# Is McCain forked yet? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 25, 2008, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mccain-forked-yet/450604 "2008-05-25T23:58:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 43
**Author:** ![Argent\_Towers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e8c25b/32.png) [@Argent\_Towers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Argent_Towers)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2008, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mccain-forked-yet/450604/841 "2008-10-02T15:51:01Z")
Because books don’t kill people, I guess (unless you bash someone over the head with them, repeatedly.) But really - you’re much much more likely to be killed by a car than by a gun (_especially_ an “assault weapon” covered in that absurd ban.) ---
**Author:** ![Least\_Original\_User\_Name\_Ever](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e480ec/32.png) [@Least\_Original\_User\_Name\_Ever](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Least_Original_User_Name_Ever)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2008, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mccain-forked-yet/450604/842 "2008-10-02T15:51:13Z")
> [@Argent\_Towers](#): > > Well, I _can’t_ compromise. Yeah it’s not like “all guns are illegal.” But Biden and friends support legislation that would make the guns that _I like_ illegal. And why? Because of _how they look,_ not having anything to do with their function or their statistical usage in actual crimes (next to none) but because they have things like bayonet lugs (when was the last time a bayonet was ever used to kill someone? The fucking Civil War?) folding stocks, pistol grips, things that look scary because you see them in stupid mindless action movies a lot, but in real life have _nothing to do_ with how dangerous, or likely to be used in a crime, a gun is. > > For me, supporting something so unbelievably illogical is _just as stupid_ as supporting the teaching of creationism in the classroom, and telling students that the world is 6000 years old and that dinosaurs and humans co-existed together. It’s equally idiotic, equally groundless, equally lacking in any kind of logic and reason, and equally reliant upon people’s stupid, superstitious, knee-jerk emotional beliefs. And I KNOW that there are Dopers here who would sooner cut off their own dick than ever vote for anyone who advocated “intelligent” design, even if they agreed with _everything else_ that candidate stood for. They wouldn’t compromise on their issue, and I’m not going to compromise on mine. So back over to you, if it’s your issue just because you like the way they look, and other guns that are just as functional are legal, how is that logical? ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Carrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@Captain\_Carrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Carrot)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2008, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mccain-forked-yet/450604/843 "2008-10-02T15:51:51Z")
[QUOTE=robby] On the other hand, I am hoping that with the recent Supreme Court decision, the issue is more-or-less settled. I have heard that if McCain gets elected, the court will shift more to the right, and if Obama is elected, the court will likely stay pretty much the same. [/QUOTE] A. Since when does a single case settle any issue in the Supreme Court? They revisit stuff when they feel it’s necessary. B. In fairness to McCain, I doubt he’ll nominate a very conservative judge, given the majority Democrats are likely to have after November; certainly several more than the Senate has now. ---
**Author:** ![Least\_Original\_User\_Name\_Ever](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e480ec/32.png) [@Least\_Original\_User\_Name\_Ever](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Least_Original_User_Name_Ever)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2008, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mccain-forked-yet/450604/844 "2008-10-02T15:58:01Z")
> [@Sinaijon](#): > > Let’s change this phrase a little to “It’s not like all **books** are illegal”. > > What happens when a politician even _asks_ about removing a book from a libraries circulation? A million and a half pit threads, that’s what. Nearly universal condemnation here. > > Lots of people posted in those threads that they would _never_ vote for a book banner. Why the double standard? Books AND guns are protected in the Bill of Rights. Books =/= guns. ---
