Mark Shields: Washington Should Get a Backbone and Ban Assault Guns

» Marcel Kincaid on 04.12.09 @ 10:52 AM

There are two reasons that these weapons are not banned: money and stupidity ... the money that the gun industry makes and that they put in the pockets of politicians, and the stupidity of people who get led around by the nose by the gun industry and its propaganda.

» ACS on 04.12.09 @ 02:53 PM

Perhaps it’s a hard thing to grasp for the more effete urban liberals in politics, but guns and ammo aren’t something magical, made by Firearms Faeries and Gun Gnomes in some U.S. factory. Unskilled labour in places like Waziristan produces perfect copies of AK-47s, Sten Guns and even RPGs. Any gangster with a lathe and a modicum of mechanical ability can do the same from his garage. The ordinance is easily made by anyone who passed high-school stoichiometry—cooking meth is harder than making primers and powder. Banning civilians from purchasing legally-made semi and full-auto weapons is as idiotic a ‘solution’ as North America’s drug prohibition has been.

Also, the “90% of gang weapons in Mexico come from the U.S.” party line is pure fiction. Most of the Mexican gangs’ weapons are either smuggled in from places like china, or appropriated from government armouries. By prohibiting American civilians from owning ‘scary’ semiauto ‘assault’ rifles, like the Mini-14, urbanites accomplish two things. First of all, they declare war on Rural America, where semiautomatic long guns are used for everything from hunting, to predator control. This is what the former, very corrupt Liberal government of Jean ‘Adscam’ Chrétien did in Canada. Secondly, Mexico is let off the hook for its ingrained culture of criminality, dating back to PRI days. Liberals can also find a politically-correct way of deflecting criticism from Criminals of Colour: Latin gangs, the Bloods and Cripps, &c;.

» Realist on 04.12.09 @ 03:39 PM

We could always apply the argument that is used for legalizing drugs here. Some say that the reason drugs are in such high demand and usage is because they are illegal. Well I guess by the same twisted logic, we should not make assault rifles illegal. A prohibition on assault rifles would only make the demand higher and push the market underground. Right, all of you pro-legalization druggies ? On the other hand, if drugs were legalized there would be no demand for assault rifles ... I give up, I have a headache.

» Bob on 04.13.09 @ 05:45 AM

I have been listening to the BBC new podcasts recently. Apparently, in London, they have a very big problem—with knives! Yes, knives. Not guns. And the podcast was concerned with ways to make sure young people do not carry knives. There was talk of random searches vs. more limited searches. But, for all of this, I can’t imagine that a knife could do more harm to more people than guns. It seems like it would be so much easier to shoot from a distance than to have to be right next to a person and stab them.

Now, I fully expect to be blasted my out gun-loving friends, here. I’m sorry for my views; but, I do believe that guns should be banned from this country, as well.

One comment on the comments: some people have said that most weapons used by criminals are obtained illegally. Perhaps they are; but, I would submit that most of those illegal weapons have simply been stolen from houses during burglaries, not smuggled in to the country somehow. Now, if those guns were not in the house already, then they would not be in the hands of criminals, now.

» Jonesy on 04.13.09 @ 06:55 AM

“....the assault rifle, the one modeled after the military weapon and built to fire hundreds of rounds of ammunition in a matter of seconds”.

Wow….what science fiction. The military weapons that you say these civilian versions are modeled after don’t even achieve this. And the ones that do are available ONLY to the military.

SEMI-AUTOMATIC….say it with me now….that’s it. You pull the trigger 1 time and 1 (ONE) round is fired. Can you pull the trigger hundreds of times in a matter of seconds? I can’t.

» Tired Of The Errors on 04.13.09 @ 07:32 AM

In your article, you state:

“Let’s begin with the assault rifle, the one modeled after the military weapon and built to fire hundreds of rounds of ammunition in a matter of seconds.”

Are you seriously suggesting that an ordinary human being could pull the trigger on one of these so-called “assault weapons” hundreds of times in a matter of seconds? The past “Assault Weapons Ban” banned, among other things *semi-automatic* rifles that had certain cosmetic features. Perhaps you are not familiar with what the term semi-automatic means. It means that each time a person pulls the trigger, one, and exactly one, round is fired. If you want to fire two rounds, you must pull the trigger twice. If you want to fire 100 rounds, you must pull the trigger 100 times. Perhaps if you had done more research for your article, you would have been aware of the mechanics of a semi-automatic rifle.

Why is it that the folks who seem to have the most problems with firearms also have the least amount of knowledge about them? The least you could do is understand what you’re talking about, unless of course you are purposely trying to mislead people about this topic.

