# Reid Admits No Support For "Assault Weapons" Ban **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 19, 2013, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reid-admits-no-support-for-assault-weapons-ban/653402 "2013-03-19T22:41:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2013, 3:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reid-admits-no-support-for-assault-weapons-ban/653402/141 "2013-03-21T03:08:45Z")
> [@Algher](#): > > .. I would expect the Supremes to overturn an AWB since those are the definition of a militia rifle… An odd logical curlicue. You expect that because such weapons are well suited to a militia, the Supremes must find them kosher, because of the stated need for a “well-regulated militia”. OK, sorta kinda. But what about the “well-regulated” part? Who commands this militia, what is their training? Why would they be so trained, seeing as we already have a National Guard. Got guns, uniforms, everything. Should we expect something equally disciplined and hierarchical as the National Guard, or were you thinking something more improvisational? Or does one simply pick up a copy of Suggested Guidelines for the Well Regulated Milita at the same Wal-Mart that serves as an armory? ---
**Author:** ![Algher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Algher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algher)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2013, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reid-admits-no-support-for-assault-weapons-ban/653402/142 "2013-03-21T03:57:43Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > An odd logical curlicue. You expect that because such weapons are well suited to a militia, the Supremes must find them kosher, because of the stated need for a “well-regulated militia”. OK, sorta kinda. > > But what about the “well-regulated” part? Who commands this militia, what is their training? Why would they be so trained, seeing as we already have a National Guard. Got guns, uniforms, everything. Should we expect something equally disciplined and hierarchical as the National Guard, or were you thinking something more improvisational? > > Or does one simply pick up a copy of Suggested Guidelines for the Well Regulated Milita at the same Wal-Mart that serves as an armory? Go ask the Supremes, or read Heller and Miller, or just one of the thousands of threads on interpreting the 2nd. You can find the term well regulated referring to being well equipped. You can find that the.militia refers to all able bodies men ( now expanded to women I would assume). Until then, this Court seems to have recognized the Right to Bear Arms. After that, it is all in the application. ---
**Author:** ![MaxTheVool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9fc29f/32.png) [@MaxTheVool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MaxTheVool)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2013, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reid-admits-no-support-for-assault-weapons-ban/653402/143 "2013-03-21T03:58:42Z")
Someone brought up an interesting point, which is that frequently discussions of this sort have been in the context of people making ridiculous claims about how Obama was going to grab your guns blah blah blah… so saying “no he isn’t, that’s ridiculous” could easily be misstated to some extent into perhaps going too far in the “Democrats don’t care about gun control” direction. That said, the extent to which those overstatements might now have been proven wrong is vastly overshadowed by the extent to which the initial alarmist claims were wrong. The fact that Obama spent his entire first term, with absolutely no guarantee that he’d be reelected, NOT doing anything about gun control, is pretty strong evidence that in fact gun control was just not a high priority for him. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2013, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reid-admits-no-support-for-assault-weapons-ban/653402/144 "2013-03-21T04:17:00Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Definitely. But my takeaway, at least, was that the push for gun control isn’t over, which seemed to be a **Bricker** assumption, since it makes no sense for Dems to give up on gun control as long as they’re passing laws in the states (even if not in DC) and revert back to ‘we’re not interested in that fight’ status. > [@RTFirefly](#): > > In reverse order: it’s to be expected that this will happen, because the midterm elections these days trend older, whiter, and more Republican than Presidential years. > > Unlike Presidential years, midterms are about turnout. What the median voter thinks is less important than whether you can get your voters to the polls. Fighting what your base regards as the good fight, win or lose, is the best way to lay the groundwork. > > So I think this stuff helps rather than hurts the Dems. It’s still an uphill fight to take the House in 2014, but it’s not out of reach, and fighting for gun control helps. Hmmm. You may have a point. If the point is to turn out the base, there certainly seems to be an energized element that supports an AWB. I’ll be the first to admit that Newton changed the conversation, for me at least. > [@elucidator](#): > > With all due awe, when did you start thinking you were qualified to take my inventory? Your what? Is that a scientology thing? You do realize that a shitload of those 30,000 gun deaths every year are children right? > [@BobLibDem](#): > > As a matter of fact, it is. I could almost understand running out and buying something with imminent legislation banning it, but jeez o peets, the gun nuts go on a buying spree every time Diane Feinstein farts. Don’t you think you might just want to wait until a bill is actually written and appears to have the votes? But they go right on paying top dollar for weapons they don’t even fucking need just on the one in a million chance that a law might get passed. Yes, I call that paranoia. Its too late if you