**Author:** ![Argent\_Towers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e8c25b/32.png) [@Argent\_Towers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Argent_Towers)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2008, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mccain-forked-yet/450604/845 "2008-10-02T15:58:44Z")
> [@Least\_Original\_User\_Name\_Ever](#): > > So back over to you, if it’s your issue just because you like the way they look, and other guns that are just as functional are legal, how is that logical? Because they’re not just as functional. I guess I mis-spoke when I used that specific word so let me elaborate. The features of an “assault weapon” do _not_ make that weapon any more likely to be used in a crime, and they certainly do not somehow make it more “deadly,” but they do help the ergonomics of the firearm. A pistol grip allows you to get a more comfortable grip on the gun with your shooting hand. A folding stock lets you adjust the stock according to your personal preference or your body type. A barrel shroud (which you hardly ever see - most “assault” rifles have plastic forearms with heat shielding inside) lets you grip the barrel without burning your hand, but again, these are practically obsolete on rifles. A vertical foregrip on a rifle allows you to grasp the front end of the weapon more firmly and comfortably. So, these features do make a difference in the ergonomics of the gun in question. But they do _not_ make it any more dangerous. The reason why they are in the “assault weapons” ban is because they _look_ scary because you tend to see them in Hollywood action movies. (Remember Carolyn McCarthy, the main force behind the AWB, didn’t even know what a barrel shroud WAS?) I’ve said it before and I will keep saying it until I’m in my goddamned grave. The only people who are screwed by the AWB are _gun hobbyists_ and recreational shooters who collect military-style firearms. The weapon of choice for actual criminals has always been, and will always be, the handgun. Of course, if you’re an “anti” - a knee-jerk anti-gun person - you will simply never see eye to eye with me on this. I could talk all day about this and you’d still just be picturing Scarface and Heat in your mind. But maybe, just maybe, I can shed some light on this by explaining it clearly. ---
**Author:** ![Sinaijon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@Sinaijon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sinaijon)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2008, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mccain-forked-yet/450604/846 "2008-10-02T16:15:27Z")
> [@Argent\_Towers](#): > > Because books don’t kill people, I guess I dunno. ‘THE COMMUNIST MANIFESTO’ killed a hell of a lot of people. ---
**Author:** ![A\_shameful\_cracka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ebca7d/32.png) [@A\_shameful\_cracka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/A_shameful_cracka)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2008, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mccain-forked-yet/450604/847 "2008-10-02T16:16:07Z")
> [@Argent\_Towers](#): > > Because they’re not just as functional. I guess I mis-spoke when I used that specific word so let me elaborate. > > The features of an “assault weapon” do _not_ make that weapon any more likely to be used in a crime, and they certainly do not somehow make it more “deadly,” but they do help the ergonomics of the firearm. It may not be the features that make them more likely to be used in a crime, it could just be reputation and appearance, but just one example (from the other thread), the SKS, IS used a lot more in crime than any other rifle. It has a bad reputation because far more law enforcement workers have been killed by the SKS than any other rifle. Don’t get me wrong, I’m against practically all gun control, but it’s inaccurate to divorce the types of weapons in these bans from crime. For whatever reason, these weapons are more popular with criminals than other weapons of similar functionality ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2008, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mccain-forked-yet/450604/848 "2008-10-02T16:18:20Z")
> [@Argent\_Towers](#): > > Because books don’t kill people, I guess (unless you bash someone over the head with them, repeatedly.) > > But really - you’re much much more likely to be killed by a car than by a gun (_especially_ an “assault weapon” covered in that absurd ban.) Think about all the times that you use or are in proximity to cars, or more to the point that people in general encounter cars. How often are people _not_ killed by cars relative to how often they are? It’s really the denominator in the consideration of risk that people really seem to fail to understand very well at all. ---
