• Yes It Should

    There is no reason that anyone needs to own assault weapons let alone that they should be manufactured for the public in anyway. This ban is a great first step towards ensuring tighter gun control and making our nation safer. Also it's a disgrace that it ever lapsed in the first place. There are ways to protect second amendment rights without it.

  • Yes, assault weapons are unnecessary.

    Even when it is agreed, and it is not always, that a person should be allowed to own a gun or guns, there is no reason why that person would need an assault weapon. These are for military use and can do a great deal of damage in a short period of time.

  • Yes, as soon as possible.

    No private citizen needs to own an assault rifle, and anyone who says otherwise is clearly working for the gun lobby. Those rifles are not used for self defense, or for hunting animals. Those weapons are used to slaughter people, and they should be outlawed for private citizens as soon as humanly possible.

  • As part of a solution

    What makes something an assault weapon (or alternatively, not one) is pretty poorly defined and won't actually take much off the market, but it's a start. I'm all for it as long as it's part of a comprehensive plan to get things under control, it by itself won't make a major difference.

  • Assault weapons are meant for killing only.

    They're called assault weapons for a reason. You wouldn't be using them to go hunt deer on the weekends, their sole purpose is to kill and main people. There's no reason for civilians to have such products, and with that in mind, I think that there is every reason for the ban on assault weapons to be reinstated.

  • I think that the assault weapons ban should definitely be reinstated as soon as possible.

    I think that the assault weapons ban should definitely be
    reinstated as soon as possible. There is
    no reason for a normal law abiding citizen to ever have possession of assault
    weapons. They are not necessary for
    hunting or for the protection of a home or business. They should be illegal.

  • Crime is on the decline

    Including gun crime from our own governments statistics (FBI). Anyone who thinks that laws prevent things like this from happening should look to Mexico or France. They have shootings there every day even though all guns are banned. We already have thousands of gun laws that don't stop criminals. It's already illegal to commit murder, let's make it extra super duper illegal.

  • No, I want my family to be able to protect themselves.

    It's a good idea that a smaller family member be able to protect the home upon aggression by criminals who are also armed. Would you want to leave a mother and children completely vulnerable in the home? Laws of physics prevent Police from arriving in time to assist in their protection.

  • Being beautiful does not make you dangerous!

    To ban "assault weapons" is downright silly. The M4 is already unlawful to own because it is a fully automatic weapon. The AR-15 is no different than a regular rifle in that it fires only one shot each time the trigger is pulled. Don't ban a gun just because it looks like another. Responsible gun owners don't use guns to kill people. How about making tougher laws on people who do harm to others. Whether with a gun or not. Stop releasing murderers after 10-15 years. Guns are not the issue. People are the issue.

  • The 2nd Amendment is Clear

    Semi Auto Rifles are important for the ability to defend against government tyranny. They are the muskets of the 21st century so to speak. If you outlaw them, criminals and the government will have a monopoly on them, thereby leaving law abiding citizens defenseless.

    BTW: Even the Full Auto Ban goes to far, since normally the 2nd amendment should ensure, that civilians can obtain the same rifles, that soldiers can.

  • Waste of politics

    The title sounds random, but its true: why have such a divisive issue polarizing the US when it does not need to? The most recent study on the subject shows that mass shootings (the acts, not the mass coverage by the media) have been declining for decades, and the majority of vast majority of gun violence is performed with handguns.

  • No it shouldn't

    I do not think that the assault weapons ban should be reinstated. I think there should be less gun control laws. I do understand why people want more laws banning guns, but I don't think there should be. I think instead, people should have to take gun training and safety classes and there should be more focus on education when it comes to guns.

  • No, it had no effect on crime, or mass killings

    The Assault Weapons Ban shouldn't be reinstated, reason being is the way that it proposed wouldn't ban assault weapons at all, just make new sales of guns with "assault weapon" features illegal, but buying a AR-15 in "sporter" format such as the C. Now in 1994 this was understandable, but now with the advent of 3D printers, 30 round magazines, and pistol grips can be printed, meaning a "sporter format" ar-15 can be easily transformed into an "Assault" weapon. Plus if a current ban was instated "Assault" Weapons would be grandfathered, meaning if you bought one before the ban, it's still legal. The Fact is even the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban didn't stop Columbine, and Conneticut's Assault Weapon Ban didn't stop Sandy Hooke. Lastly with the current administration so eager to sell guns to drug cartels it highly unlikely that an National Assault Weapon's ban will do anything to disrupt violence, if anything it will increase it.

  • A ban would hinder us from protecting ourselves.

    If we let the government take away our rights to bear semi-automatic weapons it would keep us from being able to protect ourselves as efficiently and would just allow criminals to gain an upper hand against law abiding citizens. Criminals will still be able to gain access to these weapons with 30 rounds while citizens will only be able to use shotguns that hold 3 shells or a pistol that holds 8.

  • The last ban didn't do anything.

    Crime began to drop during the last AWB but has continued to drop and roughly the same rate ever since it expired and the decrease cannot be attributed to it. Rifles are used in such a tiny percentage of crimes that it will still have no effect. If a ban had been in place it still would not have prevented the tragedy in Newtown just as the old AWB failed to stop Columbine. In my research I have not found any solid evidence to suggest that gun control legislation works at reducing crimes. So why pass a law to limit our freedom if it doesn't accomplish it's goal?

    The primary reason for the second amendment is to secure, as a last resort, the means by which the people of the US could fend off an oppressive government, either an invading one or our own should it become corrupted. The need to do so likely won't present itself soon, but it's a strong possibility for future generations and they will thank us for not disarming them.

  • Gun Control is only "Feel Good" legislation

    NONE of the gun control measures that are being proposed would have prevented the Sandy Hook horror.

    I am a mental health expert. Until we change the laws about involuntary commitment and better educate parents, teachers, and the public about how to recognize danger signs, and until the press learns not to publicize the name of the perpetrators, we will continue to have these horrible atrocities. These sad mentally-ill individuals are getting what they want. They put themselves out of their agony while going out in a blaze of glory and publicity.

    Yesterday, at the tender age of 69, I joined the NRA, because I strongly believe in the 2nd Amendment and because I am absolutely confident that new gun-control laws will do NOTHING to stop or reduce these atrocities. Gun registration and tracking by the government is an egregious violation of the original intent and true meaning of the 2nd Amendment. Better mental health management is our only hope.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.