involving AR-15s and AK-47s,two of the most popular types of assault-style rifles but not the only ones available to civilians.

Markle

Markle

2seaoat wrote:Wrong.....the studies ended with just the opposite of what you are trying to say.....that they were ineffective.....the conclusions were the benefits were to small to measure within the time period.   Here is a much better synthesis of all the studies and the application of statistical analysis......which quite frankly does not address the grandfathered weapons.....which proves that the ban must be more extensive and comprehensive.

http://us-presidents.insidegov.com/stories/9338/how-effective-assault-weapons-ban

Hmmm...THANK YOU!

What your chart shows is that mass shootings have skyrocketed under Lame Duck President Barack Hussein Obama.

The subject is Radical Islamic Terrorists. Not guns.

It did NOT work before, it will NOT work now. Proof once again that FACTS and the TRUTH do not faze Progressives or the anti-gun nuts.

And, like all their other failed programs, their answer is to double down on their failure. If a program doesn't work, THROW MORE MONEY. If the "Assault Weapon Ban" did not work, the reason is that MORE GUNS SHOULD BE BANNED.

Really stunning!

Floridatexan

Floridatexan


You wouldn't know the truth if it bit you on your gluteous maximus, which is apparently indistinguishable from...well, you figure it out. The subject of this thread is not "radical Islamic terrorists", and the gun violence certainly has not been confined to foreign terrorists. Several of these mass murders have been committed by the homegrown variety...sick perverts, brainwashed "Christians", good ol' Southern racists, confused homosexuals. People who hunt animals do not use these weapons (I'm sure there are exceptions...your lunatic cousins are out there). So, unless you're involved in some type of organized crime yourself, tell me why you personally would own an AR-15 or similar weapon.

Guest


Guest

A person might choose an ar for home protection... but it's really none of yours or my business what a lawful citizen does while causing no one harm. Politically injecting an ancillary talkingpoint is pointless... just a lame attempt to divert from the issue of radical islamic indoctrination. It's hard to believe that the enormous govt apparatus spy program that unconstitutionally records innocent citizens can't be applied to this issue. The only reason it's not is some politically correct group delusion. Muslims are being radicalized to commit atrocities upon innocent citizens in this country in real time... as we speak. Focus on the issue at hand and fix it... immediately.

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

PkrBum wrote:What you're calling an assault weapon (which is just a scary looking underpowered semi-auto rifle) is involved in a small percentage of gun crime. Not only are you diverted from the issue at hand which is an islamic terrorist act... but you can't even grasp your red herring correctly. First... violent crime in total is declining while gun sales are increasing. Second... gun crime is largely localized and committed by felons already illegally possessing a weapon. By simply removing inner cities from gun crime statistics... we are a remarkably peaceful populace.

The issue at hand, Mr. Foot in Mouth, is making it harder for nutcases, Christian, Nazi, Republican, Muslims etc. to obtain a rapid firing semi-automatic rifle with a magazine capacity of 30 rounds or more, which enables a killer in a crowded venue to murder dozens, if not hundreds of innocent lives in a very short period of time. Try and focus on what's real and stop deflecting the issues, if you can.

Sal

Sal

PkrBum wrote: Muslims are being radicalized to commit atrocities upon innocent citizens in this country in real time... as we speak. Focus on the issue at hand and fix it... immediately.

The last "Assault Weapon Ban" EXPIRED because government studies showed it was WORTHLESS Captur12

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

Salinsky wrote:
PkrBum wrote: Muslims are being radicalized to commit atrocities upon innocent citizens in this country in real time... as we speak. Focus on the issue at hand and fix it... immediately.

The last "Assault Weapon Ban" EXPIRED because government studies showed it was WORTHLESS Captur12

cheers cheers cheers cheers cheers cheers cheers cheers cheers cheers cheers cheers cheers cheers cheers cheers cheers cheers cheers cheers cheers cheers

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

Markle wrote:
2seaoat wrote:Wrong.....the studies ended with just the opposite of what you are trying to say.....that they were ineffective.....the conclusions were the benefits were to small to measure within the time period.   Here is a much better synthesis of all the studies and the application of statistical analysis......which quite frankly does not address the grandfathered weapons.....which proves that the ban must be more extensive and comprehensive.

http://us-presidents.insidegov.com/stories/9338/how-effective-assault-weapons-ban

Hmmm...THANK YOU!

What your chart shows is that mass shootings have skyrocketed under Lame Duck President Barack Hussein Obama.

The subject is Radical Islamic Terrorists.  Not guns.

It did NOT work before, it will NOT work now.  Proof once again that FACTS and the TRUTH do not faze Progressives or the anti-gun nuts.  

And, like all their other failed programs, their answer is to double down on their failure.  If a program doesn't work, THROW MORE MONEY.  If the "Assault Weapon Ban" did not work, the reason is that MORE GUNS SHOULD BE BANNED.

Really stunning!

Columbine and the Charleston church massacre were done by white Christians .... just sayin . . .

Markle

Markle

Progressives are getting SO boring.