wait until they are about to pass a bill. When you hear a hurricane is coming, do you run to the store and clean out the shelves when it starts raining? Well neither does anyone else. > [@Algher](#): > > Hell, just getting decent .308 and .300 Magnum rifle rounds is a pain right now. If California decides to pass an ammo tax (another favorite tactic of the extremists on the other side of the fence), I will be an idiot for not having picked up enough to handle my target shooting and zeroing in needs for preparation for hunting season. I can’t find ammo anywhere except the range and they are frequently out of some of the less common rounds like the 357 sig. I am seriously thinking about reloading if I can get my wife to go along with bringing explosives into the house. > [@Algher](#): > > That and it is fun to shoot. Thats all you need. I have absolutely no practical use for half my guns but I enjoy shooting all of them. > [@BobLibDem](#): > > Come on, do you honestly think the Republican caucus in the House is going to do anything but vote 100% as the NRA tells them to? Get a filibuster proof Dem majority in the Senate AND a solid Dem majority in the House AND a president who wants to pass gun control, and you MIGHT see something done. But to be fair, Republicans haven’t always been under the thumb of the NRA, Dick Nixon himself would have preferred a total handgun ban. If I was on your side, I wouldn’t lose any sleep until the Republicans lose at least 50 House seats and have under 30 Senators. Is that what happened during the last assault weapons ban? > [@BobLibDem](#): > > Still seems like jumping the gun (no pun intended) to me. Bills take a LONG time to get through Congress today. Yeah, GHWB was not a reflexive NRA president, but the party of Bush Sr. no longer exists except in name. Gun stores were basically sold out by new years. > [@Algher](#): > > But I get the concern and behavior. What I don’t get is people who already have an AR and and AK buying a second AR and AK during the buying frenzy. Did they think they were going to turn a profit on a $3000 AR? > [@elucidator](#): > > An odd logical curlicue. You expect that because such weapons are well suited to a militia, the Supremes must find them kosher, because of the stated need for a “well-regulated militia”. OK, sorta kinda. > > But what about the “well-regulated” part? Who commands this militia, what is their training? Why would they be so trained, seeing as we already have a National Guard. Got guns, uniforms, everything. Should we expect something equally disciplined and hierarchical as the National Guard, or were you thinking something more improvisational? > > Or does one simply pick up a copy of Suggested Guidelines for the Well Regulated Milita at the same Wal-Mart that serves as an armory? You know my theory. The second amendment was primarily a safeguard of the states against a tyranny from the center. This mean that you cannot ban anything at the federal level and you can only ban things at the state level if both the federal government and state agrees. Now the supreme court has reached into the penumbra and pulled out a personal right to bear arms but it has not entertained a challenge to the states rights against the federal government. I would have thought that some state somewhere would have challenged the last AWB but if they did it this time around, it seems like there is at least some chance that SCOTUS would rule that an ineffective ban would not be constitutional against the states desire that their citizens have access to these weapons. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2013, 4:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reid-admits-no-support-for-assault-weapons-ban/653402/145 "2013-03-21T04:38:42Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Several years ago, I proposed a topic for debate: I asked readers to imagine the “Liar, Liar” condition, from the eponymous Jim Carrey movie, had afflicted all politicians in the United States. (For those that missed this cinematic classic, Carrey plays a lawyer who constantly lies, both at work and in his personal life, until a wish made by his child magically forces him to tell the precise truth on any subject he discusses). I posited that while both parties’ politicians would lose ground, the Democrats would be hurt worse than the Republicans. And yet, without this supernatural gift, the Republican proved over and over again the last election cycle that the electorate recoils at many of their closely held beliefs abort abortion, “givers and takers” and immigration, to name just a few non-gun related issues. I wouldn’t underestimate the ability of the electorate to understand which party harbors beliefs antithetical to the mood of the nation. It would behoove the Republicans to take this to heart, given the thrashing they took at a time when they should have easily gained in the Senate and taken the presidency back. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2013, 6:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reid-admits-no-support-for-assault-weapons-ban/653402/146 "2013-03-21T06:31:47Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > And yet, without this supernatural gift, the Republican proved over and over again the last election cycle that the electorate recoils at many of their closely held beliefs abort abortion, “givers and takers” and immigration, to name just a few non-gun related issues. I wouldn’t underestimate the ability of the electorate to understand which party harbors beliefs antithetical to the mood of the nation. It would behoove the Republicans to take this to heart, given the thrashing they took at a time when they should have easily gained in the Senate and taken the presidency back. Yeah but if you take away those things, they would start to approximate libertarians and they would never win any elections ---
