The so-called "assualt weapons ban" didn't really do anything in the first place. It prevented weapons with certain cosmetic features from being manufactured or imported - but those in existence could still be legally sold, and the exact same firearms with different cosmetic features coudl still be legally manufactured and imported. So the fact that the "ban" has expired is really a rather irrellevant argument, IMHO. Of course, that is what the gun-haters like to do - go for the irrellevant, because heaven forbid they discuss anything logical. They know they couldn't defend their position if they tried.
Assault weapons ban lifted...good thing?
- Thread starter Endor5
- Start date
SIG-Fan, my great-great grandfather immigrated to the U.S. from Germany in 1857 for reasons that boiled down to a rejection , by him, of the political realities that existed in Germany at that time. He had family who stayed there because their tolerance for oppression , real or imagined, was greater. The entire citizenry of the U.S. ,with few exceptions, fits the profile of my ancestor. I'm not implying we have something genetic going on, but we have been raised by parents who instilled in us value for our personal freedoms to a degree that personal freedom IS America. When you were describing the process of hunting in Germany, the words "are allowed" kind of jumped off the screen at me. I'm sure I'm not the only one who rejects at the most basic level the concept of the government allowing us stuff. The people of America are the ones who allow the government it's privileges, not the other way around. The whole preceding discussion about what is reasonable regarding firearms regulation has to be looked at with that in mind. We are jealous with our freedoms and do not lightly give any of them up
3 weelin geezer
New member
This is my choice, and if any Americans do not like the freedoms that they are granted, they need to go be a citizen of some other country who will tell them what to eat, where to eat it, where to live, how much everyone makes, what to say, what not to say, where to work, etc.
Say, abelew, you forgot to add something here. I don't know about everyone else but I hear that in China they also tell you how many kids you can have and when. If you have more they confiscate them. I sure wouldn't want anyone telling me when I can get some.
Say, abelew, you forgot to add something here. I don't know about everyone else but I hear that in China they also tell you how many kids you can have and when. If you have more they confiscate them. I sure wouldn't want anyone telling me when I can get some.
too many choices!?
New member
Sorry if this was already pointed out but.....
Does anyone find the similarities between the '94 Clinton Gun Ban(aka Assault Weapons Ban) and the '86 legislation that banned new manufacture for the public, importation for the public('68?) and registration by the public odd? By the same logic that shot down(pun intended)
the '94 ban, the '86 ban needs to go as well. Neither truly banned anything it only served to regulate the gun industry in a way congresses powers were never intended to be used. An attempt to legislate intent/mind state of the user. Both laws caused a making frenzy and then freeze of an entire industry in it's tracks with the stroke of a pen. When they(gov) began to regulate certain weapons in the '30s you only had to register them to be legal(Mg,short barreled rifles and shotguns,suppressors,etc),then in '86, no new registration of machine guns(sbrs and everything else were still able to be registered). The features that made assault weapons sooooooooooooo dangerous (bayonet lugs, flash reducers, retractable stocks, full capacity magazines) were so evil/offensive that you could not even register with the gov. to make one( like you could a sbr)after the hoops and red tape !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Basically the gov. believed that bayonet lugs, retracable stocks and full capacity magazines are as "suitable for crime" as machine guns and need to be off the civie market.......... 