They are losing so many issues now that their instant response to anything is to change the topic.

Yo, kiddies, the topic is over the so called, failed "Assault Gun Ban" being a total failure and which is why it will not be reinstated.

Even when programs are proven failures, Progressives, having no solution, drag out the old failed programs. When that doesn't work, they change the subject.

LOSERS!

2seaoat



They are losing so many issues now

Yep, like clockwork you can set the issues by doing just the opposite of what Mr. Markle suggests.......8 points down nationally, and dropping........but "they" are "losing" so "many" issues........too funny. Just like his telling us Romney would win by a landslide........wrong enough to set your clock by.....

Guest


Guest

Hillary is good at blowing leads... especially when she must begin to present ideas in real time. Stay tuned folks.

RealLindaL



PkrBum wrote:Hillary is good at blowing leads... especially when she must begin to present ideas in real time. Stay tuned folks.

I'll stay tuned all right. Hillary is excellent at thinking on her feet and answering questions with clarity and depth of knowledge. Can anyone say the same about Trump? I doubt it. I also doubt he will agree to debate her. Mark my words.

Guest


Guest

Hillary won't even speak to the press without set structure. She (and the dnc) also limited debates against a socialist. The clintons have a long and contentious history with the press... and that really doesn't include bill today. There's a patten.

Guest


Guest

Wordslinger wrote:
Markle wrote:
2seaoat wrote:Wrong.....the studies ended with just the opposite of what you are trying to say.....that they were ineffective.....the conclusions were the benefits were to small to measure within the time period.   Here is a much better synthesis of all the studies and the application of statistical analysis......which quite frankly does not address the grandfathered weapons.....which proves that the ban must be more extensive and comprehensive.

http://us-presidents.insidegov.com/stories/9338/how-effective-assault-weapons-ban

Hmmm...THANK YOU!

What your chart shows is that mass shootings have skyrocketed under Lame Duck President Barack Hussein Obama.

The subject is Radical Islamic Terrorists.  Not guns.

It did NOT work before, it will NOT work now.  Proof once again that FACTS and the TRUTH do not faze Progressives or the anti-gun nuts.  

And, like all their other failed programs, their answer is to double down on their failure.  If a program doesn't work, THROW MORE MONEY.  If the "Assault Weapon Ban" did not work, the reason is that MORE GUNS SHOULD BE BANNED.

Really stunning!

Columbine and the Charleston church massacre were done by white Christians .... just sayin . . .

The fbi had plenty of contact with the orlando terrorist. They could've easily taken the evidence to a judge. I think it was the atlanta or charleston killer that the fbi should've stopped the background check but blew it too. Govt incompetence.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/21/us/orlando-nightclub-shooting/

(CNN) — A man who attended the same mosque as Omar Mateen said he notified the FBI of his suspicions in 2014 about the future Orlando nightclub gunman.

Mohammed Malik told CNN's "Erin Burnett OutFront" that he didn't think Mateen fit the profile of a radical but he was concerned about comments Mateen made to him.

Malik, who first wrote of his contact with Mateen and with the FBI in an op-ed in the Washington Post, told CNN that Mateen mentioned Anwar al-Awlaki -- American-born Muslim scholar and cleric who acted as a spokesperson for al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula -- to him and that Mateen watched his videos.

"He told me they were powerful," Malik said. "... those raised the red flags for me and prompted me to speak with the FBI."

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

PkrBum wrote:
Wordslinger wrote:
Markle wrote:
2seaoat wrote:Wrong.....the studies ended with just the opposite of what you are trying to say.....that they were ineffective.....the conclusions were the benefits were to small to measure within the time period.   Here is a much better synthesis of all the studies and the application of statistical analysis......which quite frankly does not address the grandfathered weapons.....which proves that the ban must be more extensive and comprehensive.

http://us-presidents.insidegov.com/stories/9338/how-effective-assault-weapons-ban

Hmmm...THANK YOU!

What your chart shows is that mass shootings have skyrocketed under Lame Duck President Barack Hussein Obama.

The subject is Radical Islamic Terrorists.  Not guns.

It did NOT work before, it will NOT work now.  Proof once again that FACTS and the TRUTH do not faze Progressives or the anti-gun nuts.  

And, like all their other failed programs, their answer is to double down on their failure.  If a program doesn't work, THROW MORE MONEY.  If the "Assault Weapon Ban" did not work, the reason is that MORE GUNS SHOULD BE BANNED.

Really stunning!

Columbine and the Charleston church massacre were done by white Christians ....  just sayin . . .

The fbi had plenty of contact with the orlando terrorist. They could've easily taken the evidence to a judge. I think it was the atlanta or charleston killer that the fbi should've stopped the background check but blew it too. Govt incompetence.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/21/us/orlando-nightclub-shooting/

(CNN) — A man who attended the same mosque as Omar Mateen said he notified the FBI of his suspicions in 2014 about the future Orlando nightclub gunman.

Mohammed Malik told CNN's "Erin Burnett OutFront" that he didn't think Mateen fit the profile of a radical but he was concerned about comments Mateen made to him.