» Jeff in Texas on 04.13.09 @ 08:59 AM

Mark, You really need to get some facts straight. You want to talk about assault rifles…Then lets talk about what a assault rifle is. A fully automatic machine gun. The federal government already has srict laws on these from the 1930’s. A semi-automaic rifle that resembles a military rifle is not a assault weapon. Semi-automatic rifles can not shoot hundreds of rounds in minutes or seconds as you say. You have to pull the trigger once for every shot. Get the facts straight. Also, the person responsible for killing the Oakland California police officers was a felon already who should not have had guns in the first place. Already have laws on that. Get the facts straight. The Binghamton, NY shooter used a semi-automatic pistol not an assault rifle. He had also been convicted of a crime in California in the early 90’s and he is a felon. Get the facts straight. You also said that in 1994 the democrats and Bill banned automatic weapons. That was done in the 1930’s for automaic weapons already. Oh, you mean there were some semi-automatic rifles that looked like fully automatic military assault weapons that were banned for 10 years and had no effect on gun crime during that time. Get the facts straight. Also, you state that the criminals are out there outgunning our police force with automatic weapons. You can not go into a sporting goods store and buy these types of weapons. If the bad guys have fully automatic weapons then we need to look at the international black market of guns. Just like what is happening in Mexico. Most criminals use cheap handguns or stolen weapons. Mark, you are the Typical Liberal. You spout mis-information and expect the people to take it as fact. Shame on you. Get some backbone and report objectively and factually and get the facts straight.

» Curtis CA on 04.13.09 @ 09:36 AM

Once and for all, you can not buy assault weapons in America if you are a regular citizen.  The firearms that people buy at gunshows and stores do not fire none stop when the trigger is held down.  They fire one at a time with each single trigger pull, just like a revolver or a shotgun.  Might as well repeal the entire Bill of Rights, Constitution, and just make this a Marxist state.  Even if “some” people don’t like it, firearms protect the liberal media’s right to bad mouth them.  If large countries with almost unlimited resources team up with other nation that hate us, (like Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran) all of the people that are anti-firearms are going to be really happy when those countries invade us through Mexico’s drug routes, and the only one there to protect you is your neighbor and his/her legally purchased firearms.
    Firearms are not for everyone.  I don’t try to take away your right to write what you feel is important and correct.  I won’t stomp on your 1st Ammendment right and you stop attacking this country’s 2nd and we will all be one big happy country again.

» Jim on 04.13.09 @ 10:58 AM

Why do people feel the need to comment about subjects they obviously know nothing about?. The commentator makes numerous simple errors. This editorial is completely worthless.  I wish people like Mark Shields would just have a “vertebrae transplant” and admit they want to ban all guns.

» Boss290 on 04.13.09 @ 12:31 PM

Remember “Prohibition Amendment” Was Appealed! As a firearms owner and Former Law Enforcement Officer, I really see you really do not know anything about firearms! You as a Media Person should know that when you report and report and report the same killings over and over you as the media send the signals for a mentally unstable person to commit these crimes, also do you know the difference between a full auto Assualt and semi auto Sporter, in your story you cannot tell the public the difference! People Kill you four-eyed [Editor’s note: Phrase removed for vulgarity]!

» Dan in Kansas on 04.14.09 @ 07:11 AM

Once again a misinformed diatribe!  Gun laws have proven time and again to be ineffective at reducing the unlawful use of any firearms.  Banning any sort of guns only causes those that are willing to abide by that ban to lose their guns.  Criminals have shown a nasty propensity to ignore laws.  Could that be why they’re criminals?  Do the research.  Try to find statistically significant research anywhere that shows that banning guns reduces crime.  I DARE YA!  Anywhere that guns have been banned violent crime has risen.  From the perspective of freedom, the oppression of those disallowed to have guns by those that are allowed to keep them has been dramatic.  The first step in oppressing any group is to remove their ability to defend themselves from that oppression.

» Semi-auto UZIBoy on 04.15.09 @ 02:32 AM

Once again, someone who knows nothing about guns calling for a ban.

I have a great idea for a ban, since you and your kind like banning things so much. Try banning writers from writing about things they know nothing about. It will get awfully quite out here….......

» John Locke on 04.15.09 @ 11:52 AM

Don’t worry about Shields and the other anti-gun nuts.  Obama and the Dems (including and especially Pelosi and Reid) finally figured out that they have big time support in gun country (middle America).  They won’t take this on.

» John Locke on 04.17.09 @ 01:59 PM

Never trust the press to get numerical data correct.  Esp on an issue like gun control.  Unless of course, the data fits the press’ leftist agenda.