**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:** [March 21, 2013, 10:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reid-admits-no-support-for-assault-weapons-ban/653402/147 "2013-03-21T10:34:53Z")
More people favor background checks for firearms than favor capitalism, Italian food and vacation. [http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/\_news/2013/03/21/17380285-most-favored-notion?lite](http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/03/21/17380285-most-favored-notion?lite) ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2013, 10:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reid-admits-no-support-for-assault-weapons-ban/653402/148 "2013-03-21T10:56:11Z")
While it’s been said before in this thread, I find it counterintuitive to state that the Senate Democrats’ failure to pass gun control legislation shows that they intend to pass gun control legislation. It seems that, if anything, the fact that Congress can’t pass the most basic of gun control legislation in spite of numerous massacres, including one that killed 26 people, most of them young children, shows that it is a dead issue. The gun manufacturers have won this one. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2013, 12:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reid-admits-no-support-for-assault-weapons-ban/653402/149 "2013-03-21T12:13:44Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > More people favor background checks for firearms than favor capitalism, Italian food and vacation. Helluva choice - but I might put the gun down if you offered me a steaming plate of lasagna. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2013, 12:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reid-admits-no-support-for-assault-weapons-ban/653402/150 "2013-03-21T12:26:37Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > Helluva choice - but I might put the gun down if you offered me a steaming plate of lasagna. And if I owned a gun, I’d leave it behind when I went on vacation. It’s hard to get into that properly relaxed frame of mind if you’re vacationing somewhere where you feel you ought to have a gun along. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2013, 12:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reid-admits-no-support-for-assault-weapons-ban/653402/151 "2013-03-21T12:30:20Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > And if I owned a gun, I’d leave it behind when I went on vacation. It’s hard to get into that properly relaxed frame of mind if you’re vacationing somewhere where you feel you ought to have a gun along. On the other hand, if you encounter trouble flying in to Lagos, Nigeria, it’s tough to defend yourself with a plate of lasagna. ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2013, 12:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reid-admits-no-support-for-assault-weapons-ban/653402/152 "2013-03-21T12:35:22Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > Helluva choice - but I might put the gun down if you offered me a steaming plate of lasagna. Would you also take the cannoli? ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2013, 1:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reid-admits-no-support-for-assault-weapons-ban/653402/153 "2013-03-21T13:02:11Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > On the other hand, if you encounter trouble flying in to Lagos, Nigeria, it’s tough to defend yourself with a plate of lasagna. I’d rather vacation at home and play with a set of Legos, than vacation in Lagos. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2013, 1:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reid-admits-no-support-for-assault-weapons-ban/653402/154 "2013-03-21T13:25:07Z")
> [@MaxTheVool](#): > > Someone brought up an interesting point, which is that frequently discussions of this sort have been in the context of people making ridiculous claims about how Obama was going to grab your guns blah blah blah… so saying “no he isn’t, that’s ridiculous” could easily be misstated to some extent into perhaps going too far in the “Democrats don’t care about gun control” direction. That said, the extent to which those overstatements might now have been proven wrong is vastly overshadowed by the extent to which the initial alarmist claims were wrong. The fact that Obama spent his entire first term, with absolutely no guarantee that he’d be reelected, NOT doing anything about gun control, is pretty strong evidence that in fact gun control was just not a high priority for him. True enough – the rhetoric about Obama being a gun confiscator was ridiculously overblown – a lie, in every practical sense. Notice that I do not respond to this by demanding specific examples of specific politicians saying Obama was going to grab all my guns. Why? Because I recognize that that was absolutely the KIND of commentary going around, and it would be dishonest to deny its existence, no matter how much success I might get by demanding to see a majority of current legislators’ comments before accepting it. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2013, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reid-admits-no-support-for-assault-weapons-ban/653402/155 "2013-03-21T13:58:42Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > True enough – the rhetoric about Obama being a gun confiscator was ridiculously overblown – a lie, in every practical sense. > > Notice that I do not respond to this by demanding specific examples of specific politicians saying Obama was going to grab all my guns. > > Why? Because I recognize that that was absolutely the KIND of commentary going around, and it would be dishonest to deny its existence, no matter how much success I might get by demanding to see a majority of current legislators’ comments before accepting it. Bad comparison. I would not make the statement that any Republican Senators said Obama was going to grab everyone’s guns. I doubt that is true, even though it may have been a common refrain among certain parts of the electorate. Now, it may be that “Democrats generally want expansive 2nd amendment rights” may have been “the kind of commentary going around” among some regular folks (although I’d be surprised if it was), it wasn’t the kind of thing Democratic Senators, generally, were saying or implying. And that is what you have been claiming. When I vote for Democrats, I generally assume I am going to get more, not less, gun control legislation. I don’t think they are going to “grab our guns”, but I do expect things that are, you know, in their party platform. ---