Really makes you wonder what they say behind our back if this is what they say to our face........Criminals shouldn't have these = so take it from the American public .......American public must be = to the criminals 
Does anyone find the similarities between the '94 Clinton Gun Ban(aka Assault Weapons Ban) and the '86 legislation that banned new manufacture for the public, importation for the public('68?) and registration by the public odd? By the same logic that shot down(pun intended)
the '94 ban, the '86 ban needs to go as well. Neither truly banned anything it only served to regulate the gun industry in a way congresses powers were never intended to be used. An attempt to legislate intent/mind state of the user. Both laws caused a making frenzy and then freeze of an entire industry in it's tracks with the stroke of a pen. When they(gov) began to regulate certain weapons in the '30s you only had to register them to be legal(Mg,short barreled rifles and shotguns,suppressors,etc),then in '86, no new registration of machine guns(sbrs and everything else were still able to be registered). The features that made assault weapons sooooooooooooo dangerous (bayonet lugs, flash reducers, retractable stocks, full capacity magazines) were so evil/offensive that you could not even register with the gov. to make one( like you could a sbr)after the hoops and red tape !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Basically the gov. believed that bayonet lugs, retracable stocks and full capacity magazines are as "suitable for crime" as machine guns and need to be off the civie market.......... Really makes you wonder what they say behind our back if this is what they say to our face........Criminals shouldn't have these = so take it from the American public .......American public must be = to the criminals The best argument, besides the verbatim Second Amendment, is the gang invaision from Mexico. This is a very real threat to national security, and, the gangs in Mexico traffic in automatic weapons. Also, the 13's, and 14's, last time I checked, had nearly twice the members of law enforcement, over the 13 western states. Members easily illegally armed, as easily as they smuggle illegals into the US.
The LA riots, with the police and fire fighters pulling out, to save thier asses from sniper fire from the gangs, are a prime example of the potential problem.
In the Pacific Palisaides, the ultra-liberal, anti-gun folks, had security and barriers setup with any weapon they could find. Wonder if their position against auto weapons might change, given that experience?
s
The LA riots, with the police and fire fighters pulling out, to save thier asses from sniper fire from the gangs, are a prime example of the potential problem.
In the Pacific Palisaides, the ultra-liberal, anti-gun folks, had security and barriers setup with any weapon they could find. Wonder if their position against auto weapons might change, given that experience?
s
"Mac 10s are around $3,000 now. M16s go for around $11,000 and up. "
I've fired both. Mac tens I fired would only function reliably with hardball. Heavy weapons, high rate of fire, limited accuracy, but, you could equal a 2 bore with 32 rounds of 230 grain ball in a bit less then 2 seconds. NICE home protection weapons, or, possible anti large bear, or Alaska weapons.
M16's worked for me, since you could hold them close to on target, with full auto bursts, unlike the M14, which kicked my arse, backwards.
The prices are absurd. I sold for 350 the Mac 10, Mac 11, and a couple others, because they were Soooo bad accuracy wise, except in the house.
Besides, I would either be in jail, or prison owning them, with all these new fangled, illegal laws.
s
s
I've fired both. Mac tens I fired would only function reliably with hardball. Heavy weapons, high rate of fire, limited accuracy, but, you could equal a 2 bore with 32 rounds of 230 grain ball in a bit less then 2 seconds. NICE home protection weapons, or, possible anti large bear, or Alaska weapons.
M16's worked for me, since you could hold them close to on target, with full auto bursts, unlike the M14, which kicked my arse, backwards.
The prices are absurd. I sold for 350 the Mac 10, Mac 11, and a couple others, because they were Soooo bad accuracy wise, except in the house.
Besides, I would either be in jail, or prison owning them, with all these new fangled, illegal laws.
s
s
Opinion of a Cop and a smart a$$
Ask your friends if they've noticed an increase in crimes committed with the use of the weapons that had been banned before September 2004. Unless I have been walking around in a complete haze, I don't recall our country coming apart at the seams since that useless ban expired. The assault weapons ban does nothing more than make the sheep in our society sleep better at night because they mistakenly believe that if you make something illegal, it will go away. I have tried to explain the error in this way of thinking to many by asking them if banning drugs solved the problem of drug abuse in our society.
I am a Law Enforcement Officer and I have lost a friend and coworker as the result of an "assault weapon" falling into the hands of someone who intended to do harm with it. I still do not now, nor will I ever agree with this rediculous ban.
The bottom line is this, you can not eliminate the weapons that are already out there. If you ban them, 60% of the law abiding citizens will turn theirs in, the remaining 40% will make the transition from law abiding citizens to criminals because they refuse to turn theirs in and not one single criminal will turn his weapon in. As a result, crime will increase, substantially. If you need proof, compare the crime statistics in the state of Texas the year before and the year after (then) Governor George Bush allowed concealed carry in that state. Or you could ask someone from Britain or Australia who can no longer legally protect themselves from someone with criminal intent who might enter their home late at night.
