Ken^2

Quoting your statement. I think we may all agree on that point - it's good to have some amount of gun ownership, but it's also necessary to limit the scope of what guns private citizens can own.
I am afraid I must disagree. Why must we limit the scope of what guns a law-abiding citizen may own? I don't wish to seem like a radical, but who will decide what is allowed and not allowed. And for what reasons? Who is to say that a ban started to curb crime won't escalate into something worse. If history is an indicator, we can assume it will.
I think that both sides need to take a long look at the issue, and decide if creating laws to appease some without creating results is the ideal way of doing things. What price will our children pay for the choices made today?

I find this all fascinating. Has anyone here ever read the Webster's definition of 'Infringe"? Not to mention the Supreme Court Decision issued in the US v. Verdugo Urquides, (1990). You cannot dictate the scope of this right as it may not be "infringed". And, before you open your mouth about the "militia clause" Read the above case. The majority opinion issued contains the quote "...The second Amendment protects the right of the people to keep and bear arms..." As well, it also goes on to define "the people" as "the governed". That being said did anyone know it is a felony to conspire "under the color or guise of law" to infringe on a Constitutional liberty?

"I am afraid I must disagree. Why must we limit the scope of what guns a law-abiding citizen may own?"

Well, you wouldnt really want your mentally unbalanced neighbor (Yeah, you know you have one) walking around town with, idk, a flamethrower for example.

But I have nothing against Ak-47's and Uzis and stuff. Really, Full Auto is over-rated. Big whoopity-doo, you can throw out 30 bullets in 3 seconds. If I were to go on a killing spree I would go Columbine style, with a semi-auto machine pistol. Use ammo conservatively ;-)

Unlike in video games and movies, you can't really fire a weapon in full-auto for a minute before you reload. Its more like a matter of seconds.

I am very happy they arent renewing this ban. I hope to get a few bad-ass guns myself, not for hunting and not even for self defence, just becuase I like shooting guns. Call me a gun nut... AND I'LL FUCKING BLOW YOUR HEAD OFF WITH MY (legal) AK-47!!!!!!!!!!!

And, that, Majora, is precisely why there is a prohibition against anyone who has been adjudicated mentally deficient owning or purchasing a firearm of any type.

What exactly did your therapist say about that?

Just a little info about the ban that seems to be missing. It was intended to make the liberal bed wetters happy, but leaves enough loop holes so as not to piss of the NRA and its supporters. Basically it says that certain "scary guns" such as AR-15's, AK-47's and UZI's can no longer be imported or manufactured new. This applies to Hi-Cap mags as well. The kicker is that not only can you buy them if they were produced before the ban went into effect, but they can be manufactured new or imported if they contain a certain number of American parts (6 parts must be American made I believe). If an AK-47 has no American parts, does that make it more deadly or does it mearly have lower quality parts? My AK-47 has a well made American trigger group, pistol grip and a few other parts and I have 2 40rd and 8 30rd mags. All bought and taken home legally under the "assualt weapons ban" in under 20 min including the background check. The "ban " is irrelevant and should not be reinstated since it has ZERO relevance. For the law abidding citizens that just like to go and take out some frustration on an old T.V., computer or some large fruit (not fat gay people, but water melons and the like), nothing works better than an AK!

ban this ban that! who the hell cares? it did nothing. many years ago as a young drunk i comited an act of violence not with a gun but anyway because of this stupid mistake i am never allowed to own a weapon again. in america anyway. i am not allowed to hunt or even hold anothers gun. im not allowed to have ANY gun EVER even if its completely legal for others. PLEASE!!! do you think that has stopped me from owning a gun? not at all. theres no way ill not own one. laws mean nothing. if you want an ar15 or an ak47 youll get one. regardless of the law. and as far as im concerned living in new york its time to start getting all your shit together and burying it in your backyard if you have to. fuck the law. ill tell you this much if i was a cop and did what i did i would have gotten away with it and id be allowed to buy guns. so i lost my right to bear arms because 1 i did something stupid and 2 im not privileged and connected. FUCK THAT! im keeping my assualt weapons. some cops go home and beat thier wives but i cant go duck hunting because i hit someone one night years ago? yeah screw that shit.

no one,

The laws are the laws. People that break them know the concequences. Punishments are not some great mystery that you only find out after the fact. If you choose to break the law, accept the punishment and quit whinning about it. Its not the gov., cops or anybody elses fault but your own. Assault weapons are illegal in N.Y. regardless of the assualt weapons ban and if you are willing to risk life in prison, then so be it. Just dont bitch and complain and blame the world when the shit hits the fan. Now I got to go blow some shit up with my AK and hi-cap mags that I bought last year, perfectly legally under the ban. Oh yeah, just got some high explosive incindiary rounds as well.. Kind-of expensive, but soooo cool. As a final point, John Kerry saying that terrorist are told to come to America to buy assault weapons is the single most retarded thing I have ever heard! More liberal fear mongering. Fuck Michael Moore!!!

Look guys, the real issue is your personal freedoms. If you don't feel the need for an "assault" rifle, then don't buy one. Maybe you like to read stuff I don't like, or attend a church whose teachings I disagree with. It's YOUR choice, OK? I own firearms, and Im glad our forefathers realized that it was important we had this right. I don't feel that sacrificing our gun rights in a futile attempt to whitewash the ills of an ailing society is the right path to take. Look at other countries that have done this (England, Australia), It does not make things any better; in fact it has gotten WORSE in both countries
Yes, we have more than our share of violent individuals. Why? Do you think it might have something to do with the breakup of what we once considered traditional family values? Have you ever noticed that some of our least populated states (Wyoming, Alaska) have the very highest per capita gun ownership, yet the lowest murder rates? FACE IT-- it is a "people problem", not barrel length!

All crimes are "people problems." Unfortunately, you can't regulate behavior, hence you do what you can to regulate the means to commit crimes, and to enforce punishments that deter crimes. As far as places like wyoming, arkansas are concerned, I highly doubt traditional family values is the key catalyst for low murder rates. Population density would be a much more reasonable explanation for their low murder rates.

Guns dont kill people and people dont kill people, bullets kill people. Maybe we should ban bullets. I am more scared of the fear mongering propaganda spread by the far left and right of the political parties than my neighbor with his AR-15! Humans are violent by nature and a meaningless ban on wepaons based on cosmetic design and reputation is just an attempt to make the feel good liberals all warm and cozy. We need to enforce the laws already on the books and hold PEOPLE accountable for there actions and not blame the insturment used to commit the crime. I take no responsibility for the spelling in this comment, my keyboard is too flat and its kinda dark in my house right now. I agree very much with N.C.A.C.M.S.P., definatly on the right track....preach it bother!

Ken, many of your points are well taken. I agree that we need to punish offenders, and I am certainly not against all gun laws. It's just that where I live, it is clear that the public perspective on firearms has seen a dramatic shift in the last 30 years.This is a disturbing trend to those who believe, as I do, in the importance of personal freedoms,.including firearm ownership.This Right in particular is threatened, and once we lose it it will be gone forever. Many people feel that Second Amendment rights are "collective", rather than individual. BS! Show me another Right in our Constitution that wasn't intended for each of us!
That said, there still has to be basic rules of conduct and control. You have the Right to free speech, but there are Libel laws. You can't vote until you are 18, ect. I understand this, and I'll bet you agree.Now here's the rub: Many people confuse the sport of hunting with the Second Amendment Rights our Forefathers gave us. Hunting is not a Right, it is a privelege. That's why you need a license to hunt; it is your permission slip. And like most priveleges (such as driving) it is srictly controlled. Rights, on the other hand, are considered much more absolute, with much less restriction. Specifically, your Right to Bear Arms is for your own self protection, and not for Deer hunting!
As for your belief that "population density" is the probable cause of urban violence, what are you really saying? I'm simply telling you that per capita (that's incidents of gun violence divided into the surrounding population) is much higher in our Cities than in many of the surrounding rural areas. Why? Are you saying that when people live closer together it promotes violence? Or is there a disregard for for the sanctity of life and a disrespect for the well-being of society in many of our urban homes? I think it is the latter.

To the original post by Ken:

In reference to your argument about why we don't need gun laws, we have tax laws so that the law abiding citizens will pay taxes. The criminals still do not pay taxes, and therefore are breaking the law. So the point you make to try to disprove the "that gun control laws only affect law abiding citizens, and will not affect criminals since they don't follow laws" only serves to further reinforce the point that you are trying to disavow. It is the criminals that don't pay taxes, just as it is the criminals who disobey the gun laws. Thank you.