Easy Access To Assault Weapons? Obama Says 'No,' McCain Says 'Yes'

Last week, the Brady Center released its report on the impact of military-style semi-automatic assault weapons on American families and law enforcement after Congress and the President allowed the federal Assault Weapons Ban to expire.

Two days later, the Orlando Sentinel reported the phenomenon of "disposable AK-47s" used in crime in Florida:

Orange County's latest murders reflect an alarming trend for law enforcement: urban firefights with dozens of shots fired.

The shooters in Tuesday night's double killing outside a Pine Hills apartment complex emptied two AK-47s into the victims and fled, discarding the assault rifles, two handguns and a shotgun.

"They just disposed of them like disposable cigarette lighters, I guess, because they're so easy to get," sheriff's homicide Detective Dave Clark said Friday. "I mean, it's really unusual for people to leave stuff like this behind."

Andre Patterson, 27, and Joshua Sharpe, 25, were shot repeatedly in the parking lot of Kensington Cottages apartments on Burroughs Drive off Hiawassee Road. Crime-scene technicians found 58 cartridges fired by the AK-47s and an undisclosed number from the other firearms.

One of the AK-47s had a 30-shot magazine. The other had a 40-shot magazine. Both had been fired until empty....

[more]

Sadly, as the Brady Center's report shows, such incidents are all too common.

Official statistics are unavailable because of burdensome restrictions on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, but since the Assault Weapons Ban expired in 2004, at least 163 people have been killed and 185 wounded with military-style semi-automatic assault weapons. This includes at least 38 police officers killed or wounded in states like Florida, Pennsylvania, Virginia and others.

Restrictions on assault weapons have drawn support from law enforcement and U.S. Presidents including Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, and even George W. Bush.

Senator Barack Obama said in his convention acceptance speech, "The reality of gun ownership may be different for hunters in rural Ohio than they are for those plagued by gang violence in Cleveland, but don't tell me we can't uphold the Second Amendment while keeping AK-47s out of the hands of criminals."

That's just common sense. Yet Senator John McCain, called "one of the premier flag carriers for the enemies of the Second Amendment" by the NRA, still opposes restrictions on the easy access to assault weapons.

Our communities are less safe today than they were four years ago, when devastating weapons like AK-47s were not as easily available to thugs and other dangerous people. Senators Obama and McCain should be pressed at tonight's debate to explain their differences on this important issue.

(Note to readers: This entry, along with past entries, has been co-posted on bradycampaign.org/blog and the Huffington Post.)

Comments

[StarKing]

Has it occurred to anyone that Shedances might be a not very sophisticated AI program?
Seems almost like a semi-random output from a fixed database of responses.
Kinda like an exaggerated magic 8-ball.

[Anton-63]

I am a military officer. Engineer for the production of small arms. Today the work of forensic experts.

I know and love their weapons

[djkrlsn]

Second posting 2 things--I hope you are aware that while the U S was using the Colt Peacemaker and S&W Schofield revolvers in 45 Colt and Schofield as standard issue, the Russians were issuing Schofields in a very similar round--the 44 Russian. In terms of politics and ill intent--I don't care if you are looking at Ivan the Terrible, Lenin, Stalin or Putin--you have no basis for criticizing the U.S. since Russia went straight from having serfs, to the fighting between the Bolsheviks and Menshiviks to the Gulag and you have not improved since.

[Anton-63]

You read this article?

http://www.ifamericansknew.org/stats/shoot_to_maim.html

[molonlabe]

"At about 5 a.m., deputies said, 40-year-old Mark C. Johnson, who has no listed address, burst through the front door of 1010 Kirkland Drive, a peach, one-story house with bars on the windows just south of Palm River Road.

When Johnson came into her bedroom, Enzor was waiting with a gun, and shot him in the upper torso, deputies said. Johnson attacked Enzor, but she got away after a brief struggle and called 911.