**Author:** ![Defensive\_Indifference](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/defensive_indifference/32/6502_2.png) [@Defensive\_Indifference](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Defensive_Indifference)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2008, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mccain-forked-yet/450604/849 "2008-10-02T16:29:53Z")
> [@Argent\_Towers](#): > > But really - you’re much much more likely to be killed by a car than by a gun (_especially_ an “assault weapon” covered in that absurd ban.) In 2006, there were about 202 million licensed drivers in the US. There were about 42,000 traffic fatalities ([cite](http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx)). The number of firearm owners is hard to come by. The most recent number I found was from the Department of Justice, who [estimated](http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/pubs/gun_violence/sect01.html#note6) the number of firearm owners in the US at 44 million. In 2007, there were 10,086 murders committed with firearms in the US ([cite](http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx)). So, that means that there was one traffic fatality for every 4700 registered drivers (202M/42000). There was one firearm murder for every 4300 gun owners (44M/10000). So, while you might be more likely to be killed by a car, a gun owner and a driver are about equally likely to kill someone. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2008, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mccain-forked-yet/450604/850 "2008-10-02T16:31:16Z")
> [@Argent\_Towers](#): > > Of course, if you’re an “anti” - a knee-jerk anti-gun person - you will simply never see eye to eye with me on this. It doesn’t take an “anti” not to see eye to eye with you. It takes someone like me, someone who feels that guns are not relevant to my daily life and that nothing can make guns into an issue I care about. Want concealed carry? It’s okay with me. Want to repeal the Second Amendment? It’s okay with me. I think for many of us, the right to carry guns is only seen as a right because it’s in the Constitution, while the right to other things is seen as a right because we feel it’s something really important worth protecting. I don’t defend things on the basis of them being Constitutional. I defend them on the basis of them being what I consider right and important. ---
**Author:** ![Happy\_Lendervedder](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/happy_lendervedder/32/8488_2.png) [@Happy\_Lendervedder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Happy_Lendervedder)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2008, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mccain-forked-yet/450604/851 "2008-10-02T16:34:21Z")
> [@Sinaijon](#): > > I dunno. ‘THE COMMUNIST MANIFESTO’ killed a hell of a lot of people. So do you find the “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people” arguement to be bullshit too? ---
**Author:** ![Argent\_Towers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e8c25b/32.png) [@Argent\_Towers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Argent_Towers)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2008, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mccain-forked-yet/450604/852 "2008-10-02T16:57:03Z")
> [@A\_shameful\_cracka](#): > > It may not be the features that make them more likely to be used in a crime, it could just be reputation and appearance, but just one example (from the other thread), the SKS, IS used a lot more in crime than any other rifle. It has a bad reputation because far more law enforcement workers have been killed by the SKS than any other rifle. > > Don’t get me wrong, I’m against practically all gun control, but it’s inaccurate to divorce the types of weapons in these bans from crime. For whatever reason, these weapons are more popular with criminals than other weapons of similar functionality OK, I’m going to say a lot of stuff that the people who don’t know anything about guns are not going to be able to understand, so all you guys, you can go back to doing whatever it is that you care about enough to let the rights of those who _do_ care about guns slip by the wayside. What I am about to say is directed specifically towards the quote above. The SKS rifle, which stands for (roughly translated) Simonov Self-Loading Carbine, is not and never has been considered an “assault weapon” by anybody. The only feature of the AWB that the SKS meets is that of the bayonet lug, and again, I don’t think criminals are bayoneting each other in the streets. Let me give a brief summary of the SKS. It is chambered in 7.62x39, the same cartridge as the AK-47. But this is where its similarity to the AK-47 ends. The SKS has a traditional wooden stock, like the M1 Garand or the Mauser rifle or any number of much older rifles. It does NOT have a pistol grip, which automatically disqualifies it from falling under the criteria of the AWB. The SKS has a fixed (non-detachable) magazine which holds ten rounds - perfectly kosher, by the standards of the AWB, which prohibits detachable mags, or mags with more than 10 rounds capacity, _on guns with a pistol grip._ The SKS also does not have a folding stock, at least not in its standard configuration, though aftermarket ones are available. It does not have a vertical foregrip nor a barrel shroud. The SKS rifle passes nearly all the criteria which would exclude it from the “assault weapons” ban. Therefore, it is not, and never has been considered an assault rifle, except by idiotic newspaper reporters who keep calling it one, probably because they don’t know their ass from their elbow or an M-16 from a Marlin 60. Now, as to why the SKS