The American Ban on Assault Weapons dies 13 September 2004 - 15 September, 2004

Gun sellers predict a frenzy run on assault weapons

Bush was real big on extending the ban as a condition for his presidency back in 2000, now we have a president who has worked very hard to get the ban dropped. A major change in what he said and what he has done.

Liberal politicians, knowing what side of the fence has the biggest money, say American's are just not safe enough without assault style weapons. First it was we are not safe without guns period, now it is we are not safe with assault weapons. What next?

Second Amendment and gun-nut types claim this as a major victory. Their position is that they should be able to own any type of gun they want. But the second amendment really doesn't say that.

People will now be able to purchase AK-47's and AR-15's. Tech 9's and Tech 10's. They can purchase the extended clips for these guns, the banana clips which give them additional fire power.

Sixty-eight percent of America, in a recent poll, said “no assault weapons”. Police and other law enforcement agencies have pleaded with federal and state to renew the ban. Unfortunately, all this fell on deaf ears in congress and the white house – and the NRA reasserts once again who actually runs this country.

I spoke with a Psychologist about his take on all this and he just shook his head. Despite the statistics, people will believe only what they want to believe he told me. I spoke with a Psychiatrist about his take on it – fearful people who feel powerless and need something to convince them they are in power, was his take.

Of all the guns on the American market, and every one of them designed for one purpose – death, why do we have to add assault weapons? Why do we need more firepower than we already have? Second Amendment types say only that we have the second amendment and nothing more.

The National Rifle Association is building neighborhood watch dogs. Combine this with the growing trend of people carrying weapons, and laws in the works to indemnify shooters, what does this mean? Does this mean that people like the DC shooter are actually innocent and there can be no recourse – apparently this could be an agenda?

Does this mean that your neighbor is going to be watching you very closely and at the slightest miff pull a weapon on you? David Gross of Minneapolis did just that – in a recorded interview with the Minneapolis Star, he admitted he pulled a gun on his neighbor. The neighbor moved and the city of St. Louis Park will do nothing to bring the person forward to press charges. Once city council member told me that if the neighbor fears for his life, they aren't going to do anything. But even pointing a weapon at a person is a felony; terrorist threats are also a felony. Not even our own laws can protect us when the assailant is armed. Now, the gun owners are holding people hostage.

John Lott, a discredited scholar, still maintains that 98 percent of all crime would be stopped if everyone had a gun. This has not come about – crime is still very rampant in the US. From murder, to tax cheating, to parking tickets, crime has not been stopped. Pro-gun people like to point out that guns are used in only one percent of all the crime – but in crimes involving firearms, guns are used 100 percent or the time. These people are also quick to point out that guns stop 3,000,000 crimes per day, but they also add that America is a very safe place to be and we need more assault weapons because we are not safe.

High powered weapons in private hands are sending our troops back in coffins – Somalia is a good example, and Iraq is another good example. High power weapons in private hands are killing cops in LA, in record numbers. Jeff Cooper, a member of the board of directors for the NRA, seems to think “It would seem a valid social service to keep them well-supplied with ammunition." And he is not talking about the police. Talk about a liberal concept.

Canadians are growing uncomfortable with the US gun religion, and our attitude is either to heck with them, or wise up and get guns. Obviously they are quite conservative.

I don't think it is the criminal we need to be afraid of because violent crime has been declining for the last 35 years. Gun sales have sky rocketed in the last 10 years.

Perhaps, the real fear is, and ought to be, Americans themselves.

I have been accused of being anti-American, unpatriotic, for my views on guns. I have been threatened with grave bodily harm by NRA members for my stance on gun control – we see true colors being exposed. We have 'law abiding' armed citizens walk into buildings and places posted NO GUNS, trampling on the rights of others. If the import is true, as related to me, deadly force was threatened when an NRA member was asked to leave a Doctor's office that was posted.

We see the arming of groups that express hatred and genocide within the United States. We find it criminal and reprehensible though, if someone expresses the same about us. Need I dare say radical terrorists?

We have a president who lied about his position on assault weapons in an effort to gain the moderate and conservative votes.

We have 'law abiding' citizens who call the police jack booted thugs and making law enforcement the enemy.

Gun-nuts have congress on their side, but openly say we must arm to protect ourselves from a totalitarian government. I realize that totalitarian government is an ambiguous term, but it still comes down to do it our way, or you have war. In 2002, there was a call for a million armed man march on Washington, D.C. to show congress people were serious about their guns. It was supposed to a declaration of war in all reality.

The second amendment is not the issue or the cause, it is an excuse. The real cause is a shift to the extreme right, where American values are subordinate to the values of a people who want their way through fear and intimidation. That appears to be the true American way now.

I had one gun-nut say to me: “You stupid a**hole, a gun owner just might save your stupid life one day”. But I stand a greater chance that a gun owner just might take my life one day.

Some thing that should wrankle the gun-nuts – is that while they are complaining loudly about the liberals in America, it was the liberals who helped kill the assault weapons ban. Tomorrow, when you’re dancing in the streets, or sitting home fondling the foreskin of your gun, remember one thing: do not bash the liberals.

It was the liberals who helped you get your guns and it is the liberals who help your keep your gun. Don't bash Michael Moore, he is a conservative and doesn't want guns. He is not a liberal on this issue. Next time, please try to get your terminology straight.

Michael Berglin