national

Why doesn't Hanlon give his thoughts on which, if any guns/magazines should be banned? Why isn't anyone addressing the "add ons" to guns that allow them to replicate full automatic firing? They are marketed as legal and anyone can find them on Youtube to see the devastating rates of fire attainable.......legally at this time.

A good article explaining the idiocy of these bans. It's simply a ban on cosmetics. How else can you explain why they'd exempt the M-14, a gun actually used on battlefields by our military, but ban the AR-15, a gun not used by any military.

I find it ironic that the rifles used in international shooting competitions such as the Olympics actually use CO2 as a propellant and fire pellets. Yet the dupes of the NRA and Death Merchants emphasize that the semi automatic rifles, such as the AR 15, are necessary for shooting competitions. If the pellet guns are accurate enough for the world competitions and more economical to use than the semi-automatic rifles one should prefer a pellet gun. Makes me think there's an ulterior motive. The need to kill!

And how does banning the sale of new rifles with detachable magazines keep the existing ones (or any firearm for that matter) out of the hands of those who shouldn't possess them? Let's focus on that.

This article is equivalent to saying that were going to ban 'certain' books from the library, and then claiming that were not practicing censorship because you can still find the ones we didn't ban. This exact same premise would never fly for the first amendment and it should never fly for the second amendment either. There is no moral difference between banning some of one thing that we don't like that is a protected right and some of another. If you really want to get down to it, books with ideas have killed far more people than any gun ever has.

Digger57 said, A good article explaining the idiocy of these bans. It's simply a ban on cosmetics. How else can you explain why they'd exempt the M-14, a gun actually used on battlefields by our military, but ban the AR-15, a gun not used by any military. Actually Digger I believe that the M1a, the civilian version would likely qualify for the ban due to the list of features. Just because it isn't named, doesn't mean it wouldn't be outlawed.

Jcinmn said, I find it ironic that the rifles used in international shooting competitions such as the Olympics actually use CO2 as a propellant and fire pellets. Actually there are both rifle and pistol events using .22 long rifle firearms. There is also the biathlon which also uses a rifle, not a pellet gun. There are also numerous high power rifle and pistol competitions worldwide. Some using AR-15 style rifles.

We have tens of thousands of guns laws on the books. We only need ONE GUN LAW in America. Use a gun for ANY reason other than defense, sport or hunting, GO TO JAIL. The problem is not the gun, it is the repeat criminals and the catch and release courts.

Doesn't ANYONE learn from history? This nearly exact 'assault weapons' ban has ALREADY BEEN TRIED, for 10 years. It expired because it made ZERO difference. The Justice Dept. and FBI reports proved it made no difference in reducting mass shootings. Why would they try to repeat something that has been a proven failure? Columbine and other shootings happened in the middle of the last 'ban'. It is insanity to keep doing the same thing and expecting different results. The gun-haters don't care that such bans don't work; they simply hate guns and want to ban as many as they can. That's their REAL agenda.

A reactionary bill that is designed to chip away at the second amendment and had been in the works for over a year. Like Obamacare, just waited for the opportunity to spring it on us. We won't know what is in it unless it passes! The liberals will try to take away all our freedoms because they believe we are as stupid as their followers and that they know better. Liberals are destroying this country.