is more popular with criminals than other _rifles_ of similar function (_rifles,_ not pistols) - very, very simple answer: it is cheap, and it uses cheap ammo. You can get an SKS for 250 dollars and a big case of ammo for 100. A semi-automatic civilian AK-47 variant - a Saiga, WASR, or similar rifle - will run you around 400 dollars at the cheapest, and much more if you want a higher quality weapon. (If anyone has any links to crimes committed with WASRs or Saigas, please link to them now.) Going up the ladder a little bit, an AR-15, on the very cheapest end, will cost you at least 600 dollars for a cheap Century build, and about 1000 for a decent quality Bushmaster or similar AR-15. This is not money that the average criminal has to spare. (If you have links to crimes committed with AR-15s, please link to them now.) Going up the ladder even more, an [HK91](http://www.arizonaresponsesystems.com/finish/m3blkhk9101.jpg) - which I own - will run you around $2,000. What kind of criminal has that money to spare? This might be the most evil looking rifle on the planet, and you might see it in a lot of violent action movies, but really - in real life - how many crimes are committed with this rifle? How many criminals can even afford the _ammo_ for it (.308 cartridges)? I’m willing to bet that in the past ten years, an HK91 was used in maybe ONE crime in America, if that. And yet - the AWB would ban this rifle. All the way at the top, the mighty [Barrett .50-cal.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barrett_M82) The Brady Campaign claims that this rifle is “the preferred weapon of terrorists.” To date, exactly zero crimes in the United States have ever been committed with one. See where I’m going with this? The AWB is _stupid_ in its purest and most potent form. It relies on the ignorance of firearms on the part of the public. ---
**Author:** ![Koxinga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/4af34b/32.png) [@Koxinga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Koxinga)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2008, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mccain-forked-yet/450604/853 "2008-10-02T16:59:41Z")
Holy dogshit, can’t you guys get your own thread? ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2008, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mccain-forked-yet/450604/854 "2008-10-02T17:08:42Z")
Just to stay on topic (and because I happened to be reading this article earlier and thought it was actually, you know, relevant ;)), [CNN](http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081002/ap_on_el_pr/ap_poll_presidential_race) says here that Obama is starting to pull away and that McCain’s chances are fading…unless there is a major change or gaff by Obama. > [@](#): > > WASHINGTON - Barack Obama has surged to a seven-point lead over John McCain one month before the presidential election, lifted by voters who think the Democrat is better suited to lead the nation through its sudden financial crisis, according to an Associated Press-GfK poll that underscores the mounting concerns of some McCain backers. > [@](#): > > Likely voters now back Obama 48-41 percent over McCain, a dramatic shift from an AP-GfK survey that gave the Republican a slight edge nearly three weeks ago, before Wall Street collapsed and sent ripples across worldwide markets. On top of that, unrelated surveys show Obama beating McCain in several battlegrounds, including Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania and Iowa — four states critical in the state-by-state fight for the presidency. McCain is probably not forked (yet)…but I’d say his chances are definitely fading and it’s looking more and more like it will be President Obama in a couple of months… -XT ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2008, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mccain-forked-yet/450604/855 "2008-10-02T17:15:49Z")
> [@Argent\_Towers](#): > > Well, I _can’t_ compromise. Yeah it’s not like “all guns are illegal.” But Biden and friends support legislation that would make the guns that _I like_ illegal. And this has how much chance of becoming law? > [@](#): > > And I KNOW that there are Dopers here who would sooner cut off their own dick than ever vote for anyone who advocated “intelligent” design, even if they agreed with _everything else_ that candidate stood for. They wouldn’t compromise on their issue, and I’m not going to compromise on mine. I wouldn’t give a flip about how a pol felt about intelligent design, if it was some backwater issue where even its supporters weren’t particularly energized to push for it, because it wasn’t going to make that big a positive difference in the lives of most Americans, its opposition was strong and organized, and it was about 73rd on their list of priorities anyway. ---
**Author:** ![Fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fish)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2008, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mccain-forked-yet/450604/856 "2008-10-02T17:45:57Z")
> [@Koxinga](#): > > Holy dogshit, can’t you guys get your own thread? Yeah. I didn’t subscribe to this thread to read a hijack about the minutiae of the Assault Weapons Ban. I realize that this is your pet issue, and you hope to educate people about your particular field of interest, but I don’t see why you must do so here. ---
**Author:** ![EddyTeddyFreddy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eddyteddyfreddy/32/18796_2.png) [@EddyTeddyFreddy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EddyTeddyFreddy)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2008, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mccain-forked-yet/450604/857 "2008-10-02T17:48:24Z")
> [@Koxinga](#): > > Be interesting to see whether he ever looks in Obama’s direction this time. If he just repeats the same nonverbal attitude he seemed to be adopting in the first debate, he might give the audience some definite “jerk” vibes. I suspect John won’t be able to force himself into any semblence of respect for Obama, if [his conduct](http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/01/not-so-secret-handshake/?ref=business) during the Senate’s consideration of the bailout bill yesterday is any indication: > [@](#): > > As the senators gathered to vote on the $700 billion financial rescue package on Wednesday evening, Mr. Obama walked over to the Republican side of the chamber to extend a greeting to Senator John McCain. > > He got a chilly response. > > While it took Mr. Obama several seconds to make his way over to see his rival, Mr. McCain barely pivoted his body as he took Mr. Obama’s hand for a handshake that lasted just a moment. The eye contact was just as brief. Oh, yeh, and some other interesting observations from the same source: > [@](#): > > Mr. Obama, who first arrived on the Senate floor at 5 p.m., presented his argument in favor of the legislation in a 13-minute speech. When Mr. McCain arrived shortly before 8 p.m., he did not join other Republicans in addressing the Senate. Aides to Mr. McCain said he had already addressed the substance of the bill during a speech earlier in the day in Missouri. > > As Mr. Obama worked the floor of the Senate, holding a long conversation with Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton and walking around to greet a host of other colleagues, Mr. McCain largely stayed near his seat. Republican senators wandered by to say hello, before he walked away from the chamber. ---
**Author:** ![ShadowFacts](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shadowfacts/32/2934_2.png) [@ShadowFacts](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ShadowFacts)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2008, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mccain-forked-yet/450604/858 "2008-10-02T17:50:22Z")
> [@Fish](#): > > Yeah. I didn’t subscribe to this thread to read a hijack about the minutiae of the Assault Weapons Ban. I realize that this is your pet issue, and you hope to educate people about your particular field of interest, but I don’t see why you must do so here. Are you saying you want an Assault Weapons Ban Ban in this thread? 😃 ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2008, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mccain-forked-yet/450604/859 "2008-10-02T17:54:01Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > McCain is probably not forked (yet)…but I’d say his chances are definitely fading and it’s looking more and more like it will be President Obama in a couple of months… > > -XT You forget two things- there _will_ be a Swifboating by the GOP. There also will be dirty tricks, like disenfranchising likely Dem voters. Obama needs to go in with a solid lead. ---
**Author:** ![Koxinga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/4af34b/32.png) [@Koxinga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Koxinga)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2008, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mccain-forked-yet/450604/860 "2008-10-02T18:03:27Z")
I didn’t have much of an impression of McCain before this election, but now I’m starting to think he’s a guy not just with a temper, but with some serious pent-up anger toward life in general. He went through hell in Vietnam, and now the country _owes_ him this. If Obama thinks he can stand in the way of what John believes he is _owed_ by this country, then he’s not a competitor, he’s an Enemy. Not sure that it would be wise for him to go that route, but I think if Obama makes even an innocent-sounding joke about McCain’s service, he has a good chance of provoking McCain into a frothing red-face diatribe on live TV. After John utters some boilerplate about how he will steer the economy, Obama might touch him on the shoulder and say joshingly, “LIke you crashed those five planes, John? Ah, you know I’m just kidding, buddy.” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mccain-forked-yet/450604.md?page=42) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mccain-forked-yet/450604.md?page=44)