On assault weapons, presidents and the NRA

[SecularMotion]

The gunman disabled the elevator, and then exited on the 34th floor of the San Francisco high-rise. A few steps later, he began systematically shooting the employees of a prestigious law firm.

Eight people were killed and six were wounded in a matter of minutes on that July afternoon in 1993. The killer carried an assault weapon, similar to a model that had been banned in California four years earlier.

Members of Congress contemplating additional assault weapon bans would later receive a letter that directly referred to the massacre in San Francisco:

"We are writing to urge your support for a ban on the domestic manufacture of military-style assault weapons. … While we recognize that assault weapon legislation will not stop all assault weapon crime, statistics prove that we can dry up the supply of these guns, making them less accessible to criminals.''

http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/national/on-assault-weapons-presidents-and-the-nra/1243036

[aikoaiko]

1. Never again!

!

But this article does refute the anti-gun freaks talking points that supporting guns rights is a right wing position.

Politicians on the right and left have attempted to reduce access to firearms and undermine the civil liberty protected by the 2nd Amendment.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

2. "killer carried an assault weapon... that had been banned... four years earlier"

And that's about all you need to know about the AWB.
It. Was. Worthless.

Go ahead and ban EVERY gun... it doesn't matter because there are already 250+ million of them out there. Killers will always find ways to get guns and explosives. All these bans do is cost politicians their jobs.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

3. And, if we could round up and destroy those 250 million guns,

then gun-smuggling will become another money-making activity for organized crime.

Supply will attempt to keep up with demand. Unless, of course, we institute a "war on guns". This will work almost as well as the "war on drugs".