Anyone who can not understand this is extremely naive and has no concept of reality, in my humble opinion of course.
Ask your friends if they've noticed an increase in crimes committed with the use of the weapons that had been banned before September 2004. Unless I have been walking around in a complete haze, I don't recall our country coming apart at the seams since that useless ban expired. The assault weapons ban does nothing more than make the sheep in our society sleep better at night because they mistakenly believe that if you make something illegal, it will go away. I have tried to explain the error in this way of thinking to many by asking them if banning drugs solved the problem of drug abuse in our society.
I am a Law Enforcement Officer and I have lost a friend and coworker as the result of an "assault weapon" falling into the hands of someone who intended to do harm with it. I still do not now, nor will I ever agree with this rediculous ban.
The bottom line is this, you can not eliminate the weapons that are already out there. If you ban them, 60% of the law abiding citizens will turn theirs in, the remaining 40% will make the transition from law abiding citizens to criminals because they refuse to turn theirs in and not one single criminal will turn his weapon in. As a result, crime will increase, substantially. If you need proof, compare the crime statistics in the state of Texas the year before and the year after (then) Governor George Bush allowed concealed carry in that state. Or you could ask someone from Britain or Australia who can no longer legally protect themselves from someone with criminal intent who might enter their home late at night.
Anyone who can not understand this is extremely naive and has no concept of reality, in my humble opinion of course.
The AWB only denied assult weapons to law abiding citizens. Law abiding citizens don't go wontonly committing serious violations of the law. Those that go around doing those type of violations that involve assult weapons do not care about the AWB. You could make baseball bats illegal, and one of two things will happen. Criminals will start using a metal pipe, or get a bat from a dealer on the street, who would not have to register their baseball bat, like the law abiding citizen in the world of illegal base ball bats. The only people affected by this action would be the people who wanted to play baseball, not those that would use the bat for nefarious reasons.
re this "asasault rifle/weapons" baloney.
I take it that most if not all of the correspondents on this discussion know the difference between a true "assault rifle" and the so-called "assault rifle", or might that be the "assault style rifle", that was the neat little off the shoulder number that we used to see at Hattie's, or was it Bloomies?
Granted, the anti gun type might not, or they play as if they don't know the difference. Granted also that most "reporters" especially the "blow dried media personalities" likely don't, but then they probably wouldn't recognize an 88mm field piece if one were dropped on them.
I admit to being old, I'm also tired and I tend to get cranky when I need sleep, yet I still wonder as to why in blazes we keep falliong into the same old word traps, playing the same silly word games with the antis.
One day, I had an argument with the news director at WDUQ FM, in Pittsburgh, over media's technical sloppiness, especially when there was any connection with firearms. He claimed, re their misuse of the term "assault rifle", which he admitted was the case, that the term had "entered the vernacular". I flat told him that if that were the case, then it was strictly the fault of people such as himself. and asked whether or not the station had a "style book", news papers used to have them.
Anyhow, on the subject of improper language that was now "part of the vernacular" I querried him about the term NIGGER, which at least at one tme, within my memory, was certainly "part of the vernacular". I did not involve myself with the social connotations of the term, whatever they might be, impolite, racist or what have you.
In any event he became quite annoyed at my mention of NIGGER, and I could understand why, being the I had always thought him to be of "liberal persuasion", possibly even something of a "hand wringer". Beside, NIGGER is not a "nice" word.
At about this point, I politely inquired as to whether he saw a connection between his annoyance at my use or reference to a somewhat rude term, that rude or not, was certainly "part of the vernacular", in the context of his ongoing and knowing misuse of a TECHNICAL TERM, the meaning of which had been brought to his attention more than once. He sort of grunted.