Malik, who first wrote of his contact with Mateen and with the FBI in an op-ed in the Washington Post, told CNN that Mateen mentioned Anwar al-Awlaki -- American-born Muslim scholar and cleric who acted as a spokesperson for al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula -- to him and that Mateen watched his videos.

"He told me they were powerful," Malik said. "... those raised the red flags for me and prompted me to speak with the FBI."

All good point Pkrbum, and it appears the FBI did blow it. Personally, I think the Orlando swat team blew it too. But the issue in this thread is gun control -- particularly of assault rifles. If Mateen had only had access to 5-round magazines instead of 30-round clips, there would have been far fewer victims.

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

2seaoat wrote:wrong enough to set your clock by.....

The last "Assault Weapon Ban" EXPIRED because government studies showed it was WORTHLESS Tumblr_n20jj4Kozj1rpa5uxo2_500

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Sal

Sal

PkrBum wrote:Hillary won't even speak to the press without set structure. She (and the dnc) also limited debates against a socialist. The clintons have a long and contentious history with the press... and that really doesn't include bill today. There's a patten.

Bullshit.

There has never been a more thoroughly vetted candidate than Hillary Clinton.

Meanwhile, Trump is revoking press credentials left and right and has threatened to "open up" American libel laws to make it easier to sue the press if they're not nice enough to him.

Guest


Guest

Salinsky wrote:
PkrBum wrote:Hillary won't even speak to the press without set structure. She (and the dnc) also limited debates against a socialist. The clintons have a long and contentious history with the press... and that really doesn't include bill today. There's a patten.

Bullshit.

There has never been a more thoroughly vetted candidate than Hillary Clinton.

Meanwhile, Trump is revoking press credentials left and right and has threatened to "open up" American libel laws to make it easier to sue the press if they're not nice enough to him.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/05/politics/hillary-clinton-campaign-media-access/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3620162/Hillary-hasn-t-single-press-conference-2016-promises-one-coming-soon.html

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/427026/why-democrats-buried-their-debates-times-no-one-will-watch-brendan-bordelon

http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2016/01/martin-omalley-bernie-sanders-debates

Markle

Markle

Wordslinger wrote:
PkrBum wrote:
Wordslinger wrote:
Markle wrote:
2seaoat wrote:Wrong.....the studies ended with just the opposite of what you are trying to say.....that they were ineffective.....the conclusions were the benefits were to small to measure within the time period. Here is a much better synthesis of all the studies and the application of statistical analysis......which quite frankly does not address the grandfathered weapons.....which proves that the ban must be more extensive and comprehensive.

http://us-presidents.insidegov.com/stories/9338/how-effective-assault-weapons-ban

Hmmm...THANK YOU!

What your chart shows is that mass shootings have skyrocketed under Lame Duck President Barack Hussein Obama.

The subject is Radical Islamic Terrorists. Not guns.

It did NOT work before, it will NOT work now. Proof once again that FACTS and the TRUTH do not faze Progressives or the anti-gun nuts.

And, like all their other failed programs, their answer is to double down on their failure. If a program doesn't work, THROW MORE MONEY. If the "Assault Weapon Ban" did not work, the reason is that MORE GUNS SHOULD BE BANNED.

Really stunning!

Columbine and the Charleston church massacre were done by white Christians .... just sayin . . .

The fbi had plenty of contact with the orlando terrorist. They could've easily taken the evidence to a judge. I think it was the atlanta or charleston killer that the fbi should've stopped the background check but blew it too. Govt incompetence.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/21/us/orlando-nightclub-shooting/

(CNN) — A man who attended the same mosque as Omar Mateen said he notified the FBI of his suspicions in 2014 about the future Orlando nightclub gunman.

Mohammed Malik told CNN's "Erin Burnett OutFront" that he didn't think Mateen fit the profile of a radical but he was concerned about comments Mateen made to him.

Malik, who first wrote of his contact with Mateen and with the FBI in an op-ed in the Washington Post, told CNN that Mateen mentioned Anwar al-Awlaki -- American-born Muslim scholar and cleric who acted as a spokesperson for al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula -- to him and that Mateen watched his videos.

"He told me they were powerful," Malik said. "... those raised the red flags for me and prompted me to speak with the FBI."

All good point Pkrbum, and it appears the FBI did blow it. Personally, I think the Orlando swat team blew it too. But the issue in this thread is gun control -- particularly of assault rifles. If Mateen had only had access to 5-round magazines instead of 30-round clips, there would have been far fewer victims.

How?

The terrorist was inside, alive and uninjured with hostages in the back for THREE HOURS? He'd had time to walk back through the carnage, shooting victims he didn't think were dead a second and third time.

How many victims died during those three hours?

An Islamist Terrorist plans and executes an attack on a popular night club in Orlando. An attack we KNEW was coming, especially after Boston, San Bernardino, Paris, and Brussels.

The response of the Progressives? IGNORE ISIS. Instead blame guns and call it a hate crime.

Just cannot make these things up!

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum