Gun control - Why punish the law abiding rather than the criminals?

So you are incapable of defining what an 'assault weapon' is. Not surprising.

 

Why do you think “assault” weapons should be banned?

 

"When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists."

That was said in 2015 when Trump announced his candidacy.

Mass shootings increased sharply after Trump became President. https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/mass-shootings-mother-jones-full-data/

The assault weapons ban elapsed in 2004 and mass shootings spiked. Mass shootings spiked again when Americans elected the first black President. You can draw your own conclusions about that.

 

Sandy Shanks said: ↑

Trump thinks all the problems facing mankind can be solved with rhetoric. Today, Trump went to a great deal of trouble to convince his base that, when it comes to meaningful background checks to eliminate all the loopholes, he really means it. Of course, everyone else did not believe him because they have heard all this before and, in some cases, they knew he was outright lying.

Later, I added that another Trump manufactured emergency would happen and the background check legislation will be eclipsed by another disaster created by Trump. All the fervor over background checks will cease and be forgotten. Trump probably has already changed his mind again, encouraged by his friends in the NRA or he has forgotten all about it because of the new crisis.

That has happened. Yesterday, the Dow was down 800 points, the Nasdaq was down 242 points, and the S&P was down 86 points. The Dow was at 25,480, 40 points higher than it was five months ago.

On August 1, Trump announced a 10% tariff on $300B of Chinese goods that are popular with American consumers, clothing, shoes, computers, cell phones, etc. That precipitated the worst week of the year for the stock market. The following Monday, August 5, Trump's announcement caused the worst day of the year. The Dow plunged 760 points.

On August 12, the Dow lost 391 points, but then on August 13 The US Trade Representative announced a delay of Trump's tariffs on several categories of Chinese-made consumer goods until December 15. Those goods include cell phones, laptop computers, video game consoles, certain toys, computer monitors, and certain items of footwear and clothing, and the Dow shot up more than 400 points.

Tariffs on popular consumer goods cause higher prices. Even Trump has grudgingly admitted that. Higher prices cause inflation. Inflation causes less demand. Less demand causes unemployment. Tariffs cause recession, Econ 101.

On August 15, the stock market set another record. Now it is the worst day of the year. The reason, recession fears. The Times reports, "Trade-war worries hammered financial markets again on Wednesday as data from Germany and China showed trouble for manufacturing-reliant economies, while the bond market renewed fears of an American recession."

So, we can forget about background checks until the next mass shooting of civilians in a school, mall, picnic, bar, work place, or other. Then the fervor will start up all over again with the same result. Nothing will get done as long as Trump is President and Mitch McConnell is the Senate majority leader.

 

So then not really “introduced” every year.

 

Introduced does not mean it ever makes it to the floor for a vote, that is a separate issue.

 

tt's a progressive, political correctness thing.

For example in California criminals are one of the protected classes along with illegal aliens, the LGBT community, union members and MS-13.

 

Unless it goes to the floor for a vote then it doesn’t mean anything. Kinda hard to implement a ban like that if it never makes it to the floor for a vote.

 

Dancing around the facts? The bill is introduced every year.

 

Not really

 

Yes really. Just because you don't know how this works does not mean you are right.

 

Nope.

 

Sorry you are embarrassing yourself but:

H.R.1296 - Assault Weapons Ban of 2019

02/15/2019 Introduced in House

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th...96/actions?q={"search":["semi-auto"]}&r=3&s=2

 

How many bills get implemented without a vote? "Introducing" a bill that doesn't get voted on is meaningless. You DO realize that right?

 

Every Congress has introduced an AWB. You claim that the bills were not introduced. You were wrong, and so it goes.

H.R.5087 — 115th Congress (2017-201Assault Weapons Ban of 2018
H.R.4748 — 114th Congress (2015-2016)Imported Assault Weapons Ban of 2016
H.R.4269 — 114th Congress (2015-2016)Assault Weapons Ban of 2015
H.R.437 — 113th Congress (2013-2014)Assault Weapons Ban of 2013

 

How many made it to the floor for vote?

 

The only purpose of a law is to prosecute. Laws have never prevented crime. If laws against committing murder don't work, why do these liberals think gun laws are going to work? Why when a mass shooting happens don't they clamor for more murder laws. Obviously that law was broken. To a liberal, when a law is broken, it means we must have more laws.

 

That's satire, right?

 

You claimed they were not be introduced. You were wrong so quit trying to change the goal post and just admit you were wrong.

 

Wrong. I said..."So then not really “introduced” every year". Then followed up with "Unless it goes to the floor for a vote then it doesn’t mean anything. Kinda hard to implement a ban like that if it never makes it to the floor for a vote." I've maintained all along that unless it goes to the floor for a vote it's meaningless.

 

Citizens don't need them...At the very least they should be difficult to obtain

 

Why don't citizens need them?

 

I got that wrong, introduced every Congress. Now it's your turn to admit you were wrong.

 

What did I get wrong?

 

I guess most gun owners here want no discussion beyond no.
Why are you opposed to red flag laws?
Why opposed to expanded background checks?
Why opposed to doing away with large magazines?
How do any of these hurt the rights of law abiding citizens?

I am ready to listen to logical argements.