**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:** [March 21, 2013, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reid-admits-no-support-for-assault-weapons-ban/653402/156 "2013-03-21T15:32:28Z")
> [@Damuri Ajashi](#): > > > [@Hentor the Barbarian](#): > > > > The political reality that drove the failure of this AWB is the entrenchment of the gun manufacturers advocacy group. Gun owners are declining in number, and incidents like Sandy Hook, far from being a movie of the week, have shocked the conscience of those who still have one. > > What made the AWB fail is that it was a stupid law. It is ineffective and does little more than poke a thumb in the eye of gun owners. No. What made it fail was the entrenchment of the gun manufacturer’s advocacy group. It’s the same thing that explains incidents like this: [http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/\_news/2013/03/21/17400054-boehner-briefly-supports-real-background-checks-on-everyone?lite](http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/03/21/17400054-boehner-briefly-supports-real-background-checks-on-everyone?lite) > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > TAPPER: Do you think background checks, improving background checks might be part of that? > > > > BOEHNER: **They should actually do a real background check on everyone.** > > Alas, it was a fleeting development. Tapper later reported that the Speaker’s office said Boehner misspoke, and he only supports Justice Department background checks “that are already required that are not necessarily done.” In other words, when Boehner endorsed “real background check on everyone,” he did not mean that he actually supports “real background check on everyone.” Bolding mine. Boehner cannot even endorse a position he actually supports; a position that has the support of **more than 90% of the population**. When he made the mistake of endorsing it he had to walk it back. The only reason he would have done so would be pressure from the NRA and their entrenched position in Washington politics. These things don’t fail because they are stupid meaningless laws. They fail because people who are beholden to this group don’t have the balls to voice their own opinion, even when their own position is shared by literally nearly everyone and his brother. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2013, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reid-admits-no-support-for-assault-weapons-ban/653402/157 "2013-03-21T15:34:56Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > True enough – the rhetoric about Obama being a gun confiscator was ridiculously overblown – a lie, in every practical sense. > > Notice that I do not respond to this by demanding specific examples of specific politicians saying Obama was going to grab all my guns. > > Why? Because I recognize that that was absolutely the KIND of commentary going around, and it would be dishonest to deny its existence, no matter how much success I might get by demanding to see a majority of current legislators’ comments before accepting it. Your noble adherence to strict standards of candor and straightforward honesty is a beacon to us all. And I would be remiss if I failed to mention the educational value of your postings. Until you clarified the question, I had no idea that “no support” meant precisely the same thing as “not enough support to pass”. I have no doubt that many of us look forward to the day when English teachers and dictionaries gratefully acknowledge your creative and imaginative approach. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2013, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reid-admits-no-support-for-assault-weapons-ban/653402/158 "2013-03-21T15:50:11Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > I have no doubt that many of us look forward to the day when English teachers and dictionaries gratefully acknowledge your creative and imaginative approach. Mathematicians, too! **Bricker** has just created a wonderful new branch of mathematics where all numbers in the [0,60) half-open interval are equivalent. There are surely many insightful new theorems to be proven. ---
**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:** [March 21, 2013, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reid-admits-no-support-for-assault-weapons-ban/653402/159 "2013-03-21T15:55:34Z")
It just occurred to me that the Boehner anecdote above also undermines Brickers “Liar Liar” hypothesis I still anticipate that one could still catch Boehner crying over an apple pie that he had just interfered with, though. ---
**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:** [March 21, 2013, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reid-admits-no-support-for-assault-weapons-ban/653402/160 "2013-03-21T16:00:31Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > It just occurred to me that the Boehner anecdote above also undermines Brickers “Liar Liar” hypothesis > > I still anticipate that one could still catch Boehner crying over an apple pie that he had just interfered with, though. ETA: As far as that goes, in terms of ever-constant straight-arrow truth telling, Wayne LaPierre used to be for universal background checks. (Sorry to quote myself - I thought I was editing.) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reid-admits-no-support-for-assault-weapons-ban/653402.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/reid-admits-no-support-for-assault-weapons-ban/653402.md?page=9)