Arriving deputies found Johnson still inside the home, dead. Enzor had minor injuries and faces no charges.

According to records from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Johnson has been arrested at least 33 times since 1986, and charged with robbery, larceny or shoplifting at least 20 times. He also has several drug-related or battery charges on his record, in addition to dozens of violations of probation."

http://www.tampabay.com/news/article870637.ece


Remember folks, guns are to blame for society's violence, not the fact that someone arrested 33 times in 22 years was still allowed to be out on the streets.

Paul, why no mention of this, EVER, from your organization??

[kaveman1]

Because Paul wants more crimianls on the streets so the public will grow more fearful and look to government for answers.

Enter the gun bans.

You will never hear Paul advocate that criminals should stay in jail unless the crime committed is owning a gun they think is scary looking.

[molonlabe]

I guess in today's economy, EVERYONE wants a little job security. Including Paul Helmke.

[Tao21Zen]

"The proposals by the Brady Campaign are aimed at keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of dangerous people and would not deprive law abiding citizens of conventional pistols, rifles, and shotguns."

I just had to address the many errors in this statement.

1. dangerous weapons

The weapons that the BC are targeting are no more dangerous than any other weapons. In fact, if we measure 'danger' by the actual threat it currently poses society, we find the infrequent use of rifles below knives, blunt objects, poisonings, and even hand & feet.

2. dangerous people

One thing consistent in the gun debate is that NONE of the anti-gun laws already on the books prevent evil people from obtaining weapons to use against others. The BC knows this as they continue to push anti-gun laws that have shows to do nothing to reduce crime.

3. would not deprive law abiding citizens

So, gun bans and heavier regulations will not prevent law abiding citizens from owning these banned or more heavily regulated firearms? That's just absurd.

4. conventional pistols, rifles, and shotguns

As long the BC gets to define that the approve of as being "conventional." So called "assault weapons" are main stream firearms by a majority of gun owners. Yet, they are not "conventional" to those that want to ban them. What's next, your scoped bolt action 308 hunting rifle will be an unconventional "sniper rifle" that must be banned?

[MorgansRifles]

This is a link to Jon Gambrell's story on the Central Arkansas Nuiversity shooting. Our side could use some help!

Michael

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/27/central-arkansas-universi_n_138033.html#

[MorgansRifles]

kelli:

This is from the San Francisco Chronicle

City settles with plaintiffs in arms ban fight

Earlier this year, the courts slapped down San Francisco's voter-approved initiative to ban the sale and possession of firearms, calling the proposition unlawful. Gun-owning residents, the National Rifle Association and other pro-gun groups, cheered.

Now, it looks like those plaintiffs - well, technically their attorneys - are getting paid by city taxpayers.

The city has tentatively agreed to a $380,000 settlement for lawyers' fees and other costs the plaintiffs incurred in fighting the ban. The Board of Supervisors still must approve the agreement, but it's likely they will.

And who knows? Perhaps the NRA won't cash the check but instead frame it and put it on display at headquarters like a mounted animal.

- Wyatt Buchanan


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/10/18/BA5B13J91H.DTL

[twogunmojo]

hey dewd..i look for new anti-gun posts on here every day and it certainly seems to me that josh sugarman has given up..i think their are 11 comments on his latest blog and one belongs to me..the anti-gunners hate it when you mention that less than 2 people per state per day are affected by gun violence..this is a staggeringly low figure if you believe we have something approaching a quarter of a billion guns in private hands in this country (i think it is probably more) and since shedances regards personal insight as the best knowledge you can have i have seen/felt a shift in her posts as well..the truth is always your best weapon..i was born with the right to self defense..self preservation..and self determination..it seems the anti-gunners would deny us all 3

[EmilyU]

Shedances,

Some more questions for you to ignore:

1. A TEC-9 is a:

A. Sub-machine gun
B. Machine pistol
C. Assault rifle
D. Semi-auto pistol

2. The TEC-9 is _____ powerful when compared to a standard 9 mm pistol.

A. more
B. just as
C. less

3. The TEC-9's rate of fire is _____ that of a standard 9 mm pistol.

A. faster than
B. slower than
C. the same as

4. The TEC-9 holds ______ ammo than a standard police issue 9 mm pistol

A. more
B. less
C. the same
D. Ammo capacity is determined solely by the magazine used, not by the firearm.

5. The TEC-9 is known for:

A. being inaccurate and jamming frequently
B. being exceptionally accurate and reliable

6. Thugs like the TEC-9 because:

A. its high power, reliability, and accuracy
B. its imposing apperance

[Anton-63]

The story of pistols. The history of small arms. http://www.cneat.ru/bullet-3-en.html

The maleficent American shooting school has a strong negative effect on the training and the morale of the armed forces (the customers) " "the enemy needs not only to be killed, but to be torn apart". A pistol is a standard weapon borne by the personnel of the force structures and the man-hating propaganda gradually becomes the philosophy of the whole society...

[Thirdpower]

Riiiiiiiight.

[OldSFMJT]

WTF, over???

Old SF MJT

[djkrlsn]

Anton--your post is incoherent, the link is poorly written in terms of American firearms, if you choose to trust your live to underpowered pocket pistols (yes I consider a 9mm Makarov an underpowered pocket pistol suitable only for when discretion is important)--that is your option and I am truly curios what your point is. IIRC--wasn't it the USSR that sent its troops into Stalingrad to take the city back while issueing 75%+ of its troops 5 round of ammo and to pick up a rifle from a shot compatriot?

[benEzra]

Contrary to your link, the Russian service pistol is not the antique 9x18mm Makarov; it is the 9x19mm Yarygin PYa, or MP-443 Grach (Писто�"ет Я�ыгина, ПЯ, �"Р-443 "�"�ач").

The U.S. military pistol cartridge is NOT the .45 ACP, it is the 9x19mm, a EUROPEAN cartridge and the same one the Russian military uses.

FWIW, the rifle I shoot competitively with is European made (Romanian) and chambered for a European cartridge (7.62x39mm). The most popular police AND ordinary-citizen handgun in the United States is also European, the Austrian-made Glock.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say with regard to USA/European small arms, but the above posted link makes no sense. European guns are extremely popular with law-abiding shooters in the United States.

[Anton-63]

Makarov pistol currently in the armed forces of Russia (300 J). Handgun Yarygina is not. It is a copy of Browning (Shooting with both hands). Let him fight.

[thedewd]

So, as far as The Dewd can tell, it's about 20 to 1 on Paul's own blog against him. Does anyone know where the gun banners go for a message board? I pretty much know the VPC lies and distorts. We all know their policies are aimed (pun intended) at the law abiding citizen and that these policies are ineffective anyway. What I really want is a truckload of Kelli types with whom I can discuss this issue. It borders on the ridiculous when people attempt to use logic as a platform for gun control. Seriously, the Brady Center doesn't have a blog / message board, so where can I go? I think Kelli may be a good barometer for the type of reception we would get, but the 20 of us grinding away at one of Kelli is overkill. I think we would be better served at another site that's more evenly matched. Where can I find a board that has gun banners en masse?

[djkrlsn]

I think a big part of the problem is that to remain a fervent gun banner like Kelli--belief has to come before facts-and knowing the fact tend to bring people to our side.. Helmke and Hennigan are both lawyers so they are arguing to defend their "client" the Brady Campaign so I am not sure how much of what they say/write is belief and how much is trying to earn a nice fat paycheck (note Paul's claims of victory after Heller--a couple of weeks ago I was at a talk by Chuck Michel, and acording to him we can attack any federal assault weapon law on both the common use standard of Heller and the military utility of MIller, and use the same approach on the state level for both handguns and long arms once we get incorporation, especially since Heller made the rulings supporting nonincorporation of the 2nd amendment significantly weaker).

[kaveman1]

Shedances is here for the sole purpose of drawing fire away from Paul Helmke.

The more time we expose her ridiculousness, the less time we spend slapping down Helmke.

But, in the end, dances is the public face of the Brady Bunch which, for the life of me, I can't imagine Paul thinks is a benefit.

[Thirdpower]

Factcheck fails to check the facts again.

"(The NRA says he voted "four times" but we find record of only two votes.)"

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/the_rifle_associations_true_story.html

Two words "Judiciary Committee". An additional two votes from him against it.

And they continue to use partial information to state their case. Charges were initially filed against Demar but later dropped after public outcry. Not a word about that on (we don't) Factcheck. Wonder why? Demar was fined $750 and that"s not a "petty" amount. Unless of course you also think $500 firearms are "disposable".

These guys are so ticked off by the fact that the NRA decided to push back instead of meekly accepting "Factchecks" personal biases that they're not even really looking very hard and hoping people don't 'factcheck' them.

[Thirdpower]

Paul got confused on FoxNews. He claimed that Illinois has Concealed Carry. (3:00min in)

http://www.foxnews.com/video-search/m/21280957/gun_battle.htm

One would think that it being one of only two states w/o CCW, Paul could keep it straight.

Lapierre then hands Paul his rear in response:

http://www.foxnews.com/video-search/m/21280958/right_to_bear_arms.htm

[molonlabe]

EVERY state has CCW. Only Illinios and Wisconsin prohibit law-abiding citizens from doing it legally.

[djkrlsn]

Paul always struck me as being more than a bit of a weasel--though for our side, I am glad he is not a good liar.

[kaveman1]

If you haven't seen it already, Chicago (that's in Illinois, I think) is now the murder capital of America.

Congratulations shout out to Paul and friends for this "victory" in common sense gun laws.

http://cbs2chicago.com/local/chicago.homicide.rate.2.847736.html

[molonlabe]

But not a bad per capita rate though, considering they have 9.7 million people. ;)

[Ohio9]

I love how Paul says the NRA should not worry about gun bans anymore because of the Heller case, which he called "A major victory for the NRA".

But in the BC's most recent report, they claim "The long term effects of the decision are at odd with the day-after headlines proclaiming a seminal victory for gun rights".

The reporter should have asked Paul which statement is correct. Is the Heller verdict a victory for the NRA or not? Or is it just whatever Paul wants it to be when he finds it convenient?

[Ohio9]

Hey everyone, check out the BC's newest "report". Once again they are trying to spin the Heller verdict into some warped kind of "victory", even though their entire case was rejected by the courts, meaning they decisively lost:

http://www.bradycenter.org/xshare/pdf/heller/post-heller-white-paper.pdf

You gotta love this quote:

"The proposals by the Brady Campaign are aimed at keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of dangerous people and would not deprive law abiding citizens of conventional pistols, rifles, and shotguns."

Once again the BC wants us to forget they defended DC's handgun ban and "safe storage" laws, which ment a total ban on all guns for self defense, all the way to the bitter end.

And once again, they refuse to define what a "conventional" gun is. Seeing as they advocate banning guns that use technology invented in the 19th century (semi-automatic firing), have been on the civilian market for decades, and are lawfully used by millions of citizens, their claims of not trying to ban "conventional" guns are not going to fool anyone, or at least not anyone who knows anything about guns.

[Thirdpower]

I love how they now claim that 59% support is 'not overwhelming' when they've previously claimed it was, but that was support for gun bans and not opposition to it. Then 67% becomes a 'solid majority'.

Words mean what they want them to.

They also show that 'FactCheck', even after 4 years, selectively chooses what it wants people to hear when it comes to the NRA by only partially quoting Kennedy's speech calling for banning of various types of ammunition, notably where he calls civilian ownership of .223, 7.62 , and 30-30 'unconscionable'.

They also exclude the 'inconvenient fact' of the rest of the wording of the 2A "The right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". But we all know that the Brady Legal Action Project director Dennis Henigan likes to forget the words "Of the People".

http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v282/kjhof/?action=view&current=YouTube-FrequentlyAskedQuestionsabo.flv

So much for being 'students of the Constitution and American History'.

[benEzra]

The rifles the Brady Campaign wishes to outlaw ARE conventional guns.

Mauser-style bolt-actions and Civil-War-era lever actions aren't the only conventional, NFA Title 1 civilian rifles in U.S. homes.

That statement is an attempt to tiptoe around the fact that they wish to outlaw the most popular sporting rifles in America (yes, target shooting is a sport, if you want to play the "sport" card) and the most popular defensive carbines in U.S. homes.

[kaveman1]

Of course it was a victory for the BC. That's why they rooted for this decision and submitted the amicus brief pooh-poohing DC's ban.

Oh wait. That's exactly backwards. My bad.

Paul and those like him want people to have very short memories, and sadly, many do.

That's why we're here.

[Ohio9]

In a recent debate on the "Cato Unbound", Robert Levy (the lead council representing Hller) pointed out that the BC claims to oppose a handgun ban, but support D. C. handgun ban all the way to the end.

BC's Dennis Henigan replied:

http://www.cato-unbound.org/2008/07/23/dennis-henigan/does-heller-point-the-way-to-victory-for-reasonable-gun-laws/

"Levy points to Brady"s amicus brief in the Heller case as recent evidence that the group favors a handgun ban, but our brief is entirely consistent with our view that legislators should not be constitutionally barred from enacting the gun control laws they think necessary to protect their constituents, even laws Brady does not favor as a policy matter."

Levy pointed out:

http://www.cato-unbound.org/2008/07/25/robert-a-levy/if-this-is-defeat-well-take-it/

"Let"s accept Henigan"s statement that, from a policy perspective, Brady opposes the D.C. gun ban. Is it too much to ask for a citation to one corroborating article, one radio or TV appearance, one web posting, or one quoted statement by any responsible Brady official that says, in essence, "We think D.C. should repeal its gun ban, even though it is constitutional, because it is bad public policy"?"

The fact of the matter is that the BC has never opposed any gun law ever, except on grounds that it is not restrictive enough. So much for only supporting "reasonable gun laws".

[HisXLNC]

"The proposals by the Brady Campaign are aimed at keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of dangerous people and would not deprive law abiding citizens of conventional pistols, rifles, and shotguns."

And by "dangerous people", they mean everyone except police, military, and the few other "only ones".

[djkrlsn]

And in terms of the ammo restrictions they support--the bill supported by Edward Kennedy, Gore, Kerry and Obama would bann 99% of all centerfire hunting ammo.

[Ohio9]

Oh but didn't you hear? Factcheck.org is sure that the amendment would not ban most ammo. How do they know? Because Kennedy "said his amendment was not intended to cover hunting ammunition."

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/nra_targets_obama.html

Wow, how reassuring. Believing an amendment isn't bad simply because of what the sponsor says. Um, I could be wrong here, but isn't factcheck.org's job supposed to involve....well...CHECKING FACTS? Instead they just accept a politician's word as undisputable fact with no further investigation!

Factcheck should have a new slogan: "Factcheck.org: When a politician says something, we will always believe it."

[Thirdpower]

The Maryland State Police classified 53 nonviolent activists as terrorists and entered their names and personal information into state and federal databases that track terrorism suspects, the state police chief acknowledged yesterday.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/07/AR2008100703245_pf.html

The Brady Campaign thinks these activists should now lose their constitutional rights because they were put on 'the list".

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-helmke/terrorists-and-guns_b_49990.html

[kaveman1]

Here's a newly released video of McCain from his POW days.

Might need a tissue.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvcuEqGUwmc