Corpus Christi Police Officer on AWB, "It didn't make a difference..."

[Jack_DeLeon]

http://www.kristv.com/Global/story.asp?S=2072073&nav=BsmgP3Gb

The debate on whether to renew the ban is leading up to a vote later this year.

The ban was designed in part to protect police officers from better armed criminals.

But Corpus Christi Police Sergeant D.L. Schwartz says a 1994 ban on those firearms has done little to help law enforcement, "We still have gang members roaming around with Uzis and AK-47's which are assault weapons that are suppose to be banned. It didn't make a difference in my opinion ."

Schwartz doesn't see the same results here in Corpus Christi, and He doesn't think more laws will change the situation, "We have laws that say convicted felons can't carry hand guns, but they still carry guns. I don't think more laws is the answer. I think the enforcement of the laws is the answer."

[bluestateguy]

1. The assault weapons ban was ineffective

Criminals will be criminals and will still get them. I'd rather the rest of us have access to these items to defend ourselves. Also, the Brady law will still be in effect to do background checks of all people buying these guns.

[gatlingforme]

2. and that is why I do not understand why anti 2nd. amend people(?)

think that this will change the criminals behavior if these guns are banned. I am pro-AWB but I still believe in the right to have a gun. You might as well ban smoking all together too. I am sure these criminals will stop smoking.

[PoliticsSportsMusic]

3. No citizen needs an military type assault weapon for protection.

I'm blown away anyone here would support that. Maybe I'm naive since I've never had a gun pulled on me or been robbed...I live in a suburb of Houston and I don't even lock the doors to my house if I'm going to be gone just 30-60 minutes. If I lived somewhere that I felt I needed to arm myself for protect,I would move....not buy a gun.

[FeebMaster]

4. Military type assault weapon?

What would that be? No military in the world issues weapons covered by the AWB.

[PoliticsSportsMusic]

5. oh..a nitpicker...sorry I'm not up on my guns...

last I checked the Uzi's and ak47's are miltary assault weapons used by Israelis and Russians respectively but I could be wrong as I've already stated...I AIN'T UP ON MY GUNS,BUBBA

[Jack_DeLeon]

6. Still wrong...

AKs that are used in various militaries world for the most part are all capable of firing full auto.

Full auto weapons in the US are already restricted by the National Firearm Act of 1934.

The assault weapons ban has nothing to do with machine guns, its about restricting semi-auto rifles.

When you hear about people going out and buying AKs or AR15s they most likely are not buying fullauto weapons, they are buying semi-auto civillian version.

The assault weapons ban restricts semi-auto civillian weapons, not full-auto military weapons.

[Bowline]

11. The Uzi covered in the AWB is a submachine gun, NOT an assault rifle.

It fires 9mm pistol ammo, the same as many handguns. The same as carried by many police forces and the U.S. military.

[FatSlob]

12. Not quite.

A submachine gun is full-auto. The UZI-style gun covered by the AWB is semi-auto only. 1 bullet per trigger pull.

[Bowline]

13. I stand corrected.

So, you're saying it's just a scary looking, semi-auto pistol?

[FatSlob]

14. Yup, overpriced too.

Crappy sights, cheaply made, damn near impossible to conceal. Only good is that they are FUN to shoot.

[FeebMaster]

20. Technically I think it's considered a rifle

by the feds anyway. It definitely requires a 16" barrel to not be considered a short barreled rifle.

[FeebMaster]

19. Wanting accuracy when discussing the law is nitpicking?

It's very simple. The military issues machine guns to its soldiers. The AWB has nothing to do with machine guns, only semi-automatic weapons. So as you can see, it makes no sense whatsoever to say weapons covered by the AWB are military style.


"I AIN'T UP ON MY GUNS,BUBBA"

Cute.

[Bowline]

9. The ban didn't affect the functionality of weapons.

Banning grenade launchers and bayonete lug does nothing to make the gun less lethal. Look at the D.C. sniper case. The rifle they used was a perfectly legal, perfectly compliant, post-ban weapon yet it was just as deadly as the same weapon made in 1993.

[Wickerman]

18. Incorrect

search J/PS for a discussion of the magazine ban issue

[FeebMaster]

21. Bowline is right.

The magazine ban has nothing to do with the availability or the effectiveness or functionality of the weapons available. You can still buy high capacity magazines and use them in pre-ban assault weapons or post-ban weapons. The price has gone up for some magazines due to the frozen supply, but this probably affects handguns more than it affects most rifles, assault weapon or not.

[Wickerman]

22. yep

I read his post incorrectly

[NuttyFluffers]

7. well, when the rest of the nearby states...

don't give a toss about such restrictions of course you are going to still have people get such stuff. heck, probably in a few counties in texas the law is just ignored.

just because there is inconsistency in the laws application and support doesn't mean it doesn't work. it already works in other places and already works for other things. for example the nationwide full-auto ban. see people barreling down the streets with their trucks opening up full tilt with their SAWs? i don't. hmm, maybe because consistently applied and supported laws work... hmm, maybe, just maybe...

[Jack_DeLeon]

8. Some inconsistencies in your post.

just because there is inconsistency in the laws application and support doesn't mean it doesn't work.

What are you refering to? The AWB is a federal law, it inconsistent from state to state.

Aside from the AWB, and other federal gun laws, states can enact thier own gun laws. Ofcourse they are going to be inconsistent from state to state because different states have different ideas about what gun laws are reasonable. Are you proposing that all gun laws be federal gun laws and that states should have no authority in the matter?

for example the nationwide full-auto ban. see people barreling down the streets with their trucks opening up full tilt with their SAWs? i don't. hmm, maybe because consistently applied and supported laws work... hmm, maybe, just maybe...

Perhaps the fact that people are going around in thier trucks gunning down people with SAWs is because maybe most people dont own trucks, maybe most people down own SAWs, maybe most importantly because most people are homicidal manicas. Maybe, just maybe.

That being said there is no "full-auto" ban. Fully automatic weapons are restricted, not outright banned. Civillians can own fully automatic weapons.

That also being said, the full auto restrictions dont seem to stop some crimainals from getting fully automatic weapons.

[Bowline]

10. There is no ban on full auto weapons!!

They are perfectly legal to purchase. They're expensive, but quite legal, as are silencers and large capacity magazines.

[MrBenchley]

15. Of course, what's outright hilarious

is that the officer plainly means that the ban should be renewed and strengthended....but let the spinning continue!!!

[Jack_DeLeon]

16. I guess you cant read.

the officer plainly means that the ban should be renewed and strengthended

What part of his quote, "I don't think more laws is the answer." dont you understand?

but let the spinning continue

Yes you seem to be doing a good job of that.

[MrBenchley]

17. Spin spin spin spin...

Yeah, he clearly wants gang members to have MORE firepower, don't he....

[Jack_DeLeon]

23. What part of "I don't think more laws is the answer." dont you understand?

I'm sure he doesnt want gang members to have more firepower, but he doesnt think more laws are the answer.

[MrBenchley]

24. Spin and spin...

And he's still not hoping they get EASIER access to assault weapons...no matter how furiously you spin.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CO Liberal]

26. Given The Choice Between The Opinion Of One Police Officer...

...and dozens of police CHIEFS who advocate renewing the ban, I'll go with the police chiefs.

[FeebMaster]

27. Does that mean

given the choice between the opinion of a few senators and the president, you'll go with the president?

[CO Liberal]

28. Not Fair

If we had a REAL president right now, that would be one thing. But right now, I'd take the opinion of Cletus the Slack-Jawed Yokel on The Simpsons over Pretzelboy.

[FeebMaster]

29. suuuuuuuure.

[MrSandman]

30. Do some research...

and don't depend on the opinion of others or the rhetoric of either side.

[MrBenchley]

31. And when one does some research

one finds there's no good reason to put assault weapons on the market, and hundreds of good rasons to keep them off.

[skippythwndrdog]

32. Makes sense to me

Take the political appointee's opinion over that of the troops in the trenches everyday. I wonder which of the two sees the results of the "success" of the AWB as a matter of course in his/her daily job. You're right, it's likely the chiefs seeing it right there in the conference rooms and gladhanding opportuniteis rather than the cops who actually do the work of solving crimes and catching criminals.