So while the died in the wool antis likely won't listen, most people aren't such types, and given proper presentation, could be made to see and understand the rather large difference. More important, they might even come to realize that the other side had been lying to them all along. Semi-automatic rifles have been in common use since prior to World War 1, machineguns and or selective fire weapons came upon the scene later. Before there is any possibility of so fine an occurance taking place, we have to get it right, and to many amongst us do not.
I do not know why we keep falling into this semantic trap, but how about this. He that makes up the question, to a considerable extent, controls the answers obtained. Same with the frqaming of the debate, and the words used. Let's make them our words, not their words. It might be worth the effort, and it could make a hellish large difference.
To those who sat through the foregoing, thank you. I hope that it turns out to have been worth your time.
I take it that most if not all of the correspondents on this discussion know the difference between a true "assault rifle" and the so-called "assault rifle", or might that be the "assault style rifle", that was the neat little off the shoulder number that we used to see at Hattie's, or was it Bloomies?
Granted, the anti gun type might not, or they play as if they don't know the difference. Granted also that most "reporters" especially the "blow dried media personalities" likely don't, but then they probably wouldn't recognize an 88mm field piece if one were dropped on them.
I admit to being old, I'm also tired and I tend to get cranky when I need sleep, yet I still wonder as to why in blazes we keep falliong into the same old word traps, playing the same silly word games with the antis.
One day, I had an argument with the news director at WDUQ FM, in Pittsburgh, over media's technical sloppiness, especially when there was any connection with firearms. He claimed, re their misuse of the term "assault rifle", which he admitted was the case, that the term had "entered the vernacular". I flat told him that if that were the case, then it was strictly the fault of people such as himself. and asked whether or not the station had a "style book", news papers used to have them.
Anyhow, on the subject of improper language that was now "part of the vernacular" I querried him about the term NIGGER, which at least at one tme, within my memory, was certainly "part of the vernacular". I did not involve myself with the social connotations of the term, whatever they might be, impolite, racist or what have you.
In any event he became quite annoyed at my mention of NIGGER, and I could understand why, being the I had always thought him to be of "liberal persuasion", possibly even something of a "hand wringer". Beside, NIGGER is not a "nice" word.
At about this point, I politely inquired as to whether he saw a connection between his annoyance at my use or reference to a somewhat rude term, that rude or not, was certainly "part of the vernacular", in the context of his ongoing and knowing misuse of a TECHNICAL TERM, the meaning of which had been brought to his attention more than once. He sort of grunted.
So while the died in the wool antis likely won't listen, most people aren't such types, and given proper presentation, could be made to see and understand the rather large difference. More important, they might even come to realize that the other side had been lying to them all along. Semi-automatic rifles have been in common use since prior to World War 1, machineguns and or selective fire weapons came upon the scene later. Before there is any possibility of so fine an occurance taking place, we have to get it right, and to many amongst us do not.
I do not know why we keep falling into this semantic trap, but how about this. He that makes up the question, to a considerable extent, controls the answers obtained. Same with the frqaming of the debate, and the words used. Let's make them our words, not their words. It might be worth the effort, and it could make a hellish large difference.
To those who sat through the foregoing, thank you. I hope that it turns out to have been worth your time.
Alan -
I agree with you to a point - we have allowed the media, at least to some extent, to create and use terms which are both inaccurate and contain an inherent demonization of certain types of firearms. However, its important to note that in the 10 years the 1994 AWB was in effect, the term "semi-automatic assault weapon" was specifically defined in the US Code, thus making it a legal term. As "semi-automatic assault weapons" were defined as either rifles, pistols, or shotguns with certain specific features, I think many (and certainly myself) used the term "assault rifle" as a short form for the legal definition of a specifically defined "semi-automatic assault weapon" which was also a rifle.
While I dislike the factual sloppiness of the media with regard to the use of the term "assault rifle" (especially as one who owns true selective fire assault weapons) I think its important to understand that in the context of law and legislation the term "assault rifle" or "assault weapon" may be correctly used, even in reference to a semi-automatic firearm. Additionally, some states (NY for example) still have a state assault weapons ban in place which mirrors the now expired federal ban. In those states I feel the term is still accurate IF used in reference to a weapon which is defined under the state law.
I agree with you to a point - we have allowed the media, at least to some extent, to create and use terms which are both inaccurate and contain an inherent demonization of certain types of firearms. However, its important to note that in the 10 years the 1994 AWB was in effect, the term "semi-automatic assault weapon" was specifically defined in the US Code, thus making it a legal term. As "semi-automatic assault weapons" were defined as either rifles, pistols, or shotguns with certain specific features, I think many (and certainly myself) used the term "assault rifle" as a short form for the legal definition of a specifically defined "semi-automatic assault weapon" which was also a rifle.
While I dislike the factual sloppiness of the media with regard to the use of the term "assault rifle" (especially as one who owns true selective fire assault weapons) I think its important to understand that in the context of law and legislation the term "assault rifle" or "assault weapon" may be correctly used, even in reference to a semi-automatic firearm. Additionally, some states (NY for example) still have a state assault weapons ban in place which mirrors the now expired federal ban. In those states I feel the term is still accurate IF used in reference to a weapon which is defined under the state law.
shaggy:
I grew up in NYC, and lived there for many years, Brooklyn, where I started, later Manhattan and Queens. I left in 1967 over that long gun registration of Mayor Lindsay's baloney. I've never looked back either, having lived on the road for many years, 20 some odd states and 3 foreign countries.
Frankly, and I may just be thickheaded, the "legal" term semi-automatic weapon appearing in The U.S. Code or on the ****house wall, pardon my crude language, is pure and simple the product of a political whorehouse, a low class whorehouse at that.
As for machine guns, I've fired a few now and then, actually submachine guns, I doubt that I would cross the street to do it again. This position does NOT knock the interests of others. I used to shoot 1000 yard competition, which is a rather odd way to spend an afternoon, I enjoyed it however. Best of luck to anyone interested in automatic weapons.
As for the term "assault rifle", it is a rater specific term, with particular mneaning. I never thought that anything more was needed, unless one were interested in muddying the waters, which unfortunately is seemingly the prime purpose of some "law makers".
Appreciate your input.
Best.
I grew up in NYC, and lived there for many years, Brooklyn, where I started, later Manhattan and Queens. I left in 1967 over that long gun registration of Mayor Lindsay's baloney. I've never looked back either, having lived on the road for many years, 20 some odd states and 3 foreign countries.
Frankly, and I may just be thickheaded, the "legal" term semi-automatic weapon appearing in The U.S. Code or on the ****house wall, pardon my crude language, is pure and simple the product of a political whorehouse, a low class whorehouse at that.
As for machine guns, I've fired a few now and then, actually submachine guns, I doubt that I would cross the street to do it again. This position does NOT knock the interests of others. I used to shoot 1000 yard competition, which is a rather odd way to spend an afternoon, I enjoyed it however. Best of luck to anyone interested in automatic weapons.
As for the term "assault rifle", it is a rater specific term, with particular mneaning. I never thought that anything more was needed, unless one were interested in muddying the waters, which unfortunately is seemingly the prime purpose of some "law makers".
Appreciate your input.
Best.
hey folks,
i'm still not quite sure about one issue:
why it is legal to sell FA-kits (for example in Gun magazines) if you are not allowed to install it into your semiautomatic gun. as mentioned erlier, in germany you can but the selective trigger for the Glock which could turn your semi G17 into a FA G18. But anyone how sells these triggers has to inform the customers, that you commit a crime by installing it into your G17. but in US gun magazines they mention nothing about the conversionkits commiting a crime by installing one in your semi-automatic rifle... i mean, getting into jail because of some issue that you didnt know because it wasnt told you by the gunsmith, would really suck.
-greetings from germany
SIG
i'm still not quite sure about one issue:
why it is legal to sell FA-kits (for example in Gun magazines) if you are not allowed to install it into your semiautomatic gun. as mentioned erlier, in germany you can but the selective trigger for the Glock which could turn your semi G17 into a FA G18. But anyone how sells these triggers has to inform the customers, that you commit a crime by installing it into your G17. but in US gun magazines they mention nothing about the conversionkits commiting a crime by installing one in your semi-automatic rifle... i mean, getting into jail because of some issue that you didnt know because it wasnt told you by the gunsmith, would really suck.
-greetings from germany
SIG
ahhh...i forgot
since a while, i watch the news carefully and i got the impression that there hasn't ever been that many articles about people comiting massacres since the last year. i wonder, if its because the media doesn't like the legal gun owners or if somethings works wrong in our society..... or if its because the lately restricted german gun laws, that makes the people going mad
-sig
since a while, i watch the news carefully and i got the impression that there hasn't ever been that many articles about people comiting massacres since the last year. i wonder, if its because the media doesn't like the legal gun owners or if somethings works wrong in our society..... or if its because the lately restricted german gun laws, that makes the people going mad
-sig
hey folks,
i'm still not quite sure about one issue:
why it is legal to sell FA-kits (for example in Gun magazines) if you are not allowed to install it into your semiautomatic gun. as mentioned erlier, in germany you can but the selective trigger for the Glock which could turn your semi G17 into a FA G18. But anyone how sells these triggers has to inform the customers, that you commit a crime by installing it into your G17. but in US gun magazines they mention nothing about the conversionkits commiting a crime by installing one in your semi-automatic rifle... i mean, getting into jail because of some issue that you didnt know because it wasnt told you by the gunsmith, would really suck.
-greetings from germany
SIG
****
SIG-Fan:
Re the above, your latest post, to use a polite turn of phrase, both your information, comments on "FA Kits", I assume you refer to "conversion kits" so-called, and the magazines you mentioned, but did not name, are DATED, very dated, which in plain English means out of date, currently wrong.
Some years back, there were offered, in some U.S. gun magazines, so-called conversion kits for the AR-15 Rifle. Sale and purchase of these "parts kits" were, at the time, entirely legal. Actual installation of these parts in a rifle was quite illegal, unless the rifle so altered was registered as a machinegun, which was, to say the least, a complicated proceedure. In any case, the law has since been changed, and currently, the sale of such parts is illegal. If one were found in possession of such parts in the U.S. today, they would have a lot of explaining to do, and unless they could prove possession of the parts prior to 1986 I believe, they would be in considerable trouble, or certainly could so end up.
By the way, I remember some of these ads worded more of less as follows, WHY WALTZ WHEN YOU CAN ROCK AND ROLL? The text then went on to tout the alleged virtues of these "drop in kits" so called. Problem was that many, if not most of them, when "dropped in" didn't work at all well, if at all. I have no doubt that in Germany, just like here, one can find all manner of fast talking sales people, who come equipped with fancy stories. Problem is that they are often just that, fancy stories, rather than the facts of the matter.
Once again, re your accompanying post, same following, "ahhh...i forgot
since a while, i watch the news carefully and i got the impression that there hasn't ever been that many articles about people comiting massacres since the last year. i wonder, if its because the media doesn't like the legal gun owners or if somethings works wrong in our society..... or if its because the lately restricted german gun laws, that makes the people going mad", media here, television and most mass circulation newspapers are anti-gun. Aside from that,. they are, re technical matteres, bloody near worthless, especially given technical matrewrs involving anything that goes BANG.
*****
If you are making mention of the late and unlamented Assault Weapons Ban, which dies as of 13 or 14 Septembver 2004, that legislation was pure baloney from word 1, uttered on day 1 of it's misbegotten life. As to German law re firearms, or just about anything else for that matter, I plead ignorance, ignorance being the lack of knowledge.
How are you doing in college, or have you graduated?
i'm still not quite sure about one issue:
why it is legal to sell FA-kits (for example in Gun magazines) if you are not allowed to install it into your semiautomatic gun. as mentioned erlier, in germany you can but the selective trigger for the Glock which could turn your semi G17 into a FA G18. But anyone how sells these triggers has to inform the customers, that you commit a crime by installing it into your G17. but in US gun magazines they mention nothing about the conversionkits commiting a crime by installing one in your semi-automatic rifle... i mean, getting into jail because of some issue that you didnt know because it wasnt told you by the gunsmith, would really suck.
-greetings from germany
SIG
****
SIG-Fan:
Re the above, your latest post, to use a polite turn of phrase, both your information, comments on "FA Kits", I assume you refer to "conversion kits" so-called, and the magazines you mentioned, but did not name, are DATED, very dated, which in plain English means out of date, currently wrong.
Some years back, there were offered, in some U.S. gun magazines, so-called conversion kits for the AR-15 Rifle. Sale and purchase of these "parts kits" were, at the time, entirely legal. Actual installation of these parts in a rifle was quite illegal, unless the rifle so altered was registered as a machinegun, which was, to say the least, a complicated proceedure. In any case, the law has since been changed, and currently, the sale of such parts is illegal. If one were found in possession of such parts in the U.S. today, they would have a lot of explaining to do, and unless they could prove possession of the parts prior to 1986 I believe, they would be in considerable trouble, or certainly could so end up.
By the way, I remember some of these ads worded more of less as follows, WHY WALTZ WHEN YOU CAN ROCK AND ROLL? The text then went on to tout the alleged virtues of these "drop in kits" so called. Problem was that many, if not most of them, when "dropped in" didn't work at all well, if at all. I have no doubt that in Germany, just like here, one can find all manner of fast talking sales people, who come equipped with fancy stories. Problem is that they are often just that, fancy stories, rather than the facts of the matter.
Once again, re your accompanying post, same following, "ahhh...i forgot
since a while, i watch the news carefully and i got the impression that there hasn't ever been that many articles about people comiting massacres since the last year. i wonder, if its because the media doesn't like the legal gun owners or if somethings works wrong in our society..... or if its because the lately restricted german gun laws, that makes the people going mad", media here, television and most mass circulation newspapers are anti-gun. Aside from that,. they are, re technical matteres, bloody near worthless, especially given technical matrewrs involving anything that goes BANG.
*****
If you are making mention of the late and unlamented Assault Weapons Ban, which dies as of 13 or 14 Septembver 2004, that legislation was pure baloney from word 1, uttered on day 1 of it's misbegotten life. As to German law re firearms, or just about anything else for that matter, I plead ignorance, ignorance being the lack of knowledge.
How are you doing in college, or have you graduated?
hi alan,
unfortunatelly i'm not able of editing my last post. at least i didn't figure out what to do in order to deleate the last word....
well, what can i tell? finished highschool last June, then, in october, i started studying chemistry in Darmstadt. now i have semester break, but i can't really enjoy it, because i got to write 3 tests during this break and therefore i can't stop studying chemistry stuff. don't know if there are any chemists here, but i think chemistry is a tough subject.
but at least, theres still enough free-time to meet friends and to go shooting.
this weekend, there's the first qualification for the german championship in pistol-shooting. i wonder if i'll have a chance at all, since i never participated in any type of shooting challenge before. if i qualify for it, i'll tell you.
well, i'm thinking about coming over to the US maybe this summer, or at least in 2006.
-sig
unfortunatelly i'm not able of editing my last post. at least i didn't figure out what to do in order to deleate the last word....
well, what can i tell? finished highschool last June, then, in october, i started studying chemistry in Darmstadt. now i have semester break, but i can't really enjoy it, because i got to write 3 tests during this break and therefore i can't stop studying chemistry stuff. don't know if there are any chemists here, but i think chemistry is a tough subject.
but at least, theres still enough free-time to meet friends and to go shooting.
this weekend, there's the first qualification for the german championship in pistol-shooting. i wonder if i'll have a chance at all, since i never participated in any type of shooting challenge before. if i qualify for it, i'll tell you.
well, i'm thinking about coming over to the US maybe this summer, or at least in 2006.
-sig