Alphecca: End of AWB "Debated"

June 25, 2005

End of AWB "Debated"

Well, that's the gist of the title of this story:

It's been 10 months since the federal assault weapons ban expired, and for an idea of what's happened since then, pick up a copy of a gun magazine.

There you will find advertisements for semiautomatic rifles and pistols looking like something out of a war zone, with ammunition clips holding 30 or 40 bullets -- many features that 11 months ago, U.S. manufacturers could not make and gun stores could not sell.

"Since the assault weapons ban was allowed to expire, it has been open season for criminals who want the most dangerous types of military-style assault weapons," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who in March introduced legislation to revive the old ban.

Feinstein said that the expiration of the ban she fought hard to get in 1994 "will have deadly consequences on the streets of America."

But has it really made much of a difference? Are the streets less safe?

There is no hard evidence one way or another.

Well if that's the case, than why is Di-Fi being quoted predicting dire consequences? Oh I know, to scare the newspaper readers. That must be why even after a few quotes a gun maker and gun store owner saying the end of the AWB was no big thing sales wise, they include another warning from the Brady Bunch:

Eric Howard, a spokesman for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said that just because there are no statistics to prove it does not mean the expiration of the ban has been a big so-what.

"Now manufacturers are kicking it up, and we're seeing things like fingerprint proof-resistant grips," he said.

"That's clearly to attract a niche that's not your regular duck hunter."

So Howard seems to be saying that just because there are no statistics or other anecdotal evidence to show otherwise, that doesn't mean the end of the "assault weapons ban" hasn't been a disaster. I see. Well, let me just say that just because there is no proof or evidence to show otherwise doesn't mean that Howard doesn't sleep with turtles.

Then they quote the VPC as saying there never was a real AWB. Well in that case I guess there's no reason to bring it back, right?

It seems to me that stories like this, with no real information in them other than saying, "Just look what's for sale in gun magazines!!!" serve no purpose other than to try to drum-up public support for another AWB by trying to frighten them. Reads like bias to me.

Posted by Jeff Soyer at June 25, 2005 09:56 AM

Comments

Eric Howard, a spokesman for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said that just because there are no statistics to prove it does not mean the expiration of the ban has been a big so-what.

"Now manufacturers are kicking it up, and we're seeing things like fingerprint proof-resistant grips," he said.

BUT the AWB never banned "fingerprint proof-resistant grips."

IF there are now "fingerprint proof-resistant grips" being made, WHY has NO gun control advocate introduced legislation to ban them?

Could it be because it's BS?

Posted by: Jay at June 25, 2005 12:31 PM

"Fingerprint proof-resistant grips"?!

WTF? Does he mean polymer grips? [googles]

Oh. Intratec. Oh, for God's sake, is someone recycling that old myth?

Hey, turns out my Glock's checkered grips are "fingerprint resistant" too! Lock me up, I'm a danger to society!

Posted by: Cliff S. at June 25, 2005 12:38 PM

I wondered about that, too. I don't read many gun magazines but I did a web search and didn't come up with anything. There ARE finishes that are more resistant to fingermarks but that's just to keep the finish looking nice (especially a blue'd one) but why would a criminal be interested in such a "fingerprint proof finish" anyway -- it's not like they're planning to toss the gun after robbing someone...

All I can think is that the Brady idiot actually thought grooved and checkered grips were intended for that purpose rather than to facilitate a better grip.

Posted by: Jeff Soyer at June 25, 2005 12:55 PM

One thing Karl Rove proved is you pretty much have to be an idiot to listen to liberals -- notice they were the first to the microphones as well.

The deal with liberals is they count on their leftist-MSM to carry the lie forward. The advent of common use of the Internet has nullified all that -- they just keep on lying, but now we can all laugh in their faces, and tell all our friends.

I have fingerproof grips on my guns, they are called gloves :) -- bet a criminal would never have thought of that.

Posted by: bill at June 25, 2005 04:01 PM

Note: Comments close down on posts after seven days and then
the comment input form disappears.

Your comments are welcome. You don't need to enter a URL and you don't need a "valid" email address, either. Note though that MT Blacklist is installed to flag suspiciously spam-like strings. Unfortunately, because of the bastard spammers, the strings "google.com" and "yahoo.com" (even in your email address) are currently banned as well. So are strings such as "cialis" (a common spam) which rules out words such as "socialism". Try putting a hyphan in a word like that.

By Golly, you're reading an archived post. Click Here to head to the main page and read current stuff...

Into science fiction? Check out my group blog novel, Colony: Alchibah.
See the reader's guide there for first-timer tips.

Alphecca

Check it out: My group sci-fi blog novel: Colony: Alchibah

June 25, 2005

End of AWB "Debated"

By Golly, you're reading an archived post. Click Here to head to the main page and read current stuff...

Check it out:

My group sci-fi blog novel:

Colony: Alchibah