Originally Posted by Powrjunkey
But they're going to ban assault rifles!
(assault rifles are select fire) roflmao!
He said he wanted to ban "assualt weapons" (according to the previous ban, our AR's fall into that category) then went on to say that he wanted to get automatic weapons off the streets. He was being deliberately confusing because saying he wanted to ban "assualt weapons" would swing some key States away from him but at the same time by what he said, most people think he was only talking about select fire firearms.
However, if he were to re-enact an "assualt weapon" (I really hate that term) ban, there are ways around it provided it follows the same lines as before. Go with a bull barrel with no flash suppressor and ditch the bayonet lug. Suddenly, your evil black rifle is no longer an "assualt weapon." The most telling thing for me was him saying he wanted to get "cheap handguns" off the street.
The only way to get to "cheap handguns" would be to ban all handguns. After all, there is zero definition of cheap. What I find to be inexpensive may not be the same thing that you find to be inexpensive. I often wonder if politicians actually think a ban would do anything besides keep guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens. Chicago has a ban on handguns and also has the highest violent crime rate in the country. Kennesaw Ga, which has a law that requires all heads of household to maintain a firearm and ammo, has the lowest crime rate in the country. Those results are per capita, so don't try coming at me with "Chicago has a higher crime rate because it has more people." That is a bull**** argument and gun control advocates know it but it does nothing to sway their minds.
-gun control measures bad
-gun ownership good
-Obama wants to ban guns (therefore, he is bad)
-less guns = more crime (criminals don't care about laws)
-more guns = less crime (buy a gun and learn how to use it)