# Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 26, 2009, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475 "2009-02-26T03:45:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![JXJohns](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jxjohns/32/469_2.png) [@JXJohns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JXJohns)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475/1 "2009-02-26T03:45:47Z")
To hear the diehards on this and other sites, the Obama administration with be far too busy with more important things than gun control. “It’s a losing issue” “The Congress may try to send something to him, but he nor his administration will promote it…” Really? [Full Story](http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=6960824&page=1) > [@](#): > > Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban > Attorney General Says White House Also Looking at Ban on ‘Cop-Killer’ Bullets > By JASON RYAN > > WASHINGTON, Feb. 25, 2009— > > The Obama administration will seek to reinstate the assault weapons ban that expired in 2004 during the Bush administration, Attorney General Eric Holder said today. > > “As President Obama indicated during the campaign, there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons,” Holder told reporters. > > Holder said that putting the ban back in place would not only be a positive move by the United States, it would help cut down on the flow of guns going across the border into Mexico, which is struggling with heavy violence among drug cartels along the border. > > “I think that will have a positive impact in Mexico, at a minimum.” Holder said at a news conference on the arrest of more than 700 people in a drug enforcement crackdown on Mexican drug cartels operating in the U.S… Is it wise policy to enact laws in the US that were proven for 10 years (1994-2004) to be ineffective, with the hope of stemming gun violence in Mexico? Or is this more “common sense” measures wrapped up in a different bow? ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 4:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475/2 "2009-02-26T04:06:54Z")
> [@JXJohns](#): > > To hear the diehards on this and other sites, the Obama administration with be far too busy with more important things than gun control. Hmmm, do you have cites for the assertion that posters here thought that the Obama administration wouldn’t be advocating **any** gun-control measures? Because his statement of support for reinstating the Assault Weapons Ban, AFAICT, has always been right there [on his campaign website](http://origin.barackobama.com/issues/urban_policy/#crime-and-law-enforcement): > [@Obama 2008 Campaign](#): > > As president, Barack Obama would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law enforcement to access important gun trace information, and give police officers across the nation the tools they need to solve gun crimes and fight the illegal arms trade. Obama and Biden also favor commonsense measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while keeping guns away from children and from criminals who shouldn’t have them. They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in this country childproof. They also support making the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent, as such weapons belong on foreign battlefields and not on our streets. If you really do have evidence that “diehards” thought Obama wouldn’t follow up that statement, then indeed, those diehards should admit they were wrong. But I’m not sure why they would have thought that in the first place; he seems to have been pretty candid about his intentions. ---
**Author:** ![alterego](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/6bbea6/32.png) [@alterego](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alterego)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 4:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475/3 "2009-02-26T04:11:27Z")
> [@JXJohns](#): > > To hear the diehards on this and other sites, the Obama administration with be far too busy with more important things than gun control. > > “It’s a losing issue” > > “The Congress may try to send something to him, but he nor his administration will promote it…” > > Really? > > [Full Story](http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=6960824&page=1) > > Is it wise policy to enact laws in the US that were proven for 10 years (1994-2004) to be ineffective, with the hope of stemming gun violence in Mexico? Or is this more “common sense” measures wrapped up in a different bow? You realize that Obama was a constitutional law professor? The least you could do is convince us that you understand his argument. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 4:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475/4 "2009-02-26T04:14:39Z")
> [@JXJohns](#): > > Is it wise policy to enact laws in the US that were proven for 10 years (1994-2004) to be ineffective, with the hope of stemming gun violence in Mexico? Or is this more “common sense” measures wrapped up in a different bow? Personally, I dunno. Law enforcement officials [don’t seem to think the assault weapons ban was ineffective](http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=display_arch&article_id=384&issue_id=92004), though: > [@President](#): > > Since the law was enacted, the ban has proven remarkably effective in reducing the number of crimes involving assault weapons. Since 1994 the proportion of assault weapons traced to crimes has fallen by a dramatic 66 percent. Public opinion polls continue to prove that more than 75 percent of the public supports a reauthorization of the current ban. […] > > Opponents of the assault weapons ban often argue that the ban only outlawed certain weapons because of their “cosmetic features” and not because they are inherently more dangerous than other weapons. This is simply not true. > > While most rifles are designed to be fired from the shoulder and depend upon the accuracy of a precisely aimed projectile, semiautomatic assault weapons are designed to maximize lethal effects through a rapid rate of fire. Assault weapons are designed to be spray-fired from the hip, and because of their design a shooter can maintain control of the weapon even while firing many rounds in rapid succession. > > The cosmetic features opponents of the ban point to are actually military features such as silencers, flash suppressors, pistol grips, folding stocks, and bayonets that were designed specifically to increase the lethality of these weapons and make them more concealable. Many come equipped with large ammunition magazines allowing 50 or more bullets to be fired without reloading. > > Weapons of this nature serve no legitimate sporting or hunting purposes and have no place in our communities. […] > > Over the last decade, we have made significant progress in our efforts to reduce violent crime rates. The ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines has been a crucial component of our national crime-fighting strategy. ---
**Author:** ![Bobotheoptimist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/919ad9/32.png) [@Bobotheoptimist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bobotheoptimist)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 4:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475/5 "2009-02-26T04:23:21Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Hmmm, do you have cites for the assertion that posters here thought that the Obama administration wouldn’t be advocating **any** gun-control measures? Since the OP didn’t say that I suspect it’s going to be hard to cite, but two of the threads I remember that were full of “He’s got better things to do” type of posts are [here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=504549) and [here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=491340) although I don’t think anyone said BO wouldn’t advocate any gun-contol measures. More along the lines of: “If I were convinced Pres. Obama was going to do something about the gun laws, I probably would have reconsidered voting for him. But I think the economy and war will keep him plenty busy” “I’m not too worried. The Dems know that gun control is a loser issue.” “If, in the face of all the problems we have right now, Obama chooses to make gun control a priority, he’s a fool plain and simple.” “Gun control is a bit of a stale issue right now. Plenty of lawmakers still remember what happened around 1994. The dems thought they had a winning issue and they got killed at the polls.” “All the hysteria now is the NRA nutballs exercising their paranoia muscles.” “I think people who own guns really overestimate how much people who don’t own guns care about guns.” “I don’t see any fear of significant gun control being realistic. Gun ownership is a constitutional issue and that means any new attempts at gun control have to get past the Roberts court - which effectively means no new gun control laws.” and on and on and onandon ---
**Author:** ![Stealth\_Potato](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d78d45/32.png) [@Stealth\_Potato](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stealth_Potato)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 4:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475/6 "2009-02-26T04:42:42Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Personally, I dunno. Law enforcement officials [don’t seem to think the assault weapons ban was ineffective](http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=display_arch&article_id=384&issue_id=92004), though: The single statistic quoted ignores the fact that high-capacity “assault weapons” were already a nearly negligible component of crime statistics in the first place. When you talk about violence committed using firearms, you are overwhelmingly speaking of dirt cheap revolvers and small, low-power, low-capacity pistols. > [@](#): > > While most rifles are designed to be fired from the shoulder and depend upon the accuracy of a precisely aimed projectile, semiautomatic assault weapons are designed to maximize lethal effects through a rapid rate of fire. Assault weapons are designed to be spray-fired from the hip, and because of their design a shooter can maintain control of the weapon even while firing many rounds in rapid succession. This quote alone is sufficient to discredit that source. Anybody who seriously thinks that an AR-15 or an AK-pattern rifle is designed to be “fired from the hip” is completely and totally ignorant on the subject of firearms. This is just more of the same old “scary black plastic guns designed to be spray-fired from the hip” fearmongering. Further, it’s a repetition of the same tactic employed by the gun-grabbers in years past: they like to feed on public confusion about semiautomatic weapons vs. already heavily regulated fully automatic weapons by using terms such as “spray fire” and focusing on the cosmetic similarities between certain styles of ordinary rifles and their select-fire military counterparts. These people are either cynical liars and manipulators, or else in the fantasy land inside their heads things like pistol grips, collapsible stocks, and barrel shrouds (a.k.a. “shoulder things that go up”) really are “military features” that “increase the lethality” of a firearm. :dubious: Seriously, though, while I’m not entirely surprised by Obama’s movement in this direction, I am disappointed. If he really does pursue this course of action, it’s going to cost him a lot of the moderates who helped put him in office last year. ETA: As a side note, it looks like it’s finally time for me to get over my personal distaste for the NRA and join up. ---
**Author:** ![JXJohns](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jxjohns/32/469_2.png) [@JXJohns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JXJohns)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 4:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475/7 "2009-02-26T04:48:40Z")
> [@alterego](#): > > You realize that Obama was a constitutional law professor? The least you could do is convince us that you understand his argument. Which argument? This one: > [@](#): > > “I think that will have a positive impact in Mexico, at a minimum.” The AW ban didn’t take a single gun off of the “street”. It simply forced manufacturers to change the cosmetic appearances of their products to meet the standards of the new law. As such, there will not be fewer guns making a run for the border. It doesn’t work that way. This argument: > [@](#): > > “Some recent Mexican army and police confrontations with drug cartels have resembled small-unit combat, with cartels employing automatic weapons and grenades,” The AW ban does not apply to automatic weapons OR grenades. This one: > [@](#): > > I think closing the gun show loophole… More BS, there are no special loopholes that allow federal firearm laws to be disregarded just because people go to a gun show. The same laws apply in or out of a show. Or this gem: > [@](#): > > the banning of cop-killer bullets What the fuck is a cop killer bullet? Anything that will penetrate a bullet proof vest? Or in other words, any bullet used in a centerfire hunting rifle? I understand the arguments just fine. Do you? ---
**Author:** ![E-Sabbath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e19adc/32.png) [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475/8 "2009-02-26T04:56:31Z")
No, no, it’s not wise. But he’ll probably get it, because the Republicans are busy fighting the wrong battle. Such is life. ---
**Author:** ![JXJohns](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jxjohns/32/469_2.png) [@JXJohns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JXJohns)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475/9 "2009-02-26T04:57:04Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Personally, I dunno. Law enforcement officials [don’t seem to think the assault weapons ban was ineffective](http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=display_arch&article_id=384&issue_id=92004), though: [Well, both the Clinton and Bush Justice Departments as well as the Urban Institute felt differently](http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3827/is_200306/ai_n9241101) > [@](#): > > The U.S. Department of Justice conducted two studies of the consequences of the 1994 assault weapons ban. In 1999,-Bill Clinton’s Justice Department looked exhaustively at the ban’s effects. It concluded that “the public safety benefits of the 1994 ban have not yet been demonstrated.” In 2001, a second Justice Department review similarly found no evidence that the ban had a statistically significant effect on violent crime. A congressionally mandated study by the Urban Institute reached comparable conclusions. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 5:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475/10 "2009-02-26T05:05:51Z")
> [@Stealth Potato](#): > > This quote alone is sufficient to discredit that source. Anybody who seriously thinks that an AR-15 or an AK-pattern rifle is designed to be “fired from the hip” is completely and totally ignorant on the subject of firearms. […] > > These people are either cynical liars and manipulators, or else in the fantasy land inside their heads things like pistol grips, collapsible stocks, and barrel shrouds (a.k.a. “shoulder things that go up”) really are “military features” that “increase the lethality” of a firearm. Me, I wouldn’t know. Argue with Police Chief Joseph M. Polisar, President of the International Association of Chiefs of Police, who is the guy who made the statements you’re objecting to. But this is what gets me, as a non-gun-owner who is in general sympathetic to gun owners’ desires to own guns: When it comes to gun safety issues, how come you anti-gun-control folks and law enforcement professionals can’t get on the same page? If it’s a matter of arguing for a right to own a certain type of gun **irrespective** of public safety concerns, that’s different. I may not share your position, but I won’t be concerned about the fact that the police chiefs don’t share it. It’s true that there are trade-offs between freedom and safety, and I expect the law enforcement types to be more focused on safety, but I don’t think that excuses me from the obligation to consider the other side of the argument from the perspective of what gun owners want. But when the argument is actually **about** safety issues, why shouldn’t I listen to the law enforcement types rather than you? You’re standing there telling me that a **police chief** is “completely and totally ignorant on the subject of firearms”, and either a “cynical liar and manipulator” or else living in a “fantasy land inside his head”. 😕 This makes no sense to me. Let’s face it, in the real world the cops are doing lots more work and running lots more risks for the immediate preservation of my safety than, say, any gun-enthusiast militia types or other gun-rights activists are. The cops deal with firearms, their own and those used by criminals, all the time. Why should I take your word for it that the cops don’t know what they’re talking about? If you really have a persuasive argument to make in favor of the needlessness of banning assault weapons, I have to say I’d find it a lot more convincing if you could manage to persuade law enforcement organizations to agree with you first. From my current naive perspective, I know of absolutely no reason why I should trust you rather than law enforcement professionals on issues of crime, firearms and public safety. ---
**Author:** ![JXJohns](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jxjohns/32/469_2.png) [@JXJohns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JXJohns)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 5:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475/11 "2009-02-26T05:13:04Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > But this is what gets me, as a non-gun-owner who is in general sympathetic to gun owners’ desires to own guns: When it comes to gun safety issues, how come you anti-gun-control folks and law enforcement professionals can’t get on the same page? Police chiefs are politicians with axes to grind. Re-read my post above regarding the Justice Department, both the Clinton and Bush departments. > [@](#): > > If you really have a persuasive argument to make in favor of the needlessness of banning assault weapons, I have to say I’d find it a lot more convincing if you could manage to persuade law enforcement organizations to agree with you first. From my current naive perspective, I know of absolutely no reason why I should trust you rather than law enforcement professionals on issues of crime, firearms and public safety. Ask your local cop what he thinks and you will hear a completely different opinion. I can’t cite it of course so take it for what it’s worth. ---
**Author:** ![Cisco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ccd318/32.png) [@Cisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cisco)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 5:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475/12 "2009-02-26T05:25:22Z")
I don’t like guns, I don’t own a gun, and I probably never will own a gun. That being said, there are 3 things I’d like to say on the topic: 1. The 2nd amendment guarantees our right to bear arms 2. You’re never going to get guns out of America. You’re only going to annoy hobbyists, confiscate the personal property of some law-abiding citizens, criminalize otherwise harmless and innocent people who don’t want to surrender their personal property to the government, and give gun-wielding criminals less to worry about. 3. Banning “assault weapons” is beyond absurd. It’s like getting fed up with auto accidents and banning red cars. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 5:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475/13 "2009-02-26T05:31:19Z")
> [@JXJohns](#): > > Re-read my post above regarding the Justice Department, both the Clinton and Bush departments. I did. And even if I take its not-particularly-unbiased presentation (“Firearm Facts Refute Hollow Rhetoric of Anti-Gun Activists” :dubious: ) as entirely accurate, all it says is that the studies didn’t show much one way or the other, mostly because assault weapons were always a small percentage of the weapons used in crime. A [wiki article](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban#Effect_on_crime) on the AWB that provides cites to the actual study documents claims: > [@](#): > > Following implementation of the ban, the share of gun crimes involving AWs declined by 17% to 72% across the localities examined by this study. […] [A 2001 study] found that: > “The ban may have contributed to a reduction in gun homicides, but a statistical power analysis of our model indicated that any likely effects from the ban will be very difficult to detect statistically for several more years. We found no evidence of reductions in multiple-victim gun homicides or multiple-gunshot wound victimizations. The findings should be treated cautiously due to the methodological difficulties of making a short-term assessment of the ban and because the ban’s long-term effects could differ from the short-term influences revealed by this study.” > [@JXJohns](#): > > Police chiefs are politicians with axes to grind. […] Ask your local cop what he thinks and you will hear a completely different opinion. Well, the Fraternal Order of Police also supports the assault weapons ban, and they’re not just police chiefs, but ordinary officers. So as far as I can tell, the statistical studies are at best inconclusive. The cops in general (at least, according to all the organizations that officially represent them, AFAICT) are in favor of the assault weapons ban. Your response is to declare that the cops are (a) being politically manipulative, and/or (b) not in agreement with the organizations that represent them. IME, cops do not tend to be bleeding-heart liberals, ideologically opposed to gun ownership by responsible and law-abiding individuals, or ignorant of the realities of urban crime. If the assault-weapons policies that you support truly pose no increased risk to public safety, I just don’t see why you can’t get the cops to agree with you. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 5:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475/14 "2009-02-26T05:31:57Z")
This is dissapointing. I was sincerely hoping Obama would put what was right and practical over ideology. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 5:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475/15 "2009-02-26T05:37:38Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > But when the argument is actually **about** safety issues, why shouldn’t I listen to the law enforcement types rather than you? 1. It’s an appeal to authority, which isn’t an argument in itself. 2. Police chiefs are more politicians than police - the spokesman for a police chief organization is probably a full rung even further towards politician. Officers who are closer to actual police work, when polled, respond much more favorably to gun rights than police chiefs do. 3. There are varying opinions on the issue of gun control among police officers. You’ll find some that advocate a total ban, and some who want machine guns made more accesible. You can’t find one who supports your belief and then say “See, the police feel this way” as if you were talking about a monolithic entity. and… 4) He’s full of shit. He’s using the same deliberately misleading language that other gun control advocates do in order to prey on the ignorance of the public about the differences between civilian and military weapons. Saying things like that the weapons are designed to be “sprayed from the hip” are complete nonsense and he knows it. ---
**Author:** ![JXJohns](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jxjohns/32/469_2.png) [@JXJohns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JXJohns)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 5:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475/16 "2009-02-26T05:43:10Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > IME, cops do not tend to be bleeding-heart liberals, ideologically opposed to gun ownership by responsible and law-abiding individuals, or ignorant of the realities of urban crime. If the assault-weapons policies that you support truly pose no increased risk to public safety, I just don’t see why you can’t get the cops to agree with you. Again, organizations say one thing, and individuals say yet another. I can direct you to several websites that are full of active and retired cops and you will see a completely different opinion. Because those sites are pro gun in nature, you will most likely dismiss them. I can’t help that. Pro gun cops hang out in pro gun websites. Go figure. I am sure that you have read the countless threads on the assault weapon ban here. Simply put, it was a ban on the production of guns with specific cosmetic features. It was bad legislation that I call ineffective, you and the Justice Department(s) call inconclusive, yet the the police chiefs are touting it as a hallmark of safety measures. See the problem? Now the AG and POTUS want to enact it again to help Mexico fight its gangs? The AG goes on to make claims that the gangs are using weapons that are not even available to the average joe US citizen, nor covered by the AW legislation, and he spices it up with words like loophole and cop killer. Politics as usual, and I am truly disappointed. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 5:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475/17 "2009-02-26T05:50:45Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > 1. It’s an appeal to authority, which isn’t an argument in itself. Sure. But if I just take your word for the accuracy of the opposing position because you assert that you know what you’re talking about, that’s an appeal to authority too. Not being knowledgeable about guns myself, I have no effective alternative to ultimately trusting **somebody** ’s appeal to authority. And I don’t understand why the groups of people that I would naively consider worth trusting on this issue—namely, responsible gun owners, and law enforcement officials—can’t seem to agree on it. > [@SenorBeef](#): > > 1. Police chiefs are more politicians than police - the spokesman for a police chief organization is probably a full rung even further towards politician. Officers who are closer to actual police work, when polled, respond much more favorably to gun rights than police chiefs do. > > 2. There are varying opinions on the issue of gun control among police officers. You’ll find some that advocate a total ban, and some who want machine guns made more accesible. You can’t find one who supports your belief and then say “See, the police feel this way” as if you were talking about a monolithic entity. Again, as I noted above, we’re not just talking one police officer here. We’re talking, AFAICT, about **every** major organization that represents police officers. Do you have evidence that the official pro-AWB position of these organizations seriously belies the views of most law enforcement officials? Not just that cops in general tend to be somewhat less pro-AWB than police chiefs, but that **most** cops in fact aren’t pro-AWB at all? > [@SenorBeef](#): > > and… 4) He’s full of shit. He’s using the same deliberately misleading language that other gun control advocates do in order to prey on the ignorance of the public about the differences between civilian and military weapons. Saying things like that the weapons are designed to be “sprayed from the hip” are complete nonsense and he knows it. [shrug] I wouldn’t know. Again, I don’t know of a reason why I should regard your bare assertions as more authoritative than his bare assertions. ---
**Author:** ![pkbites](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pkbites/32/204_2.png) [@pkbites](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pkbites)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 5:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475/18 "2009-02-26T05:52:40Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Hmmm, do you have cites for the assertion that posters here thought that the Obama administration wouldn’t be advocating **any** gun-control measures? The word “any” is too broad and get’s you off too easily. But here are some posts from just [one](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=492850) single thread: > [@Respond to this Anti-Obama Gun Freak](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/respond-to-this-anti-obama-gun-freak/472687/3): > > I suspect that guns are a non issue for Obama. Certainly there are more pressing concerns what with the economy and the war. The topic didn’t come up in the debate, and I haven’t heard him talking about it during the campaign. It’s not even listed on his [platform page](http://www.barackobama.com/issues/) as far as I can tell. [This source](http://www.ontheissues.org/domestic/Barack_Obama_Gun_Control.htm) seems to indicate that he is somewhat for gun control but probably is happy to leave it up to state and local authorities. > [@Respond to this Anti-Obama Gun Freak](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/respond-to-this-anti-obama-gun-freak/472687/15): > > Obama has said that he believes that gun ownership is an individual right protected by the Second Amendment, and he supported the Supreme Court’s reversal of the gun ban in DC. > [@Respond to this Anti-Obama Gun Freak](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/respond-to-this-anti-obama-gun-freak/472687/28): > > Oh, ferchrissake! Obama, despite what you have heard, is a fairly CONSERVATIVE Democrat!!! See? That’s FIVE exclamation points, the most I give. You have nothing to fear that your guns will be yanked from your warm, flexible, hands. ANYTHING ELSE IS FROM LISTENING TO SCAREMONGERS ON THE RADIO!!! Look: Dude is trying to build a fuckin’ COALITION! HOW THE FUCK CAN HE HOPE TO DO THAT WHILE DUMPING ON THE GUN FANS??? > [@Respond to this Anti-Obama Gun Freak](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/respond-to-this-anti-obama-gun-freak/472687/54): > > So unless and until we have another major shooting, I think gun control is probably not something that will come from him. > [@Respond to this Anti-Obama Gun Freak](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/respond-to-this-anti-obama-gun-freak/472687/94): > > I don’t think Obama will push any anti-gun bills. What fools these mortals be!:smack: ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 5:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475/19 "2009-02-26T05:56:56Z")
> [@JXJohns](#): > > Again, organizations say one thing, and individuals say yet another. I can direct you to several websites that are full of active and retired cops and you will see a completely different opinion. Because those sites are pro gun in nature, you will most likely dismiss them. :dubious: Thanks for the expression of confidence in my intellectual integrity and good faith, pal. Anyway, what bothers me about that recommendation is not the pro-gun nature of the sources _per se_, but the apparent lack of quantitative evidence showing that these pro-gun cops who oppose the AWB are in fact representative of **most** cops. If the majority of cops really are against the AWB, then why are all the organizations that represent cops officially supporting the AWB? I know that organizations don’t reflect the views of **all** their members equally, but if there’s really such a glaring, misleading disconnect here, I’d like to see some evidence and explanation of it. ---
**Author:** ![JXJohns](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jxjohns/32/469_2.png) [@JXJohns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JXJohns)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 6:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475/20 "2009-02-26T06:09:19Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > :dubious: Thanks for the expression of confidence in my intellectual integrity and good faith, pal. Anyway, what bothers me about that recommendation is not the pro-gun nature of the sources _per se_, but the apparent lack of quantitative evidence showing that these pro-gun cops who oppose the AWB are in fact representative of **most** cops. Nice words, but did I read them wrong or did you just dismiss the sites I spoke of? > [@](#): > > If the majority of cops really are against the AWB, then why are all the organizations that represent cops officially supporting the AWB? I know that organizations don’t reflect the views of **all** their members equally, but if there’s really such a glaring, misleading disconnect here, I’d like to see some evidence and explanation of it. The orgs represent their members, not all cops. Also, some members are members, not for the political stances that the orgs take but perhaps for the benefits, luncheons, free donuts at the club meetings, discounts at the bowling alley, who knows? My brother is a union plumber. His union endorsed Obama. He chose otherwise. When asked, he told me that the benies that he got from the union were worth putting up with the political BS. It happens. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475.md?page=2)